search results matching tag: workplace

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (67)     Sift Talk (3)     Blogs (4)     Comments (276)   

bareboards2 (Member Profile)

vil says...

I take all that to heart.

In my native language and for me any woman under my age is a girl AND any man or woman taking part in sports and games is a boy or girl. They would be greeted and befriended in a much less formal manner than, for example during an opera performance intermission in the theatre hallway or in a workplace setting. For me girls running around on skis with guns are girls, I dont think of them as world class athletes but as ordinary people doing something enjoyable and rewarding.

I have trouble being entirely serene in the face of political correctness, so do feel free to correct my errors if I am found wanting in this area, even if I sometimes may appear to not take things seriously. Just a disclaimer.

"Edit this video" is now hidden in a menu that appears when you hover over your name above your video (Eric told me). Thanks.

bareboards2 said:

Ah! Excuse me for being vague.

Girl is a young person. Age 17 or less.

A woman is a world class athlete.

If you want to fix it, look for the words "edit this video" underneath the video, bottom left.

Click on that and you can fix your description. If you want to.

Asmo (Member Profile)

bareboards2 says...

I just now saw this. My yahoo email account sometimes disappears things on me. I lost another email about the same time.

I absolutely agree with everything you say. Biology is biology. There are differences. Sex is in the workplace, of course, and women bring it there.

I can agree with all these things, and still be creeped out by the indulgence, the wallowing, of only hiring very attractive women.

There is a long history of that in America, and it was creepy then, too. Stewardesses and what they were subjected to in the workplace is a great example. They would lose their -- THEIR WORK -- if they gained five pounds, is an example of really inappropriate use of a woman's appearance as a job qualification. These people are responsible for the safety of the passengers if a tragedy strikes. I love reading stories about how women are heroes and professional when an accident happens.

A shooting range is not a strip club. Wanting to be surrounded by women in your business who COULD work in a strip club is creepy.

Creepy really isn't the right word. It is shorthand for a complex interplay of gender roles and abuses and complicity that is endemic in our culture. I just like the way it feels in my mouth -- I found that Japanese word for it that perfectly explains my pleasure in using it. I am still pleased to know that word exists.

Gitaigo: Onomatopoeia that describes states of being, not sounds.

Creepy perfectly feels like my state of being around this video.

We are all biological beings who like to look at pretty people. Tall men make more money. Attractive people of both genders make more money. We will never be free from those responses.

But lets keep it unconscious, shall we? Let us work to be better human beings than people who reduce ourselves to walking genitalia looking for constant stimulation.

The rest of your points... yeah. I'm right with you. I am not someone who criticizes men for "looking." I find myself looking and I'm pretty firmly on the hetero side of things.

It came up the other day on a hike through the woods. A woman passed me wearing some sort of body hugging stretch pants. There was natural jiggling from her movements, which caught my eye. I found myself staring, I became aware of how perfectly proportioned she was, and how the rest of her was lovely in every aspect (I had seen her a few moments before, walking in a different direction.) I almost called out to my friends -- my god, that is the most beautiful woman. All triggered by a chance glance at an objectively beautiful rear-end.

Biology. It happens. I have no problem with it.

And those shooting range owners want to stimulate that reaction in the workplace, 100% of the time. And that, my friend, is creepy.

Asmo said:

I was responding to your comments, as I understood them, and if I got the wrong impression, I apologise. But I think it's somewhat blinkered to say that it's men that bring sex in to the workplace. eg. Most of the young ladies that work in the same building as me wear short skirts or tight pants, lots of decolletage on display etc. That is absolutely their right as long as they meet the dress code of their employer, but it certainly brings sex appeal firmly in to the limelight.

Unfortunately, while men are seen as rather simple creatures biologically when it comes to sex, there is more than meets the eye. The science certainly isn't conclusive, but there is a lot of evidence pointing to desire being a function of the amygdala, which is strongly stimulated by visuals in men. The following article is a pop news summary of a longer (and fairly dry) study which I couldn't find an non-subscription version of, which compares brain activity in response to viewing porn images for both men and women.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/16/health/in-sex-brain-studies-show-la-difference-still-holds.html

Women still get aroused by the images, but the desire that is evoked in the male amygdala is not replicated in the female. Hence men tend to respond far better to objectification than women do. There are other results with further delve the difference between male and female sexuality, and it's not surprising that society as a whole has been molded by our biology.

Probably also explains, at least somewhat, why men (myself included) find it hard to accept criticism for something that comes naturally to most of us. Few men would go to a public place with the express purpose of leering at attractive women, but almost all men (at least the straight ones) will find themselves gazing for longer than perhaps polite at certain women that catch our eye. That is not to take away from the fact that we are generally in charge of our actions, but it certainly adds an imperative that is less about being creepy and more about our biology.

Asmo (Member Profile)

bareboards2 says...

I didn't express disapproval of the demand for sex work.

I am creeped out by men who bring sex into the workplace.

I am a huge fan of Dan Savage. He is a deeply moral man who is helping people become more fully themselves. That includes sexual expression in the privacy of the home or other agreed upon public spaces, while respecting the agreements made consensually between adults.

I also didn't say anything about the women being forced to look the way they do. It is their free choice to sell barter themselves on their sexual attributes in an arena that has nothing to do with sex -- a shooting range.

And I think it is creepy that men want this. To bring sex out of the dating world. Out of strip clubs. Out of sex clubs. And into a mundane world of a shooting range. It has implications about the treatment of women, the objectification of women, that creep me out. The blindness of it creeps me out.

