Savage Love Podcast
-
Episode 161
(Nov 17) -
Episode 160
(Nov 10) -
Episode 159
(Nov 3) -
Episode 158
(Oct 27) -
Episode 157
(Oct 20)
Savage Love Archives
- Mad Men (Nov 12)
- Girl Seeking Girl (Nov 5)
- Moral Bankrupt (Oct 29)
- Plunge In (Oct 22)
- Feeding Time (Oct 15)
More from Dan Savage
-
Today in Traditional Marriage
-
Pit Bulls!
-
Teabaggers Turn On Palin
-
Do Your Balls Hang Low?
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk
Books by Dan Savage
The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family
Things I've Learned from Women Who've Dumped Me
Skipping Towards Gomorrah
The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant
Savage Love: Straight Answers from America's Most Popular Sex Columnist
Savage Links
- Babeland
- Fleshbot
- Good Vibrations
- Joe Newton/Savage Illustrations
- Planned Parenthood
- Spreading Santorum
- Planned Parenthood's Teen Wire
Contact Dan Savage
Co-Workers of the World
November 19, 2009
Tools
I am a happily married, happily nonmonogamous male. We are not wild swinger types. For us it's more about the fact that monogamy does not work than about nailing everything that walks by. Anyway, I have encountered an odd situation a few times now, and again last night, where I'll be flirting with a potential fling and she knows I'm married and she's very interested. But when she finds out my marriage is nonmonogamous, she suddenly backs out. Case in point, a coworker: We have been flirting since I started my new job a few months ago. Today she asked me what my wife would do if she found out I was sneaking around on her. Good time to make a full disclosure! But when I told her my situation, that was the end of our flirtation.
Any idea why women find the idea of cheating with me okay, but once they find out I have a free go of things, they walk?
No Figuring Women
This woman didn't find the idea of cheating with you "okay," NFW, she wanted to fuck you because you're married and presumably monogamous. Try to look at it from her perspective: When she thought you were willing to cheat on your wife to be with her, NFW, that meant you found her so attractive, so utterly irresistible, that you would break your marriage vows and risk everything to get into her pants. Sleeping with her with your wife's permission? Meh, where's the ego boost in that?
I am a 40-ish married straight woman living in New York. I have been happily married in a monogamous relationship for 11 years. My husband and I met when we were in our early 20s. After listening to all of the Savage Lovecasts together, we started to talk about the idea of "some degree of openness," as you put it.
In the past year, I have had a crush on a coworker. My husband is okay with me having something on the side with this coworker. This coworker is single (last I heard) and 17 years younger (yikes!), and he knows I am married. We had a great working relationship while we were assigned to a project together, but now he's in another department. My question is, how to go from here? After having a few good talks with my husband, I am excited about this idea and terrified. I'm having a private lunch with my coworker soon. This is fine with my husband. What can you tell me to calm me the hell down and not be so stressed? After being conditioned my whole life that monogamy is the only way to go, I am having a hard time shifting!
Newly Open Couple Lacks Understanding & Education
Have that lunch, and tell your coworker/crush that you and the husband are just beginning to explore the idea of openness. For all you know now, your much younger coworker may not be interested in being your piece on the side. If it turns out that he is interested, take things very, very slowly and keep your husband fully informed. But even if I could relieve you of your stress and anxiety with a few words, NOCLUE, I wouldn't. You should be anxious and stressed out; it's appropriate to be anxious and stressed out. Your nervousness is prompting you to take things slowly and to be careful and conscientious about your husband's feelings. If this works out—for you, for your coworker, for your husband—it will be in large part thanks to the stress, NOCLUE, not despite it. Enjoy.
I am in a strange situation. I work in the corporate sector in marketing and sales. It is a high-stress, fast-paced job, and everyone has a short fuse. I have a coworker who is losing business to a competitor who happens to be gay. In her fits of anger, she keeps calling him a faggot. I hate it. The thing is, I am not gay. And if anyone in our office is, they are in the closet. She has used the word in front of other coworkers and even our boss, and no one seems to be bothered.
