4 ms·

That's the point, you should be able to hold that opinion, but you should not publicly state it openly at work in the first place.

by azffz 7y ago

october_sky 7y ago
Taking the other side, how do you counter the "So some opinions are okay to state publicly, while others are not?" I think this is the rub... For any given X, you'll find groups of people that are pro-X, and someone anti-X.
- my_username_is_ 7y ago
  There's a big difference between fiscal policy and sexual orientation, though. If you say "taxes are theft" I may disagree with your viewpoint, but I'm not personally attacked by it. If your viewpoint is a challenge to their personal identity, you should probably keep that to yourself.
- tdb7893 7y ago
  Some things shouldn't be okay to say. That intolerance actually hurts people, if someone says "the Nazis were right" that really doesn't end up being a victimless crime, America is an example right now where the rhetoric is leading to actual violence towards certain groups. While I think the government regulating it too much is not good I don't see the issue of doing it collectively as individuals. Edit: just as a final thought, I've been on both sides of this, I've been silenced and I've silenced other people and honestly they both suck. I hold this view with the believe that some middle ground of things not being okay is the only one that works. If someone thinks that a free for all of ideas works well they are welcome to try it on their social media and at their company and I could be convinced if I could see it work at scale. It's really a practical view more than a philosophical one
  - ntnxw 7y ago
    You know this only leads to only left-wing points of view being acceptable.
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      You're arguing that right-wing points of view are the only ones that can harm people or cause violence?
chipotle_coyote 7y ago
The example given by the person you're replying to seems, to be understated about it, to be in a bit more complicated of an area than "just don't talk about it and things will be fine." If Bob and Alice have significant disagreements about health care policy and taxation, they can probably still get along by just not talking about it. If Bob believes Alice should be put to death because she's a transwoman, that could, you know, lead to a bit of workplace tension even if they don't have casual conversations at the La Croix cooler over how he thinks she should be stoned and she thinks she shouldn't.
- josteink 7y ago
  > If Bob believes Alice should be put to death because she's a transwoman That’s clearly a straw man. Nobody is having that discussion at work. And death threats are not politics, they are matters which should be reported to the police.
  - r0ze-at-hn 7y ago
    Nobody should be having that discussion at work, but sadly that discussion does occur. It mostly occurs behind the back of "Alice" so if you ever hear that type of talk it is your job to report it to HR who can investigate. No one should have to fear for their safety when they come to work.
  - chipotle_coyote 7y ago
    I was responding to the exact argument made in the post above me. Since people are downvoting me, presumably because I used sarcastic humor and HN is populated by people who are just too darn logical for sarcasm,* let me make the point more explicit: no, Bob and Alice aren't literally going to have that conversation at work. I get that. However, even if the work has a strict "no politics" policy, if Bob does have significant prejudice against transgender people, then having Bob in the workplace with Alice at all potentially puts her at risk. There doesn't need to be a conversation about trans rights for him to know that she is trans, and for that to translate into harassment and even violence. I don't have a solution for that problem. But that doesn't mean it's not a problem. And it's not a problem that's solved by prohibiting employees from talking about controversial topics in the workplace -- which is the argument that was made by the poster I was actually responding to. *Dammit, I did it again! Sorry.
josteink 7y ago
So only leftist politics are allowed to be discussed openly? That sounds like a rather discriminating and polarising policy. And are we allowed to discuss that (clearly leftist) policy?
- wtveb 7y ago
  I think you should not discuss politics at work. Unfortunately I agree with you: this will lead to only feelgood (i.e. leftist) politics being talked about.
nailer 7y ago
Many women don't want people with penises in their change rooms. Others believe this is hatred. Google provides onsite gyms at many locations, which have change rooms. In this case, that discussion will likely have to take place at work.
LaGrange 7y ago
As a trans woman, I’d rather they did. Even if they don’t get fired, at least I know it’s not safe to come out. “Don’t ask don’t tell” is a tempting policy, but that’s how you end up surrounded by TERFs when something inadvertently outs you.

