T O P
mortyskidneys

Bad news for Frank Reynolds?


authoruk

Bad news for all humanity


dumbademic

We need to have a rule where you have to post the source of these quotes. Right now it's a few disembodied paragraphs with no supporting data.


Rough-Prior-6540

Is this good or bad?


dehehn

Boomers think it's bad. I think Millennials will do just fine. I've managed to work at my job for 15 years of mostly millennials without any issues of sexual harassment or misgendering or racism or office back stabbing. I feel blessed to have no idea what it's like to work in a toxic workplace. It boggles my mind to hear things like the Blizzard environment.


SexWomble

To be fair, that blizzard environment sounded completely alien to me even from my experiences starting in the tech industry 25 years ago. There have always been both pleasant and toxic work places.


tripu

Source?


SeanV2oh

I'm assuming this is an excerpt from their [recent article in Persuasion](https://www.persuasion.community/p/haidt-and-lukianoff-how-to-end-corporate). Jon & Greg were right when they published the Coddling of the American mind a handful of years ago and I think they're going to be right again, unfortunately.


Ok-Entertainment7185

What part of 80s to 00s corporate culture is threatened by millennials is worthy of keeping? And I would hard call them "right" the book was just a long list of boomer opinions. Being the the actual workforce the young millennial and Zommers coming into the work force are running circles around the older workers. The industries that the US is dominating in are primarily staffed by young people.


dbcooper4

Another “OK boomer” response. So original.


MushroomMystery

It's just an attempt on their part to create "emotional safety" for themself.


Ok-Entertainment7185

That's not what I said at all and you didn't answer the question.


dbcooper4

Boomer opinions was the term you used. As if they should be ignored because of their age. Are you ageist?


asparegrass

Woke bigotry


dbcooper4

It’s OK to discriminate. As long as it’s for the woke cause.


TotesTax

Old people have been bitching about the youth for literally thousands of years.


tripu

It is. Thanks.


Ok-Entertainment7185

Millennials have been in the work force for almost 2 decades now. But also pre-millennial corporate culture was a steaming pile of shit. The 80s and 90s corporate culture of greed is good, prioritization of short term gains over long term stability, sweeping misconduct under the rug, and the death of a healthy work life balance are all things that should go away. Maybe the place you spend 1/3rd of your life shouldn't grind you into a fine dust with horrible work practices, call me crazy.


[deleted]

Oh that mentality is still there, they just arent supposed to say it out loud anymore.


Ok-Entertainment7185

I work in a tech adjacent industry and the last decade has improved working conditions drastically. I know that's not the case for everyone but a changing workforce has lead to some changes in the work place.


BatemaninAccounting

Another huge shout out to EA-Wife for helping kickstart that trend as well.


The_Winklevii

I mean let’s be honest, Ok-Entertainment is exactly the kind of person that totally buys into this flavor of empty corporate glad-handing.


Ok-Entertainment7185

Nice job building up that strawman I guess.


goodolarchie

The median millennial has spent just a bit less than a decade in a post-collegiate (aka, corporate) job.


[deleted]

In some ways I'm glad that this discourse is reaching the corporate world. It was always funny to me the pearl clutching over "deplatforming" and whatnot at Universities that not only have to be open to ideas, but they have to be open to the shittiest people's ideas imaginable with no free speech recourse whatsoever. Imagine Coca-Cola or Fox News being forced to "platform" people that challenge their sensibilities, lmao


TJ11240

>The 80s and 90s corporate culture of greed is good, prioritization of short term gains over long term stability, sweeping misconduct under the rug, and the death of a healthy work life balance are all things that should go away. > >Maybe the place you spend 1/3rd of your life shouldn't grind you into a fine dust with horrible work practices, call me crazy. This is all true, but DEI isn't going to fix it.


orincoro

Honestly this just reads to me like “kids these days.”


FitArtichoke7088

>prioritization of short term gains over long term stability, lol so glad we fixed that


plasma_dan

I totally believe this is gonna happen and I'm honestly not that mad about it. Generations change culture, and they always have.


[deleted]

Having just taken it for my new job, corporate training in 2021 is just someone showing you a graveyard of things that were "unwoke" in decades past and telling you under no circumstances are you to ever do them. The wokies of the 80's were saying maybe its not okay if all women everywhere are risk of getting slapped on the ass or fired b/c they wont blow the boss. Wokies of the 90s were saying maybe the great "fag" joke you heard at the bar wasn't quite as welcoming and funny around the office cooler, etc etc. Now we're up to 2021 and the dinosaurs are still fighting the good fight against human decency.


dbcooper4

Now we fire people for telling an off color joke or committing a gaff on social media. So much better.


