431–440 of 660 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Truth values are in fact a binary difference, fuzzy logic is a tiny portion of mathematics." "Light switches are in fact a binary difference, dimmer switches are a small portion of all switches." "Life is in fact a binary difference, brain death patients are a tiny portion of all patients."
In the context of there being measurable differences between the sets of males and females, 99% is binary enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least in law that's not true. There were licensed women lawyers long before it became common for women to be in the profession.
I was referring to when women were disallowed from law schools or bar associations. But there's a bit of nuance to the history of it. Women have been in court in different ways for a long time. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/awhhtml/awlaw3/women_lawyers.htm...
TL;DR Some guy not only speaks his mind, but has the balls to actually write his thoughts down. The completely predictable response from "forward thinking progressives" follows.
Are not those people also just speaking their mind?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By the overloaded term "work", OP really meant "effort"
I understand that part, but I don't understand how that sentence relates to the second: "That's why professional environments are effective and make a pleasant place to work for all." If there's a missing "if" before the "it's" in his first sentence, I can only assume he means it takes effort to restrain oneself from being unfiltered, but there's an uncanny taste of an insult I can't pinpoint.
I think for clarity I'd add a comma:
> Usually, if it takes work to distinguish, it's not worth it within a work environment.
Such that it's read as:
> Usually, if it takes work to distinguish [whether it's worth it,] it's not worth it within a work environment.
The idea is that in a professional environment, part of "being professional" is avoiding those situations where your comments might be read as unwelcome. With a viable rule of thumb being to just err on the side of assuming they'd be unwelcome in any case where you have to think about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had come across that study/story before, and consider it one of the great successes in combating discrimination that I have ever heard! Blinding the auditions is brilliant, because it isn't a "bias for bias" approach. It doesn't attempt to combat one bias by intentionally introducing another bias. It just removes the jury's ability to be biased, by concealing the musician's sex. Because of this, the results of that…
I believe they could! With all that technology? Shoot. All we had was a stage and a screen to work with. I will say that in another study it was found that the sound of women's dress shoes unconsciously biased juries. So we all (even men) walk to the stage on a carpet strip to mute that sound, or we play in stocking feet or soft shoes. Taking the screen away at the end is its only flaw. I will say something that a lo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a difference between "sexual harassment" and "sexual harassment to a level that's criminal". I think it's reasonable to say that something is simultaneously inappropriate at work and not something you should be arrested for.
Is the primary authority's (EEOC) definition of sexual harassment: It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. [0] And is the primary authority's (EEOC) definition of harassment in general: Offensive conduct may…
That said, I acknowledge it's very situational whether something might be read as unwelcome. Which is why avoiding these things in a professional context seems pretty wise.
Anyway, since we're replying here to door's comment... I think they're right regardless of whether we want to call it "sexual harassment". If you offend someone in a way which feels creepy / harassing to them, even assuming that you absolutely meant it in a non-sexual non-flirtatious entirely-platonic matter, your should apologize, maybe clarify your intentions, and say you'll do better in the future. Attempting to argue that you didn't mean it that way so they shouldn't be offended is counterproductive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that part, but I don't understand how that sentence relates to the second: "That's why professional environments are effective and make a pleasant place to work for all." If there's a missing "if" before the "it's" in his first sentence, I can only assume he means it takes effort to restrain oneself from being unfiltered, but there's an uncanny taste of an insult I can't pinpoint.
(I'm not the OP, so I might be misrepresenting taysic's views here.) I think for clarity I'd add a comma: > Usually, if it takes work to distinguish, it's not worth it within a work environment. Such that it's read as: > Usually, if it takes work to distinguish [whether it's worth it,] it's not worth it within a work environment. The idea is that in a professional environment, part of "being professional" is avoiding…
I see now looking through that lense it makes sense. After re-reading my comment he was replying to I think I understand exactly what the OP was trying to convey.
"If you have to consciously figure out if comments are malevolent or not, you should find a new workplace."
And that "that's why professional environments are effective and make a pleasant place to work for all," implies more real work is done when you're not playing office politics, and everyone comes out happier because of it.
In retrospect, it seems like a silly thing to try and figure out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is the primary authority's (EEOC) definition of sexual harassment: It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. [0] And is the primary authority's (EEOC) definition of harassment in general: Offensive conduct may…
Mind you, by that definition it's easy to construe it as borderline "unwelcome sexual advances" or "verbal harassment of a sexual nature". That said, I acknowledge it's very situational whether something might be read as unwelcome. Which is why avoiding these things in a professional context seems pretty wise. Anyway, since we're replying here to door's comment... I think they're right regardless of whether we want t…
My only gripe was with semantics, which have the potential to do more harm than good.
Is this being downmodded? (230 points, 3 hours ago, 298 comments, and already on page 4)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what context is it not unprofessional to comment on a coworker's body?! I feel like I'm on crazy pills.
First situation that comes to mind is in a conversation where the coworker has raised the subject in conversation: "I've been working out a lot the last few months. I managed to lose a lot of weight and I think I look good." "Yeah, you looks great, that work definitely paid off." The coworker brought it up, which indicates that they're comfortable talking about it and the comment is a celebration of the coworker's ac…