5 ms·

Being an ass, or ramming their religion down peoples faces tends to annoy people. He could have been secure in his beliefs, chosen he/him or whatever pronouns

Being an ass, or ramming their religion down peoples faces tends to annoy people. He could have been secure in his beliefs, chosen he/him or whatever pronouns were appropriate and moved on. Most places in North America, I thought, was at will employment.

david38 3y ago
Yes, I agree. Ramming idiology down someone’s throat in an environment whose purpose is to make $$ is uncalled for. So why did Bitwarden do it? They could have made it entirely optional.
adhesive_wombat 3y ago
I thought he had put it as a joke ("Assigned by God said that Assigned by God's tickets need to be triaged before Assigned by God's holiday") and firing him was a huge overreaction, but did not at first consider that someone might be so entirely serious about that. Though still sounds weird to me, both that you'd fire someone for just that (or maybe there's more going on) or that if you knew you could be fired for just that, that you'd do it anyway.
bsaul 3y ago
"ramming your religion down people's face" is what a LOT of religion are doing. Take for example hidjab (muslim scarf). We even have a law at some point in france to prevent religion from intruding special places like school, but i was under the impression that was considered discriminatory in the US..
- jleyank 3y ago
  I suspect misogyny underlays much of the “ohh, teacher in hidjab” bs.
  - friend_and_foe 3y ago
    Yeah, being required to cover your hair because you're a woman is very misogynistic.
- cholantesh 3y ago
  >prevent religion from intruding special places like school With a rather conspicuous exemption for crosses.
  - bsaul 3y ago
    there are no cross in public schools, only private catholic ones.
    - jleyank 3y ago
      Not sure about Quebec, but there are public Catholic schools in Ontario. Bothers the crap out of me...
      - bsaul 3y ago
        i don't know about quebec either, I was actually only speaking about france. I have the feeling france really has something unique with its relationship to religion ( and multi-culturalism in general) that could really benefit a lot of modern western societies. Unfortunately for now the influence goes the other way, we're the ones being influenced by the craziness happening in the US..
    - cholantesh 3y ago
      Except the ones worn on one's neck. The ban specifically allows for them, but not for kippahs or the hijab.
      - bsaul 3y ago
        yes , it makes sense i think. Those necklaces are barely visible and very often are hidden by your shirt. They're hardly comparable to something that covers half your head.
        cholantesh 3y ago
        Kippahs cover a very small portion of your head; I work daily with a guy who wears one and rarely notice it. Hijabs are more conspicuous, but like...so what? The intent of the 1905 law is abjuring the promotion or the degradation of religion, and simply wearing something on your head is not promoting anything, any more than being gay or, god forbid, indicating that gay people exist, is promoting homosexuality.
Supermancho 3y ago
> He could have been secure in his beliefs, This is perfectly in line with many people's belief. Pronoun selection is intended to be arbitrary to serve your own identity...except when someone objects to a specific selection. The Jedi religion evolution in Australia, at least gave a line (that Jedis were able to cross) for what constitutes a religion. I have little faith that a more comprehensive ruleset for pronouns will come out of California.
balls187 3y ago
So it’s between ramming preferred pronouns down someones throat vs ramming religion down someones throat. What’s the difference?
- EA-3167 3y ago
  It's an interesting question, but as far as I understand it no one is ramming pronouns down anyone's throats? You don't even need to use them if you don't want to, just refer to people by name. Plus realistically no one is going to make you use any given pronoun, there's no council of pronouns. By contrast forcing religion on people has a long history of real harm, it isn't just a social nicety. The worst that comes out of "pronoun policing" is arguably just rudeness, the worst that comes out of forcing religion is a known quantity, and it's as bad as it gets.
  - mixmastamyk 3y ago
    Article states it happened to its subject?
  - balls187 3y ago
    I only did a cursory read, but Chard (the former VP) listed “Assigned by God” as his personal pronoun, and (over simplified) that lead to his termination. I understand that Christianity has gone out of favor in the workplace, but it’ss odd that corporate policies for inclusion seem to still alienate Christian beliefs (I say that as a Heathen). Like having preferred pronouns in your email signature is valid, but listing you walk in the light of Christ would not fly.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - jleyank 3y ago
      Is it so hard to segregate personal and work activities? Do the personal stuff, hobbies, religions, ... on your own time in your own place with your own group. When in the work environment, do work things and play well with others who probably aren't the people you'd prefer to be with. If their behaviour is that uncomfortable to you, you'll move on. Similarly, if your behaviour is that uncomfortable to them, you'll move on.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
Which pronouns are allowed and which aren't? I forgot. This shit isn't freedom, its requirement to demonstrate loyalty to ideology. This person used the prescribed methods to demonstrate loyalty to a different ideology, and the cult came after them. That is all that happened here.
- sacnoradhq 3y ago
  Rewind to 1999 or 1976. There was always workplace-appropriate communication, say the title on a corporate business card. Using that as a medium to advance personal views was and is inappropriate.
  - AdrianB1 3y ago
    Using pronouns on business cards in 1999 or 1976 was also inappropriate. If you did that in 1976, people would consider you are a lunatic, according to my parents that did have business cards at that time.
    - UtopiaPunk 3y ago
      Instead we used Mr, Ms, Mrs. I don't know why listing one's preferred pronouns are somehow worse
  - friend_and_foe 3y ago
    Yup, and if someone tried to leverage corporate communication to force their coworkers to appease their ideology that would have been a pretty big deal.
- kgwxd 3y ago
  Allowed: "The part of speech that substitutes for nouns or noun phrases and designates persons or things asked for, previously specified, or understood from the context." Not allowed: Everything else. It's how words work.
  - friend_and_foe 3y ago

