Cursed Political Content

[TexRex]

I sort of get it.

I mean you start off by saying that it's about a thing but then you go off on this meandering diatribe which has exactly nothing to do with that thing. It's...it's weird.

If this is providing a cornerstone for you to generalize that many women are falsely accusing men of rape because they will somehow benefit personally from this as a way to somehow game the system, I think you should re-evaluate that belief.

 

[Joey D]

Is it? I see it with white people all the time. "Brown people took my job and are ruining the country", etc.

Bigotry isn't a protected class, and saying legitimately bigoted things can and should get you in trouble. But calling out a terrible employee who happens to be black and you're white isn't bigoted or racist, it's calling out an inept person. But some people will use their race, religion, sexual orientation, whatever, to deflect the criticism and preserve their job while making it more difficult for the person who called them out.

That's a sad story. There is an element of it that does not ring true, because if it was a long drawn out battle for your cousin, it was a long drawn out battle for someone else as well, with little hope of any payoff other than "justice". Someone who simply wants to shake the stigma of being with a "loser" doesn't file a police report. They simply make false accusations.

Her saying he's a loser does not mean he didn't rape her. Her saying she would accuse him of rape does not mean he didn't rape her. Now, it's quite possible that he didn't, but I'm not sure how a screenshot could prove that unless the screenshot said she knew he didn't but would falsely accuse him anyway for... reasons. I do understand that you know your cousin better than I do, but I also understand that there are many motivating factors to believe a cousin.

She specifically said something along the lines of that her friend said he was a loser and that she shouldn't have slept with him, therefore she's just going to say he raped her. Obviously, an investigation determined that he wasn't guilty and that the girl lied. I have no idea what, if anything, happened to the girl, but I'm guessing the worst thing should could've been charged with is filing a false police report. I wasn't there, and I got the information from him and my aunt. But at the end of the day, he wasn't guilty of any crimes, so clearly the justice system sided with him.

If this is providing a cornerstone for you to generalize that many women are falsely accusing men of rape because they will somehow benefit personally from this as a way to somehow game the system, I think you should re-evaluate that belief.

I don't base it on one incident at all. People are falsely accused of sexual assault all the time. It's impossible to know how many reports are false, though, but it's suggested that between 2-8% of reports are false. That's not an insignificant number because being falsely accused of sexual assault will ruin someone's life.

I mean you start off by saying that it's about a thing but then you go off on this meandering diatribe which has exactly nothing to do with that thing. It's...it's weird.

Cool, you don't believe me.

I'm not sure how you don't think what I wrote isn't about what the subject was. I get why some white males are walking on eggshells because people who aren't white men and are assholes have learned they can weaponize their miniority status to cover their own ineptitude and preserve their jobs. HRs are all about protecting liability for a company and it way more likely for someone to sue and win using a racism or sexism claim over a white male trying to make a claim they're being discriminated. In no way does this mean all minorities do this, it's just easier for assholes who happen to be a miniority to be assholes.

 

[Danoff]

Bigotry isn't a protected class, and saying legitimately bigoted things can and should get you in trouble. But calling out a terrible employee who happens to be black and you're white isn't bigoted or racist, it's calling out an inept person. But some people will use their race, religion, sexual orientation, whatever, to deflect the criticism and preserve their job while making it more difficult for the person who called them out.

That's also what people are doing when they're complaining about immigrants taking their jobs though. If someone can do the job better than you, or cheaper, crying about it by saying they should be kicked out the country is quite parallel to the kind of game you're talking about. It's just the white people play it more.

She specifically said something along the lines of that her friend said he was a loser and that she shouldn't have slept with him, therefore she's just going to say he raped her. Obviously, an investigation determined that he wasn't guilty and that the girl lied. I have no idea what, if anything, happened to the girl, but I'm guessing the worst thing should could've been charged with is filing a false police report. I wasn't there, and I got the information from him and my aunt. But at the end of the day, he wasn't guilty of any crimes, so clearly the justice system sided with him.

The threshold for proof is high.

I don't base it on one incident at all. People are falsely accused of sexual assault all the time. It's impossible to know how many reports are false, though, but it's suggested that between 2-8% of reports are false. That's not an insignificant number because being falsely accused of sexual assault will ruin someone's life.

