I'M SICK OF BEING PC (regarding certain individuals) i.e., I am an insensitive bitch.


Usually I have great admiration for your observations and witty, interesting writing.

This time, you sir, have crossed the line
::stomps off muttering[sub]Krispy Kremes RULE dammit[/sub]::

His crime is also his punishment

Every time this guy eats more than his fair share of extremely unhealthy food, he is damaging himself. Every time someone else doesn’t get a donut, they are being spared something that will contribute to poor health.

He’s a selfish glutton headed for Dante’s 3rd circle of hell. Sit back and - if you want - take pleasure in the pain and suffering his poor knees, heart, arteries, colon, etc etc will soon cause him.

Maybe what needs to happen is that FATTY gets his own very special plate of, say, 10 doughnuts and every one else is asked not to touch FATTY’s plate and therefore FATTY gets the wolfing he “needs”.


A very special note goes around the doughnuts that states NONE FOR YOU FATTY 'COS WE DON’T LIKE YOU.

In either manner your are either celebrating the difference between FATTY and everyone else, accepting that he “needs” more, or you are excluding him because you dislike him rather than 'cos he’s a FAT BASTARD.

Anyone else thinking of Milton and the incident with Lumburgh’s cake in Office Space?

Are you on crack? This isn’t a quibble over whether 1/8 or 1/6 of a pie is an appropriate piece. Fucko over there took almost half of the food for himself. It was supposed to be for everyone (or almost everyone) and he took half. Half! The fact that he happens to be fat would have been irrelevant had he a) not used it himself as an excuse and b) not threatoned to complain to upper management about it so he could bully his was into continuing to take more than his share. He deserves to be shamed for his selfishness.


This is what I’m thinking too.

This guy is an ass - a selfish hog of an ass. And he’d be an ass if he were fat or thin.

I personally don’t care what you said to him, because he’s clearly an ass, and he doesn’t deserve much sympathy. But your attitude here tells me that you have some “issues” with fat, and this guy is a convenient target because he’s an ass, who also happens to be fat.

His weight has little to do with it. He’s just an ass.

This man is a greedy pig.

Being a greedy pig has made him fat.

So it’s his own fault. You despise him for being a greedy pig, there’s nothing wrong with that.

How fking selfish and mean-spirited to eat 5 donuts. And how fking disgusting. (Assuming these were big donuts, not those mini ones).

You know what I am thinking? I will tell you.

More office disputes are over food-issues than over salary. I swear to Og, if people would cool it with the bringing-in-food and the dividing-up-food-into-portions and the birthday-parties and the washing-up and the give-me-money-to-buy-food and the I’m-a-good-person-because-I-brought-in-food -

Well really. It’s stupid, it causes more problems than it solves, and if I were an office manager, I would just ban all food in the office. Too big of a fucking headache.

No offense to the OP. Enjoy your doughnuts.

I work in a law office, too. Sounds as if this guy is a certainty for partnership - he has all the right attitudes.

We’ve got one like that in our office, too: we make bets on how quickly he’ll hoover up any new goodies that appear in the pantry.

Kate S

Whether you intended it to be or not, that is some funny fuckin shit you said there. The picture in my head is priceless.

That would explain a lot.

Just a nit: I don’t think there’s enough information in the story problem to conclude that he took half the doughnuts. He took five. Five!

The fact that he happens to be fat is irrelevant, except the OP spent the first three paragraphs ripping on fat people. Was the guy rude? It appears so, no matter what his weight. Is he oversensitive about his weight, thus imputing false motives to BBJ? Probably, but perhaps understandably. Did BBJ have to play doughnut police? I guess she thought so.

But the tone of the OP still offends me. I am left with the feeling that if the offender were a marathon runner in training, and his excuse was that he “had just run a 20 miler this morning”, the we wouldn’t be treated to those three paragraphs ranting about scrawny long distance runners, and how they’re always overeating because they artificially burn more calories than they need to. I’m not sure what the equivalent of “so large his ripples have ripples”, “he sweats when he has to walk from one end of the office to the other”, “He is NOT disabled in any way aside from the weight”, and “MY GOD THIS BOY CAN PUT AWAY THE GROCERIES. Fried chicken, fried pies, french fries, burgers, cheesecake…he eats enough for a small army” would be for a long distance runner.