Anyway.

Glad to know you weren't talking about me. Because I don't recognize myself in the way you talk about the conversation I have been engaged in. Sooo many times I say -- I didn't say this. I didn't say that.

It does get frustrating having a conversation on the Sift (not just you) where my words get twisted and embroidered.

And I love it when someone says something that shows I am incorrect or have stated something that doesn't clearly communicate my point of view. It helps me understand the world a little bit more, helps me see my own bias, and teaches me to communicate better. (Like blaming Keanu -- that was a huge mistake.)

Thanks for engaging with me. I appreciate you taking the time.

Asmo said:

It's an inference based on the fact that I don't see slave chains on any of the employees... No one forced these women to take these jobs and while they are certainly attractive, I doubt many people go to a shooting range for the express purpose of eyeballing the staff. Strip clubs are much cheaper imo.
= \

And while your entitled to not approve of the demand for sex work, you'll be pleased to know that sexual liberation (that funny thing feminists got the ball rolling on) is paying dividends for women using men.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/sex-and-relationships/the-women-who-hire-male-escorts-20140203-31wtv.html

General stats are that women and couples are using male sex workers a lot more now and more power to em if that's their thing. Objectification cuts both ways. Back when I was dating, it was refreshing to not meet a women who didn't objectify my wallet...

Which is neither here nor there in regards to the ladies at the gun range. There are no facts in evidence that they are forced to look the way they do.

Keanu Reeves Tactical 3 gun shooting

entr0py says...

Yeah, I've got to agree, that cannot be a coincidence. It is creepy on the same level as a hooters or any other business that hires exclusively hot women to do a job that should have nothing to do with looks.

It's not so much that I worry about the average female gun enthusiast going without work, but that it's hard to imagine that sort of workplace culture isn't rife with sexual harassment. Any time a woman looking sexy is a job requirement, it's a fair bet that her boss wants more than to look at her.

bareboards2 said:

All the super attractive women creeped me out. Too many of them. Keanu doesn't know any normal looking women? Creep. Pee. (I'm a cis woman, by the way, for those who don't know.)

Inside the mind of white America

newtboy says...

I checked...you're right.
Survey respondents were asked about unfair treatment of blacks in seven specific institutions or realms of community life: the police, the court system, the workplace, stores and restaurants, public schools, the health care system and elections.
49% of whites answered there was none in any of those categories.
What's worse is, when taken individually, it averages out to only 20% of whites think blacks are treated more poorly than whites in those categories. (37% say cops are biased, 13% say voting is).
I'm astonished at those numbers, even if they're 4 years old.

eric3579 said:

I assume it's in reference to the Pew Research Centers study mentioned in the video description.

Great Moments in Congressional Hallway History

bareboards2 says...

This vid is a good case for why there was an urge to ban the media from, essentially, the workplace.

That looks really unpleasant to try to walk to your job inside a building.

They will survive it. And -- I understand the urge.

Japanese people take their calculators very seriously.

SDGundamX says...

Japan is full of these kinds of paradoxes. It's like when you wander around Tokyo and find a Shinto shrine that is hundreds of years old squeezed between two skyscrapers. There are tons of things here that could be done more efficiently or effectively but aren't done that way because of tradition or social values.

Just to give one example at my own job, people nearly always come to see me face-to-face for even the most trivial of things that could be easily resolved with a one-line email. Most workplaces in Japan still very much appreciate the "personal touch" of interacting with another human being and value the relationship between co-workers over the efficiency technology can provide.

Payback said:

What they need to do is figure out how to put their facts and figures in electronic form. Maybe using a "computer" running a "program" that adds figures up in columns and rows like a "spreadsheet".

sam harris on the religion of identity politics

ChaosEngine says...

The one time he allows for a persons life experience, he gets it wrong.

"My mom is Catholic and she believes in hell" is absolutely NOT a valid response to "Catholics don't believe in hell". For someone who believes in data, that's a terrible response. It's a sample size of one out of over 1 billion. And if you were to dig up the canonical Catholic teaching on hell, that STILL wouldn't be the right data (the argument was "Catholics don't believe in hell", not "Catholicism does not teach the concept of hell". Even if you were to say "actually every Catholic I know believes in hell" that's still not a valid argument, unless you know thousands of Catholics.

I've lost a lot of respect for Sam Harris over the years and this just reinforces that.

Of course, data is important, especially when it comes to things like whether vaccines cause autism (they don't).

But if you're talking about things like how police treat black people or whether women are paid less in the workplace... the life experience of those people are a vital part of the data, especially when the data isn't clear cut.

Adam Ruins Millennials

Kids These Days

Cheeky McDonald's Drive Through

poolcleaner says...

Seeing him in action and not just through the speaker made this. Perfect ending!

I remember my brief few months in fast food. They weren't bad at all. I enjoyed myself and the people. You gotta love your job no matter what and make people smile -- when you think of the people you're serving, and you distance yourself from workplace negativity, you'll love every minute of the day.

And when you no longer love enjoy your day -- which is inevitable -- that's a sign that you need to move on to bigger and better things.

Guys like this do their thing and then move on. That's the natural progression of quality employees. Don't get stuck. If you don't put on a show, it's time to move on.

Train-Robbing Cowboys Concerned About Workplace Diversity

Singularly Disturbing Safety Training Video

Singularly Disturbing Safety Training Video

Mordhaus (Member Profile)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon