Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:25 PM
Two Many Cats Two Many Cats is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
"You look particularly nice today!"

"That's a nice new outfit. Very professional"

If the outfit includes a short skirt, there you go. You don't have to have commented inappropriately, merely noticing it as new can be enough.

So never compliment anyone ever. Or say anything nice to anyone. Unless it's a man. Yeah, great way to eliminate sexism and make people comfortable in the work place.
If figuring out how to compliment people is too difficult for you, just don't hand out compliments. Talk about the weather or something.

Jesus, do you need instructions in blowing your nose too?
  #152  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:28 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post


What you're not getting is that commenting on a co-worker's appearance is by default inappropriate, even if you didn't say anything explicitly sexual.


Commenting on a male co-worker's appearance is by default inappropriate too.

The kind of butthurt obtuseness you're promoting here is obscuring the simple professional principle that you should not be offering your co-workers any judgements about what they look like, unless something about their appearance is directly relevant to work issues (e.g., company dress codes, safety regulations, etc.). Not even if you intend your judgement as a compliment.

If you want to compliment your co-worker about something related to his or her work, feel free. If you want to engage in a gendered ritual of openly evaluating and praising a woman's physical appearance that has jack-shit to do with work, save it for your social life.
Ah, but changes in behavior- dress, etc.- typically are indicative of changes in life. Not noting changes in fact can be isolating and upsetting for people, and working relationships are fundamentally that- relationships.

Interesting that you changed it to a purely female statement there at the end, which is exactly what I was commenting on: If one of my flannel and jean male coworkers shows up in a 3 piece suit, I'm free to comment and even admire the cut (which is a prelude to inquiring about the tailor, say, or offering them best wishes on their new job application), but if one of my flannel and jean female coworkers shows up in a formal blouse and skirt with sharply done hair, I should say nothing, even if she looks tight around the eyes and it gives her the opportunity to say she has to go to court and address a traffic ticket and doesn't know how she's going to accomplish updates on X, which gives me the opportunity to offer to help support.

Both of those have happened to me in the last year. Hard and fast rules don't cover the nuance of social interaction because of the "fast" element.
  #153  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:30 PM
filmore filmore is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Assuming this is all true... so what?
Why should the guy take the risk in the first place? That's what the article is about. If the guy does nothing, there's no risk to him. If he chats, invites for lunch, works one-on-one, there's always the risk to him of being falsely accused. Even if the woman doesn't go to HR, she could still spread gossip about how the older employee was trying to flirt.

In the past, the accused was given way too much consideration. Even when they were explicitly sexually harassing in the workplace (e.g. Matt Lauer), the accusations were discounted. But now it has swung so far the other way that the companies have to respond to every allegation. If your manager hears gossip that you're flirting, you'll get reprimanded whether or not you actually were flirting.

For men who don't known when they're crossing the line (like that guy who complemented a coworker's skirt), it's best for them not to interact at all. If they're so clueless that they don't realize when they are harassing, then really they should not interact unless necessary.

I've been part of group interactions where a woman later said that one of the guys was flirting, but I thought he was just being his normal friendly self. This was a guy who was good at chatting, could tell good stories, etc. But I thought he was just being the same guy he always is. He was the same chatty guy he is when it was just guys. So whatever she took as flirting I didn't see. Maybe she misinterpreted his friendly personality as flirting, or may he really was flirting with her and I didn't notice. It's that kind of stuff that can get a guy in trouble these days. Just being accused of flirting can get you reprimanded, regardless of whether or not what he said was actually flirting.
  #154  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:30 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
If figuring out how to compliment people is too difficult for you, just don't hand out compliments. Talk about the weather or something.

Jesus, do you need instructions in blowing your nose too?
That's the most idiotic non-sequitur ad hominem I've seen in years. Congratulations on being unable to follow the point being made by admittedly reducio ad absurdum.
  #155  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:30 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob
I have. I typically follow it with "what's the occasion?" [...]

Ah, but changes in behavior- dress, etc.- typically are indicative of changes in life. Not noting changes in fact can be isolating and upsetting for people, and working relationships are fundamentally that- relationships.
Well, if your office has a genuinely social atmosphere where men and women alike are all comfortable talking about their special-occasion outfits and their reasons for wearing them, and if you talk to your female colleagues about their outfits the same way you talk to your male colleagues about theirs, then I don't see a problem with that.

But also, if that's really what your workplace is like, then I don't believe that anyone there has ever actually gotten in any trouble merely for complimenting a co-worker on her new suit.

That's because an atmosphere of social trust and friendliness in the workplace has to be earned, as Airbeck pointed out, by sincere respect and concern for one's co-workers. If you're sulking around the place insisting "Hey I just enjoy paying friendly compliments to the office ladeez, why bitches gotta be gettin so upset about that?", then you are not actually being friendly or gallant, you're being an inconsiderate asshole.