I'm not doubting that people are falsely accused. I think the default has to be to believe the accuser though, because honestly there is not much in it for them and it's hard to do. I'm not sure what this has to do with inept co-workers, but I think you should reconsider your belief on this one.

I get why some white males are walking on eggshells because people who aren't white men and are assholes have learned they can weaponize their miniority status to cover their own ineptitude and preserve their jobs.

White men are also generally weaponizing their status against minorities to preserve their own ineptitude. It goes by the name of MAGA at the moment.

HRs are all about protecting liability for a company and it way more likely for someone to sue and win using a racism or sexism claim over a white male trying to make a claim they're being discriminated. In no way does this mean all minorities do this, it's just easier for assholes who happen to be a miniority to be assholes.

I think it's actually easier for white male assholes in this country at the moment. It's just that there are avenues for assholes of all colors.

 

[TexRex]

I'm not sure how you don't think what I wrote isn't about what the subject was. I get why some white males are walking on eggshells because people who aren't white men and are assholes have learned they can weaponize their miniority status to cover their own ineptitude and preserve their jobs. HRs are all about protecting liability for a company and it way more likely for someone to sue and win using a racism or sexism claim over a white male trying to make a claim they're being discriminated. In no way does this mean all minorities do this, it's just easier for assholes who happen to be a miniority to be assholes.

I don't think what you wrote is about what the subject was because the "walking on eggshells" idiom refers to a specific thing and though you did touch on that thing briefly, the vast majority of what you wrote previously and have continued as quoted is about an entirely different thing which may or may not have merit so long as the topic isn't "walking on eggshells."

And I should say I do understand to some degree why you've lumped the two things together, as they are frequently lumped together in conservative grievance loops with each point, however tangential, feeding some other part of it. Even the whole thing about regretting having consensual sex and then crying rape comes up and abortion gets wrapped up into it ("oh you didn't think you would get pregnant but because you did and you don't have access to legal abortion services it's suddenly rape you little slut") because of conservatives' general contempt for the notion of consent but for when it's their own or when it can be seized upon to deprive others of liberty and bodily sovereignty. But that's weird and so it continues to be weird when you do it even as I understand why you've done it. It's as if there's this giant grievance reservoir with a single spigot at the bottom where where every little bitch what purports to be a victim lines up to fill their own tank.

"Walking on eggshells" refers to grievance about not speaking as you wish in the workplace because others are too easily offended, but that's also stupid because it's the workplace and you don't really have control over who your coworkers are short of quitting. I can be very crass in company that I've chosen but I understand and accept that there may be consequences if I let that spill over into the workplace, and that there may be consequences that compel me to be mindful of what I say does not make me a victim.

Oh and I've worked in some hiring capacity off and on for...christ...close to thirty years now and you'd better believe I've been accused both of selecting and overlooking applicants because they're part of very nearly every demographic except Amish, but that's still nothing to do with "walking on eggshells."

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I get why some white males are walking on eggshells because...<snip>...In no way does this mean all minorities do this, it's just easier for assholes who happen to be a miniority to be assholes.

In my experience the opposite of true. Assholes tend to overwhelmingly be white males specifically due to the entitlement they have derived from not to having to walk on eggshells. Assholism, generally, seems to stem from entitlement (just look at the two biggest assholes in the world who also happen to be the two most entitled people in the world), and white men still have more of it than any other group.

Raise the top income tax rate to 92%. Reform executive compensation. Eliminate the electoral college.

 

[TexRex]

This is a ride.

 

[Danoff]

This is a ride.

Do they not know what Grok is?

 

[McLaren]

Disturbingly hilarious how Elon & Donakd's relationship to Maxwell is consistently ignored by these things.

 

[TexRex]

Disturbingly hilarious how Elon & Donakd's relationship to Maxwell is consistently ignored by these things.

So I'm assuming the edit was changing Donald to Donakd.

 

[McLaren]

So I'm assuming the edit was changing Donald to Donakd.

It was adding -ly to disturbing b/c hand type faster than brain a lot.

Donakd is what I'll start calling him properly from now on, if that's how he wishes to call himself. I respect people's names.

