DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bad Manners and Brimstone
HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Work Day
*****************************************************
#Post#: 24901--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why a boss should not hug his subordinates, ever
By: mime Date: January 29, 2019, 12:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24855#msg24855
date=1548722688]
[quote author=pjeans link=topic=863.msg24848#msg24848
date=1548721262]
[quote author=Jayhawk link=topic=863.msg24831#msg24831
date=1548706829]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24801#msg24801
date=1548690293]
[quote author=gramma dishes link=topic=863.msg24772#msg24772
date=1548637689]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24766#msg24766
date=1548627874]
Grabbing somebody who doesn't want your hug isn't sweet
spontaneous affection. That's literally all there is to
it.[/quote]
I missed the part where he grabbed her.
[/quote]
She didn't want his hug. If she wanted him to hug her, she would
not have reported him for misconduct.
What word would you use for someone putting their hands on you
or putting their arms around you against your wishes?
[/quote]
Battery
[/quote]
Or "misread signal", or "overstepped" or other words that
acknowledge that his action was unwanted, but don't imply he was
actually *trying* to assault the girl or make her feel
threatened. Sure, he has something to learn here about other
peoples' boundaries, but to label him in a way that implies
something untrue or unproven about his character is wrong.
[/quote]
I think "fired for inappropriate contact with a student" is
precisely correct.
He made contact. It was inappropriate. He was fired.
I no longer buy the argument that people put their hands on
others without consent because they "have something to learn."
The man was apparently able to get a job and get through an
ordinary day without getting beaten up or arrested.
Which means he is perfectly capable of understanding people's
boundaries when he cares to. The only thing he needed to learn
was, "Yes, the same rules apply to everyone. Even weepy young
ladies."
[/quote]
"Fired for inappropriate contact with a student" is correct as
it gets at the facts and legalities of the matter. Some of the
other terms offered up were not.
This guy almost certainly had work rules about no contact, which
he violated and lost his job as a result. Personally, I don't
buy that people who understand how to "get through an ordinary
day and not get beaten up or arrested" must therefore be
magically fully aware of everyone else's boundaries, and that
they never slip up and act according to their own boundaries
instead.
I agree with gramma dishes that something good about our society
has been lost. Abusive people, people who are intent on forcing
their own ways on others, and people who never stand up for
themselves when they should have brought us to a place where
everyone is so quick to condemn a person who may have simply
come from a culture where it is *kind* rather than *criminal* to
hug a person who is in tears.
#Post#: 24904--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why a boss should not hug his subordinates, ever
By: guest657 Date: January 29, 2019, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=pjeans link=topic=863.msg24901#msg24901
date=1548784833]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24855#msg24855
date=1548722688]
[quote author=pjeans link=topic=863.msg24848#msg24848
date=1548721262]
[quote author=Jayhawk link=topic=863.msg24831#msg24831
date=1548706829]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24801#msg24801
date=1548690293]
[quote author=gramma dishes link=topic=863.msg24772#msg24772
date=1548637689]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24766#msg24766
date=1548627874]
Grabbing somebody who doesn't want your hug isn't sweet
spontaneous affection. That's literally all there is to
it.[/quote]
I missed the part where he grabbed her.
[/quote]
She didn't want his hug. If she wanted him to hug her, she would
not have reported him for misconduct.
What word would you use for someone putting their hands on you
or putting their arms around you against your wishes?
[/quote]
Battery
[/quote]
Or "misread signal", or "overstepped" or other words that
acknowledge that his action was unwanted, but don't imply he was
actually *trying* to assault the girl or make her feel
threatened. Sure, he has something to learn here about other
peoples' boundaries, but to label him in a way that implies
something untrue or unproven about his character is wrong.
[/quote]
I think "fired for inappropriate contact with a student" is
precisely correct.
He made contact. It was inappropriate. He was fired.
I no longer buy the argument that people put their hands on
others without consent because they "have something to learn."
The man was apparently able to get a job and get through an
ordinary day without getting beaten up or arrested.
Which means he is perfectly capable of understanding people's
boundaries when he cares to. The only thing he needed to learn
was, "Yes, the same rules apply to everyone. Even weepy young
ladies."
[/quote]
"Fired for inappropriate contact with a student" is correct as
it gets at the facts and legalities of the matter. Some of the
other terms offered up were not.
