Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

[SJHovey]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

If you don't understand that standards from 1986 may be different or archaic today...

Hey, I'm flexible. If this is no longer the law, or the approach the EEOC takes, with respect to the question of whether a woman's sexually provocative speech or dress are relevant, I'm here to be convinced.

[johnnypohlfan]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

I had no idea about the Scoob situation (and I'm still pretty confused about it after reading your post).

I just didn't buy your call-out and I offered my opinion on it. That's what happens when you shiv somebody en passant. (I haven't forgotten about you, Nate!)

I'm genuinely curious what you would call yourself if not "conservative." That's my general impression of your posts, though I could easily be mixing you up with others.

Scooby's post is literally one page back and not that hard to find, nor is it confusing in the least. He believes someone is guilty of something, solely based on the fact that said person is right-wing, and has been accused of doing something. That's all.

I've already explained my political views enough to you on this board, but it's not surprising you either didn't read them, or simply want us to believe you don't remember. Honestly I'm not sure which of those is the case.

But just to humor you, I'll give it one more shot. I'm middle of the road on many issues, and have become moderate to progressive on many things as I've gotten older. In fact I'd consider myself very liberal on most social issues, while moderately conservative on most fiscal issues. And on other issues I like to think I lean in the direction of common sense.

While you might see me poking and prodding you lefties much more than righties, it's only because I find the attitudes of many lefties so generalizing and hypocritical (occurs on both sides, I know), but mostly the condescending aspect of many of your posts, including your latest, 'I don't have any context as to how this started, but all I know is YOU'RE WRONG.' There's an air that you are so certain you're the smartest guy in the room, and for some reason folks that come across that way have always bothered me. And I see that from my liberal friends at about a 10:1 ratio more often than the more conservative ones.

Bottom line, if you look back, you'll see me skewering both left and right. And while I might come at the left more often for their posts here, you certainly won't see me defending the righties' actions that may have led to those posts.

[unofan]

Hey, I'm flexible. If this is no longer the law, or the approach the EEOC takes, with respect to the question of whether a woman's sexually provocative speech or dress are relevant, I'm here to be convinced.

I'm saying as someone who worked on hundreds of discrimination claims in my last job that playing the "she was asking for it" card almost always said more about the defendant than the complainant, and the woman's clothing choices never merited consideration.

The few times it worked, there was ample evidence of consent, like exchanges of nude pics, tape recordings, acknowledgement of a preexisting relationship, etc.

The worst kept rumor in the industry was that Hooters and its knockoffs kept a slush fund to pay out harassment claims since the business is responsible for policing is customers' conduct on the premises. They made more paying out to its employees rather than kicking out every Michael Scott that showed up. I never had a case that let me test that one, but it was extremely believable

[Kepler]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

Scooby's post is literally one page back and not that hard to find, nor is it confusing in the least. He believes someone is guilty of something, solely based on the fact that said person is right-wing, and has been accused of doing something. That's all.

I've already explained my political views enough to you on this board, but it's not surprising you either didn't read them, or simply want us to believe you don't remember. Honestly I'm not sure which of those is the case.

But just to humor you, I'll give it one more shot. I'm middle of the road on many issues, and have become moderate to progressive on many things as I've gotten older. In fact I'd consider myself very liberal on most social issues, while moderately conservative on most fiscal issues. And on other issues I like to think I lean in the direction of common sense.

While you might see me poking and prodding you lefties much more than righties, it's only because I find the attitudes of many lefties so generalizing and hypocritical (occurs on both sides, I know), but mostly the condescending aspect of many of your posts, including your latest, 'I don't have any context as to how this started, but all I know is YOU'RE WRONG.' There's an air that you are so certain you're the smartest guy in the room, and for some reason folks that come across that way have always bothered me. And I see that from my liberal friends at about a 10:1 ratio more often than the more conservative ones.

Bottom line, if you look back, you'll see me skewering both left and right. And while I might come at the left more often for their posts here, you certainly won't see me defending the righties' actions that may have led to those posts.

All this makes sense. Thank you for taking the time.

I agree with you that "why do you assume you're the smartest in the room" is more of a liberal problem than conservative (though there are conservative detachments, like the Von Misean crowd, who are every bit as offensive). Some of that is because "we're obnoxious and disliked did you know that?" Some of it is because a lot of us come from argumentative professions where you battle it out and the best ideas win, no harm no foul and we all drink together at the end of the day.

But some of it comes from an experience almost all educated liberals I know have had when we run smack up against someone who not only disagrees on results but also on premises. How do you argue with someone who responds to an argument about evolution by quoting the Bible? There are ways to engage without being condescending -- Stephen Gould used to be good at this, for example -- but not all of us are geniuses and living saints and so most of us at that point get snarky or at least a little "sigh, OK, let's go back to first principles..." and come off as know it alls.