 

[TexRex]

It was adding -ly to disturbing b/c hand type faster than brain a lot.

A terrible affliction that I'm all too familiar with.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Disturbingly hilarious how Elon & Donakd's relationship to Maxwell is consistently ignored by these things.

Also analizing the picture seems a tad extreme.

 

[Blitz24]

It was adding -ly to disturbing b/c hand type faster than brain a lot.

Donakd is what I'll start calling him properly from now on, if that's how he wishes to call himself. I respect people's names.

You have to show us how to pronounce "Donakd". Else I'm going the "Wojciehowicz" route.

 

[Denur]

"Yes, of course I have heard about NATO's article 5. It has something to do with friends and there are many words in this article, the greatest words. I am sure someone can explain them to me, or not. Let's not talk about this anymore"



/s

 

[Joey D]

That's also what people are doing when they're complaining about immigrants taking their jobs though. If someone can do the job better than you, or cheaper, crying about it by saying they should be kicked out the country is quite parallel to the kind of game you're talking about. It's just the white people play it more.

That has nothing to do with being threatened at work, though. You can spout all the BS you want at work about how immigrants are taking your job, but HR isn't going to protect you because of it. If anything, they're going to reprimand you for it. Outside the workplace, at least the corporate workplace, I would agree that it's a very different thing.

My point is though, people who would yell false accusations at work over racism, sexism, whatever have the same mindset of someone would would falsely accuse someone of rape. They're using something they know will get traction to, at best, deflect their own shortcomings or bad decisions, and, at worst, ruin someone's life. I get why some white men could feel like they need to be careful because often times they're seen as the default and a decent number of people believe that white men can't be raped, or have racism or sexism done to them. This does not in any way discount that many claims of sexism, racism, rape whatever are absolutely true, but there is a mindset among some people that they can just claim this stuff as a get out of jail free card.

I don't think what you wrote is about what the subject was because the "walking on eggshells" idiom refers to a specific thing and though you did touch on that thing briefly, the vast majority of what you wrote previously and have continued as quoted is about an entirely different thing which may or may not have merit so long as the topic isn't "walking on eggshells."

And I should say I do understand to some degree why you've lumped the two things together, as they are frequently lumped together in conservative grievance loops with each point, however tangential, feeding some other part of it. Even the whole thing about regretting having consensual sex and then crying rape comes up and abortion gets wrapped up into it ("oh you didn't think you would get pregnant but because you did and you don't have access to legal abortion services it's suddenly rape you little slut") because of conservatives' general contempt for the notion of consent but for when it's their own or when it can be seized upon to deprive others of liberty and bodily sovereignty. But that's weird and so it continues to be weird when you do it even as I understand why you've done it. It's as if there's this giant grievance reservoir with a single spigot at the bottom where where every little bitch what purports to be a victim lines up to fill their own tank.

"Walking on eggshells" refers to grievance about not speaking as you wish in the workplace because others are too easily offended, but that's also stupid because it's the workplace and you don't really have control over who your coworkers are short of quitting. I can be very crass in company that I've chosen but I understand and accept that there may be consequences if I let that spill over into the workplace, and that there may be consequences that compel me to be mindful of what I say does not make me a victim.

Oh and I've worked in some hiring capacity off and on for...christ...close to thirty years now and you'd better believe I've been accused both of selecting and overlooking applicants because they're part of very nearly every demographic except Amish, but that's still nothing to do with "walking on eggshells."

I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that different people interpret idioms and sayings differently. I don't hear the phrase "walking on eggshells" and immediately think it means you can't use racist language in the workplace because people can't take a joke. To me, it means someone is going to fly off the handle at every little thing even if what's being said to them is 100% justified and correct. I've had a boss in the past would get mad if you typed too loudly, didn't format e-mails the way they wanted it done, and didn't keep your desk in a certain order. To all of us we felt like we had to walk on eggshells not to get her wrath. She didn't last long as a boss, but we all had to essentially tip toe around or risk getting our ass chewed out.

I'm not sure how the questions were posed in the survey since all I can find are news articles on it. It's likely not even a real survey done with any kind of scientific merit, but if you open endedly asked me if I felt like I had to walk on eggshells at work, I would say yes, there are times I do. It's not because I want to tell offensive jokes, use the n word openly, or sexual harass Sue from accounting. It's because I fear backlash by a small set of assholes who've learned they can use things to get you in hot water with HR.

