4 ms·

But those aholes are sooo useful. A company has a interior and a endoplasmatic reticulum, and while the interior can be a nice place, the parts closer to the s

But those aholes are sooo useful. A company has a interior and a endoplasmatic reticulum, and while the interior can be a nice place, the parts closer to the skin get continuously more ahole. Which makes it a intersting question if Dick was a ahole to everyone equally. Some people in there have to be the mean guys, stopping cash from hemorrhaging outwards, be the grave digger for eternal projects, who everybody wants to "save" since the founding of the company. Being a Machiavellian brute when it comes to negotiation, with other Machiavellian brutes. A company is like a spaceship in a hostile environment, and you need ass-tronauts to climb out and weld the holes shut, that the universe punches into it. And if you life dangerously, you will want to "measure" up with all other guys, who of course claim "to life dangerously too", but might run on first sign of trouble. Dick might actually regard her much higher for hitting him, than a lot of his colleagues. Very neanderthal, but that is how it is. And then there are sexist aholes, who should be beaten to death with a baseball bat. Like that Thuna guy. Makes me ashamed to be part of the species. Seriously, should be fired, with a public declaration of why, so he never will ever be hired by anyone again.

rasputnik6502 5y ago
Too little we know about Dick. Apart from the fact that he touched the hair of his coworker and made some personal remarks. Then when the woman asked him to stop he couldn't, he couldn't just apologize and stop because this would mean he did something wrong. So he did it again pretending it's just a fun joke. I dont know, i'm not a woman. I dont even know how to handle some strange situations at work. But what Dick did reminds me of kids behavior -they do something annoying, for example kick the chair, and when asked to stop they will pretend they dont understand, kick one or two more times and laugh - just to check if the situation can be transformed into harmless/no consequence and they can get out without having to admit wrongdoing. Sometimes it's a sociopath targeting a victim while pretending it's a harmless friendly joke, but quite often its just a big child..
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  > when the women asked him to stop he couldn't As a functioning human adult, "wouldn't" is the correct word here. It may seem like a small matter, but it's not: saying "couldn't" is a very popular way to represent the idea that men aren't responsible for behavior that others find unacceptable, especially when it's towards women. Please take more care around your phrasing in the future. > apart from the fact that he touched the hair of his coworker "apart from" trivializes and sets aside the most important thing we know about Dick: that he touches women without their consent and refuses to honor their requests to stop. There is no "apart from" that weakens, mitigates, or excuses this. > just to check if the situation can be transformed into harmless/no consequence and they can get out without having to admit wrongdoing Men who behave in this way are fully expecting other men to let them get away with it. They are right, statistically speaking. Men, don't silently let them get away with it. It may feel uncomfortable to try to hold a man accountable for their actions. Bad men thrive on how reliably that discomfort makes other men stay silent. They're depending on you being too socially weak and inept to overcome that. I know it can be difficult, and you won't succeed every time, but it's important that you try every time all the same. Best of luck.
  - rasputnik6502 5y ago
    Yes, basically agree, i'm just saying that men are trying to avoid responsibility for their actions by behaving like a child. Im not saying this is right, it's just how people behave. Boys just do stupid things to avoid admitting defeat or losing face in front of the group, and these stupid things include disobedience, provocation or bullying. The other direction is - if you can't go this path and have your way by forcing, then play a victim, accuse others of harming you, being bad abusers or bullies while maintaining you're innocent. This also removes your responsibility from the situation so why not. And my perception is that women will more often go with strategy #2 while men would first try #1. Is it sexism? I dont know, i dont have the knowledge necessary to tell. Maybe ask divorce lawyers, they have many real world cases. My point is that thesse kinds of behaviors are wired in humans and cannot be elliminated. You should identify bullying and harrasment at work but not by single incidents that always happen. If the negative behavior is repetitive, comes from the same person all the time then it's justified to call it abuse.

rasputnik6502 5y ago

Too little we know about Dick. Apart from the fact that he touched the hair of his coworker and made some personal remarks. Then when the woman asked him to stop he couldn't, he couldn't just apologize and stop because this would mean he did something wrong. So he did it again pretending it's just a fun joke. I dont know, i'm not a woman. I dont even know how to handle some strange situations at work. But what Dick did reminds me of kids behavior -they do something annoying, for example kick the chair, and when asked to stop they will pretend they dont understand, kick one or two more times and laugh - just to check if the situation can be transformed into harmless/no consequence and they can get out without having to admit wrongdoing. Sometimes it's a sociopath targeting a victim while pretending it's a harmless friendly joke, but quite often its just a big child..

floatingatoll 5y ago
> when the women asked him to stop he couldn't As a functioning human adult, "wouldn't" is the correct word here. It may seem like a small matter, but it's not: saying "couldn't" is a very popular way to represent the idea that men aren't responsible for behavior that others find unacceptable, especially when it's towards women. Please take more care around your phrasing in the future. > apart from the fact that he touched the hair of his coworker "apart from" trivializes and sets aside the most important thing we know about Dick: that he touches women without their consent and refuses to honor their requests to stop. There is no "apart from" that weakens, mitigates, or excuses this. > just to check if the situation can be transformed into harmless/no consequence and they can get out without having to admit wrongdoing Men who behave in this way are fully expecting other men to let them get away with it. They are right, statistically speaking. Men, don't silently let them get away with it. It may feel uncomfortable to try to hold a man accountable for their actions. Bad men thrive on how reliably that discomfort makes other men stay silent. They're depending on you being too socially weak and inept to overcome that. I know it can be difficult, and you won't succeed every time, but it's important that you try every time all the same. Best of luck.
- rasputnik6502 5y ago
  Yes, basically agree, i'm just saying that men are trying to avoid responsibility for their actions by behaving like a child. Im not saying this is right, it's just how people behave. Boys just do stupid things to avoid admitting defeat or losing face in front of the group, and these stupid things include disobedience, provocation or bullying. The other direction is - if you can't go this path and have your way by forcing, then play a victim, accuse others of harming you, being bad abusers or bullies while maintaining you're innocent. This also removes your responsibility from the situation so why not. And my perception is that women will more often go with strategy #2 while men would first try #1. Is it sexism? I dont know, i dont have the knowledge necessary to tell. Maybe ask divorce lawyers, they have many real world cases. My point is that thesse kinds of behaviors are wired in humans and cannot be elliminated. You should identify bullying and harrasment at work but not by single incidents that always happen. If the negative behavior is repetitive, comes from the same person all the time then it's justified to call it abuse.