MushroomMystery

Shhhhh, you're drowning out all the utopia.


manteiga_night

is that how you feel?


dbcooper4

The so much better part was sarcasm.


Ok-Entertainment7185

> off color I do love that when people swap ina different word for racist/sexist to make it sound a little more palatable. Don't be a piece of shit at work seems like a low bar. It's an pain in the ass to fire someone also. If someone gets fired for the way they act more likely than not its for a string of behaviors and after numerous warnings. It's not like one mistep and your gone. Corperate america ain't retail.


okay-wait-wut

Off color jokes start like this: A Muslim a Catholic and a cis ivory male all walk into a bar…


[deleted]

[удалено]


okay-wait-wut

Off color remarks are discouraged.


skull_and_bone

Whoa whoa that's not okay dude. That's a racial joke. That's kind of insensitive and are you racist? Idk if I have a choice, I'm gonna have to talk to HR about that one


okay-wait-wut

Fuck you, Steve, you’re just doing this because I threw out your moldy lunch from 3 weeks ago.


dbcooper4

*off-color - somewhat indecent or in poor taste.* There are plenty of examples of people being fired for one misstep. Often times for things they said outside of work hours in their free time.


OneEverHangs

And there are plenty of *anecdotes* about people being fired for the color of their skin or gender or nothing at all, yet so much pearl clutching on this sub seems focused perpetually elsewhere.


dbcooper4

That’s against the law. Race and gender are protected classes. Those companies can be sued and victims awarded millions of dollars.


tomaskruz28

Lol this seems like an open admission that your goal is simply to swap one problem for another. That’s not progress, that’s selfishness.


ReAndD1085

Man, I'm never reminded of the elite social positioning of the people on this sub as when yall talk about workplace culture. People are still openly racist and sexist at work to huge audiences with no repercussions in most work places. I work two jobs (white dude) and people will openly say "don't seat black people at my tables, those fuckers don't tip", they'll stick their fingers like buck teeth and imitate the accent of an elderly Asian person they fielded a call from, they'll complain about how women these days are such bitches. None of this is unusual AT ALL. I would say there are four to five overtly bigoted remarks made just to me each day, and there is absolutely no effort by anyone to push back on this stuff, to reform office culture, blah blah blah I'm glad yall are having seizures over your bizarre elitist institutional squabbles though. Good luck with that


SprinklesFederal7864

Holy crap.Your workplace is rly messed up. I'm curious why your coworkers are explicit racist.


ReAndD1085

*both* of my workplaces. And 4 of the last 6 jobs I had in my life. People think it's funny and they don't care that it's offensive. Again, yalls elite culture meltdowns are so weird to constantly read about. Having "low status" jobs makes yalls constant media wars so weird to have to constantly read about.


[deleted]

I think what happens is that people in highly visible positions get fired for stuff like that, as elites tend to be at the forefront of shaping culture and then it spills down to the rest of us, and you see people in elite positions not necessarily getting super harsh consequences for their indiscretions, but usually just not being able to occupy a highly visible and powerful place any more, and people who are not as high on the totem pole and not as subject to these sorts of elite cultural constraints they’re next on the list and that it’s going to run rampant. It kind of reminds me of the constant slippery slope fallacies employed by conservatives which seem to be a core part of the conservative worldview - not to say the only ones worried about this are conservative. Corey Robin identifies this in “the reactionary mind” wherein he describes conservatism as arising in its most pure form in those who react in response to a challenge from those lower on the hierarchy, reacting in the moment to the actual, current challenges and demands brought by the petitioners, but also highly wary of greater encroachments on power they imagine might be made possible by a concession to the demands of the petitioners. Not sure if there’s a connection there but it seems possible there are parallels there.


okay-wait-wut

This is all low-paying low-skill mostly male jobs in my experience. His description brought back ugly memories of when I used to deliver furniture…


twyckf

Get a job at those place and change it from the inside!


[deleted]

Yeah, nobody in history has ever had their particularly sensibilities coddled by corporate culture before 🙄


SprinklesFederal7864

I guess share-holder capitalism is also responsible for coddling rich.


chytrak

By far the largest cross generational conflict is housing.


orincoro

It’s difficult to read this as anything more than a ptolemization of the old generational polemics. The dialectic here treats it as a given that inter generational conflict is *caused* by younger people representing a negative or disruptive force and bringing dysfunction to a functional system. It does not entertain as a possibility first of all that the system as it already exists is dysfunctional, or that power differences between these particular generations are exceptionally large because of any dysfunction already present. It seems very unlikely to me that the ultimate cause of conflict is the youth generation’s insistence on a certain use of language or its intelectual attitude. If that was all that was going on, then the older generations would pragmatically adapt to these demands of a new standard of speech and behavior (as they have done without compliant for decades already). Rather the “coddled mind” seems to represent some standard that the critics can’t effectively describe, or separate from the reasonable demands of the politically correct which *can* be incorporated and internalized. It’s all some vague and formless bugbear about the unfairness of it all. It doesn’t seem to occur to these critics that their wealth and influence may be the cause and the true target of politically correct criticism, with speech coding being merely a proxy for these attitudes.


