But they generally weren’t pretty. They’re not works of art. If it was just about pretty women for pure aesthetic appeal then they’d be clothed.
Sure. Because they’re just as aesthetic clothed. Because calendar girls aren’t pretty. Because all flesh is merely smut. Because only you get to decide what qualifies as a work of art.
Goya knew about people like you.
Nowhere did I say any of that. Why don’t you read what I actually wrote? Do you see me being as extreme as that anywhere? Everything I’ve written is very mild - note the words “unintentional” and that it wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for me at work. You’re treating me as if I’m the same as the special snowflakes who managed to find insult in Martin’s bereaved tweet and really trying your best to be insulting. I can’t be arsed continuing with such an inane argument.
So you’re leaving the thread? You can leave in a taxi. If you can’t get a taxi, you can leave in a huff. If that’s too soon, you can leave in a minute and a huff.
[Moderating]
Exapno, you’re getting a bit too irritable for this forum. Please dial it back a little.
Shrug, you would call HR if you went to the shop and one of the fellows there said “good morning, boss; good morning, beautiful ladies” with an overwrought bow?
I wouldn’t, but then, I’m not American. I recognize a compliment when it’s intended that way.
And I’m not offended by blondes in bikinis either: remarks about what a great fellow Berlusconi is, and about how the best thing a girl can ask for is to be fucked by a 70yo rich dude, sure, I find offensive. Blondes in bikinis or firemen toting hoses around, no.
Blink, you assume that recognizing mildly inappropriate workplace behavior necessarily involves calling HR?
I wouldn’t, but then, I’m not illogical.
As I indicated very clearly in the post that you quoted, while it’s not professional workplace behavior to address your female colleagues as “beautiful ladies”, it’s probably not worth complaining about. Especially in the case of a clueless elderly old fart who probably doesn’t even recognize why it’s unprofessional.
[QUOTE=Nava]
I wouldn’t, but then, I’m not American. I recognize a compliment when it’s intended that way.
[/quote]
This may blow your non-American mind, but the fact is that not all compliments, not even well-intentioned inoffensive ones from clueless elderly old farts, constitute appropriate workplace behavior. It’s unprofessional for co-workers in general to include personal remarks, even complimentary personal remarks, in standard workplace greetings.
Clueless elderly old farts, who have spent their lives taking it for granted that there doesn’t exist any conceivable situation in which it’s inappropriate to evaluate or comment on a woman’s personal appearance, typically get a pass on ignoring this concept. But it’s reasonable to expect that most of the rest of the working world, American or otherwise, will have a better grasp of it.
[QUOTE=Nava]
And I’m not offended by blondes in bikinis either: remarks about what a great fellow Berlusconi is, and about how the best thing a girl can ask for is to be fucked by a 70yo rich dude, sure, I find offensive.
[/QUOTE]
See now, some would say that that’s just joking banter and they recognize joking banter when it’s intended that way, so it’s ridiculous to get offended about it.
This is why the sensible uniform standard for professional workplace conduct is just to omit gratuitous references to personal appearance, sex lives, relationship prospects, etc., entirely.
No, we don’t have to make a full-blown sexual harassment case out of it every time some doofus says something a bit inappropriate. But if we all start from the same common-sense principle that personal/familiar/intimate comments don’t belong in standard workplace communication, then we’re much less likely to have any potentially offensive situations to argue about in the first place.
Not challenging mod disciplinary action but just pointing out that Exapno’s response was in fact a classic quote from Duck Soup. Not so much grouchy as Groucho. 
What part? The “people like you” bit, the “only you get to decide what qualifies as a work of art,” the various other parts of his posts, they were all Groucho Marx quotes?
Well, “You can leave in a taxi. If you can’t get a taxi, you can leave in a huff. If that’s too soon, you can leave in a minute and a huff.” that he posted is by Rufus T. Firefly, Groucho Marx, from Duck Soup .
Which would have been perfectly all right if the Doper posting it had been RTFirefly rather than Exapno Mapcase.
Ah - can’t see that post, but yeah, that’s a very famous quote and somehow I doubt it’s what was being moderated.
What you did there: I see it. 
Man.
Sign me up to that robotic crap hole of a workplace.
Though if that includes a total ban on either discussion of kids or personal problems I might reconsider.
Note that professional workplace etiquette doesn’t in any way preclude having personal conversations with co-workers whom you actually know personally.
But greeting random female co-workers as “beautiful ladies” when you first meet them doesn’t fall into that category.
There’s really nothing intrinsically “robotic” or “crap” about talking to co-workers professionally, without subjecting them to your random observations about their looks or their gender or their clothes or their relationships or other personal issues.
[QUOTE=billfish]
Though if that includes a total ban on either discussion of kids or personal problems I might reconsider.
[/QUOTE]
Good news! That etiquette does in fact include a total ban on discussing kids, personal problems, or other personal subjects with co-workers whom you don’t personally know well enough to discuss personal matters with.
In the case of co-workers you’re actually friends with, though, or even friendly-acquaintances, I’m afraid you don’t get an exemption from the general requirement to listen to your friends talk about things that are important to them and try to look like you care.
Of course there is. The older you are, the more likely you grew up in an era when certain levels of casual misogyny were acceptable. And, the older you are, the more rigid you are in your thinking, so it’s harder to change habits. And aging beyond a certain point tends to reduce inhibitions, both just from having lived so long and changing priorities, and as possible actual brain changes.
I mean, who hasn’t heard of the racist (great) grandpa, who we tolerate because it’s basically too late to change, and we know he doesn’t mean anything bad by it, and is not going to be in a position to discriminate, anyways?
I mean, there’s a reason why this board both skews older and, despite otherwise being quite liberal, has a huge problem with political correctness.
I’d say the outrage was a reaction to an all-too-real-phenomena that is not actually present in the tweet they reacted to, unless you really squint your eyes a certain way.
It is a reality that females of all ages are judged on their looks in ways that males are not. It’s done by men and women alike, it’s not even necessarily done to hurt women or put them down, it’s simply the environment in which women live. Some folks who object to this will object to anyone professing to value a woman because of her beauty.
I don’t think Martin was doing that, it’s different to acknowledge someone’s beauty than to say they are valued simply because of their beauty. So I can say the objectors were wrong, but I get where they’re coming from.
True, but I doubt a board member that posted nothing but <honk> and <harp music> would last very long.
It wasn’t the first time we met, it was the first and only time we went into the shop.
After how many times is it appropriate to refer to someone’s appearance?
You need to imagine my facial expressions and body language when I post a <honk>. And the silverware dropping out of my left sleeve.
<clang>
There goes the coffee pot. Thus I refute Berkeley.
Berkeley is not a poster, mods. Look it up.