I am torn about what I should do. I am black, and if she were using the word "nigger," I would call her on it and raise issue with our HR department. Can I file a complaint on behalf of a group I do not belong to? If she found out I complained, she would see it as a threat to her own job, which could lead to a decidedly hostile workplace. But if it were a racial slur, I would not let that deter me. I want to do the right thing. How would you handle the situation?
Not My Problem?
If someone at my office were tossing the word "nigger" around, NMP, I would lodge a complaint. I would resent the assumption on my coworker's part that since I'm white she can use racist speech in my presence, because, hey, all us white people are racist POS, right? And I would complain because a workplace that tolerates racist remarks is a workplace that tolerates homophobic remarks. If people are using "nigger" when there aren't any black people in the room, they're doubtless using "faggot" when there aren't any gay people in the room. And vice versa. Have a word with HR.
I have a new coworker, a young man who is gay and quite effeminate. He's slim, wears makeup, has boyish/feminine features, and has done some modeling work as a woman. He said in a lunchroom discussion today that he prefers to wear women's clothes. He said he had worn women's clothes at a previous workplace, and no one had been offended. I suggested he talk to HR to protect his job before coming to work dressed in women's clothing. Good advice or should I just mind my own business? One coworker suggested that he work up to it, while another said he should just do it and let the chips fall where they may. The question of what restroom he should use when dressed as a woman came up. I'm not 100 percent comfortable sharing the ladies' room with him. Though I am certain most of the men won't be comfortable sharing the men's room with him either.
Do you have any suggestions on how to handle situations where I might find myself in the same restroom as my newest coworker?
She Knows It's Really Trivial
If your coworker identifies as female, she should use the women's room. If he identifies as male, he should use the men's room. And seeing as he's using the men's room now—despite his wearing makeup and being openly gay—I don't see how the addition of a dress should change things for his male coworkers. And from the way you describe that lunchroom conversation, SKIRT, it sounds like your effeminate new coworker has at least some support at work—but yes, he should have a talk with HR.
As for "handling situations" where you find
yourself in the same restroom with your newest coworker, SKIRT, unless
you routinely offer to zip up your coworkers or wipe their asses for
them, I don't see how his presence—or his attire or the
particular brand of genitalia tucked into his panties—really
impacts you at all. ![]()
4
9
For NOCLUE, isn't part of the thrill of "cheating" the anxiety and stress of it all? I think when it's no longer stressful, it'll also be no longer interesting, right? Yeah, human behavior is fucking weird, just go with it.
SKIRT's coworker should definitely inform HR before just showing up dressed as female. Let people know ahead of time so no one mistakes it for a punk'd episode or is left confused or something.
10
Also, sounds like SKIRT's got a serious "I don't want a penis touching my public toilet seat" complex. What is she so worried about happening?
http://fasttimesinpalestine.wordpress.co…
I've tried the link immediately above the "add a comment" window, which shows there are 17 comments at this point, and also the "all comments" link at the top of the comments section.
I don't see an opportunity to sign in w/o posting a comment. Am I missing something?
Oh yeah! Great stuff this week, Dan.
But that she was FLIRTING. With the safety that nothing would happen. And if something started to happen, or more than she wanted, she could always threaten to tell his wife.
But as a free-range husband he's just as "risky" as most other guys. And she only wanted to flirt when options were limited and greater control was hers.
and to the people with open marriages. flirt, etc... but a full disclosure of your marital status and your deal with your wife/husband is not necessary to flirt., even to fuck someone. as long as you let them know that you are committed to someone elkse, I don't really see why you sould explain which are exactly the rules of your commitment.. .5 is right on the spot.
Dan, when you changed from calling people "retards" to calling people LeoTards you did not change much.
Would you give advice to cut bigots a break if their hate speech changed to shouting insults that sounded like "Fagot" but did not start with "F".
Dan, you can't stand the hypocrisy of Santorm, nor can I. But will you please do what you say and clean up the hate sppech, aka use other adjectives than "retard". Nobody is forcing me to listen to your podcasts, but you sliped in "Tard" recently. barf.
Likewise....Newspapers are justified if they have a problem with people who use remarks that rhyme with the N word, and they should not tolerate Dan or anyone who frequently and recently uses remarks like "Tard" and "Leotard".