Last edited by Kimstu; 12-06-2018 at 02:31 PM.
  #156  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:36 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Well, if your office has a genuinely social atmosphere where men and women alike are all comfortable talking about their special-occasion outfits and their reasons for wearing them, and if you talk to your female colleagues about their outfits the same way you talk to your male colleagues about theirs, then I don't see a problem with that.

But also, if that's really what your workplace is like, then I don't believe that anyone there has ever actually gotten in any trouble merely for complimenting a co-worker on her new suit.

That's because an atmosphere of social trust and friendliness in the workplace has to be earned, as Airbeck pointed out, by sincere respect and concern for one's co-workers. If you're sulking around the place insisting "Hey I just enjoy paying friendly compliments to the office ladeez, why bitches gotta be gettin so upset about that?", then you are not actually being friendly or gallant, you're being an inconsiderate asshole.
They have. I'm currently on a new job trying to create friendliness amongst my new team members, which I find takes a certain kind of aggressive even-handed niceness made always in groups so everyone of both genders can perceive the even-handedness. And that's a disservice to humanity, in my opinion, that we can't give the initial benefit of the doubt before concluding any remark must be intended as a microaggression. Wait for a pattern before concluding it's harassment, it's basic social courtesy that's been lost in the modern era.
  #157  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:36 PM
Two Many Cats Two Many Cats is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
That's the most idiotic non-sequitur ad hominem I've seen in years. Congratulations on being unable to follow the point being made by admittedly reducio ad absurdum.
If figuring out sarcasm is too difficult for you, I would suggest you try another message board.
  #158  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:40 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
If figuring out sarcasm is too difficult for you, I would suggest you try another message board.
And again. You do or do not understand that my comment, and your response, are both in support of the article?

"If you are having trouble figuring out what's OK in the modern world, talk about the weather or something"

The article, summarized:

"Because standards are changing and there's no longer a presupposition of innocent error, business people are ensuring that even conversations about the weather can't happen when there's a chance of an unintended slipup."
  #159  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:42 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
Why should the guy take the risk in the first place? That's what the article is about. If the guy does nothing, there's no risk to him. If he chats, invites for lunch, works one-on-one, there's always the risk to him of being falsely accused. Even if the woman doesn't go to HR, she could still spread gossip about how the older employee was trying to flirt.
Again, so what? Yes, people can misinterpret things and "spread gossip". That has always been true and always will be true. It's irrelevant to #MeToo and the problem of widespread tolerance for harassment and abuse.

Quote:
But now it has swung so far the other way that the companies have to respond to every allegation.
Or course they should respond to every allegation! Every accusation should be taken seriously and investigated.

Quote:
If your manager hears gossip that you're flirting, you'll get reprimanded whether or not you actually were flirting.

For men who don't known when they're crossing the line (like that guy who complemented a coworker's skirt), it's best for them not to interact at all. If they're so clueless that they don't realize when they are harassing, then really they should not interact unless necessary.

I've been part of group interactions where a woman later said that one of the guys was flirting, but I thought he was just being his normal friendly self. This was a guy who was good at chatting, could tell good stories, etc. But I thought he was just being the same guy he always is. He was the same chatty guy he is when it was just guys. So whatever she took as flirting I didn't see. Maybe she misinterpreted his friendly personality as flirting, or may he really was flirting with her and I didn't notice. It's that kind of stuff that can get a guy in trouble these days. Just being accused of flirting can get you reprimanded, regardless of whether or not what he said was actually flirting.
I see no reason to believe that it's true that minor interaction ("chatting" on mundane, non-intimate topics) has any significant likelihood of getting someone reprimanded.
  #160  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:43 PM
Two Many Cats Two Many Cats is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Ah, but changes in behavior- dress, etc.- typically are indicative of changes in life. Not noting changes in fact can be isolating and upsetting for people, and working relationships are fundamentally that- relationships.
As a working woman, I can assure you that none of us gals are sitting around on tenterhooks wondering if you notice our new business suit. And if we are, we really don't have enough work to do.

Really, we don't care if you don't mention our clothing. Believe me.

Compliment our work ethic, or our production results, or our neat desk, or something.

Really, it's not hard to do at all.
  #161  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:43 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 9,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
They have. I'm currently on a new job trying to create friendliness amongst my new team members, which I find takes a certain kind of aggressive even-handed niceness made always in groups so everyone of both genders can perceive the even-handedness.
No offense, but if some new guy started using "aggressive even-handed niceness" in order to make me more friendly, I would be creeped out. And I'm a guy.
  #162  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:44 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
As a working woman, I can assure you that none of us gals are sitting around on tenterhooks wondering if you notice our new business suit.

No, you can speak for yourself, and you're probably someone who doesn't signal that way. Not everyone does. If you value desk neatness, and your desk is suddenly a mess, that might be worth an observation.
  #163  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:45 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
The definition of creepy changes over time. The 45 year olds know this better than the 19 year olds, because it was true when they were 19.

