5 ms·

I'm baffled by this thread. Yes it might not be appropriate and yes it might necessitate action, but fire him immediately when the "milf" handled it, ended it,

by anjc 10y ago

I'm baffled by this thread. Yes it might not be appropriate and yes it might necessitate action, but fire him immediately when the "milf" handled it, ended it, and the situation was finished? He didn't push it further than his perception of her comfort level. Furthermore, the term "MILF" has transcended its literal meaning. It doesn't, at this stage in time, literally mean "I want to fuck you". It's a normal Pop Culture term now which is synonymous with "attractive", is in every tabloid, on every reality show, blah blah. I'm not saying that it was appropriate to say it to her, but it isn't the aggressive, invasive term that is being suggested in this thread. I can only guess that this occurred in the US; you all make it sound like a seriously stressful environment to be in.

Loughla 10y ago
It absolutely is an aggressive, invasive term. It literally means he wants to fuck her. "Mom I Want to Fuck". That's the thing it means. And his 'i have a secret' junior high bullshit sort of cements that as his view. Your perception of my comfort level means nothing. Maybe you shouldn't be in a situation where you have to worry about my comfort level? >I can only guess that this occurred in the US; you all make it sound like a seriously stressful environment to be in. So sexual harassment is only a US thing?
- anjc 10y ago
  Did you not read my post? It does not literally mean "I want to fuck you". You'd have to be pretty dense to think it is a literal come on or proposal. It's a mainstream pop culture term. Turn on any random X-Factor type show for 3 minutes and you'll hear Sharon Osbourne or someone use it. > So sexual harassment is only a US thing? If this occurred as OP described, I don't see how it can be construed as sexual harassment. He ended contact upon her making it clear that it was unwanted, so by the very definition of "harassment" he didn't harass her. Again, I'm not saying that it was appropriate or that it doesn't warrant action, but I'm flabbergasted that people are suggesting he be fired.
  - Loughla 10y ago
    k. Let's do that, then. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm "It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature." or https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-sex.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-sex.cfm "Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances, including but not limited to the following: [...] The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome." Unwelcome sexual advances. That's your black and white definition. Being called a MILF can be an unwelcome sexual advance. Being called a milf ----LITERALLY---- means you are a mother I would like to fuck. Regardless of how you perceive pop-culture to use the term. It ----LITERALLY---- is an acronym for mother I want to fuck. There is not another interpretation. You're wrong. You're just wrong. As for: >If this occurred as OP described, I don't see how it can be construed as sexual harassment. He ended contact upon her making it clear that it was unwanted, so by the very definition of "harassment" he didn't harass her. OP said nothing about how the male employee ending contact. He said that the female employee "handled it well and didn't let it get out of hand." That is something entirely different. That means that, had the female employee not ended the contact herself, this could have gone on. EITHER WAY. You're just wrong. This could be perceived as harassment by a female employee. Now, whether or not the guy should be fired really depends on what OP learns when s/he interviews both parties, after s/he talks to a lawyer. Honestly, the EEOC or lawyers or courts would try to determine if the actions were pervasive (I don't think they were) and created a hostile work environment (sooooo grey, maybe this did, maybe it didn't). I'm telling you that you're just wrong. That's not phrased as a question - it is a declarative statement.
    - anjc 10y ago
      You've literally cherry picked sentences from your own links to avoid pointing out that - as I originally said - instances of harassment such as being called a "milf" must occur at a demonstrably frequent enough rate that it creates a hostile work environment. I.e. you must be harassed, not simply affronted. It appears that you realised this halfway through your post...? Anyway, there is no court in the western world which will deem this lone instance as "sexual harassment". I don't know why you're so insistent that I'm "wrong" regarding this, as if I'm the harasser or something. I have not suggested that this incident should be dismissed or taken lightly, in the least. I simply said that I'm shocked that 90% of this thread is saying he should be fired. In my country, not only would you not be fired, it would be illegal to fire you for this.
pestaa 10y ago
It's an acronym. It can't transcend its literal meaning. The amount of convenient and false assumptions you made in your post is indeed baffling.
- anjc 10y ago
  I understand that it's an acronym. You mustn't be thinking straight if you feel acronyms can't transcend their literal interpretation. Spend 10 seconds thinking about it and you'll think of many nouns which originated as acronyms.
  - kybernetikos 10y ago
    Like OK, Laser, Pin, Id. There are also words like 'posh' which have claimed acronym origins (although they are probably incorrect). http://www.etymonline.com/baloney.php http://www.etymonline.com/baloney.php And according to the Oxford dictionary the particular word in question counts too. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/milf http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_englis...
    - anjc 10y ago
      And Captcha!
nobody_nowhere 10y ago
Picture yourself, as an owner of the company, explaining to a jury how "Mother I'd Like to Fuck" doesn't constitute a hostile environment in the course of a sexual harassment lawsuit. Maybe with a jury that includes someone your grandmother's age. And maybe not as a result of this particular conversation, but the next time it happens.
- anjc 10y ago
  I'm not saying the owner should not be concerned at all. He should clearly log this incident and follow up at a later date to ensure that similar incidents haven't continued. If the female worker is satisfied that they haven't continued then there's no way that a court would construe this as sexual harassment, ever. Also, "milf" is in standard printed dictionaries at this stage. I haven't ever used the term, but I understand that people simply use it as a colloquial noun and don't tend to use it as a literal proposal. I'm confused that so many people in the thread seem to think this.
  - tomc1985 10y ago
    Are there any other acronyms around sexual intent that are considered benign intact but offensive when mentally unpacked? I can't think of any. Because when you unpack it the original meaning becomes clear. It's hard to imagine someone dignified not taking offense to being called a MILF, because regardless of what was intended you just told the person they are a mom you'd like to fuck, to their face.