So, I may be imputing false motives to BBJ too, and if so, I apologize, Jeanie. Reading and rereading the post, it still strikes me as offensive. If I were overweight, reading it would make me feel shitty. And so I don’t think it’s all that nice to post it here. Not that we have to be nice, but we should. We should not insult entire groups of people unless they’ve earned it. YMMV.

Another gem from this thread. lol

Well, you’re not apparently overweight, so how do you know how fat people feel?
I’m not obese.
I’m portly !
Well, maybe a little chunkier than portly, but I couldn’t give two rats arses whether you think I’m fat or not.
If I ate half the donuts, I think it fair that you think I’m a pig.
By Og, if I ate half the donuts I would think myself a pig.
But obviously this person doesn’t.
It’s not about being fat, it’s about the idea of sharing.

I have a fat cock. Thats abuot all thats fat on me.

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Yikes, I didn’t know this would be all that controversial. I have two ways of knowing about other people: talking to them and putting myself in their shoes. Both communication and empathy suggest that people don’t like undeserved personal criticism.

Err, then why didn’t it start off with: “So calling someone “rude” or “inconsiderate” as a criticism is a VERY BAD THING on these boards…”?

The OP didn’t suggest that they referred to the culprit here as fat, but only that PC requires she not refer to him as fat.

Me, I would have referred to him as a greedy bastard, making it quite clear that he was taking more than his share and avoided the fat altogether.

What appears to have happened, is that
BottledBlondJeanie suggested that the gentlman, take his fair share (ie. “you don’t need that many.”) and he appeared to start in on the fat (really implying that he knows he’s done bad, and is trying to deflect the situation from himself back to BBJ).

Bad, fat boy !!!

But then she did go on to refer to him as fat. In quite insulting terms.

Note that I’m not objecting to what BBJ said to him, I could give a rats ass about that. I’m objecting that she came in here ranting about “fat people”.

We’ve established that his bad behavior had nothing to do with his weight. She didn’t speak to him about his weight, so ripping on him about it here doesn’t do anything to him. What it does do is insult any reader who happens to be heavy (whether you feel insulted or not).

Again, it’s quite clear that her gratuitous criticism in this rant is about his appearance, and that appearance happens to be one that is shared by any number of people who didn’t take five doughnuts.

She didn’t confine her criticism to his behavior, and I will not hold off pointing that out. I don’t give a crap if she was sensitive to this particular dick she works with that she already has a history with. I do give a crap if she’s sensitive in general to other people.

Not trying to be the PC police, just saying: if you say rude things, others might point it out.

Newton, you are not making sense. Your first post in this thread was a rather lame analogy suggesting that what the gentleman did (inhale 5 donuts) was not wrong, and that what Jeanie said to him was unwarranted (“it’s about not eating the exact amount I think you should”). Now you say: “Note that I’m not objecting to what BBJ said to him, I could give a rats ass about that. I’m objecting that she came in here ranting about “fat people”.”

What gives? Once you find fault with a post, are you the type of person who will seek to nitpick each and every point therein instead on focusing on the point you objected to? The preferred method for doing this to quote her post line by line, inserting your own commentary after each brief quote.

No, it was a lame knee-jerk analogy suggesting that she saw malice where perhaps none was intended and that it shouldn’t matter so much to her what others eat. Upon further reading, I saw that this person was an “asshole” and her secretary was deprived of a much needed doughnut thus making it everyone’s business, so I withdraw the lame analogy.

Yes, that’s the essence of it. That’s my sole remaining objection.

What if I have more than one objection? Is that allowed? Initially, I objected on two grounds:

  1. I wouldn’t worry so much about what others eat
  2. despite the prostetations of the pro-insult camp, bitching about someones appearance while claiming it has nothing to do with appearance are incongruent

Now, I’m happy to accept that what her coworkers eat is DDJ’s business, and she has a duty to make sure that they share. But I still hold objection #2. I will accept that one can disagree and find the rant damn funny. And I suppose I’ll just shut up about it.

Thanks for the fill-in. I though snarky sarcastic comments would be more effective.

Snarky comments are fine, but only the line by line dissection announces, “I’m here to argue about everything.” I should have mentioned that at least one of the mini-arguments should be purely on semantic grounds…

Anyway, I’m glad to see you at least admit the guy is an ass. As for having more than one objection: sure, go nuts. My point was that your latter post seemed to contradict your former.