Example: Buying someone a drink at a club, which is a commonly recognized social meeting place for initiating romantic contacts, is now considered creepy by some young people, when by middle-aged people it was considered a respectful no-pressure approach; rejection of the drink indicating the same thing as swiping whichever direction the kids swipe today.
You are overthinking all of this.

Simple rule: respect other humans.

If you are having a hard time understanding the rule, it's not the rule's fault.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #164  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:46 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
The article, summarized:

"Because standards are changing and there's no longer a presupposition of innocent error, business people are ensuring that even conversations about the weather can't happen when there's a chance of an unintended slipup."
Actually, the article summarized is:

"Men are upset that they can't act any way they want in the office, so they are passively-aggressively punishing women for not thinking their crudeness is endearing."
  #165  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:48 PM
Two Many Cats Two Many Cats is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
And again. You do or do not understand that my comment, and your response, are both in support of the article?

"If you are having trouble figuring out what's OK in the modern world, talk about the weather or something"

The article, summarized:

"Because standards are changing and there's no longer a presupposition of innocent error, business people are ensuring that even conversations about the weather can't happen when there's a chance of an unintended slipup."
Uh-huh? Business people are banning conversations about weather?

All I can say is, if figuring out exaggeration for emphasis may be used in a written article is too difficult for you, I would suggest avoiding most written media.
  #166  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:48 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
No offense, but if some new guy started using "aggressive even-handed niceness" in order to make me more friendly, I would be creeped out. And I'm a guy.
Like everything socially, it's all about style and presentation.

There's the coworker who likes to talk about their kids but is divorced. There's the cranky guy that no-one listens to that just wants someone to engage with their ideas. There's the no-nonsense guy who generally doesn't mention his personal life often, but mentions he's getting married again in six months, and when he leaves on vacation will jump then smile when the last thing you say to him is "Oh, and congratulations, by the way" and otherwise go along with pretending he is an automaton with no interests outside work. There's the woman who is very career-oriented and hot on her career who is very down on anything she sees as personal but is very down for a hair-down, joint-project presentation, "do we really want to phrase this this way" discussion of what the various execs personally prefer.
  #167  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:50 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
You are overthinking all of this.

Simple rule: respect other humans.

If you are having a hard time understanding the rule, it's not the rule's fault.
One person's respect is another's unwanted intimacy. Not providing that intimacy is a third person's disrespect.

You are deliberately oversimplifying to make grand declamatory statements. Since these are particular situations in varied environments, there is actually a lot of room for error.
  #168  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:52 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
Uh-huh? Business people are banning conversations about weather?

All I can say is, if figuring out exaggeration for emphasis may be used in a written article is too difficult for you, I would suggest avoiding most written media.
Again with trying to imply that I don't understand. Clumsy to do it so close together.

Business people are eliminating casual interaction opportunities, per the initial article. I think the equivalency is fair for the purposes of discussion.
  #169  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:53 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,409
Ah yes, each coworker is an individual person that should be treated with respect. And the way that respect is shown is different depending on them individually.

Notice I didn't mention she, him, her, he, male female.

Try to think of a way to behave toward your coworkers that doesn't depend on which pronoun describes them and you are on your way.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #170  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:55 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 9,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
there is actually a lot of room for error.
There is quite an easy fix to avoid all these errors: Don't talk about non-work stuff at work.
  #171  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:55 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm open to persuasion. Under what circumstances is it reasonable for someone to be upset about #MeToo?
Well, under these circumstances, for one example.

It's a very long thread but you participated in it so I'm sure you're familiar with the content. I think it's fair to say that Hardwick being immediately terminated was indicative of the networks and various media taking his accuser seriously, and Hardwick being fully reinstated following an investigation can reasonably be taken as indicative of his innocence (not that he's perfect, but that the seriousness of some of the allegations was not supported by the evidence). So the conclusion appears to be that in this case, his accuser was being unfairly vindictive -- a fact that remains a fact even if in her own mind she was being forthright. And these accusations were given tremendous weight in the public perception by #MeToo -- a weight that is independent of their truthfulness. Also in that thread is an anecdote about a false accusation that I happen to know about, again strengthened by #MeToo.

One of the problems, as I think was indicated in that thread, is that #MeToo started as a movement for women who were victimized by real and serious sexual abuse, and has been morphing into a movement that supports women who bring forward a vast range of relatively benign complaints dressed up as "sexual abuse".