VStarffin

Is this supposed to be...bad? *New generation, more attuned to certain moral and social sensitives, starts inlfluencing the workplace as they require their bosses no longer be assholes.* Oh no!


asparegrass

It's all fun and games until a kid comes into the office and tries to get you fired for referring to firewall *black*lists.


Ok-Entertainment7185

You can certainly be afraid of everything if you just make up an enemy whos coming for you.


raff_riff

That’s not made up though. Companies are literally prohibiting the use of words like blacklist, black hat/white hat, etc. Focusing on these entirely innocuous and trivial things really undermines legitimate efforts to address actual racism. It’s silly virtue signaling.


Ok-Entertainment7185

What are you referring to? I'm not in tune with the outrage of the day. All I could find was Twitter was changing their coding standard from blacklist to blocklist. Which ok. I don't see the problem. I can't find anything claiming that people will be fired for using the wrong word.


raff_riff

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-jp-morgan-race-exc-idUSKBN2433E4 https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/06/us/racism-words-phrases-slavery-trnd/index.html And my own Fortune 100 company imposed a similar list of allegedly problematic words, which obviously I won’t source so you’ll have to take my word for it. Anecdotally I’ll also add a brilliant example from one of our corporate D&I white guilt lectures where the presenter tried to tell us “picnic” was a racist word because it sounds similar to “pick-a-n*gger”. I can get behind moving beyond the use of words like “master” and “slave”. But master bedroom? Black hat? Focusing on these non-issues trivializes actual, genuine attempts at addressing racism. This is useless, woke corporate virtue signaling.


[deleted]

Banks and financial institutions are some of the least progressive and most conservative companies on the planet lol. I remember how they fought tooth and nail to prevent looser dress codes, and I know how they fought letting women get their own separate credit cards separate from their husbands as late as the 1970s. All of this stuff about banks being too woke, or excessively more progressive than your average company are made up.


Ok-Entertainment7185

You 100% failed to prove your assertion. If you think JP Morgan is "woke" I really don't know what to say here. Changing of coding standards is not banning a word and firing anyone who uses it. Then you say you are behind the choice! Your second article is an entirely irrelevant opinion piece that has nothing to do with the conversation. You are using it as outrage bait. you say you support JP morgans choice then call it "woke corperate virtue signaling".


raff_riff

I didn’t say people were getting fired. If you actually read the second article you’d see where it mentions several organizations that are changing their use of certain terminology. It has everything to do with the conversation because you asked for examples of companies doing precisely that. I don’t think JPMC is woke. None of these companies are. That’s why I think it’s useless virtue signaling. They get some positive press while appearing to do something meaningful while ignoring actual issues. I think it undermines actual attempts at progress by dumbing down the broader movement, focusing on things most people probably don’t care about. It’s hard to take your movement to reform police seriously when, at the same time, you’re quibbling over “master bedroom” or “black hat” or “picnic”. Edit to address your other point I skipped: Yes, I think references to “master” and “slave” should be abolished. I’m actually surprised they survived this long given the obvious implications in American lexicon. There’s literally no charitable way to see their usage. But most other examples listed in these articles are utterly silly. Imagine being offended by “black hat”. Connotations of black/white for evil/good have been around literally forever. It’s probably the most ubiquitous analogy in literature. It’s ridiculous to find racism there. “Picnic’s” etymology is French and has nothing to do with lynching. The left has lost their fucking minds if these are the hills we’re willing to die on.


[deleted]

The entire reason this thread started out as alleging that this turn toward wokeness was problematic was because “It's all fun and games until a kid comes into the office and tries to get you fired for referring to firewall blacklists.” The person you responded to was saying that that was made up, and thereby that insofar as (we’ll call it) this woke turn was thought to be problematic based on people getting fired unreasonably, it’s a non issue because they arent. You took the conversation in a different direction. As for what you said once you went that direction: I guess it’s possible some dummies think that the movement to address real racial inequities is stupid overall because some corporations are doing some dumb some stuff. But that’s because they’re dummies. People also think that multiracial/multiethnic, durable welfare states aren’t possible because people won’t want to support people across racial lines. Those people are stupid too. Their stupidity shouldn’t undermine the project.