In my experience the opposite of true. Assholes tend to overwhelmingly be white males specifically due to the entitlement they have derived from not to having to walk on eggshells. Assholism, generally, seems to stem from entitlement (just look at the two biggest assholes in the world who also happen to be the two most entitled people in the world), and white men still have more of it than any other group.

Raise the top income tax rate to 92%. Reform executive compensation. Eliminate the electoral college.

I don't disagree that a lot of white males are assholes, but I don't think assholism is race specific. Anyone can be an asshole. What I was specifically talking about is that assholes who are from a miniority group have something they can and do weaponize to hide their asshole behavior. It's really easy to gather sympathy by just shouting "you're racist" or "you're sexist" during an argument. I mean, look at how virtually every Israeli supporter is when you call out Israel for committing genocide. Instead of discussing it, they immediately call you an antisemite to deflect that they support the mass killing of Muslims.

 

[Danoff]

That has nothing to do with being threatened at work, though. You can spout all the BS you want at work about how immigrants are taking your job, but HR isn't going to protect you because of it. If anything, they're going to reprimand you for it. Outside the workplace, at least the corporate workplace, I would agree that it's a very different thing.

I guess I don't understand why you're limiting your discussion of this to the workplace.

My point is though, people who would yell false accusations at work over racism, sexism, whatever have the same mindset of someone would would falsely accuse someone of rape. They're using something they know will get traction to, at best, deflect their own shortcomings or bad decisions, and, at worst, ruin someone's life.

Why are we not limiting this to discussion of the workplace? I mean, I suppose you could falsely accuse your boss of rape, but you could also accuse your boss of being or hiring an illegal immigrant. I'm struggling to understand where you're going to include something in the discussion and where it gets excluded. To avoid stepping on toes (walking on eggshells as it were), I'll stop there.

False accusations of rape likely have a variety of different motives. First, it's not something that is going to happen often. Second, for Darwinistic reasons, female humans are socially blamed for promiscuity (not men of course). One way to avoid this accusation (in some cultures), is to blame a man for for forcing the act, thereby absolving yourself of promiscuity, but simultaneously taking on the stigma of a loss of purity, which can put you in the penalty box for period of time until it's clear that you're not carrying.

This is lessened in a culture such as ours that doesn't punish AS MUCH for promiscuity. So part of the way to avoid men getting falsely accused of rape is to adopt a culture that is accepting of female promiscuity. You'd think this would be a win win for men, but male culture really leans into biological impulses and so we, as a group, are too stupid to get out of our own way.

In general, a false accusation of rape might get traction. But it accomplishes little to actually deflect shortcomings or "bad" decisions. It would likely come from someone who is deeply concerned about the social harm that promiscuity can cause. It can cause other false statements too after a breakup.

A false accusation of rape in court is something a little different. It could be about getting a legal stamp of approval on promiscuity, but it comes at extreme cost of time and money, and accomplishes little over simply stating a false accusation and then not pressing charges. It requires evidence, patience, effort, time. And the hope of a payoff? In most cases (especially if the man is a "loser"), basically no way of recouping that effort except for maybe a misplaced sense of improved social status.

Anyway, I thought we were talking about the workplace.

mindset among some people that they can just claim this stuff as a get out of jail free card.

You mean like crying DEI?

I've had a boss in the past would get mad if you typed too loudly, didn't format e-mails the way they wanted it done, and didn't keep your desk in a certain order.

Walking on eggshells is what happens in corporate jobs at every level. Because people (men especially) are bad at managing.

I would say yes, there are times I do. It's not because I want to tell offensive jokes, use the n word openly, or sexual harass Sue from accounting. It's because I fear backlash

It's because you have a desk job and managers are almost universally incompetent in management, because they don't get promoted for managerial success.

Instead of discussing it, they immediately call you an antisemite to deflect that they support the mass killing of Muslims.

Everyone does this. Motivated reasoning and dehumanization is almost universal.

 

[Joey D]

I guess I don't understand why you're limiting your discussion of this to the workplace.