That's the point, you should be able to hold that opinion, but you should not publicly state it openly at work in the first place.

by azffz 7y ago

That's the point, you should be able to hold that opinion, but you should not publicly state it openly at work in the first place.

october_sky 7y ago

Taking the other side, how do you counter the "So some opinions are okay to state publicly, while others are not?" I think this is the rub... For any given X, you'll find groups of people that are pro-X, and someone anti-X.

my_username_is_ 7y ago
There's a big difference between fiscal policy and sexual orientation, though. If you say "taxes are theft" I may disagree with your viewpoint, but I'm not personally attacked by it. If your viewpoint is a challenge to their personal identity, you should probably keep that to yourself.
tdb7893 7y ago
Some things shouldn't be okay to say. That intolerance actually hurts people, if someone says "the Nazis were right" that really doesn't end up being a victimless crime, America is an example right now where the rhetoric is leading to actual violence towards certain groups. While I think the government regulating it too much is not good I don't see the issue of doing it collectively as individuals. Edit: just as a final thought, I've been on both sides of this, I've been silenced and I've silenced other people and honestly they both suck. I hold this view with the believe that some middle ground of things not being okay is the only one that works. If someone thinks that a free for all of ideas works well they are welcome to try it on their social media and at their company and I could be convinced if I could see it work at scale. It's really a practical view more than a philosophical one
- ntnxw 7y ago
  You know this only leads to only left-wing points of view being acceptable.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    You're arguing that right-wing points of view are the only ones that can harm people or cause violence?

chipotle_coyote 7y ago

The example given by the person you're replying to seems, to be understated about it, to be in a bit more complicated of an area than "just don't talk about it and things will be fine." If Bob and Alice have significant disagreements about health care policy and taxation, they can probably still get along by just not talking about it. If Bob believes Alice should be put to death because she's a transwoman, that could, you know, lead to a bit of workplace tension even if they don't have casual conversations at the La Croix cooler over how he thinks she should be stoned and she thinks she shouldn't.

josteink 7y ago
> If Bob believes Alice should be put to death because she's a transwoman That’s clearly a straw man. Nobody is having that discussion at work. And death threats are not politics, they are matters which should be reported to the police.
- r0ze-at-hn 7y ago
  Nobody should be having that discussion at work, but sadly that discussion does occur. It mostly occurs behind the back of "Alice" so if you ever hear that type of talk it is your job to report it to HR who can investigate. No one should have to fear for their safety when they come to work.
- chipotle_coyote 7y ago
  I was responding to the exact argument made in the post above me. Since people are downvoting me, presumably because I used sarcastic humor and HN is populated by people who are just too darn logical for sarcasm,* let me make the point more explicit: no, Bob and Alice aren't literally going to have that conversation at work. I get that. However, even if the work has a strict "no politics" policy, if Bob does have significant prejudice against transgender people, then having Bob in the workplace with Alice at all potentially puts her at risk. There doesn't need to be a conversation about trans rights for him to know that she is trans, and for that to translate into harassment and even violence. I don't have a solution for that problem. But that doesn't mean it's not a problem. And it's not a problem that's solved by prohibiting employees from talking about controversial topics in the workplace -- which is the argument that was made by the poster I was actually responding to. *Dammit, I did it again! Sorry.

josteink 7y ago

So only leftist politics are allowed to be discussed openly? That sounds like a rather discriminating and polarising policy. And are we allowed to discuss that (clearly leftist) policy?

wtveb 7y ago
I think you should not discuss politics at work. Unfortunately I agree with you: this will lead to only feelgood (i.e. leftist) politics being talked about.

nailer 7y ago

Many women don't want people with penises in their change rooms. Others believe this is hatred. Google provides onsite gyms at many locations, which have change rooms. In this case, that discussion will likely have to take place at work.

LaGrange 7y ago

As a trans woman, I’d rather they did. Even if they don’t get fired, at least I know it’s not safe to come out. “Don’t ask don’t tell” is a tempting policy, but that’s how you end up surrounded by TERFs when something inadvertently outs you.