OneEverHangs

Oh nooooo! Anything but not using the word backlist! We’ll never recover!


raff_riff

I think the second half of my comment explains why I feel this is an issue. I personally don’t care about not being able to use those words but I do feel it undermines addressing actual issues with racism by focusing on such petty, useless non-issues.


[deleted]

How does changing corporate verbiage undermine anything? Corporations change their verbiage to be softer to be descriptive, to be less descriptive etc etc all of the time. You can think that it's not productive and that they should be doing more productive things, but i find it hard to see what the relationship actually is.


raff_riff

I think one is much less likely to take your movement seriously if you’re triggered by “master bedroom” and “grandfathered”.


[deleted]

So you’re saying some third party will, for example, erroneously conflate this woke corporate posturing with the actual activists which are seeking legitimate redresses to the real racial inequalities across our society and the real damage this does to people, and this will undermine the movement to actually help people? Or do you conflate the two?


JR-Oppie

> your movement ... JP Morgan is a "movement" now?


[deleted]

You sound like the only one here whose triggered, lmao


geriatricbaby

>Companies are literally prohibiting the use of words like blacklist, black hat/white hat, etc. Where? Which ones?


raff_riff

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-jp-morgan-race-exc-idUSKBN2433E4 https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/06/us/racism-words-phrases-slavery-trnd/index.html There’s more I’m sure but that’s a quick search. My own Fortune 100 company has imposed a similar list of problematic words. It’s probably the norm. I will admit master/slave is problematic and we should move past that but “black hat”, “master” bedroom?


The_Winklevii

GitHub for one


geriatricbaby

Do you have a link about this? I can't find anything on a quick search. Oh. So they're changing shit like "master" to "main." I guess that is horrific and a telltale sign of a democracy in decline.


The_Winklevii

Google has changed the terminology for [chrome and for android](https://9to5google.com/2020/06/12/google-android-chrome-blacklist-blocklist-more-inclusive/). So, it’s been done for the world’s most used web browser and mobile OS too. But keep on moving those goalposts. But more to the point, you’re just following the same reality-denying pattern of every basic-ass wokester on the planet. 1. “This thing that is happening isn’t actually happening” 2. “This evidence you’ve presented me with is actually not evidence, and besides, it’s inconsequential” 3. “Well it’s actually a good thing it’s happening, why do you have a problem with it?” You’re currently at stage 3.


Kanthumerussell

Personally I think wokeness is a plague, getting canceled seems to be one of the worst things to come out of modern technology and social networks. With that being said though it certainly doesn't help that for some people this has turned into a full blown moral panic. As much as an argument like "thats just boomer talk" isn't an actual argument it is true that it has turned into a political talking point and is no longer a fringe topic that you only heard on long-form podcasts with professors. Like anything else politically popular a lot of people have some really bad takes on it. Just look at the statewide CRT bans in education. Some of them didn't even change anything, it was just a token effort to gain some political sway. In Australia the Prime Minister is going on an anti-cancellation campaign and trying to get laws passed that would be close to infringing on rights in the US. Also, it's hard to see what happened to someone like Dave Rubin where his entire personality is based on being anti-woke. And for some people the word woke is so vague it can mean as little as just Democrat and is just used to dismiss people you don't agree with. Used in this way "woke" is as useful as "systemic racism" or "ACAB". In all of this is an actual issue though. How do we sift through the generic overblown nonsense and actually get a good grasp of how bad it is? What can we do about it? Really that's all I care about. Unfortunately like I said though it's now a polar issue and I'm not saying I'm right but even suggesting half the stuff I've said here is considered gaslighting and bad faith by some.


JR-Oppie

Except that there is still no evidence presented for the described events -- companies *prohibiting* this language and *firing people for it*. So the steps here are closer to: 1. Claim loudly that the sky is falling. 2. Insist against all reason that it's not just rain. 3. Claim you were talking about rain the whole time. You're currently at stage 3.


The_Winklevii

For someone who allegedly works in academia, your reading comprehension seems to regularly be extremely poor. The comment in question, emphasis added: > It's all fun and games until a kid comes into the office and **tries to get you fired** for referring to firewall blacklists. It seems like everyone who is objecting to this comment is deliberately misreading or misinterpreting what was written. I wonder why that is? Or perhaps it’s not deliberate, your reading comprehension really is that poor. And, even more impressively, you managed to misread it on multiple levels. The comment is *not* about a company prohibiting language and then firing someone for it. It’s about a younger worker becoming offended at a banal term being used and *attempting* to get the offending individual fired. Why are you expecting there to be a news article about such an occurrence? What standard of evidence would satisfy you? Because I have a feeling if anyone shared their personal experiences with situations like this, you’d simply dismiss it as an anecdote or claim that it was fabricated. So really this is more about you trying to rationalize away any potential evidence that runs contrary to your ideological priors than anything else. It’s cute that you’re trying to copy me, but it works a lot better when it’s actually applicable to the situation at hand.


geriatricbaby

I mean, can you explain exactly what the big deal is? Like why is this particular change so upsetting to you? I'd really like to understand. Also, please don't put words in my mouth. I've said exactly none of those things and I've put up exactly zero goalposts.