This guy almost certainly had work rules about no contact, which
he violated and lost his job as a result. Personally, I don't
buy that people who understand how to "get through an ordinary
day and not get beaten up or arrested" must therefore be
magically fully aware of everyone else's boundaries, and that
they never slip up and act according to their own boundaries
instead.
I agree with gramma dishes that something good about our society
has been lost. Abusive people, people who are intent on forcing
their own ways on others, and people who never stand up for
themselves when they should have brought us to a place where
everyone is so quick to condemn a person who may have simply
come from a culture where it is *kind* rather than *criminal* to
hug a person who is in tears.
[/quote]
If the person in tears wants this particular individual to hug
them, then it is a kindness. If they don't, it's not. This is
not new. It's just finally being acknowledged.
Why should a person who is already upset also bear the burden of
having to physically fend off an unwanted embrace? How is that
kind, to impose on someone like that?
I'm pretty old, and I've lived a lot of different places. I've
never encountered a culture where a person being hugged by
someone they *didn't want touching them* perceived it as a
kindness.
Now, I remember very well what it was like to feel like there
was nothing you could do but put up with it. Or laugh nervously
and squirm.
And I remember what it was like to feel that you were *supposed*
to like it. To try to convince yourself that "they meant well"
or that wishing someone would keep their hands to themselves was
"judging" them or "being rude."
And I am really, really glad that things are changing. I truly
don't understand the mindset that it's some kind of loss when
every person gets to decide for themselves who gets to touch
them, and when, and where.
No means no. And if there is no "yes", that also means no. Even
if it's not sexual. Even if it's Grandma. Even if you "meant
well."
Because if you don't care about how the other person feels and
whether they want a hug from you, then ....well, you don't
actually care about them. If you truly want to be kind to
someone, you put their feelings ahead of your own. Don't you?
We teach preschoolers to keep their hands to themselves. Are we
accusing them of being criminals? No. We are teaching them
respect. It's certainly not too much to ask that a grown person
have the same standards of self-control as a preschooler.
#Post#: 24914--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why a boss should not hug his subordinates, ever
By: mime Date: January 29, 2019, 4:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24904#msg24904
date=1548786858]
[quote author=pjeans link=topic=863.msg24901#msg24901
date=1548784833]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24855#msg24855
date=1548722688]
[quote author=pjeans link=topic=863.msg24848#msg24848
date=1548721262]
[quote author=Jayhawk link=topic=863.msg24831#msg24831
date=1548706829]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24801#msg24801
date=1548690293]
[quote author=gramma dishes link=topic=863.msg24772#msg24772
date=1548637689]
[quote author=Anon4Now link=topic=863.msg24766#msg24766
date=1548627874]
Grabbing somebody who doesn't want your hug isn't sweet
spontaneous affection. That's literally all there is to
it.[/quote]
I missed the part where he grabbed her.
[/quote]
She didn't want his hug. If she wanted him to hug her, she would
not have reported him for misconduct.
What word would you use for someone putting their hands on you
or putting their arms around you against your wishes?
[/quote]
Battery
[/quote]
Or "misread signal", or "overstepped" or other words that
acknowledge that his action was unwanted, but don't imply he was
actually *trying* to assault the girl or make her feel
threatened. Sure, he has something to learn here about other
peoples' boundaries, but to label him in a way that implies
something untrue or unproven about his character is wrong.
[/quote]
I think "fired for inappropriate contact with a student" is
precisely correct.
He made contact. It was inappropriate. He was fired.
I no longer buy the argument that people put their hands on
others without consent because they "have something to learn."
The man was apparently able to get a job and get through an
ordinary day without getting beaten up or arrested.
Which means he is perfectly capable of understanding people's
boundaries when he cares to. The only thing he needed to learn
was, "Yes, the same rules apply to everyone. Even weepy young
ladies."
[/quote]
"Fired for inappropriate contact with a student" is correct as
it gets at the facts and legalities of the matter. Some of the
other terms offered up were not.
This guy almost certainly had work rules about no contact, which
he violated and lost his job as a result. Personally, I don't
buy that people who understand how to "get through an ordinary
day and not get beaten up or arrested" must therefore be
magically fully aware of everyone else's boundaries, and that
they never slip up and act according to their own boundaries
instead.
I agree with gramma dishes that something good about our society
has been lost. Abusive people, people who are intent on forcing
their own ways on others, and people who never stand up for
themselves when they should have brought us to a place where
everyone is so quick to condemn a person who may have simply
come from a culture where it is *kind* rather than *criminal* to
hug a person who is in tears.
[/quote]
If the person in tears wants this particular individual to hug
them, then it is a kindness. If they don't, it's not. This is
not new. It's just finally being acknowledged.
Why should a person who is already upset also bear the burden of
having to physically fend off an unwanted embrace? How is that
kind, to impose on someone like that?
I'm pretty old, and I've lived a lot of different places. I've
never encountered a culture where a person being hugged by
someone they *didn't want touching them* perceived it as a
kindness.
Now, I remember very well what it was like to feel like there
was nothing you could do but put up with it. Or laugh nervously
and squirm.
And I remember what it was like to feel that you were *supposed*
to like it. To try to convince yourself that "they meant well"
or that wishing someone would keep their hands to themselves was
"judging" them or "being rude."
And I am really, really glad that things are changing. I truly
don't understand the mindset that it's some kind of loss when
every person gets to decide for themselves who gets to touch
them, and when, and where.
No means no. And if there is no "yes", that also means no. Even
if it's not sexual. Even if it's Grandma. Even if you "meant
well."
Because if you don't care about how the other person feels and
whether they want a hug from you, then ....well, you don't
actually care about them. If you truly want to be kind to
someone, you put their feelings ahead of your own. Don't you?
We teach preschoolers to keep their hands to themselves. Are we
accusing them of being criminals? No. We are teaching them
respect. It's certainly not too much to ask that a grown person
have the same standards of self-control as a preschooler.
[/quote]
I'm not saying the girl should be required to consider the hug a
kindness if she doesn't want to! I'm just saying that us
onlookers should not all be assuming this is an obnoxious power
play by someone who must clearly be an absolute jerk.
He messed up. Our world doesn't tolerate his kind of behavior.
He has to learn that.
I've had more than my share of those experiences, too: where you
don't want some contact, and not sure what to say or not say
about it. I've also had more than my share of uninvited contact
that didn't bother me, but where angry observers insist that I
should be mad or offended or complain to someone-or-other about
how someone else 'victimized' me. Suggesting that my perception
and feelings about the situation are flat-out wrong because of,
well, I don't know why. Just some very angry people, I guess.
My mindset is not that it's a loss for people to decide for
themselves. I see that I'm not making myself clear. I think it
is a loss that as a society, we're so quick to anger and quick
to assign evil in others.
#Post#: 24936--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why a boss should not hug his subordinates, ever
By: Aleko Date: January 30, 2019, 2:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]I think it is a loss that as a society, we're so quick to
anger and quick to assign evil in others.[/quote]
But we're in a transitional period, and I hope things will
rebalance. For far too long the more powerful members of society
(men, bosses, great-aunts, etc) have been able to impose
unwanted physical contact on the weaker (young women, employees,
children, etc) with impunity, and this is finally being pushed
back on. If and when we get to a situation where young women
like this student don't grow up routinely having to defend
themselves from or put up with opportunistic groping, I suspect
they will be able to deal with a misjudged but well-meant hug in
their stride.
#Post#: 24975--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why a boss should not hug his subordinates, ever
By: syfygeek Date: January 30, 2019, 11:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Aleko link=topic=863.msg24936#msg24936
date=1548838184]
[quote]I think it is a loss that as a society, we're so quick to
anger and quick to assign evil in others.[/quote]
But we're in a transitional period, and I hope things will
rebalance. For far too long the more powerful members of society
(men, bosses, great-aunts, etc) have been able to impose
unwanted physical contact on the weaker (young women, employees,
children, etc) with impunity, and this is finally being pushed
back on. If and when we get to a situation where young women
like this student don't grow up routinely having to defend
themselves from or put up with opportunistic groping, I suspect
they will be able to deal with a misjudged but well-meant hug in
their stride.
[/quote]
The bolded especially! I went from corporate to a non profit
museum- there was hugging, cheek kissing, etc.. whether you
wanted it or not. For the first few years I kept thinking "Wait,
this was in the "What not to do at work" seminar"
Part of my non-hugging also comes from forced hugs by
grandmother, great-grandmothers and great aunts- all of whom
dipped snuff, spit, and then wiped their lips. Getting kissed on
the cheek was disgusting when they hadn't wiped well enough,
and when being hugged, all I could smell was their snuff.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page