Because that's what the article posted was about:

Why are we not limiting this to discussion of the workplace?

I'm talking about the culture of false accusations and how that carries over to the workplace. We hear cases about false accusations of rape and sexual assault all the time, especially in the sports world. Pitcher Trevor Bauer was wrongfully accused, kicker Matt Araiza was wrongfully accused, and there was an entire scandal at Duke regarding the lacrosse team just to name a handful of well-known cases. I'm saying a person who wrongfully accuses someone of sexism, racism, whatever, in the workplace has the same mindset as someone who would falsely accuse someone of rape.

You mean like crying DEI?

Sure? I'm not seeing what "what about X" is needed here. I'm pretty sure I've made it clear that this stuff happens all across the board. The initial headline was "white men feel like they are walking on eggshells at work," which is what I'm talking about.

It's because you have a desk job and managers are almost universally incompetent in management, because they don't get promoted for managerial success.

Nope, it's not because I have a desk job. It's because I don't know the intentions of any of my coworkers, because I don't care to know enough about them outside what they do at work. Maybe they're the type to raise a fuss with HR over things, maybe they aren't. I try to know as little as possible about the people I work with and focus strictly on work. It makes it easier to judge them solely on the work that they do because if I openly liked or hated someone on a personal level, then it's going to skew how I view their work. I've worked plenty of non desk jobs where I try to do the same thing.

Everyone does this. Motivated reasoning and dehumanization is almost universal.

Everyone does not resort to calling people antisemites.

 

[Danoff]

Because that's what the article posted was about:

View attachment 1460343

Ok, but you started a broader conversation about this and then want to exclude things from the broader conversation. This clip from Fox News is just pandering to white male victim complex. I'm surprised you didn't dismiss it at that. Everyone walks on eggshells at work. It's impossible not to identify with that part of it.

I'm saying a person who wrongfully accuses someone of sexism, racism, whatever, in the workplace has the same mindset as someone who would falsely accuse someone of rape.

...and illegal immigration, and MAGA. Yes. This is your broader discussion that extends outside of the workplace, but then when I talk about the "mindset" you want to limit it to the workplace. When you talk about the "mindset" you can talk about Israel or rape and it's fine somehow, even though it's outside the workpalce.

Sure? I'm not seeing what "what about X" is needed here. I'm pretty sure I've made it clear that this stuff happens all across the board. The initial headline was "white men feel like they are walking on eggshells at work," which is what I'm talking about.

DEI is generally a workplace initiative, and white men moan constantly (these days) about that workplace initiative. So it's totally 100% on point and is the same mentality and you're STILL excluding it from the conversation.

Nope, it's not because I have a desk job. It's because I don't know the intentions of any of my coworkers, because I don't care to know enough about them outside what they do at work. Maybe they're the type to raise a fuss with HR over things, maybe they aren't. I try to know as little as possible about the people I work with and focus strictly on work. It makes it easier to judge them solely on the work that they do because if I openly liked or hated someone on a personal level, then it's going to skew how I view their work. I've worked plenty of non desk jobs where I try to do the same thing.

You completely ignored my point. Nobody knows the intentions of their co-workers. Nobody knows whether they'll get in trouble, or not promoted, or whatever, because of anything they say about virtually anything. Which is why EVERYONE (especially at desk jobs) walks on eggshells at work. It is also known as emotional labor, and it is something that people do when in customer facing positions as well.

You're trying to make a point in a vacuum except where you like the context. It is motivated reasoning.

Everyone does not resort to calling people antisemites.

No, they resort to claiming that they'll falsely accuse you of rape or that they'll falsely accuse you of being a racist.

 

[UKMikey]

I'm not sure about reducing victims of racism and sexism in the workplace to "people who can't take a joke". It costs nothing to treat people with the same respect they'd want to be shown themselves. This is the fundamental basis of courtesy and being a decent human being.

 

[Joey D]

Ok, but you started a broader conversation about this and then want to exclude things from the broader conversation. This clip from Fox News is just pandering to white male victim complex. I'm surprised you didn't dismiss it at that. Everyone walks on eggshells at work. It's impossible not to identify with that part of it.