The_Winklevii

Do you have amnesia? You said, in reply to another comment: >> Companies are literally prohibiting the use of words like blacklist, black hat/white hat, etc. > Where? Which ones? And I provided answers to “Where? Which ones?” I mean what kind of answer were you expecting to get? Or were you just expecting everyone to play along and do what you were doing, which was pretending that it isn’t happening? > I've said exactly none of those things and I've put up exactly zero goalposts. You literally have gone through every stage I listed, and you absolutely are moving the goalposts. You went from credulously asking where this was happening to now arguing “oh this is good actually, why would anyone have a problem with that?” Since you seem to be ignorant of common fallacies, that is called moving the goalposts.


skull_and_bone

You think that people have a problem with woke lunacy because it means that democracy is dying?


Uncle_Daddy_Kane

If your boss tells you to stop using blacklist, and you throw a tantrum about CRT and being oppressed until you're fired...you weren't fired for saying "blacklist" you were fired because you lacked the emotional maturity to either explain the technical repercussions of doing so, if those are even relevant. Corporate changes nomenclature all the fucking time. Throwing a fit over it instead of bitching about it to your coworkers at happy hour like a normal corporate drone is just silly.


[deleted]

I'm sure you have a citation for this happening and it's not just more anti-woke hysteria. I'm sure. It's totally happened and if not, it's any minute now. The wokies are coming!


asparegrass

[here](https://9to5google.com/2020/06/12/google-android-chrome-blacklist-blocklist-more-inclusive/). lol no joke. These woke kids are wild


FernandezFernandez

So who was fired?


asparegrass

Well nobody yet to my knowledge, but it’s just a matter of time I think.


FernandezFernandez

And what do you think is going to be the cause of dismissal? Failure to follow policy or not being woke enough?


[deleted]

Wait wait wait. In the other comment threads I’ve read here you were asserting that it undermines real antiracism. Is your problem with this some corporate posturing that? Or is it that you think people will get unreasonably fired? Or both?


Ok-Entertainment7185

Wait that doesn't prove the assertion one bit. What you linked was an extremely simple coding standard change. Which is normal and happens frequently.


asparegrass

It wasn’t an assertion it was a joke, get over yourself please


[deleted]

Oh, no. A change in corporate verbiage. That's never happened before. Somebody get this man a safe-space and a hunk of rope to bite until the delirium passes.


asparegrass

It’s the nature of the change that’s humorous here. Surely you see that. It’s like being upset that your library has a “history” section but not a “herstory” section


[deleted]

Yes, making up people in your head and getting mad about them trying to fire you is very fun. Yes. yes.


[deleted]

But in your other comments you didn’t seem to think it was humorous, first you said it undermines real, legitimate antiracism, then you seemed to think the problem with it was people will be fired. Now it’s just something that’s funny? Sorry to spam you but I’ve just been reading down this thread you’re all over and it seems your positions are all over, with the only unifying theme of them being opposition to this coding change?


goodolarchie

The pendulum overswingeth, methinks. "Mastery" was removed from program naming at my company, as in you can't have mastery over a given subject anymore. It took months of work to scrub out all the references that could have been spent actually improving the programs, advancing their careers and generally providing better outcomes for the offended.


VStarffin

No, that's still fun and games. You should be fired for this post.


jbo99

Not a thing


BloodsVsCrips

I love the postmodern nature of these claims. What would it take to measure "spreading rapidly through the corporate world?" To assert this claim you'd have to include the growing scale of the corporate world in absolute terms, the trillions of daily interactions, and be able to define what the "it" is that is spreading. But none of these criteria are being met. They aren't even being attempted.


RPMreguR

I get your gripe, but can you state your position so we can understand if you disagree with the assertion overall? 1. Do you believe Gen Z and younger millennials place more emphasis on emotional well being and emotional safety in particular? 2. Is it reasonable to assume differences in expectations revolving around emotional safety between generations will require the corporate world to adapt?


manteiga_night

Do you think mental health shouldn't be a factor in working conditions?


RPMreguR

I think it depends on the severity, but overall the answer is they should be.


noor1717

I hundred percent believe younger generation understand emotional well being or mental health better. I think it’s a great thing. We should definitely talk about the overreaching that sometimes happens like getting someone fired for something silly reasons or opinions should be looked down upon. But younger generations are more concerned with well being which is amazing. Shit Sam Harris’s wrote a book on morality should be linked to increasing the well being of everyone.


TheAJx

These are good questions, but you are constructing a motte here when the bailey was "millennials in the corporate workplace want to be coddled."


RPMreguR

I don't think you understand the concept of a motte and Bailey fallacy arguements. Asking somebody to specifically define their position has nothing to do with it. You can't just say "motte and Bailey" whenever somebody asks you explain how you logically arrive at a conclusion (or to explicitly stated your opinion). Motte and Bailey has to do with a deceptive withdrawal of your position to a more easily defensible one. I am simply asking bvc to clarify his position on the subject at hand rather than simply criticise the study.


TheAJx

>Asking somebody to specifically define their position has nothing to do with it. You realize that you can answer yes to the two questions you offered and still reject the "corporate coddling" narrative, right? So answering those two questions still doesn't tell you anything about the assertion in the OP.


RPMreguR

"differences in expectations revolving around emotional safety" could be viewed as synonymous with corporate coddling. I think that would be a somewhat gruff interpretation, but not inaccurate.


dbcooper4

u/BloodsVsCrips is an anti-Harris troll who has been posting here for years. Don’t waste your time.


[deleted]

I’m generally pro Harris, but the idea you’d invoke him being anti Harris to try to undermine him in the eyes of someone else is kind of lame. Call him a troll if you want - he’s not - but who cares if someone’s here and is anti Harris or not?!


dbcooper4

Because that user has been posting here since like 2015 (I’ve been here that long) and is only here to shit on Harris. I’ve literally never seen them say anything positive about Sam. A person who hangs out at someone’s subreddit **for years** with the sole intent of hurling insults at them is the definition of a troll IMO.


[deleted]

> and is only here to shit on Harris He’s literally not doing that right now in this thread


dbcooper4

Yeah, because this thread isn’t about something Harris said.


[deleted]

Your claim was that he’s been “posting here since like 2015 (I’ve been here that long) and is **only here to shit on Harris.**” He’s not doing that, whether or not it’s in a thread about Sam Harris. So he clearly isn’t only here to shit on Harris. He isn’t here “with the sole intent of hurling insults.”


Mr_Owl42

I love that you (and this sub through your upvotes) are able to defend even those they disagree with. This remains the most honest subreddit I've ever been in, and I hope we remain honest enough to keep around our detractors and our fans.


dbcooper4

I’ve literally never seen them say a single positive thing about Sam in the six years they’ve been posting here. They are always disagreeing with Sam and insinuating he’s a racist, sexist, homophobe, islamaphobe and that he’s wrong on every issue. No, in this thread he can’t call Sam any of those things given that Sam didn’t write any of what was quoted by the OP. I thought that was pretty obvious. I can’t believe you’d make such a silly pedantic point. Scroll through that user’s comment history here and you’d see what I’m talking about.


[deleted]

One of your main reasons you gave for ignoring B & C was that he’s anti-Harris. If the subject has nothing to do with Harris then that’s irrelevant.


RPMreguR

I'm aware, but I like to engage. I'm 50/50 on whether or not he actually believes the things he says. Either ways it's enjoyable to me, and I believe morally necessary to keep conversation grounded and relevant in this sub. Once the heavy downvotes roll in I just step back and let them speak for themselves.


skull_and_bone

As they so often do with him haha


BloodsVsCrips

> Do you believe Gen Z and younger millennials place more emphasis on emotional well being and emotional safety in particular? Relative to what? > Is it reasonable to assume differences in expectations revolving around emotional safety between generations will require the corporate world to adapt? If it's 2000 and a male exec gets triggered for being told that he's going too far with female employees, is the corporate world pandering to his emotional well-being? Because that type of thing has been the norm for ages. CNN just let a legal analyst back on the air after masturbating on a zoom call. Is this an allowance for his emotional well-being? Because it's certainly not an emphasis on the emotional needs of zoomers and/or women.


RPMreguR

>Relative to what? Other generations currently in the work force. >If it's 2000 and a male exec gets triggered for being told that he's going too far with female employees, is the corporate world pandering to his emotional well-being? Because that type of thing has been the norm for ages. CNN just let a legal analyst back on the air after masturbating on a zoom call. Is this an allowance for his emotional well-being? Because it's certainly not an emphasis on the emotional needs of zoomers and/or women. Clearly an attempt to obfuscate. We both know the definition of emotional safety. Just answer the question without pointing to prior generations and saying "But look how bad these guys are." Let's establish your actual position and then we can move on to a discussion about how prior generations have needed coddling in other ways.