I understand that the problems #MeToo is addressing are real, deeply entrenched, and deeply serious. I'm just saying that there are two sides to this, and we're seeing some of the downsides of it. The same sort of thing happened with MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) which was formed to deal with an equally serious problem, and whose impetus largely came from those who had lost loved ones to drunk drivers -- certainly a group one can empathize with. But over time, as with any bureaucracy, it has started to morph into an intransigent advocacy empire -- for example, pushing for increasingly draconian penalties that have been shown to less effective than education and training for normal people and completely ineffective for chronic alcoholics, and, incredibly, at one point suggesting that all new cars -- all of them -- should be equipped with mandatory breathalyzer interlocks! There is nothing inconsistent with saying "I strongly oppose drunk driving" and at the same time, "in some areas MADD has lost its way and gone around the bend". It's potentially the same with #MeToo.
  #172  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:55 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Actually, the article summarized is:

"Men are upset that they can't act any way they want in the office, so they are passively-aggressively punishing women for not thinking their crudeness is endearing."
Pushing a narrative interpretation over the article.

Let's remove the office for the moment, and take a look at the dating scene: Men aren't trying to be Weinstein, they're afraid of being Aziz Ansari (who had no idea he'd stepped over the line, even going for affirmative consent).

False equivalency to say the only things any individual person finds offensive are always unquestionably over the line to all people all the time in that situation. Sensitivity is one thing, enshrining the lowest common denominator is another. The essential solution is to have a reasonable standard or room for someone to not realize what they have said or done is offensive, instead of claiming men are either saints or wang-slapping every woman in the office.
  #173  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:57 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
One person's respect is another's unwanted intimacy. Not providing that intimacy is a third person's disrespect.

You are deliberately oversimplifying to make grand declamatory statements. Since these are particular situations in varied environments, there is actually a lot of room for error.
No I'm not doing that at all. I have never seemed to have any issues treating every coworker with respect in every work situation I've ever been in. In fact I don't even have to really think about it. It seems like you almost get paralyzed with overthinking about this stuff.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #174  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:57 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
I'm currently on a new job trying to create friendliness amongst my new team members, which I find takes a certain kind of aggressive even-handed niceness made always in groups so everyone of both genders can perceive the even-handedness. And that's a disservice to humanity, in my opinion, that we can't give the initial benefit of the doubt before concluding any remark must be intended as a microaggression.
Maybe it will assuage your irritation to recall the fact that the default for many millennia has been a decided absence of "even-handedness", in which women's physical appearance was automatically prioritized and judged by men in ways that other men's appearance was not.

How's that for "a disservice to humanity"? Why don't you spend some time thinking about how shitty that situation was for women, and how it still carries over into so many aspects of women's lives, before going into your sulk about what a terrible burden it is for you to have to worry about possible unintended microaggressions?

We've spent thousands of years where microaggression (and macroaggression) denigrating women's competence and sexually objectifying women was the automatic default, and damn near universal. And then as soon as the social pendulum swings even slightly in the direction of equality and non-gendered "even-handed" respect, some men start whining how unfair it is not to immediately give them the benefit of the doubt that when they follow traditionally sexist gendered behavior patterns they don't really mean anything sexist by it. Sheesh, talk about perpetuating male privilege and fragility.
  #175  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:59 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Ah yes, each coworker is an individual person that should be treated with respect. And the way that respect is shown is different depending on them individually.

Notice I didn't mention she, him, her, he, male female.

Try to think of a way to behave toward your coworkers that doesn't depend on which pronoun describes them and you are on your way.
Read my posts. I do that, and it has to be highly individually customized. If you were at all a courteous human being, as you are claiming to be, in sincerity you would have read with that consideration. Since you haven't, here's a hint: THIS IS THE POSITION I'M ADVOCATING IS NECESSARY
  #176  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:59 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,409
So why are you having such a hard time with it then?
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #177  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:01 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
No I'm not doing that at all. I have never seemed to have any issues treating every coworker with respect in every work situation I've ever been in. In fact I don't even have to really think about it. It seems like you almost get paralyzed with overthinking about this stuff.
Per you. Your coworkers may have a different opinion.

And it's an effect of being a mature adult that one is aware of things. There's no need to think about it much, just be aware.
  #178  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:03 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
So why are you having such a hard time with it then?
I don't. But I understand people who do, because I consider them with respect to their individuality. Which is why I frankly can no longer believe, based on your comments in this thread, that all your coworkers feel you have always treated them with respect. You frankly have shown a tendency to rush to judgment to secure a moral high ground. Plenty of people, myself included, find that highly disrespectful.
  #179  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:04 PM
Two Many Cats Two Many Cats is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
So why are you having such a hard time with it then?
I could comment on this, but he'd only get upset. Typical man.
  #180  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:05 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Business people are eliminating casual interaction opportunities
Which is probably a good thing in many respects and has been strongly advocated as a social improvement by a number of people, such as the etiquette advice columnist Miss Manners, for decades before #MeToo was ever born or thought of.
Quote:
December 04, 1994 [...]

Miss Manners attributes a lot of workplace breaches of etiquette to "this peculiar attempt to pretend that the workplace is not a workplace, that it is a social place where you go and celebrate birthdays, have parties, do things of that nature, call everybody by their first names, talk in a personal way and so on, which all sounds charming and lovely."

