Trial by media
#121
Ever been to British hen party in full flow, Kiwi? Do we sack every drunken fool for every drunken outburst? It's all about context. Nobody is defending his behaviour. Whether he should be fired or not has nothing to do with his gender.
What speaks volumes to me is the general public braying for some young nobody to lose his job when no real threat took place. It's the politics of being offended. The guy should have been verbally slapped down by the reporter (which he was) possibly slapped down by the media (which he was) asked to apologise (which he did) end of story.
What speaks volumes to me is the general public braying for some young nobody to lose his job when no real threat took place. It's the politics of being offended. The guy should have been verbally slapped down by the reporter (which he was) possibly slapped down by the media (which he was) asked to apologise (which he did) end of story.
#123
Outside of work and in private with other consenting adults is one thing. Outside of work but in public and harassing other folk trying to get on without hindrance in their lives is something else.
I would expect the same rules to apply as in other situations where some may expect employer action.
This isn't really the same as exercising freedom to go on a demo or take part in some other kind of protest. People are not free to be obnoxious just because they want to be. There are consequences.
#124
slanderer of the innocent










Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,695
From: Vancouver, BC











Ever been to British hen party in full flow, Kiwi? Do we sack every drunken fool for every drunken outburst? It's all about context. Nobody is defending his behaviour. Whether he should be fired or not has nothing to do with his gender.
What speaks volumes to me is the general public braying for some young nobody to lose his job when no real threat took place. It's the politics of being offended. The guy should have been verbally slapped down by the reporter (which he was) possibly slapped down by the media (which he was) asked to apologise (which he did) end of story.
What speaks volumes to me is the general public braying for some young nobody to lose his job when no real threat took place. It's the politics of being offended. The guy should have been verbally slapped down by the reporter (which he was) possibly slapped down by the media (which he was) asked to apologise (which he did) end of story.
In spite of all of the women on this thread telling you that this behaviour IS threatening and demeaning and lets other women know, by being allowed to continue, that treating us like crap and making sexual jokes at us because of our gender is okay. You just don't get it. And this, my fellow women, is why we're still in this position.
#125
it's official. You just don't get it.
In spite of all of the women on this thread telling you that this behaviour IS threatening and demeaning and lets other women know, by being allowed to continue, that treating us like crap and making sexual jokes at us because of our gender is okay. You just don't get it. And this, my fellow women, is why we're still in this position.
In spite of all of the women on this thread telling you that this behaviour IS threatening and demeaning and lets other women know, by being allowed to continue, that treating us like crap and making sexual jokes at us because of our gender is okay. You just don't get it. And this, my fellow women, is why we're still in this position.
#126
slanderer of the innocent










Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,695
From: Vancouver, BC











wut?
#127
Binned by Muderators










Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 11,708
From: White Rock BC











it's official. You just don't get it.
In spite of all of the women on this thread telling you that this behaviour IS threatening and demeaning and lets other women know, by being allowed to continue, that treating us like crap and making sexual jokes at us because of our gender is okay. You just don't get it. And this, my fellow women, is why we're still in this position.
In spite of all of the women on this thread telling you that this behaviour IS threatening and demeaning and lets other women know, by being allowed to continue, that treating us like crap and making sexual jokes at us because of our gender is okay. You just don't get it. And this, my fellow women, is why we're still in this position.
#128
But here's the major difference relevant to this situation.
Outside of work and in private with other consenting adults is one thing. Outside of work but in public and harassing other folk trying to get on without hindrance in their lives is something else.
I would expect the same rules to apply as in other situations where some may expect employer action.
This isn't really the same as exercising freedom to go on a demo or take part in some other kind of protest. People are not free to be obnoxious just because they want to be. There are consequences.
Outside of work and in private with other consenting adults is one thing. Outside of work but in public and harassing other folk trying to get on without hindrance in their lives is something else.
I would expect the same rules to apply as in other situations where some may expect employer action.
This isn't really the same as exercising freedom to go on a demo or take part in some other kind of protest. People are not free to be obnoxious just because they want to be. There are consequences.
She was just trying to do her job.
I'd rather have seen the Police caution and fine this guy. I think it's something that should have been handled by the authorities.
I can understand why the employer severed ties too. You can't be seen to condone that behaviour in anyway. The tragedy here is that the guy who originally shouted into the microphone has never been named or shamed. He is living his life quite happily with no doubt some notoriety amongst his bro's.
Last edited by JamesM; May 21st 2015 at 4:10 am.
#130
Lost in BE Cyberspace










Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,578
From: Somewhere between Vancouver & St Johns











#132
Binned by Muderators










Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 11,708
From: White Rock BC











Moving off slightly and speaking generally, I'm always surprised when people say employers are free to hire and fire who they like and operate whatever practices they see fit.
Isn't this why we have laws that protect employees and potential employees from discriminatory practices?
Isn't this why we have laws that protect employees and potential employees from discriminatory practices?
Firing, or not hiring, someone because they are an arsehole isn't.
#133
Ranting on a forum anonymously will not solve the issue.
#134
(Note that my belief that sexist behaviour is rampant in Canadian workplaces should not be construed as an endorsement of such behaviour. Nor should it be taken to mean that I think specific other countries are necessarily better. Still, I think there's little an individual victim in Canada can do about it).
Last edited by dbd33; May 21st 2015 at 4:30 am.
#135
A dose of reality, regarding employment in the US military:
US: Military Whistleblowers At Risk | Human Rights Watch
Summary
Spat on. Deprived of food. Assailed with obscenities and
insults—“whore,†“cum dumpster,â€
“slut,†“faggot,†“wildebeest.†Threatened
with death by “friendly fire†during deployment. Demeaned. Demoted.
Disciplined. Discharged for misconduct.
It is no secret that the US military has a sexual assault
problem: the Department of Defense estimates that 18,900 US service members
were sexually assaulted in fiscal year (FY) 2014.[1] But the slurs, sanctions, and scorn described above are not the punishments
that soldiers and their superiors have meted out to those who have perpetrated
sexual assault in the armed forces, but rather what happened to victims
who reported their experiences.
Military sexual assault survivors almost never see a remedy
for these actions, for which virtually no one is held accountable. Military
surveys indicate that most respondents—62 percent—who experienced
unwanted sexual contact and reported it to a military authority faced
retaliation as a result of reporting.[2] In other
words, military service members who reported sexual assault were 12 times more
likely to suffer retaliation for doing so than to see their offender, if also a
service member, convicted for a sex offense. Just 5 percent (175 out of 3,261)
of sexual assault cases in the Defense Department’s jurisdiction
investigated with a reportable outcome in FY 2014 led to a sex offense
conviction.[3]
It is estimated that only one in four victims reports sexual
assault to military authorities. In surveys, service members consistently cite
fear of retaliation from the perpetrator or the perpetrator’s friends, or
concern about their careers, as reasons for not reporting.[4]
US: Military Whistleblowers At Risk | Human Rights Watch
Summary
Spat on. Deprived of food. Assailed with obscenities and
insults—“whore,†“cum dumpster,â€
“slut,†“faggot,†“wildebeest.†Threatened
with death by “friendly fire†during deployment. Demeaned. Demoted.
Disciplined. Discharged for misconduct.
It is no secret that the US military has a sexual assault
problem: the Department of Defense estimates that 18,900 US service members
were sexually assaulted in fiscal year (FY) 2014.[1] But the slurs, sanctions, and scorn described above are not the punishments
that soldiers and their superiors have meted out to those who have perpetrated
sexual assault in the armed forces, but rather what happened to victims
who reported their experiences.
Military sexual assault survivors almost never see a remedy
for these actions, for which virtually no one is held accountable. Military
surveys indicate that most respondents—62 percent—who experienced
unwanted sexual contact and reported it to a military authority faced
retaliation as a result of reporting.[2] In other
words, military service members who reported sexual assault were 12 times more
likely to suffer retaliation for doing so than to see their offender, if also a
service member, convicted for a sex offense. Just 5 percent (175 out of 3,261)
of sexual assault cases in the Defense Department’s jurisdiction
investigated with a reportable outcome in FY 2014 led to a sex offense
conviction.[3]
It is estimated that only one in four victims reports sexual
assault to military authorities. In surveys, service members consistently cite
fear of retaliation from the perpetrator or the perpetrator’s friends, or
concern about their careers, as reasons for not reporting.[4]