Please Dan, check yourself. offer a real apology to people with mental disabilities and their friends. Open up your Thesaurus and avoid your history of bigoted adjectives.
But when she learns that his wife knows and approves - then the wife still has primacy in the relationship and flirty co-worker is just his piece on the side - not so powerful.
I believe flirting is often as much about power dynamics as about sex.
1. What does POS stand for? Pieces of Shit? Plenty of Sex? Penises Off Site? Please Offer Service?
and
2. When he says "And vice versa" what exactly is he referring to here?
Thanks, folks!
When you start involving yourself in dramatic scenes others are creating at work, or worse yet, start making your own scenes, bosses start to see you as one of the headaches in the office.
Guess who is first to go in downsizings? If others are creating problems, let them stay other people's problems.
so, Dan says, "If someone at my office were tossing the word 'nigger' around, NMP, I would lodge a complaint."
Stupid advice. At most go talk to the person, tell them others may react like you do, and that would be bad for the hater. If that doesn't end the behavior, and the company actually gives a rat's ass about "faggot"-epithet slingers, that person is slitting their own throat. Let the person keep slitting their own throat and stay well clear in the meantime of that walking corpse. If the company does *not* care about such epithets, lodging a complaint will be taking a piss in the punch bowl around the office. If you care about the job much, don't do that--you may end up looking for a new job 6 mos. from now because of some other alleged reason.
Oh, and that middle aged woman about to hit on a coworker 17 years younger than you? Eeeek. I was that late twenties something guy with tight abs in a corporate office working with women old enough to be my mom. When gals old enough to be my mom cougared up on me, it usually creeped me out. To be really blunt, most of them were not women I did want to have sex with. Even if I found them attractive enough to sleep with, I would rather not have had them bring their mid-life crisis into my work-life. I am sure you gals who had to deal with paunchy, bald guys hitting on you at work know what I am saying. Why do you think it is different for guys that same age facing the advances of older women?
And for both the guy and the gal looking for a bit on the side and doing so at work, you have absolutely no one to blame but yourself if the office gossip becomes you are involved in a swinging, deviant marriage and you hunt for new meat at work. The workplace rumor mill will most likely turn your discrete advances into slobberingly aggressive overtures. That is why people always say keep that stuff well away from the office. Ever heard of Craigslist?
Really great collection this week, Dan, and loving the workplace theme.
Who says it's different? But who says older, paunchy guys aren't allowed to make a pass for younger women? Just be nice, not too pushy, and if she's clearly not interested, back off immediately and don't pursue it.
More often than not, it's the manner that offends, not a person's age or appearance.
here we go:
http://www.infoniac.com/offbeat-news/sin…
So according to that skeeviness, those women wanted to get the whole new wife package not just to be an add-on
38
39
"women usually abhor interaction with emotionally unavailable males"
He SAYS the women who flirt with him are interested in him at first *because* he's married.
"Today she asked me what my wife would do if she found out I was sneaking around on her."
This makes me believe she has an investment in what the wife thinks. It doesn't sound like she was just flirting for fun.
i think you're making some dangerous assumptions about what sex means to people.
"unless you make totally clear that they will never be anything but a fling, a meaningless piece on the side to be used sexually and then thrown away."
as a woman in a very stable, successful and happy polyamorous relationship, i take issue with this characterization of sex. i have several relationships that are primarily sexual, and i wouldn't define any of them as "meaningless." they are fun, casual and each is extremely fulfilling in its own way. no one is "using" anyone in these relationships, and we all have far too much respect for each other to "throw [anyone] away" when the relationship reaches its conclusion.
and as for my male partner and his other female lovers (and male lovers, for that matter), he has yet to become involved with anyone who wants to usurp my position in his life. you see, we don't respect these gender norms that dictate sexual ownership, entitlement, conquest or manipulation, and we don't get involved with people who buy into that bullshit.
i will agree with you that the perspectives you discuss are very prevalent. however, i think it's a tragedy that many people subscribe to these beliefs, and i choose to live my life without them. it's ignorant and presumptuous of you to characterize casual sex for others as it is for you.
I don't think it's the issue of sharing a bathroom with a crossdresser so much as it is an issue with sharing a bathroom with a man.
For most women, the societal understanding is that if a man you don't know or don't know well is in the women's public restroom, he's a pervert or he's trying to rape you. Women are socialized to think of dudes in there as something that should trigger a fight-or-flight kind of response.
Which, maybe is something that needs to change, but I can understand why someone would be made uncomfortable by it without being especially conservative or a homophobe.
As to the outrage over hate speech towards retards, this is getting to be too much.
"Please Dan, check yourself. offer a real apology to people with mental disabilities and their friends."
I understand that using the word or words that refer to another group is insulting to that group, and that calling them "leotards" doesn't fool anything.
But suddenly making a perfectly respectable word like "retarded" off limits because it used as an insult is ridiculous. It's not like the words "faggot" and "nigger" which are used to insult because their connotations. "Retard" is used for it's denotations, and is usually reserved for people who the speaker knows perfectly well are *not* retarded. Nobody over the age of 13 calls retarded people "retards". Change the rules about what words are permissible, and people 10 year olds will just switch to other words or phrases like "short bus" (and also people who think it's cute to use playground insults from when they were 10 year olds). You're not going to accomplish anything that way.
Did the retarded people manufacture this outrage themselves? Most retarded people wouldn't have known any differently, unless some unretarded person is coaching them to be offended. And "retarded" is itself a euphemism for the old words people called them, like "idiots" and "fools". Are those words off limits now too, or has the statute of limitations run out? If we agree to say "mentally disabled", why can't we use "retarded" the same way those other words are now used? Just recently lots of people got offended because Sarah Palin referred to her child as retarded. Then she had to pretend she would never use such an offensive word (because lying is her first reaction to anything).
In an ideal universe we'd all be well-adjusted and secure, yet in reality most of us make stupid decisions because of unresolved fear, anger, etc. To be perfectly clear, I'm perilously insecure, yet instead of hurting innocent spouses/girlfriends my wounds tend to be self-inflicted. Smart? Nope, but I feel better knowing that I haven't left too many victims in my wake.
In an ideal universe we'd all be well-adjusted and secure, yet in reality most of us make stupid decisions because of unresolved fear, anger, etc. To be perfectly clear, I'm perilously insecure, yet instead of hurting innocent spouses/girlfriends my wounds tend to be self-inflicted. Smart? Nope, but I feel better knowing that I haven't left too many victims in my wake.
As to NFW, maybe the women think he's lying. Of course, if they're flirting with married men, you'd think they'd be OK with a guy who lies. However, maybe once he says "My wife's OK with it," they think he's a delusional liar, and change their minds.
And just for the record, it's not just women...men do this too. I can't tell you how many times guys flirted hardcore with me only to reject me once I expressed that I was actually interested in them (I was a bit of an Ugly Betty back then and they smelled the desperation). Some were nice about it, and we stayed friends, some were not so nice and it was a bit painful. But such is life...
Will you marry me? Oh wait, I forgot, I'm gay!
Oh wait, that's okay! Can I join your co-op?
I LOVE reading postings from evolved individuals,
or groups even... Many blessings!
BTW... My question from last night, (#18) has resolved its self.
Today, all postings are showing at first access, as usual.
Damn, that's brilliant.
60
Yes, I believe that we all should be free to be who we really are, regardless of what that is, but this is about the WORKPLACE.
Most people in the workplace have enough sense to either not display their whole lifestyle, or tone down who they are in the workplace. It's a professional environment, so why does this guy feel the need to put his personal business on display? That should be reserved for when he goes out AFTER work to the tranny bars, or places where others like him congregate.
This whole situation brings the recent controversy at Morehouse to mind.
If your comment doesn't appear right after you've posted it, give the app a few minutes to make your comment appear. If you can't link to the comments at all, you might need to wait an hour or two and try back.
If a link Dan's included in a post doesn't work, email him directly with a link and the address of the page on which it appears, and he'll take care of the problem quickly.
Or perhaps she was actually interested and would have been willing to cheat with him, but only if it could turn into something more. Knowing from the outset that it would never be more than purely sexual--i.e. no possiblity for great love--then game over.
No matter how good a man might be in bed, most women want at least the hope of something emotional/something meaningful to be part of the deal.
Or it could be what Dan said. In any event, I do applaud this guy's honesty about his intentions. That kind of frankness will be rewarded when karma sends the right candidate along his path. Good luck to him.
@55: #63 is right. Hovering is definitely a problem with a lot of women.
NMP: I would print out an anonymous letter as follows:
"Dear Carole: I work with you. I am not gay but that's no reason I should have to listen to you use the epithet "faggot" when you are upset about your competitor Hank. If I EVER hear that word in the workplace again, I will file a complaint with H.R. I am writing anonymously to allow you to save face but do NOT mistake that as fear. If getting you to stop means keeping a record of incidents, gathering witnesses and getting you fired, I'll do it. It is 2009. I will not tolerate intolerance.
Thank you."
By floating the idea out there, SKIRT's co-worker is giving the management a chance to quietly tell him there will be a problem, *before* he bites the bullet and shows up in feminine apparel. Any issues would be relatively minor as long as the idea is hypothetical - but once he shows up to work in a dress, then everything is official and HR and lawyers and who knows who else may be dragged in. Even if the immediate co-workers don't have an issue with it, it could turn into an HR nightmare.
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me. (by Martin Niemöller)
74
Don't have a word with HR ... yet.
You owe it to yourself to have a word with the co-worker before you go to HR. You don't need to mention your orientation, which has nothing to do with this. All you need say is, "Look, you keep saying 'faggot' and I find it highly offensive and unprofessional. I'd like you to stop. I don't want to go to HR because maybe you haven't thought about how offensive that word is."
You'll atone for your sin of silence and you might even help her understand that she is being hurtful and stupid. If she's a deep bigot and keeps using it, THEN go to HR.
@74: totally agree.
76
"It's a professional environment, so why does this guy feel the need to put his personal business on display? That should be reserved for when he goes out AFTER work to the tranny bars, or places where others like him congregate."
His personal business? Like, say, the pictures of your wife on your desk? (Why do people need to advertise their sex lives?) Like, your photo of Kirk Gibson after he hit the homer for the Dodgers? (How do your hobbies have any place in the workplace?) Like, say, any mention around the water cooler of what you're doing after work or on the weekend? (Stop wasting work time!)
No straight person ever thinks they're putting their personal business on display when they talk about their spouses. No man who identifies as male and wants to dress as a male ever thinks he's advertising that fact when he wears a pair of pants in public.
MT3, shut up unless you're willing to wear a unisex smock to work. How could it possibly matter to you how your coworker dresses, so long as it's a professional skirt or professional pants?
See:
http://books.google.com/books?id=z_VmtjA…
To use "impact" improperly is leotarded, Dan.
79
SKIRT's coworkers shouldn't have to be the ones dealing with this problem, this matter should be taken head-on by the his employer as soon as possible cause this has the potential of creating a very uncomfortable work environment. Based on the fact that SKIRT as a male in his previous job did the same thing and remained as a male, his intentions are not of someone who identifies with any clear gender. This is a very frequent behavior expressed by people like him and coworkers of his both male and female have every reason to feel uncomfortable and talk with HR if they don't address this matter with SKIRT and he decides to present himself in women's clothing and make use of the restrooms. Because the freedoms of expression we all enjoy are not a green light to inconvenience and disrupt upon the lives and work of those around.
@79 and several others:
You're suggesting that the word "faggot" has not been used in association with oppression or murder? Or that it still isn't? What if someone said that "The N Word" can't be compared to "faggot", and that "faggot" is the more oppressive one because it is used against people who still don't have their civil rights.
I'm not done. I can think of other terms that stand a chance against "The N Word", in regards to your statement that no other slur can compare. What about "The G Word" and "The J Word", used against Asians or Asian-Americans. Consider that the Chinese were banned from entering the US for decades, and the Japanese were put in internment camps during World War II.
I could come up with more examples if you require them.
83
Homosexuals are not a protected class under the constitution (yet), so you will likely not get the same reaction from HR that you would if your coworker was using a racial slur. The outcome will likely depend on how liberal your company is, so perhaps you should raise the issue with your coworker first. If she knows you are offended, she may stop using the offensive language. If she overreacts to your suggestion, that may be more evidence to take to HR.
Before running to HR, I'd suggest just telling the coworker you're uncomfortable with how she's talking. Ask her not to use that kind of language in the workplace, straight out.
Sometimes, peer pressure is enough to get people behaving the right way.
This is along the same lines of that phenomenon that every guy is familiar with: many women find you more appealing when you're involved with another woman than when you're single and available.
Absolutely. It's much harder for a typical man to find a woman for casual sex than it is for a typical woman to find a man for that. Men like an emotional connection but they don't require it in order to fuck to the degree that women do.
I'm not excusing lying in order to get laid but the reason men do it is that most women require some profession of feelings from a guy before they're willing to get naked with him. Women don't have to lie in order to get laid because if a woman is honest with a guy and says, "I just wanna have sex", his response is "No problem!"
I worked with a woman once who talked endlessly at work about her ex-husband and her troubled son. One time, when I'd heard enough from her about how gays "should keep their personal lives private," I turned to her and asked, as sweetly as possible, "Nancy, do you leave your personal life at home?"
I never heard her use the "gays should keep their personal lives private" line again.
91
You're all spot on about what's happening here. Not exactly sexy for her to find out that she really is just a piece of ass for him. Woman can get laid any day of the week. No thanks - she's gone. Either that, or this chick really *was* just flirting and had no intention of making it a reality.
@57
Oh wow, you're both just soooooo "evolved" from the rest of the lower species of monogamous people. STFU, dickwad. Accept the fact that people are all different when it comes to what they want/can handle in love and relationships and most people are just comfortable with monogamy. Are bisexuals "evolved" because they can have sex with both genders? Are gay people "evolved" because they can have sex with people of their same gender? Of course not. They're just different. You ain't better than nobody, asshole, and it's pathetic you've led yourself to believe that. Get a life.
I mean, sure, there could be an emotional connection there, and it'd be a full-blown affair, but we've heard so many cases of women who hope that a husband would leave his wife for her after fucking around for a while -- and he doesn't, because he'd be risking kids, his bank account, whatever, etc., and he was just looking for some fun.
FIFY.
Good call. An old friend recently put an abrupt end to the 'dirtier' aspect of our now long-distance friendship when I suggested we hook up when he comes to town. He'll flirt - hell, he'll talk dirty and send homemade porn - but the thought of actually fucking a married woman apparently did him in.
I am torn about what I should do. I am black, and if she were using the word "nigger," I would call her on it and raise issue with our HR department. Can I file a complaint on behalf of a group I do not belong to? If she found out I complained, she would see it as a threat to her own job, which could lead to a decidedly hostile workplace. But if it were a racial slur, I would not let that deter me. I want to do the right thing. How would you handle the situation?
Not My Problem?
If someone at my office were tossing the word "RETARD" around, NMP, I would lodge a complaint. I would resent the assumption on my coworker's part that since I'm NOT MENTALLY DISABLED she can use HATE speech in my presence, because, hey, all us NOT MENTALLY DISABLED people THINK IT'S FUNNY, right? And I would complain because a workplace that tolerates HATEFUL remarks is a workplace that tolerates homophobic remarks. If people are using "nigger" when there aren't any black people in the room, they're doubtless using "RETARD" when there aren't any MENTALLY DISABLED people in the room. And vice versa. Have a word with HR.
Awesome advice, Dan Savage. You hypocrite.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
Sure, maybe it's some unconscious female competition, or maybe it's just harmless flirting...
But, maybe? Maybe married men are more attractive because they're not trying so hard. One of the things I hate about being single is that so few single men just "talk" to me. They're always working an angle, trying a pitch--and I feel manipulated and, on occasion, repulsed by them. I often wonder, "If they have to go to such lengths to present such an orchestrated script/scenario/line, is it because they've got nothing real to offer?"
With married men, they interact more naturally cuz they're not trying to score with you. That leaves you more of an opportunity to get to know them...and, surprise surprise, feelings can develop.
I also find that I'm less guarded about myself with men that I know to be taken... so maybe that's part of it too.
Care to respond? How is this different, exactly?