[deleted]

>We both know the definition of emotional safety. Of course. We all know that "emotional safety" refers specifically to triggered libtards. Now, when the regional manager barely gets a slap on the wrist after sexually harassing half his female employees? Why that's just doing what's good for the company, ya know?? 🤔


The_Winklevii

Whose ban-evading alt are you?


[deleted]

you'll never know sweetie 😘


JR-Oppie

> Other generations currently in the work force .... Just answer the question without pointing to prior generations I don't suppose there's any chance you'll ever spot the cognitive dissonance here?


RPMreguR

Only present if you cut out the second portion of the second sentence. He can use that as a reference, and I'd be happy to hear him out once he gave an answer, but alas, he refused to present his position entirely (as predicted).


JR-Oppie

You could have just said "no, I probably won't spot it." > Only present if you cut out the second portion of the second sentence. The rest of the sentence doesn't change the display of cognitive dissonance; it only makes it worse. You ask him to compare two generations and then foreclose any discussion of how one generation might be as bad or worse than the other. You're either contradicting yourself or operating from a foregone conclusion; there's literally no form of disagreement that could meet the criteria you've established here.


BloodsVsCrips

> Other generations currently in the work force. You're asking me an empirical question that you seem to already believe has been proven. I see no difference between the norms established to protect the emotional state of status quo and the emotional demands of people who want to change that state. > Just answer the question without pointing to prior generatiins You literally asked me to compare generations, and when I do that exercise you balk? CNN *currently* reinstated someone who, by your assumption, should have been culled to protect the emotional safety of younger generations. But that didn't happen. Instead they protected the emotional state of the person doing the harm. When police unions rage about a cop being suspended for abuse, whose emotional well-being is being prioritized when that cop gets reinstated?


VStarffin

You're such a denialist. We all know what critical race theory is and how is spreads through osmosis. Pretending not to understand it just means you're a dupe for big pharma. Or something. It's clearly not a moral panic or anything. Certainly not.


Rough-Prior-6540

I hate that I thought this post was serious til the 4th sentence


TheAJx

A lot of the stuff that would be construed as coddling (and viewed as a close cousin of DEI initiative), I haven't seen in practice - I have mostly seen it in trainings and in a large number of "conversations" type of company meetings we are having. I have yet to see millennial employees or gen z employees voice concerns about "emotional safety" or overanalyze misunderstandings in workplace interactions - at least not yet. The one thing I have continued to observe is that older senior leaders still get away with being assholes, regardless of race or gender.


BatemaninAccounting

> I have yet to see millennial employees or gen z employees voice concerns about "emotional safety" or overanalyze misunderstandings in workplace interactions - at least not yet. Would this even be a bad thing over the current "bosses don't give a fuck about your mental or emotional health" status quo at many workplaces? Out of the dozens of places I've worked or heard very personal stories about from family+friends, veeeeery few places in america are run with bosses that care about their employees beyond the labor-money extraction they can get out of you. That goes even for the 'good' bosses that are wonderful to personally work for as well. I'd much rather my boss was a Gen Z person than a Boomer. I'm going to be able to have a much smoother work experience with the gen z boss, and be able to have that flexibility that we all need in life at the times we need it, while also maximizing what I can do in terms of labor.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ok-Entertainment7185

>They are the most sensitive adult children ever That's boomers my dude. >The early 20's on my team keep taking mental health days and whining to me about the most mild performance related criticism from our boss. They are so soft and so annoying. It's mind blowing how so many of these young adults are unable to deal with minor uncomfortable social interactions. You are crying about people taking sick days.


goodolarchie

Boomers aren't really this way at work though. They are the ones who adopted the corporate greed-is-good mentality in the 80's after they threw away their hippy clothing, they still run a lot of these companies. The mental health days are in addition to sick days, which people also take. But it was never a thing until Gen Z was in the workforce, so above poster is right about that. But more time off is a good thing so I'm all for it, and I don't know any non-owner who wouldn't be. Recognizing the importance of mental health and **burn out** is critical when we're cooped up for 2 years and counting in this pandemic.


dontrackonme

It began when mental health was given the same status as physical health for insurance purposes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ok-Entertainment7185

Boomers are the generation of War on christmas/Satanic panic/gay agenda moral panics consuming the generation. Participation trophies? That's a boomer parent creation.


[deleted]

You're talking about Fox News. I've seen more than one zoomer melt down over a code review and zero from all other generations combined. Gen Z actual has way worse mental health than any other generation. They hit all of the milestones of adulthood, driving, sex, drinking etc. way later than any previous generation. The zoomers at my work come to me with their problems like I'm their daddy. They are struggling.


PrologueBook

Things sucked for me, and as a worker, I've been exploited, and meant to feel uncomfortable in my workplace. Therefore no progress shall be made.


[deleted]

[удалено]


TheRealGuyDudeman

You seem like a nightmare of a coworker.


PrologueBook

Your first comment was sufficient enough. We already knew you were someone who has never experienced workplace harassment or exploitation. That must be very nice for you.


[deleted]

[удалено]


PrologueBook

Well you called them mentally ill, and in your next comment called them little pussies. Like I said, it's nice for you that you can pretend workplace exploitation and harassment doesn't exist by blithely applying your coworkers (whom you seem to hate) experience to the general workforce.


[deleted]

[удалено]


PrologueBook

There is a long line of whiney little pussies, in every generation, that have secured your comfortable position. It's your expectations of the workplace that are being disrupted. Every new generation has new expectations, and it's a struggle to move forward. I bet you would have called workplace integration activists little pussies too. People like you certainly did. I'm sorry you can't say that one really good joke with the slurs anymore. It's just kind of strange that you think improving workplace conditions and making people feel safer at work is a bad thing...? Like, what a dumb hill to die on.


[deleted]

[удалено]


PrologueBook

That's really interesting, because I read your comments as speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Your first couple of comments addressed all of gen z. Then when I said that was bullshit you're claiming that you're only speaking about your particular coworkers. It doesn't matter if you think your coworkers are pussies. What matters is that there is meaningful change about workplace safety going on, and you are scapegoating your coworkers as a reason to dismiss all progress.


Gatsu871113

Bunch of straw man bull shit followed by “what a dumb hill to die on”.... smh. Yeah, that would be a dumb hill, but the redditor you replied to didn’t say those things and certainly not in those terms as you did. You’ve stripped all nuance from what the person you’re replying to said. My first assumption is that you don’t have counterpoints for the moderate points that you don’t like, but *can* go into attack mode if you substitute those slanted versions of those points; ie, it shows a weakness in your arguments (arguments that would be very pro-coddling, in the context of Haidt’s and Lukianoff’s [sp?] usage of “coddling” in their book).


TheRealGuyDudeman

/r/GenZedong is going to be a much bigger pain in your ass.


Raven_25

Im not concerned. The reason corporations are embracing this is because it drives down the value / cost of labor. All the pandering, coddling and virtue signalling is entirely directed to engaging the widest possible field of prospective employees. Corporations have always used some kind of pathological doublespeak. DEI is just the updated script. Just wait until the DEI agenda starts interfering with their ability to make profits. We will very quickly see how none of this was ever about social justice or morality. Be. More. Cynical.


Gatsu871113

You sound too optimistic, not cynical in my opinion :p


nl_again

Agree with much of this, although I think the corporate embrace of this culture is due to the fact (IMO) that corporations are simply much more reactive and much less strategic than people envision. There is rarely a mastermind steering companies, usually it’s more many groups of loosely assembled employees trying to figure things out while jockeying for status. That’s my impression at least. I agree that the blowback from this era will be significant once bottom lines are impacted and power has changed hands. Once this next generation gets settled into more powerful positions I can pretty much guarantee they will suddenly start extolling the virtues of Tough Love Culture. The “I’m *so* offended, so everyone above me on the corporate ladder needs to be fired!” strategy clearly *is* strategic, albeit maybe at a subconscious level. Once some level of takeover is complete, the ladder-kicking will begin via some form of culture shift, again, likely towards Gen Z proclaiming they have now discovered the merits of a “tough love, suck it up buttercup” approach. This is how narcissistic behavior always goes - extreme sensitivity is expected for the narcissistic, everyone else is “too sensitive”. Like I keep saying, the 80s is coming again. Cue Don Henley singing “Get oooover it, get ooover it!”, the tough love anthem when the Flower Children became yuppies and suddenly enamored with bootstraps, personal responsibility, and related buzzwords.


TheSensation19

When Harris discussions turn into the softening of the next generation I am perplexed by just how beta they tend to be


goodolarchie

But that's not the surprising part. The surprising part is the physics-defying limbo moves that corporations are willing to make to continue to sponsor the oppression olympics.


TheSensation19

You must be replying to someone else


_cob_

Oh goody


MrDuhVinci

The thing is most of us know the type of person that is looking to be offended and can parse your words in the most uncharitable ways imaginable. The type of person who would police the use of the word 'bitch' in a conversation they aren't apart of, when not even used to denigrate anyone, etc. By living in a culture where those types of people can gain enormous sympathy on social media (by stripping out context and misconstruing intent), conversation just ends up becoming increasingly/depressingly restrictive - (employers have to cow-toe to these norms for fear of a media shit-storm)... and not just because the words/phrases themselves can't be spoken but because you have to increasingly scan your speech/thoughts for things that 'may' be interpreted uncharitably - regardless of intent.