I was saying I can understand where the idea is coming from. And I did dismiss it in my first post saying "this isn't likely what the article is talking about." It's from Fox, I assumed its angle was about a victim complex, but regarding the survey, I'm guessing not everyone who took it thought that way. There is a concern among some people in the workplace because some people like to falsely accuse. In my opinion, white men are likely to have this happen to them more because it's pretty easy to blame a white man in the workplace and have HR listen.

I don't disagree the MAGA doesn't bitch and moan about everything. I don't disagree that they make false accusations. It feels like a "what about x" kind of comment. I'm not interested in quantifying every single thing when presenting an idea. I mean, I could list many things that get falsely accused, but is that needed? We know MAGA bitches about things.

I'm not sure about reducing victims of racism and sexism in the workplace to "people who can't take a joke". It costs nothing to treat people with the same respect they'd want to be shown themselves. This is the fundamental basis of courtesy and being a decent human being.

I don't think anyone here is reducing it to that.

 

[UKMikey]

I don't think anyone here is reducing it to that.

It's the impression I got from the following sentence.

I get why some white males are walking on eggshells because people who aren't white men and are assholes have learned they can weaponize their miniority status to cover their own ineptitude and preserve their jobs.

Not everyone who complains is doing it for performative reasons.

 

[Danoff]

I was saying I can understand where the idea is coming from. And I did dismiss it in my first post saying "this isn't likely what the article is talking about." It's from Fox, I assumed its angle was about a victim complex, but regarding the survey, I'm guessing not everyone who took it thought that way. There is a concern among some people in the workplace because some people like to falsely accuse. In my opinion, white men are likely to have this happen to them more because it's pretty easy to blame a white man in the workplace and have HR listen.

I don't disagree the MAGA doesn't bitch and moan about everything. I don't disagree that they make false accusations. It feels like a "what about x" kind of comment. I'm not interested in quantifying every single thing when presenting an idea. I mean, I could list many things that get falsely accused, but is that needed? We know MAGA bitches about things.

Why does it not say that everyone feels like they're walking on eggshells at work? Because I'm highly confident that they do.

White men are ‘walking around on eggshells at work’, afraid to speak freely: Survey

A survey shows two-thirds of young White men are "walking on eggshells" at work and afraid to speak freely, facing hostility and discrimination.

www.yahoo.com

...according to a poll by J.L. Partners for Tim Samuels’ new 5-part YouTube and podcast series, "White Men Can’t Work!"

"Millions of guys facing discrimination or hostility, walking around on eggshells too anxious or scared to speak out," Samuels said in the recent trailer for his podcast.

If you open the article, the survey polling doesn't have a lot of controlling or contextual data. It's just, "white guys feel threatened" over and over. By the guy who wants to sell a book to white men about how they're victims. So why are we talking about this again?

Everyone, for all kinds of reasons, emotionally labors at work. Especially when you're talking about desk jobs. Why desk jobs? There is a broader cross-section of people in office environments, where "jokes" and other phrases are not as likely to be interpreted by others in the same way.

In my opinion, white men are likely to have this happen to them more because it's pretty easy to blame a white man in the workplace and have HR listen.

The "this specific thing happens to white men more" seems like a pretty fair assumption in this case. But does this mean that white men are emotionally laboring MORE than other groups at the workplace because of a hostile environment? I find that highly doubtful.

Basically, white men are used to not giving a crap how they make other people feel, and are irritated by environments where there are consequences to being a prick. I don't think it makes up for the disadvantages faced by every other group in the workplace.

 

[Joey D]

It's the impression I got from the following sentence.Not everyone who complains is doing it for performative reasons.

I've said repeatedly this isn't about "not being able to take a joke" but people who use their minority status to get people in hot water with HR simply because someone criticized them. I even gave an example of how a black coworker was terrible at her job and outright threatened to kill me on social media when I called her on her BS and she said I was being racist. She had no action taken against her, and I had to deal with HR trying to determine if my criticisms were racially motivated, despite her saying I specifically was going to get "the business end outside of work" if I continued to "try her".