So to the letter writer I would suggest that you do what Mr. Savage does rather than what he says and simply go along with your co-worker's use of the word. Use it yourself!
whether or not the word "Tard" is offensive. And neither do you, @51. As the mother of a child with Down syndrome who is not yet old enough yet to advocate for himself, I do.
Black people should not have to be treated like less-capable human beings just because they are black. Gay people should not have to be treated like less-capable human beings just because they are gay. Retarded people are less-capable human beings my definition.
So implying someone is incompetent because they are black or gay is offensive. Implying someone is incompetent because they are retarded is, well, true.
---JRS
And I should add that most people with Down syndrome are perfectly aware they are being insulted when they are called "retard" or when that word is used around them.
The offender doesn`t even necessarily have a particular problem with gays, just the one that she is in competition with and she needs to know that NWP doesn`t find her speech acceptable. Talking to HR before talking to her escalates the situation when this may not be necessary. HR are always there for backup if the direct approach fails.
Get a grip!
1. You have the balls to argue that somebody should lodge an HR or legal complaint when using the f- or n-word in a derogatory manner (which, in fact, I agree that they should), but at the same time you use "retard" or "tard" or "retarded" or "leotarded" (long list, huh?) in a derogatory manner all the time???
2. Is your argument based solely on the idea that discrimination against Black people and gays/lesbians is illegal under U.S. anti-discrimination law? Hmmmm... that doesn't quite work given that all people with disabilities (including INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES) are afforded the same exact legal rights (and in some cases MORE protection) under Federal and State laws.
3. You argue that you would "resent the assumption... that since [you're] white she can use racist speech" in your presence. So, is it just RACIST speech that offends you because you're not a racist POS (your words, not mine)? Does that mean that you are just a POS that thinks it's okay to demean, belittle, ostracize, offend, patronize, and trample on the rights of people with a mental disability?
4. Is your argument that racist and anti-gay language is not okay because if a workplace tolerates one, they must tolerate the other? That doesn't seem to be the case in your workplace. Obviously, you don't tolerate racist or anti-gay language (except when you "claim" the f-word for yourself) in your workplace, but advocate for using the word "retard" as synonymous with "dumbass," "lame," and "stupid," or simply to poke fun at people with an intellectual disability. So, if you don't tolerate some, why do tolerate (and yourself use!) the word retard in a similar fashion? Although I do not know for sure, I'm willing to put money on the fact that no person with an intellectual disability would claim the word "retard" like you choose to claim the f-word.
5. Interestingly, you told NMP that if people use the n-word when no Black people are around they are likely using the f-word when no gay people are in the room. I claim this is interesting because you clearly use "retard" regardless of who hears it, including people who themselves have, or are family members of somebody who has, an intellectual disability. Hell, you even call people with these disabilities "retards"!!!!
6. Clearly you wouldn't claim using "retard" is your First Amendment right while arguing that people shouldn't be afforded the same First Amendment rights to use other hateful and hurtful speech (f- and n-words are you most recent examples in this blog post). Honestly, that was probably the only argument I would have bought from you. Just because speech is protected by the First Amendment doesn't make it right or good, but at least the First Amendment affords me the right to tell somebody who uses hurtful speech what I think of it. And trust me, I'm trying REAL hard to use my protected speech in an effective and meaningful way right now instead of using a long list of ad hominem attacks.
7. Maybe you simply don't value people with intellectual disabilities... People who use the f- and n-words clearly don't respect and value Black people or gays/lesbians. So maybe that's it. Maybe you don't value people with mental disabilities. But wait. That doesn't work either, does it, Dan? Because you were ready to embrace your child back when you thought FAS was a possibility.
I can't figure it out on my own, Dan. I need your help, and your silence begs too many questions...
So, back to my original question: Are you effin kiddin' me? Either you are a hypocrite, or you're a dumbass that can't see when his own logic has failed him.
I WILL ASK YOU AGAIN, PLEASE DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. CHANGE THE TITLE OF YOUR "TARD SUPPER" BLOG POST AND ISSUE A PUBLIC APOLOGY
OR
2. EXPLAIN WHY YOU REFUSE TO DO SO
The people with intellectual disabilities - and their friends and family who love them - weren't in the room when you wrote "Tard Supper" so just help us understand why all people should embrace such labels.