But it is not so pretty, Miss Manners maintains, because although colleagues may be friends, in the workplace they must be co-workers first and foremost. Otherwise, she maintains, productivity suffers. [...]

Professional demeanor, she said, demands some "formality, some distance, so that you behave in a respectful and decent manner to people whether you like them or not." [...]

"Lack of diversity was an incredible crime against civilization," Miss Manners said. "People were devalued because of race or gender--that was a longstanding rudeness I hope we're coming out of. . . . It's part of the widespread problem of people not understanding you're there in the business role and the business role is what they should be looking at, not gender, not race or any other irrelevant factors. . . . It's professionally rude to notice these things even in a positive way."
  #181  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:06 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Maybe it will assuage your irritation to recall the fact that the default for many millennia has been a decided absence of "even-handedness", in which women's physical appearance was automatically prioritized and judged by men in ways that other men's appearance was not.

How's that for "a disservice to humanity"? Why don't you spend some time thinking about how shitty that situation was for women, and how it still carries over into so many aspects of women's lives, before going into your sulk about what a terrible burden it is for you to have to worry about possible unintended microaggressions?

We've spent thousands of years where microaggression (and macroaggression) denigrating women's competence and sexually objectifying women was the automatic default, and damn near universal. And then as soon as the social pendulum swings even slightly in the direction of equality and non-gendered "even-handed" respect, some men start whining how unfair it is not to immediately give them the benefit of the doubt that when they follow traditionally sexist gendered behavior patterns they don't really mean anything sexist by it. Sheesh, talk about perpetuating male privilege and fragility.
Ah, but I'm not those men, and any relationships I establish with any individual, regardless of gender, are our relationships. I'm no more guilty of what your father/brother/uncle did to you than you are of what my father/brother/uncle did to me. I'm only accountable for treating you with respect- which yes, should include being considerate to sensitivities and issues you may enter into new relationships with as a courtesy- but you are accountable for the same, in my view.

You aren't thousands of years of women any more than I'm thousands of years of individuals either. We're the result, but we're also our own persons.
  #182  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:08 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
I could comment on this, but he'd only get upset. Typical man.
Ah, so you suffer from sexist bigotry you can't overcome in interactions with others. I pity you for that.
  #183  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:09 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Which is probably a good thing in many respects and has been strongly advocated as a social improvement by a number of people, such as the etiquette advice columnist Miss Manners, for decades before #MeToo was ever born or thought of.
Honestly, there's truth to that, but the problem is it's upsetting to business dealing norms.

Not that they're right or wrong, but the handshake interpersonal deal has been part of business- the interpersonal trust side- and so it needs a replacement with removal. Instead, women are being unfairly shut out.
  #184  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:11 PM
Two Many Cats Two Many Cats is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Ah, so you suffer from sexist bigotry you can't overcome in interactions with others. I pity you for that.
If understanding irony is too difficult...

...oh, screw it.
  #185  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:12 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Per you. Your coworkers may have a different opinion.

And it's an effect of being a mature adult that one is aware of things. There's no need to think about it much, just be aware.
I am aware of how to treat other people. You seem to be the one having such difficulty with the concept. I'm trying to help you see that you are overcomplicating things. Paralysis by over-analysis is the phrase that comes to mind.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #186  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:16 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Pushing a narrative interpretation over the article.
No YOU are!

Quote:
Men aren't trying to be Weinstein, they're afraid of being Aziz Ansari (who had no idea he'd stepped over the line, even going for affirmative consent).
We should all be so lucky to be Aziz Ansari. He's got a major comedy tour coming up, and is already selling out shows. So much for, "If you are even falsely accused of misconduct, your life is DESTROYED!!!1!!"
  #187  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:18 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
I could comment on this, but he'd only get upset. Typical man.
This is hilarious. I'm sorry some men didn't get it. You might have to interrupt them to explain it, maybe in a condescending tone. Sometimes our little brains can't keep up with complex ideas.
  #188  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:18 PM
JB99 JB99 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Ah yes, each coworker is an individual person that should be treated with respect. And the way that respect is shown is different depending on them individually.
I don't understand this. Is it supposed to be sarcasm? I'm not trying to start an argument or anything. I just genuinely don't know what is meant by this. If I'm being courteous and professional, why should that treatment vary by person?
  #189  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:18 PM
Urbanredneck Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 6,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
What the fuck is wrong with... him? And how on earth do you think his punishment is unfair? Jesus Christ.
Why cant you use adult language?
  #190  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:19 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
What the fuck is wrong with... him? And how on earth do you think his punishment is unfair? Jesus Christ.
We don't actually know what the punishment was, just that it was "hot water."