So no, I'm not reducing this to people who cannot take a joke. I'm saying some assholes belong to a minority group who will use their miniority status to make up for being inept because HR will fold the moment they play the racism or sexism card. If I were to make a racial joke at work or sexually harassed someone, then got in hot water with HR over it. It wouldn't be because people couldn't take a joke, it would be because I was acting like an asshole.

Why does it not say that everyone feels like they're walking on eggshells at work? Because I'm highly confident that they do.

The article says 66% of men who took the survey feel that way.

If you open the article, the survey polling doesn't have a lot of controlling or contextual data. It's just, "white guys feel threatened" over and over. By the guy who wants to sell a book to white men about how they're victims. So why are we talking about this again?

Because there's validity to it? Some white men do feel threatened at work and it's not because they can't make off color jokes, openly use the n-word, or grab the secretary's ass.

The "this specific thing happens to white men more" seems like a pretty fair assumption in this case. But does this mean that white men are emotionally laboring MORE at the workplace because of a hostile environment? I find that highly doubtful.

Basically, white men are used to not giving a crap how they make other people feel, and are irritated by environments where there are consequences to being a prick. I don't think it makes up for the disadvantages faced by every other group in the workplace.

I can't speak for how anyone else deals with work. I only have experience as a white male in the workplace. I'm also not discounting what others go through. Plenty of people go through things at work, but on the subject of white men feeling like they need to walk on eggshells, I feel like there's validity to that. That doesn't mean that a black woman in the workplace doesn't also feel like she's walking on eggshells. Both things can be true, but I only have experience as a white male in the workplace, so I can't really comment on the feelings of others.

And no matter what race, sex, or whatever you are. You should feel safe enough to call out BS at work without repercussions. I should be able to call out a black coworker for lying, being lazy, and not doing their job correctly without the fear of being called a racist. It has absolutely nothing to do with their skin color and everything to do with the fact that they're a garbage employee. I've called out white coworkers time and time again and never once been taken to HR over it.

 

[Darla Starch]

NATO chief bizarrely calls Trump ‘daddy’ as he tries to brush off F-bomb rant

NATO chief referred to Trump as ‘daddy’ while praising his intervention with Iran and Israel

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Danoff]

Because there's validity to it? Some white men do feel threatened at work and it's not because they can't make off color jokes, openly use the n-word, or grab the secretary's ass.

I don't doubt it. And while I have never felt like a target at work for being a white man, I have definitely felt the need to walk on eggshells, and so did my non-white and non-male colleagues. So I would respond to that survey as saying "yes" I have felt the need to walk on eggshells at work, and I guess since I'm a white man this statistic would be used to confirm to other white men that they are targets for being a white man despite the fact that I would not have responded to the survey in that way to convey that meaning.

Basically, Fox spin. "White men are victims" supported by survey results that do not show that.

but on the subject of white men feeling like they need to walk on eggshells, I feel like there's validity to that.

As a white male who has had to walk on eggshells at work for reasons totally unrelated to being a white man, I totally agree. But it's misleading to state it in this way. What you're actually saying is that you think you walk on eggshells because you believe you are a target precisely because you are a white male, and a survey would need to be pretty precise to get at the point, and to differentiate it from every other group. Do you think the survey was conducted in this scientific way? Or was the survey supposed to grab white victimhood headlines and sell some books? Could be both a I guess, I doubt it though.

Both things can be true, but I only have experience as a white male in the workplace, so I can't really comment on the feelings of others.

You could try to contextualize your experience and decide what the merits are for talking about it... whether it rises to the level of a high priority problem in the workplace for example... this is what organizations with limited resources must do after all.

You should feel safe enough to call out BS at work without repercussions.

Yes. And yet... many workplaces do not offer that safety for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes those reasons are as insane as just knowing that the boss is a nazi. I'm not talking about a figurative nazi, I'm talking about Elon specifically.

I should be able to call out a black coworker for lying, being lazy, and not doing their job correctly without the fear of being called a racist. It has absolutely nothing to do with their skin color and everything to do with the fact that they're a garbage employee. I've called out white coworkers time and time again and never once been taken to HR over it.

Has it crossed your mind that even though it is an uneven playing field that you can be taken to HR and questioned about racism when accusing some coworkers of poor performance but not others, that this might be better than the uneven playing field of NOT having such a system in place?

