Fags howl at Fartbongo for not giving them workplace protections

Discussion in 'News' started by SWfan, Jun 14, 2013.

  1. SWfan

    SWfan
    Expand Collapse
    EDF Elite

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,687
    was7638178.
    SOURCE: http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/14/lgbt-advocates-losing-patience-with-obama-on-workplace-protections/
     
  2. GSTalbert1

    GSTalbert1
    Expand Collapse
    Girlvinyl

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2012
    Messages:
    6,754
    Occupation:
    Part Time Substitute Teacher Full time Teal Deer
  3. Fraud Based Economy

    Fraud Based Economy
    Expand Collapse
    Disinherited Nigerian Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Messages:
    2,848

    Bullshit, I've actually ran across jobs in my own field (mainly defense sub-contracting companies) in the UK which state point blank that they can't hire foreign or dual nationals (I assume it works the same way in the US). The reason for this is obvious as they don't want military secrets being leaked to other countries. What I generally do in those situations is ask if this is company policy, or if it's a legal obligation. In the latter case, I just thank them for their time and wish them well on their candidate selection process. In the former case, I generally cite that there hasn't been an official armed conflict between the United States and the United Kingdom in over 200 years (the War of 1812), and ask if signing an appropriate set of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) would suffice instead? If they say that's fine, then everything is cool. If not, then I still don't feel bad about it.

    TL;DR: Sometimes discrimination based on nationality makes total sense.

    As for sexuality, I generally don't get the issue at all. Unless you're a sex worker, it shouldn't even factor in (because it's rarely mentioned in practice). In fact, most job applications either don't bother with those questions or have an option regarding questions like that along the lines of "I'd prefer not to say." I almost always pick this one. I only choose to inform them of my gender. Workplaces also tend to have strict rules against "fraternization" too. And that sword cuts both ways.

    On further reflection though, I suppose the sexuality question only applies to trannies (because they're fucking gender confused idiots). If I was hiring and a candidate who says they're male on an application and somebody with a pair of breasts walks into the interview it will get a raised eyebrow from me. It doesn't mean that I might not hire them in the end if they're the most qualified of the lot, but it would mean that they'd have to demonstrate a very good degree of "personability" and tolerance toward people who do ascribe to traditional gender roles.

    On the flip-side, if a guy walks into an interview in a dress the issue becomes more complicated. I'd have to run it by the other people in the office first and make sure that they're comfortable with that development. Yes, it is the fucking double standard here. But the fact remains that if a girl wears jeans or a business suit, no one cares. However, if a guy wears in a dress then people do. Sorry, that's life.

    TL;DR: I don't think that the LGBT issue is as big these idiots want you to think. Chances are good that if you're having trouble getting hired it's because you're an unlikeable, antisocial, moron.
     
  4. Slavoj Jizzek

    Slavoj Jizzek
    Expand Collapse
    Girlvinyl

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,086
    Occupation:
    I'm an evil Scotsman and my name is Jock
    More corporations have shit on the books about favoring gays than anything I've read harming them. I saw a recent training where it was stipulated that:

    A: Partner's names are not private information
    B: Unless it is a spouse of the same gender, revealing sexual preferences
    =It is disallowed for the company to shuffle through your romantic life if you are gay.

    So why is it ok for the company to dig up on your private life if you're straight, but not kosher if you're gay? Why should they enjoy an extra level of privacy where a company will not probe into private details at all for fear it will be seen as discrimination and targeting? Companies are so terrified of getting the everliving shit sued out of them by disgruntled "disenfranchised" minorities that they tirelessly beat down anybody who wouldn't have MSNBC's wet dream of a class-action lawsuit in order to comfort and appeasement to anybody who has a politically correct case for offense.

    Fix the retarded court system. Fuck the current media elites. People who bitch, complain, and are likely to launch lawsuits should never be given a job or should be fired upon recognition of this, not given free passes for life because a company and coworkers are terrified of getting analized by a shlick attorney and butthurt activist judge in a progressive District Court.
     
  5. GSTalbert1

    GSTalbert1
    Expand Collapse
    Girlvinyl

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2012
    Messages:
    6,754
    Occupation:
    Part Time Substitute Teacher Full time Teal Deer
    Make the legal code easy to understand and have enough cash that they don't have to fund themselves with fines, whic inevitably leech substantial amounts of resources from the very places we are having to PUMP shit into.

    Speaking of TL;DR I found an instructors copy of the first comprehensive business law textbook to cover ecommerce.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Here's the intro, and good luck on being an E-Lawyer.