But again, how do you even begin with someone who is, intellectually, from another planet? A planet that looks suspiciously like the one we all more or less occupy in childhood until we start to use the intellectual tools of logic and skepticism?

I would compare it to the way many conservatives assume that liberals are conservatives who simply lack some life experience: the Churchill heart/brain quote, or the "hasn't been mugged" quote. It's just so easy to Go There and thus resolve the High Weirdness of someone standing in front of you who by all rights ought not be able to tie his shoes. It's a useless and destructive response, but to some extent I think most of us do it.

We should all treat each other with more respect, even if, especially if, we think our interlocutor has a head full of mush.

[SJHovey]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

I'm saying as someone who worked on hundreds of discrimination claims in my last job that playing the "she was asking for it" card almost always said more about the defendant than the complainant, and the woman's clothing choices never merited consideration.

The few times it worked, there was ample evidence of consent, like exchanges of nude pics, tape recordings, acknowledgement of a preexisting relationship, etc.

The worst kept rumor in the industry was that Hooters and its knockoffs kept a slush fund to pay out harassment claims since the business is responsible for policing is customers' conduct on the premises. They made more paying out to its employees rather than kicking out every Michael Scott that showed up. I never had a case that let me test that one, but it was extremely believable

No doubt. If Roger Ailes comes in and uses the "Carlson is a slut" defense, they're going to pay a lot of money.

But here's the question. Hooters pays off these provocatively dressed women who are harassed. But how much? I have nothing to back it up but I'm going to guess that from the plaintiff's perspective the lawyer would much rather have the quiet, demure church-going young lady than the blonde with the 38's and the tight t-shirt.

[Kepler]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

No doubt. If Roger Ailes comes in and uses the "Carlson is a slut" defense, they're going to pay a lot of money.

But here's the question. Hooters pays off these provocatively dressed women who are harassed. But how much? I have nothing to back it up but I'm going to guess that from the plaintiff's perspective the lawyer would much rather have the quiet, demure church-going young lady than the blonde with the 38's and the tight t-shirt.

Any good attorney can effectively portray any Madonna as a Whore or vice versa. The emotional narratives used in court cases are even more contrived than those used in political campaigns.

[SJHovey]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

While you might see me poking and prodding you lefties much more than righties, it's only because I find the attitudes of many lefties so generalizing and hypocritical (occurs on both sides, I know), but mostly the condescending aspect of many of your posts, including your latest, 'I don't have any context as to how this started, but all I know is YOU'RE WRONG.'

Plus, on this Board at least, it's a more target-rich environment.

[Kepler]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

Plus, on this Board at least, it's a more target-rich environment.

True dat. It is a bit weird to go from a workplace that is 90% knuck to a board that is at least 70% liberal.

The "C" in USCHO may have something to do with that...

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

Scooby's post is literally one page back and not that hard to find, nor is it confusing in the least. He believes someone is guilty of something, solely based on the fact that said person is right-wing, and has been accused of doing something. That's all.

Not true. You have no idea what I'm basing my opinion on. For instance you have no idea what I do or don't know about Scott Brown. You assume that I said that because he's right wing.

Just because you think I made an assumption doesn't give you the right to say I did by doing so yourself.

I happen to know for a fact that Scott Brown is pure drip slime.

[unofan]

No doubt. If Roger Ailes comes in and uses the "Carlson is a slut" defense, they're going to pay a lot of money.

But here's the question. Hooters pays off these provocatively dressed women who are harassed. But how much? I have nothing to back it up but I'm going to guess that from the plaintiff's perspective the lawyer would much rather have the quiet, demure church-going young lady than the blonde with the 38's and the tight t-shirt.

Except, of course, that the demure church going young lady is the blonde who wears the tight t-shirt once she's on her own. And the defense counsel will find those pictures, and then the young lady has to explain the juxtaposition.

As an attorney, I'll take consistent behavior from a poor client over erratic behavior from the otherwise perfect client any day. Way easier to plan for, mitigate the downsides, and far less surprises.

[trixR4kids]

I run a business that employs large numbers of younger people - 18 to 25 is not uncommon. They don't work directly for me but they're in the vicinity. Despite the fact 80% of the population here professes themselves Catholic there is no shortage of cleavage, skirts that push the boundaries of "within 4 inches of the knee" and there being a great many very pretty faces, I've never not been able to refrain from grabbing *****, winking, slinging innuendo, going cartoon google eyes on anyone nor asking for a date, etc., etc., etc. That is not not to say I've never glanced and you sure as hell notice these things as a hetero male, but to insist these circumstances renders you to be incapable of behaving yourself is beyond absurd.

Treating others with dignity and respect is very difficult for some people.

[Handyman]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

Comments can definitely be harassment whether or not you are asked to stop. You may think "you look pretty" is a compliment, but plenty of people think it's an intrusion, because it implies you have the right to also say "you don't look pretty." Keep your opinions to yourself unless you are sure the other party is like-minded.