Maybe you should be glad that people are willing to investigate you for racism because it means that people are investigating for racism in the workplace. Perhaps a little inconvenience to Joey D is the best we can do in this situation because it means that we're actively protecting people who need protection in the workplace.

 

[Joey D]

Basically, Fox spin. "White men are victims" supported by survey results that do not show that.

I'm not disagreeing with that, I didn't read the article because I didn't want to give Fox News clicks but I assumed that's what the article was about. My point was, there's validity to it outside the way Fox News spun it. When I attempted to look up the survey itself, everything just pointed to news sites talking about it instead of the survey itself so I didn't really think the article itself was worth much, but the idea it presented was.

Has it crossed your mind that even though it is an uneven playing field that you can be taken to HR and questioned about racism when accusing some coworkers of poor performance but not others, that this might be better than the uneven playing field of NOT having such a system in place?

Maybe you should be glad that people are willing to investigate you for racism because it means that people are investigating for racism in the workplace. Perhaps a little inconvenience to Joey D is the best we can do in this situation because it means that we're actively protecting people who need protection in the workplace.

She wasn't investigated despite actively threatening me and it was brushed under the rug while I was investigated for racism. I never used racial language, nor did I bring up she was black. I said she was bad at her job and her actions caused a chain of failures across the system that resulted in incorrect clinical reporting for hundreds of patients, lied about fixing the problem, then proceeded to just continue letting the problem happen until there was a safety event because of it. Apparently calling her on a patient safety issue on the application she solely worked on was racist in her mind and I got investigated because of it. She kept her job and then went on to threaten me on social media (I only saw it because numerous other coworkers saw the post and brought it to my attention). When I brought it up, it was dismissed. I left that job soon after.

It wouldn't be a big deal if the organization investigated things uniformly, but picking and choosing was an issue. It was also an issue that there was very clear evidence that she was the sole reason for the safety event, yet nothing came of it. Then having it brushed aside when my safety was threatened was another thing I took issue with.

The playing field should be level all the way around. White men shouldn't be preferred treatment because they're white men and minorities shouldn't get preferential treatment because they're minorities. I know it's a hard thing to balance since the field's been unbalanced, but you don't level the playing field but unbalancing things. You apply policies uniformly no matter sex, race, or position in the company.

 

[Danoff]

I left that job soon after.

That sounds like a smart move.

It wouldn't be a big deal if the organization investigated things uniformly, but picking and choosing was an issue. It was also an issue that there was very clear evidence that she was the sole reason for the safety event, yet nothing came of it. Then having it brushed aside when my safety was threatened was another thing I took issue with.

Seems like you're on the right side of the conflict, and they're likely to be sued for willful negligence. A history of ignoring reports such as yours can really raise damages when someone gets harmed and they knew it was going to happen.

The playing field should be level all the way around. White men shouldn't be preferred treatment because they're white men and minorities shouldn't get preferential treatment because they're minorities. I know it's a hard thing to balance since the field's been unbalanced, but you don't level the playing field but unbalancing things. You apply policies uniformly no matter sex, race, or position in the company.

Maybe in the long run. In the short run, it's obvious that some groups of people are disproportionately picked on. If we create policies specifically to prevent that, it's likely to be uneven, and even if it's not perfect, it could still be an improvement.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

NATO chief bizarrely calls Trump ‘daddy’ as he tries to brush off F-bomb rant

NATO chief referred to Trump as ‘daddy’ while praising his intervention with Iran and Israel

www.independent.co.uk

Looks like the Europeans are learning how to play Trump like the Saudis and Israelis do.

 

[GBO Possum]

Looks like the Europeans are learning how to play Trump like the Saudis and Israelis do.

If a normal person was called "daddy" in this context, they'd rightly assume they were being mercilessly mocked.

This narcissist is so deeply into his narcissism that he takes it as a deserved compliment.

Even Elon could see through such flattery, I'm almost sure.

 

[McLaren]

If a normal person was called "daddy" in this context, they'd rightly assume they were being mercilessly mocked.

This narcissist is so deeply into his narcissism that he takes it as a deserved compliment.

Even Elon could see through such flattery, I'm almost sure.

Elon's too busy trying to get Grok to call him daddy.