Yes.
No, about the same.
Here, let me play you the song of my people for your “concern”, motherfucker:
Seriously, you don’t think your past and your politics has ever disqualified for a job? If your a conservative, the very idea that this can happen to you may be a new and startling concept, but as a liberal female who had a long and successful sales career, it’s something I’ve been aware of for a long time.
My politics and religion ( or lack thereof) would have disqualified me from working for several companies in the industry I used to work in, had I chosen to apply. But I didn’t apply, because I knew I wouldn’t be a good fit for the highly religious corporate culture of those businesses, which included things like lunchtime prayer meetings. Anyway, those companies filled all their executive positions through religion-specific head-hunting services.
But I’ve lost sales jobs with companies that weren’t as ardently religious, because the owners made a calculation that their clientele was too conservative for me. HOW DO I know this?
Thirty, forty years ago, the hiring managers had no compunction about telling me WHY they went with someone else, and it usually went like “You are very qualified but our clients are very old school and set in their ways and we don’t think they’d respond well to a young modern woman handling their account.” And I’ve been in meetings where the owners made the same calculation about other potential hires.
So, worlds smallest violin. Life’s not fair.
I am very, very far from being a conservative.
Same. My religion in fact barred me from a job for which I was applying, a few decades ago.
No shit. I’m not complaining. Just saying I got lucky.
Apparently you’ve forgotten how to treat people with respect. Your childhood self was better.
Eh, that’s not really “cancel culture”. That’s the Trumpworld staffers being entitled and not realizing that when the wheel turns and you’re at the bottom, you go back down to the trenches especially if your turn at the top was entirely a stroke of luck. If some of those people were willing to swallow their pride and go work for some state GOP or mid-sized corporation in “flyover” country, they’d likely find the space for them. Sure, at half or a third the salary, but cost of living is lower there. Oh, José Andrés does not have restaurants there? Deal with it. I’ve known what it’s like to take a 50%+ cut or a big reloc that stresses a relationship to stay in the game. Didn’t kill me.
Which BTW does touch upon this thread’s recent themes, though. Many posters seem to be focused on the idea that McCammond will (or should) never again have it this good again. Well, hell, how do we know that?
What? Are you suggesting that people aren’t entitled to the job of their choice? And your personal history might mean the job you want might not want you?
Surely this is some SJW woke nonsense that was only invented in the last few years!
While I have mixed feelings about dredging up old social media posts and holding them against someone, I think you make a valid point here. This was a business decision. Even assuming McCammond’s coworkers were okay with her, her continued employment may have made many of Teen Vogue’s readership upset and pissing off your customers is bad for business.
“Kavanaugh was just a kid if he did sexually assault those women.” “We really shouldn’t hold Brock Turner’s behavior against him, he is young and on such a promising path.”
You know, some behavior just means that you are career limited, no matter when that behavior occurred. That doesn’t mean no one should ever hire you, just that becoming Editor of Teen Vogue or a Supreme Court justice should not be in your future. There are plenty of people who operate at the highest level that don’t have misogynist or racist shit in their backgrounds.
I think there’s a world of difference between a guy forcing his penis into a woman’s mouth and verbalizing a politically incorrect thought.
He’s fully embraced his intrinsic victim status.
This is possibly one of the shallowest, most reductive, superficial, and deceptive types of comparisons that can be made.
I would have to agree with this statement. But that means nothing. It’s an irrelevant comparison.
I treat people with respect until they show they’re not deserving of it. Perfectly consistent with my younger self, who would also have told you to shove off, just more politely.
It’s not at all superficial or reductive. We’re discussing degrees and how to calibrate an appropriate response, which depends on the offense. I wasn’t the one who used sexual assault for the purposes of comparison, but since someone did, I pointed out that the obvious, that it’s much easier to forgive a teenager who commits a slip of the tongue than one who commits rape. Introducing comparisons to rape reflects fuzzy thinking, and not on my part.
Repeated racist polemic is not “a slip of the tongue”
Denying someone a plum public job is nowhere near the degree of punishment that we hope for a rapist. That’s where your comparison failed. Yes, some consequences for the two might turn out to be similar, but that’s not where the comparison ends, and that’s not the important part of the comparison, and that’s where your statement was superficial and deceptive.
That’s certainly true.
Hopefully we’re not okay with that being a justification, in and of itself, for employment policies.
Point taken, but it’s not like we’re talking about a doxed Stormfront user, either.
I don’t really care about the Kavanaugh comparison, as it wasn’t my yardstick anyway.
I would probably be less inclined to defend McCammond in this instance if we were back in 2019 and this was the first time someone had confronted her. I’d still likely say that it was a long time ago and ask whether she’s made any close to those kinds of remarks in recent years, but I would at least get the argument that it’s the first time she’s being held accountable for her past remarks.
But having since owned up to past insensitivity, having taken down the offending messages, having apologized, having done really all anyone could reasonably ask her to do…and then to have to deal with this again makes McCammond the victim, not those who were ‘offended’ by what she wrote. And in a sane world, that shouldn’t be possible; it’s only possible when there’s a misapplication of ‘justice,’ which is what we have here.
Ahh, who else remembers 2019? Before the internet, before aeroplanes, back when the world ran on coal and whale oil…
2021-2019=2 . . . that’s a very narrow definition of “recent years” and “long time ago” you got there.