You don't get to come up with a "fair is fair" standard. I know this is an earth-shattering revelation, but many women find workplace compliments as offensive as construction site whistles, particularly given the kind of guy who usually takes it upon himself to play workplace beauty consultant.

My advice is zip it, secondarily because that's sensible, but primarily because that's just polite now that women are no longer workplace whiffle balls for us to play with.

Being offended is not the same as being harassed. I am often offended by things my boss does or says and I would never claim harassment. While I agree with your advice wholeheartedly I think this stuff gets blown way out of proportion and all it really does is weaken the argument against much worse behavior. It is like calling someone Hitler...it used to mean you were the face of genocide and evil, now it just means you lead a group I dont like.

And before someone says it, I am not in any way saying women deserve to be treated as objects or that they have to take it. I am just saying there is a reason you drool over Megyn Kelly Kepler and it isnt for her intellect. She knows the best way to get ratings is to sex it up and she does it. Exploiting the fact that men are pigs is very smart but also makes your whole argument hollow if you are saying the pigs are acting like pigs and it offends you. That is what I am saying...

And again, that doesnt mean guys should be pinching butts, or giving massages, or making unwanted advances cause that is beyond wrong. But this stuff reminds me of my female friends that go out to bars dressed to get a reaction then get all annoyed when guys stare at them or make a move. This isnt 1955 you can choose to dress and act however you like. If you own your sexuality and love your body great show it off believe me I wont stop ya! Dont act all angry though when you shove the girls in my view and I take a gander

[Handyman]

Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

Not true. You have no idea what I'm basing my opinion on. For instance you have no idea what I do or don't know about Scott Brown. You assume that I said that because he's right wing.

Just because you think I made an assumption doesn't give you the right to say I did by doing so yourself.

I happen to know for a fact that Scott Brown is pure drip slime.

Hey what did drip slime ever do to you?

[Jimjamesak]

All this makes sense. Thank you for taking the time.

I agree with you that "why do you assume you're the smartest in the room" is more of a liberal problem than conservative (though there are conservative detachments, like the Von Misean crowd, who are every bit as offensive). Some of that is because "we're obnoxious and disliked did you know that?" Some of it is because a lot of us come from argumentative professions where you battle it out and the best ideas win, no harm no foul and we all drink together at the end of the day.

But some of it comes from an experience almost all educated liberals I know have had when we run smack up against someone who not only disagrees on results but also on premises. How do you argue with someone who responds to an argument about evolution by quoting the Bible? There are ways to engage without being condescending -- Stephen Gould used to be good at this, for example -- but not all of us are geniuses and living saints and so most of us at that point get snarky or at least a little "sigh, OK, let's go back to first principles..." and come off as know it alls.

But again, how do you even begin with someone who is, intellectually, from another planet? A planet that looks suspiciously like the one we all more or less occupy in childhood until we start to use the intellectual tools of logic and skepticism?

I would compare it to the way many conservatives assume that liberals are conservatives who simply lack some life experience: the Churchill heart/brain quote, or the "hasn't been mugged" quote. It's just so easy to Go There and thus resolve the High Weirdness of someone standing in front of you who by all rights ought not be able to tie his shoes. It's a useless and destructive response, but to some extent I think most of us do it.

We should all treat each other with more respect, even if, especially if, we think our interlocutor has a head full of mush.

For the younger of us we reached the threshold of stupidity we're willing to deal with about 2006 or so and so sarcasm and mostly snark is used in response. We tried reasonable, well thought responses but you only handle so much "hurr durr librul!" before you snap.

[Jimjamesak]

Being offended is not the same as being harassed. I am often offended by things my boss does or says and I would never claim harassment. While I agree with your advice wholeheartedly I think this stuff gets blown way out of proportion and all it really does is weaken the argument against much worse behavior. It is like calling someone Hitler...it used to mean you were the face of genocide and evil, now it just means you lead a group I dont like.

And before someone says it, I am not in any way saying women deserve to be treated as objects or that they have to take it. I am just saying there is a reason you drool over Megyn Kelly Kepler and it isnt for her intellect. She knows the best way to get ratings is to sex it up and she does it. Exploiting the fact that men are pigs is very smart but also makes your whole argument hollow if you are saying the pigs are acting like pigs and it offends you. That is what I am saying...

And again, that doesnt mean guys should be pinching butts, or giving massages, or making unwanted advances cause that is beyond wrong. But this stuff reminds me of my female friends that go out to bars dressed to get a reaction then get all annoyed when guys stare at them or make a move. This isnt 1955 you can choose to dress and act however you like. If you own your sexuality and love your body great show it off believe me I wont stop ya! Dont act all angry though when you shove the girls in my view and I take a gander

There's a huge difference between acceptable behavior in an office type environment and acceptable behavior in a bar. Yeah sorry but you don't need to ogle a woman at work no matter how she dresses.