by anjc 10y ago

Loughla 10y ago

It absolutely is an aggressive, invasive term. It literally means he wants to fuck her. "Mom I Want to Fuck". That's the thing it means. And his 'i have a secret' junior high bullshit sort of cements that as his view. Your perception of my comfort level means nothing. Maybe you shouldn't be in a situation where you have to worry about my comfort level? >I can only guess that this occurred in the US; you all make it sound like a seriously stressful environment to be in. So sexual harassment is only a US thing?

anjc 10y ago
Did you not read my post? It does not literally mean "I want to fuck you". You'd have to be pretty dense to think it is a literal come on or proposal. It's a mainstream pop culture term. Turn on any random X-Factor type show for 3 minutes and you'll hear Sharon Osbourne or someone use it. > So sexual harassment is only a US thing? If this occurred as OP described, I don't see how it can be construed as sexual harassment. He ended contact upon her making it clear that it was unwanted, so by the very definition of "harassment" he didn't harass her. Again, I'm not saying that it was appropriate or that it doesn't warrant action, but I'm flabbergasted that people are suggesting he be fired.
- Loughla 10y ago
  k. Let's do that, then. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm "It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature." or https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-sex.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-sex.cfm "Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances, including but not limited to the following: [...] The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome." Unwelcome sexual advances. That's your black and white definition. Being called a MILF can be an unwelcome sexual advance. Being called a milf ----LITERALLY---- means you are a mother I would like to fuck. Regardless of how you perceive pop-culture to use the term. It ----LITERALLY---- is an acronym for mother I want to fuck. There is not another interpretation. You're wrong. You're just wrong. As for: >If this occurred as OP described, I don't see how it can be construed as sexual harassment. He ended contact upon her making it clear that it was unwanted, so by the very definition of "harassment" he didn't harass her. OP said nothing about how the male employee ending contact. He said that the female employee "handled it well and didn't let it get out of hand." That is something entirely different. That means that, had the female employee not ended the contact herself, this could have gone on. EITHER WAY. You're just wrong. This could be perceived as harassment by a female employee. Now, whether or not the guy should be fired really depends on what OP learns when s/he interviews both parties, after s/he talks to a lawyer. Honestly, the EEOC or lawyers or courts would try to determine if the actions were pervasive (I don't think they were) and created a hostile work environment (sooooo grey, maybe this did, maybe it didn't). I'm telling you that you're just wrong. That's not phrased as a question - it is a declarative statement.
  - anjc 10y ago
    You've literally cherry picked sentences from your own links to avoid pointing out that - as I originally said - instances of harassment such as being called a "milf" must occur at a demonstrably frequent enough rate that it creates a hostile work environment. I.e. you must be harassed, not simply affronted. It appears that you realised this halfway through your post...? Anyway, there is no court in the western world which will deem this lone instance as "sexual harassment". I don't know why you're so insistent that I'm "wrong" regarding this, as if I'm the harasser or something. I have not suggested that this incident should be dismissed or taken lightly, in the least. I simply said that I'm shocked that 90% of this thread is saying he should be fired. In my country, not only would you not be fired, it would be illegal to fire you for this.

pestaa 10y ago

It's an acronym. It can't transcend its literal meaning. The amount of convenient and false assumptions you made in your post is indeed baffling.

anjc 10y ago
I understand that it's an acronym. You mustn't be thinking straight if you feel acronyms can't transcend their literal interpretation. Spend 10 seconds thinking about it and you'll think of many nouns which originated as acronyms.
- kybernetikos 10y ago
  Like OK, Laser, Pin, Id. There are also words like 'posh' which have claimed acronym origins (although they are probably incorrect). http://www.etymonline.com/baloney.php http://www.etymonline.com/baloney.php And according to the Oxford dictionary the particular word in question counts too. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/milf http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_englis...
  - anjc 10y ago
    And Captcha!

nobody_nowhere 10y ago

Picture yourself, as an owner of the company, explaining to a jury how "Mother I'd Like to Fuck" doesn't constitute a hostile environment in the course of a sexual harassment lawsuit. Maybe with a jury that includes someone your grandmother's age. And maybe not as a result of this particular conversation, but the next time it happens.

anjc 10y ago
I'm not saying the owner should not be concerned at all. He should clearly log this incident and follow up at a later date to ensure that similar incidents haven't continued. If the female worker is satisfied that they haven't continued then there's no way that a court would construe this as sexual harassment, ever. Also, "milf" is in standard printed dictionaries at this stage. I haven't ever used the term, but I understand that people simply use it as a colloquial noun and don't tend to use it as a literal proposal. I'm confused that so many people in the thread seem to think this.
- tomc1985 10y ago
  Are there any other acronyms around sexual intent that are considered benign intact but offensive when mentally unpacked? I can't think of any. Because when you unpack it the original meaning becomes clear. It's hard to imagine someone dignified not taking offense to being called a MILF, because regardless of what was intended you just told the person they are a mom you'd like to fuck, to their face.