4 ms·

Saying "I wasn't sure whether to hire you or hit on you" is fucked up if you're in a position to hire that person. What the actual fuck.

gduncan12 9y ago
Raping someone is fucked up. I don't see how that sentence is fucked up. If someone said that to me, I would take it as a compliment. To me it says not only are you smart enough to be hired, you're also attractive. Is it better to split it up into two separate sentences? Obviously the guy is hitting on her, if she's not interested then that's fine. I really don't see the problem, could someone please explain?
- michaelf 9y ago
  Seriously, I think "Always Sunny" explains it best (i.e., because of "the implication") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE
  - lovehashbrowns 9y ago
    Yeah, I immediately thought of that video when I was considering the massive power imbalance at play here. You can re-word most of Dennis' dialogue to fit the situation, too. "The implication that [she won't get an investment] if she refuses to sleep with me." The last part of that clip is especially applicable. The other commenter sees this as a compliment. "She's attractive; of course she'd get hit on!" But it's a "compliment" with an asterisk attached to it, and the subtext is a massive power imbalance.
  - hueving 9y ago
    Is it really productive to compare this situation to an implication of life-threatening violence?
- mturmon 9y ago
  If you happen to work in California, you should study the law better before you consider a supervisory position. This style of advance is black-letter sexual harassment in California, if done by a supervisor to an employee in their organization. (This wasn't the precise case here, but it was very close, and your wording seems to take in cases beyond this particular scenario.) If these advances continued, it is easy grounds for a lawsuit.

gduncan12 9y ago

Raping someone is fucked up. I don't see how that sentence is fucked up. If someone said that to me, I would take it as a compliment. To me it says not only are you smart enough to be hired, you're also attractive. Is it better to split it up into two separate sentences? Obviously the guy is hitting on her, if she's not interested then that's fine. I really don't see the problem, could someone please explain?

michaelf 9y ago
Seriously, I think "Always Sunny" explains it best (i.e., because of "the implication") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE
- lovehashbrowns 9y ago
  Yeah, I immediately thought of that video when I was considering the massive power imbalance at play here. You can re-word most of Dennis' dialogue to fit the situation, too. "The implication that [she won't get an investment] if she refuses to sleep with me." The last part of that clip is especially applicable. The other commenter sees this as a compliment. "She's attractive; of course she'd get hit on!" But it's a "compliment" with an asterisk attached to it, and the subtext is a massive power imbalance.
- hueving 9y ago
  Is it really productive to compare this situation to an implication of life-threatening violence?
mturmon 9y ago
If you happen to work in California, you should study the law better before you consider a supervisory position. This style of advance is black-letter sexual harassment in California, if done by a supervisor to an employee in their organization. (This wasn't the precise case here, but it was very close, and your wording seems to take in cases beyond this particular scenario.) If these advances continued, it is easy grounds for a lawsuit.