I will go ahead and say that if it is literal, in that they are boiling this guy alive a punishment, then that may be a bit unfair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Railer13 View Post
The one example I remember of a guy being accused of such was many years ago, when a co-worker somehow climbed atop the copier with his pants down and took a picture of his junk, and then gave said picture to another co-worker, who was a single woman. She immediately reported it to her supervisor and the offender was fired the same day. I often wondered how he explained to his wife how he lost his job.
He could show the documentation on the incident. I am sure that she will be so excited to receive a facsimile of his manliness that all will be forgiven.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
No, it's the attendant "believe all women" meme, not that a substantial number of accusations are false.

It's that accusations are to instantly be treated as true or as evidence of a crime, regardless of male behavior. Since women span the same gamut of law-abiding to criminal that men do as a gestalt group, even a man who has done absolutely nothing can face a false accusation. This happened to a college student in the last few years- his face was plastered all over campus as something like "Rapist of the Month"; he was essentially randomly pictured (no rape, he was in fact a virgin) to "bring attention to the problem" by an activist group. While straightened out formally, the social impacts can and do last.

Is it likely that any individual woman will make a false accusation, or an accusation based on incomplete context? Absolutely not. Are there women who will? A small minority. Is there any way of identifying who might wield this power arbitrarily? Nope, not unless they've developed such a pattern and documentation to this extent is provable (Tawana Bradley's escalating accusations against men who poked holes in her story, her identifying as rapists the men it was most convenient for her to have raped her in an escalating story is such a pattern). Solution: Avoid the situation, eliminate the risk.
So, what I hear you saying here, is "Don't believe women."

A popular position, and one that has been the guiding principle for our patriarchal society for quite a while. Why fix what ain't broke, amiright?

Just for shits and giggles though, lets sit down and actually listen to what they have to say. We can always go back to patronizing later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina View Post
Yup, I'm a fucking sexist pig, or somethin'.
"Believe women" means "don't believe men" even if there is only the remotest of chances of the accusation being true. I don't care how few the false accusations are, if it's against me it's 100%.
So, what I hear you saying here, is "Don't believe women."

A popular position, and one that has been the guiding principle for our patriarchal society for quite a while. Why fix what ain't broke, amiright?

Just for shits and giggles though, lets sit down and actually listen to what they have to say. We can always go back to patronizing later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by filmore View Post
A realistic example might be something like this. A company hires a bunch of college new hires. A 50-year-old male employee is waiting for an elevator when one of the new hires comes up. The older employee introduces himself, asks how the new hire is enjoying the company, what they are working on, if they found an apartment, what they do for fun in the city, etc. There are a few ways this conversation can be construed:

1. Idle chit-chat to make the new hire feel welcome and get to learn more about them
2. The older employee is chatting to flirt with the new hire
3. The older employee is just making idle small talk, but the new hire interprets it as flirting
The first three things he did are fine. Talk about yourself and your job in the company. Ask how they are doing in the company, ask what they are doing in the company. Great.

Then you ask about where you live, and what you do outside of work. Does that not seem to be at least a bit invasive? That a complete stranger is coming up and demanding to know these things?
Quote:
If the new hire is a man, then likely both people take it as idle chit-chat. But if the new hire is a woman, then it's not so clear. The woman has to be evaluating the conversation to determine if the older employee is trying to flirt. And even if the older employee is just making chit-chat, there's always the possibility the new hire could misconstrue it as flirting.
And if it is a man, then the man is probably thinking "Who the eff does this guy think he is, demanding to know all this about me?" But yeah, he finds it tiresome and boring, especially if this is the nth such conversation he has had today while he is just trying to get on the elevator, but as a guy, he may find it less threatening than if it were a woman.
Quote:
Even if the older employee is just trying to be welcoming, he may not instigate conversation out of respect. Unless they will be working together, there may not be any need for them to actually talk to each other. He may not want to put her in the uncomfortable position of trying to decide if he's a nice coworker or creepy older stalker.
If he is unable to separate work conversation from his social life, then that may be for the best. People are there because they want a paycheck, they are not there to listen to your stories and answer your questions about their personal lives.

The difference between social and work interactions, is if you are a bore or worse in a social interaction, they can just stop interacting with you. If it happens at work, they cannot do that without quitting.
Quote:
There's also more of a burden on the older employee to be cautious in what he says. He should be conscious if asking about things like what part of town she lives in or what she does for fun could be construed as being creepy.
And there is no burden on the young worker who has this old guy coming up and demanding to know where they live and what they do outside of work?
Quote:
While I think #MeToo is good and important, and it's brought many issues of harassment to the forefront, it has also increased the penalties and reduced the amount of consideration given to the accused. If the new hire goes to HR and says the older employee was being creepy, there will be quick consequences to the older employee. Even if that's 100% because the new hire misinterpreted the older employee's idle chit-chat, that won't matter a whole lot. HR has to take swift and decisive action in the #MeToo era. The safest thing for a man is not to interact unless necessary, but the consequence is that it's harder for male and female coworkers to get to know each other.
It should have also made some people rethink the way that they interact with people. That someone being uncomfortable with the way that you approach them may be actually on the way that you approach them, not on them for being creeped out by your approach.

