Author Topic: Chet  (Read 5791 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53677
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #50 on: August 21, 2015, 02:32:37 PM »
Quote
But in 2013, the Departments of Justice and Education greatly broadened the definition of sexual harassment to include verbal conduct that is simply “unwelcome.” Out of fear of federal investigations, universities are now applying that standard—defining unwelcome speech as harassment—not just to sex, but to race, religion, and veteran status as well. Everyone is supposed to rely upon his or her own subjective feelings to decide whether a comment by a professor or a fellow student is unwelcome, and therefore grounds for a harassment claim. Emotional reasoning is now accepted as evidence.

I mean, isn't this what harassment has always been? If someone thinks speech is unwelcome, isn't it in fact unwelcome and could be considered harassment? Maybe I don't understand what harassment traditionally meant.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40475
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53677
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #52 on: August 21, 2015, 02:35:09 PM »
Quote
Until recently, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights acknowledged that speech must be “objectively offensive” before it could be deemed actionable as sexual harassment—it would have to pass the “reasonable person” test.


^this isn't based on subjective feelings? Just because you say it's objective doesn't make it so.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53677
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40475
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #54 on: August 21, 2015, 02:38:41 PM »
i think it could depend on how the standard is applied - in practice, i'm sure it's subjective.  but it could be objective if the "reasonable" person is really the mean or median person and it was based on what %s of people find what stuff offensive.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40475
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #55 on: August 21, 2015, 02:39:38 PM »
I would have considered that microaggression

would have been very empowering for me.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53677
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #56 on: August 21, 2015, 02:49:21 PM »
i think it could depend on how the standard is applied - in practice, i'm sure it's subjective.  but it could be objective if the "reasonable" person is really the mean or median person and it was based on what %s of people find what stuff offensive.


yes I suppose that's possible, but really it's probably some judge deciding what a reasonable person is offended by. (guessing)

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20446
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #57 on: August 21, 2015, 03:31:20 PM »
reasonable person standard is used for all sorts of legal stuff.  Like would a reasonable person similarly situated have let neighborhood kid Billy in the family Roman candle fight which resulted in a total loss of vision?

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41960
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #58 on: October 29, 2015, 06:18:28 PM »

Offline OK_Cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16212
  • Hey
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #59 on: October 29, 2015, 09:19:06 PM »
Trolling the hell out of you, trim

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41960
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #60 on: October 29, 2015, 11:46:33 PM »
Trolling the hell out of you, trim

I like Westbrook, and don't even find it necessary to make clear that I like him in a heterosexual way only.

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Chet
« Reply #61 on: October 30, 2015, 04:39:04 PM »