118
Excellent point! I hadn't thought of that, but it's so true. Always being "pitched to" all the time really is unattractive and a buzz kill. And it reeks of desperation. Women are sooooo used to the pathetic pitches all day long that it's refreshing to be around someone that's not playing any game, just being himself. And it draws her in. Makes perfect sense.
As long as they meet the job requirements, folks with retardation should have the exact same opportunity to work a job as anyone else. Denying someone a job for which they are qualified just because they have retardation is also blatant discrimination.
And besides, I think the point is more about the vocabulary in this case, isn't it?
I think it's all been said, but I will throw out there that I am sick of the hypocrisy, Dan.
jssmbdy (comment #51) makes an interesting point, and it's true that the word "retarded" began with a non-pejorative meaning, but so did "negro," and people tend to avoid that word today, because its context has changed. I believe "retarded" is the same way.
Regardless: come on, Dan, explain yourself!
122
I worked in a DNA sequencing lab for a few months which was managed by a man who lost his previous job because he had a kitschy postcard of a girl in a swim suit from Florida - totally as a joke, the guy is gay. One of the women who worked for him saw it, took him to court, she won, he was out the door and was unable to find another job because once HR sees a sexual harassment suit on your record they won't touch you with a 10 foot pole.
I would talk to the co-worker 1 to 1, point out that the use of the word is offensive, and remind her of exactly what she is jumping into.
127
Or are we still in that amorphous world in which the acceptability of slang terminology depends on the context and intent, depending on the comfort level of all those persons in the universe, and in perpetuity.
Personally, as a VERY gay-friendly guy, I hear the words "faggot" and "queer" used by gay and straight alike; the insinuated intent and context of the usage seems to be the determining factor as to whether the terms are to be interpreted as slang or as cultural slurs. The same is true with the term "nigger" (niggah). I find the term generally distasteful and insulting, but it is a slang term widely used by my black friends, but with a potent exclusion for "white folk." Should it not be subject to the same context-related criteria?
The main difference seems to be an implied threat of violent retribution for a misused reference. Both terms carry an identical penalty for malicious harassment (and penalties therefore.) Shouldn't the social implications be uniform?
129
My momma likes to use the Gary Cooper for perspective when it comes to words.
That's not that line. Cooper and the book both said, "When you call me that, SMILE."
The Virginian hadn't paid attention to someone earlier calling him a son of a bitch. The narrator was shocked. It was a time and place where men have killed each other for less.
When the villain says it...
Therefore Trampas spoke. "Your bet, you son-of-a--."
The Virginian's pistol came out, and his hand lay on the table, holding it unaimed. And with a voice as gentle as ever, the voice that sounded almost like a caress, but drawling a very little more than usual, so that there was almost a space between each word, he issued his orders to the man Trampas: "When you call me that, SMILE." And he looked at Trampas across the table.
@ "Male DNA=Men's room" (#36):
That would be exactly as inappropriate as a lesbian diddling herself to the same thing in the same place, or a gay male jerking off to you peeing right next to you. And in case you can't do the math, the degree of inappropriateness here is "entirely." If you want to jerk off, use the internet at home. The workplace is, whadday fuckin' know, a place for work.
As for the rest of you, who ever said that casual non-commitment-related sex was "meaningless?" Maybe it's not your cup of tea, and that's fine. But keep in mind that there are plenty of people who find your silly matrimonial song and dance to be meaningless, too. And that's OK. People are different and value different things; the problem here, as I see it, is that NFW is asking a stranger (albeit an intelligent and experienced and witty one) what another individual is thinking, and wanting to generalize from there. I call bullshit. If NFW really wants to know what's going on in this chick's head, he ought to ask her - and he also ought to be OK with the prospect that even she might not know, or might not be willing to share. But at the end of the day, arbitrary social conventions are arbitrary. The important part is to find a way to play the games you like with a number of people you're comfortable with, and then everybody wins because the point is playing in the first place.
133
I can't tell from the letter whether he said to her what he said to Dan and us about "it's not about nailing everything that walks by," but maybe that's what she thought.
134
http://shutyoureverlovingpiehole.wordpre…




RSS
Comments (135) RSS