Judging by this thread, we have a ways to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
They have. I'm currently on a new job trying to create friendliness amongst my new team members, which I find takes a certain kind of aggressive even-handed niceness made always in groups so everyone of both genders can perceive the even-handedness. And that's a disservice to humanity, in my opinion, that we can't give the initial benefit of the doubt before concluding any remark must be intended as a microaggression. Wait for a pattern before concluding it's harassment, it's basic social courtesy that's been lost in the modern era.
I think I see the problem. You are doing "friendliness" wrong. That's not how it works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
There is quite an easy fix to avoid all these errors: Don't talk about non-work stuff at work.
This may be the wisest thing you have ever said on these boards.
  #191  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:22 PM
Velocity Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,052
IIRC, in many workplaces, there was always the unofficial policy that when a boss has to fire an employee, there should always be a 3rd person present in the office to serve as a witness, because the fired person has incentive to distort or create false accusations about what went down in that conversation in the office. This would be one main area where the Pence Rule (not just applied to women, but all employees in general) would be perfectly logical. In a situation where an employee has cause for revenge/grievance (as a fired employee may feel,) don't give them ammo. A fired woman may feel incentive to fabricate a false accusation against a male boss if it's just him and her in the office.
  #192  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:24 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Read my posts. I do that, and it has to be highly individually customized. If you were at all a courteous human being, as you are claiming to be, in sincerity you would have read with that consideration. Since you haven't, here's a hint: THIS IS THE POSITION I'M ADVOCATING IS NECESSARY
Wait, did you just complain that you have to treat every individual as if they are an individual? Huh.
  #193  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:26 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
Well, under these circumstances, for one example.

It's a very long thread but you participated in it so I'm sure you're familiar with the content. I think it's fair to say that Hardwick being immediately terminated was indicative of the networks and various media taking his accuser seriously, and Hardwick being fully reinstated following an investigation can reasonably be taken as indicative of his innocence (not that he's perfect, but that the seriousness of some of the allegations was not supported by the evidence). So the conclusion appears to be that in this case, his accuser was being unfairly vindictive -- a fact that remains a fact even if in her own mind she was being forthright. And these accusations were given tremendous weight in the public perception by #MeToo -- a weight that is independent of their truthfulness. Also in that thread is an anecdote about a false accusation that I happen to know about, again strengthened by #MeToo.

One of the problems, as I think was indicated in that thread, is that #MeToo started as a movement for women who were victimized by real and serious sexual abuse, and has been morphing into a movement that supports women who bring forward a vast range of relatively benign complaints dressed up as "sexual abuse".

I understand that the problems #MeToo is addressing are real, deeply entrenched, and deeply serious. I'm just saying that there are two sides to this, and we're seeing some of the downsides of it. The same sort of thing happened with MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) which was formed to deal with an equally serious problem, and whose impetus largely came from those who had lost loved ones to drunk drivers -- certainly a group one can empathize with. But over time, as with any bureaucracy, it has started to morph into an intransigent advocacy empire -- for example, pushing for increasingly draconian penalties that have been shown to less effective than education and training for normal people and completely ineffective for chronic alcoholics, and, incredibly, at one point suggesting that all new cars -- all of them -- should be equipped with mandatory breathalyzer interlocks! There is nothing inconsistent with saying "I strongly oppose drunk driving" and at the same time, "in some areas MADD has lost its way and gone around the bend". It's potentially the same with #MeToo.
I disagree with your characterization of that thread (and the topic in general). There's nothing wrong with women coming forward and telling their stories honestly, and we've received no indication that the accuser of Hardwick wasn't being honest. Maybe the network conducted a full and thorough investigation and reached the correct conclusion, or maybe not -- it's very possible we'll never know. But tons of people (don't recall if you were one of them) were all too happy to denigrate Hardwick's accuser when there was no reason to believe she was not being honest -- and such denigration is actively harmful to the cause of doing a better job of being compassionate to those with stories to tell, and treating those stories with seriousness.

So I don't believe you've offered any good reason why someone could reasonably be upset about the #MeToo movement in general.
  #194  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:28 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
IIRC, in many workplaces, there was always the unofficial policy that when a boss has to fire an employee, there should always be a 3rd person present in the office to serve as a witness, because the fired person has incentive to distort or create false accusations about what went down in that conversation in the office. This would be one main area where the Pence Rule (not just applied to women, but all employees in general) would be perfectly logical. In a situation where an employee has cause for revenge/grievance (as a fired employee may feel,) don't give them ammo. A fired woman may feel incentive to fabricate a false accusation against a male boss if it's just him and her in the office.
The "Pence Rule" is about women specifically, and thus the "Pence Rule" applied to all employees is like "racism" applied to all races -- nonsense.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 12-06-2018 at 03:28 PM.
  #195  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:30 PM
BrainFireBob BrainFireBob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
So, what I hear you saying here, is "Don't believe women."

