Word of the day is “empathy.” You seem to have none.
I work for a large employer with thousands of employees around the world. We embraced DEI from the top down. One of the training videos specifically covered natural hair styles (though I don’t recall all the details now and couldn’t tell you if they listed what is and isn’t acceptable). You wouldn’t survive at a modern multinational like that with your outdated views.
Do your “traditional American values” include loving your neighbor and respecting different traditions? Hard to tell from the way you say it.
I totally believe you on this. And you have swallowed the kool-aid enthusiastically.
Right again. Back in my day I declined job offers from IBM twice. The offers were separated by several years and were from different divisions. Little did I realize at the time the high level of prescience my decisions were displaying.
Only up to a point. I believe there is an American culture which should be observed above celebration of individual foreign cultures and values. That American culture is a melting pot of disparate cultures, and is influenced by those of numerous subcultures. But to bring us together it is the American culture which must be celebrated and emphasized, NOT the individual subcultures.
But you just wrote that the “American culture” is influenced by those subcultures, so how could it be influenced if not by celebrating those subcultures?
Getting back to the subject at hand, the black hairstyles are as American as the people who wear them. I suspect you don’t agree with the last part.
What is American about the coiffure of an African tribesman from the 1700’s? Many black Americans in 2020 do not buy into such efforts to protest American culture. Ditto for many African people today who chose a modern appearance over an overt statement of protest.
So you’re saying that those McDonalds employees who got fired wore their hair as a statement of protest? Or that it was something unseen since the 1700’s? I sincerely doubt all of that.
Let me guess - the employee gets to decide what constitutes a distraction, not the employer for whom they’re working and representing?
And you must’ve missed it, I clearly said that I always appreciated unique hairstyles, even encouraged them (even far beyond anything remotely “natural”) - if anything, hair was a selling point for their employment, not a detriment (and in all honesty, hair style was as big of a factor as their shoe size - as in, I couldnt have cared less). But when I’m paying someone to represent me, I’m the one who decides how I am being represented.
I have no issues with culturally traditional hairstyles or headwear. I have issue when people expand definitions to include almost anything that will allow them to call people racist when they aren’t actually racist.
Should black people at McDonalds get fired for having a culturally traditional hairstyle? No. Does anyone with any sense of how multinational corporations operate in our current climate and an understanding of the job market right now think that was honestly the only specific reason that particular person was fired? If so, let them know I’ve got a bridge for sale.
There was a reason that article didn’t link to any facts about the situations they are claiming are rampant around the country. It’s because they aren’t. But race hustlers gotta race hustle.
The guy posting these got banned briefly for posting other people’s tweets, for which none of them were banned. The twits working there didn’t like his comparisons making “their side” look like the hypocrites they were.
Nice to have a comparison for Twitter’s political leanings. Trump is still banned for possibly encouraging a few of the Capitol police to beat up and/or kill a few of his supporters, while Russia actually starting a war and invading another country is still just fine.
While they didn’t try to muzzle me outright, I was told repeatedly to “think about what I was saying.”
This is what’s so ridiculous. All she was really doing is asking others to think about what they were saying, instead of mindlessly parroting a party line. It all started with her simply wanting to have a open discussion about the issue.
I still hold that the only reason to shut down discussion is when you’re afraid that you’ll be proven wrong.
Embarrassing your employer is a good way to get fired. And it wasn’t just a matter of asking people to think.
Yeah, kids weren’t at substantial risk from Covid before Omicron–but their families certainly were. And the teachers were. I know a teacher who retired rather than return to in-person teaching because she felt it was too dangerous.
The vast and overwhelming majority of parents of school age kids were never and still aren’t at substantial risk of hospitalization from covid. And that minute risk wasn’t significantly increased by their children attending in-person school unmasked.
Her [former] employer should be embarrassed by all their hypocrisy.
Notably
“We don’t weigh in on hyper-local issues like this,” I was told. “There’s also a lot of potential negatives if we speak up strongly, starting with the numerous execs who have kids in private schools in the city.”
That I was just citing facts didn’t matter. The head of HR told me personally that even though I was right about the schools, that it was classist and racist that public schools stayed shut while private schools were open, and that I was probably right about everything else, I still shouldn’t say so.
So as long as we get to keep sending our kids to school, it’s racist and inappropriate to say that all kids should have that same privilege?
Except the vast majority were not.
So you celebrate one person for doing what she felt was right for herself, while denouncing others for wanting the same right to do what’s best for themselves? That’s what’s so asinine - someone decides they don’t like the risk, so dammit everyone else must be forced to suffer the consequences of that decision as well regardless of what they’ve each decided. What a brilliant plan - “my kid’s education is going to suffer if I don’t send him to school, so let’s close schools and make every kid’s education suffer so my kid doesn’t fall behind everyone else!” That is the voice of those supporting such policies. Although I suspect there’s also an aspect of “the population of my kid’s school includes a lot of diseased infested scum, so I dont want my kid in the same building as them right now” as well.
The pediatrics departments were filling up with Omicron cases.
The right keeps pretending the risk is minute. A million dead say otherwise.
You say the teachers weren’t at risk. Said teacher recently lost her mother to Covid.
The private schools should have gone remote, also.
Except it’s not doing what’s best for themselves. It’s being sheeple following a death cult ignoring the danger. There’s a reason America has fared very poorly against the virus and it’s called “Republicans”.
Not at all. It’s saying that education suffering is better than dying. Or leaving the kid minus a parent–or even an orphan.
The majority of the threat from Covid comes before symptoms show. Thus it’s not a matter of being around sick people–the people spreading it do not know they are infected. (And note that this means Covid has no pressure to evolve into something milder–whether it kills it’s host is irrelevant to it’s reproductive success. We got lucky with Omicron that the change that made it more infectious also made it less lethal, but that was simply because both are consequences of being higher up in the respiratory tract.