A popular position, and one that has been the guiding principle for our patriarchal society for quite a while. Why fix what ain't broke, amiright?

Just for shits and giggles though, lets sit down and actually listen to what they have to say. We can always go back to patronizing later.
False dichotomy.

I'm not saying "Don't believe women."

I'm saying that demonstrating how woke you are by insisting on action now, or that only dealing with things by going to HR instead of going first to the coworker themselves or their boss, is believing that women are never wrong, mistaken, or malicious, and that's not right.

MeToo hasn't morphed into "believe all women," it's morphing into "If you don't take immediate action that's publicly visible, you're showing you don't believe women." Pendulum's too far for justice and fairness. Particularly the public part bothers me. A private reprimand- or even a private "Hey Paul, someone took that remark as sexual and this is how and why. You understand that you shouldn't do that, even if it didn't used to be that way?" is acceptable to actually correct behavior. Even a "Hey, Paul, I find that kind of offensive." Not "Paul should be publically reprimanded."

I had a coworker rush another coworker to the hospital at 1am (we are 24 hour) with a heart attack because there was no-one on site that could use the defibrillator. Saved her life, apparently, but was a complete violation of the safety guidelines. So he had a private "Don't do that" from his boss, and we all had to take safety training. No names were ever named publically. That's a fair handling of an honest error.

https://quillette.com/2018/11/23/war...r-your-career/ This is an example of a generational reference being taken as sexualized, and therefore offensive. They investigated (fair), concluded he had done nothing inappropriate and she had misunderstood him (OK), and fired him anyway (ridiculous).
  #196  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:31 PM
Ají de Gallina's Avatar
Ají de Gallina Ají de Gallina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lima, Perú
Posts: 4,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Can't quite figure out what your point is here, aside from something about your balls shriveling (and hey, speak for yourself -- I'm aware of the rare but non-zero existence of false accusations, and mine feel just fine).
Maybe some reading comprehension is needed.
Or maybe the air is too thin up there on your horse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
How does one false accusation "cancel" even one non-false accusation, much less a hundred of them?

Because, if you aren't an asshole, the false ones are the ones that worry you. You are happy they get all the bastards, but the ones against good guys are the ones that could, improbably, hit you.

Quote:
All such accusations should be taken seriously and investigated. That's what the maxim "believe women" fundamentally means.

It should, but it doesn't. In practice, BAW means men have to prove their innocence.

Quote:
When the investigation finds that, say, one out of a hundred women was not being truthful in her accusation, nobody is demanding that you believe that woman's false claims.

Everyone believe the women who accused Kavannaugh and then she recanted.

Quote:
But you aren't legally, ethically or socially entitled to disregard a hundred valid accusations (or even one) merely because you know of one accusation that was false. Or vice versa, of course.
Definitely.
  #197  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:35 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman
What the fuck is wrong with... him? And how on earth do you think his punishment is unfair? Jesus Christ.
Why cant you use adult language?
I know the kids use the word "fuck" a lot these days, but I still consider it adult language.
  #198  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:43 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
Ah, but I'm not those men, and any relationships I establish with any individual, regardless of gender, are our relationships. I'm no more guilty of what your father/brother/uncle did to you than you are of what my father/brother/uncle did to me.
As you note, though, we as individuals are the outcome of thousands of years of social conditioning in unequal relationships. Nobody in society, including you, can magically shuck off all vestiges and effects of that conditioning just by consciously recognizing that the inequality was wrong. And you are being selfish and unreasonable if you expect other people to assume that you have.

You don't get to decree, as an individual, that although you automatically benefit from having the advantage of your historically privileged status, everybody else is required to give you the (very unrealistic) benefit of the doubt that your historically privileged status has absolutely zero effect on your views or actions.
  #199  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:45 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 9,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrainFireBob View Post
https://quillette.com/2018/11/23/war...r-your-career/ This is an example of a generational reference being taken as sexualized, and therefore offensive. They investigated (fair), concluded he had done nothing inappropriate and she had misunderstood him (OK), and fired him anyway (ridiculous).
Are you sure you read that article correctly?
  #200  
Old 12-06-2018, 03:45 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB99 View Post
I don't understand this. Is it supposed to be sarcasm? I'm not trying to start an argument or anything. I just genuinely don't know what is meant by this. If I'm being courteous and professional, why should that treatment vary by person?
With that post I was trying to speak in his language so he'd better understand what I was trying to say, that's one example. I'm a tech director at a school. The way I explain things when coworkers need help depends on what level of tech knowledge they have, that's another example. I pay attention to how people talk to me, and the things they talk about, so that when I have conversations I'm taking that into consideration. I just mean treating people as individuals, and respecting every individual. that's all.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017