david38 3y ago

Yes, I agree. Ramming idiology down someone’s throat in an environment whose purpose is to make $$ is uncalled for. So why did Bitwarden do it? They could have made it entirely optional.

adhesive_wombat 3y ago

I thought he had put it as a joke ("Assigned by God said that Assigned by God's tickets need to be triaged before Assigned by God's holiday") and firing him was a huge overreaction, but did not at first consider that someone might be so entirely serious about that. Though still sounds weird to me, both that you'd fire someone for just that (or maybe there's more going on) or that if you knew you could be fired for just that, that you'd do it anyway.

bsaul 3y ago

"ramming your religion down people's face" is what a LOT of religion are doing. Take for example hidjab (muslim scarf). We even have a law at some point in france to prevent religion from intruding special places like school, but i was under the impression that was considered discriminatory in the US..

jleyank 3y ago
I suspect misogyny underlays much of the “ohh, teacher in hidjab” bs.
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  Yeah, being required to cover your hair because you're a woman is very misogynistic.
cholantesh 3y ago
>prevent religion from intruding special places like school With a rather conspicuous exemption for crosses.
- bsaul 3y ago
  there are no cross in public schools, only private catholic ones.
  - jleyank 3y ago
    Not sure about Quebec, but there are public Catholic schools in Ontario. Bothers the crap out of me...
    - bsaul 3y ago
      i don't know about quebec either, I was actually only speaking about france. I have the feeling france really has something unique with its relationship to religion ( and multi-culturalism in general) that could really benefit a lot of modern western societies. Unfortunately for now the influence goes the other way, we're the ones being influenced by the craziness happening in the US..
  - cholantesh 3y ago
    Except the ones worn on one's neck. The ban specifically allows for them, but not for kippahs or the hijab.
    - bsaul 3y ago
      yes , it makes sense i think. Those necklaces are barely visible and very often are hidden by your shirt. They're hardly comparable to something that covers half your head.
      - cholantesh 3y ago
        Kippahs cover a very small portion of your head; I work daily with a guy who wears one and rarely notice it. Hijabs are more conspicuous, but like...so what? The intent of the 1905 law is abjuring the promotion or the degradation of religion, and simply wearing something on your head is not promoting anything, any more than being gay or, god forbid, indicating that gay people exist, is promoting homosexuality.

Supermancho 3y ago

> He could have been secure in his beliefs, This is perfectly in line with many people's belief. Pronoun selection is intended to be arbitrary to serve your own identity...except when someone objects to a specific selection. The Jedi religion evolution in Australia, at least gave a line (that Jedis were able to cross) for what constitutes a religion. I have little faith that a more comprehensive ruleset for pronouns will come out of California.

balls187 3y ago

So it’s between ramming preferred pronouns down someones throat vs ramming religion down someones throat. What’s the difference?

EA-3167 3y ago
It's an interesting question, but as far as I understand it no one is ramming pronouns down anyone's throats? You don't even need to use them if you don't want to, just refer to people by name. Plus realistically no one is going to make you use any given pronoun, there's no council of pronouns. By contrast forcing religion on people has a long history of real harm, it isn't just a social nicety. The worst that comes out of "pronoun policing" is arguably just rudeness, the worst that comes out of forcing religion is a known quantity, and it's as bad as it gets.
- mixmastamyk 3y ago
  Article states it happened to its subject?
- balls187 3y ago
  I only did a cursory read, but Chard (the former VP) listed “Assigned by God” as his personal pronoun, and (over simplified) that lead to his termination. I understand that Christianity has gone out of favor in the workplace, but it’ss odd that corporate policies for inclusion seem to still alienate Christian beliefs (I say that as a Heathen). Like having preferred pronouns in your email signature is valid, but listing you walk in the light of Christ would not fly.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jleyank 3y ago
    Is it so hard to segregate personal and work activities? Do the personal stuff, hobbies, religions, ... on your own time in your own place with your own group. When in the work environment, do work things and play well with others who probably aren't the people you'd prefer to be with. If their behaviour is that uncomfortable to you, you'll move on. Similarly, if your behaviour is that uncomfortable to them, you'll move on.

friend_and_foe 3y ago

Which pronouns are allowed and which aren't? I forgot. This shit isn't freedom, its requirement to demonstrate loyalty to ideology. This person used the prescribed methods to demonstrate loyalty to a different ideology, and the cult came after them. That is all that happened here.

sacnoradhq 3y ago
Rewind to 1999 or 1976. There was always workplace-appropriate communication, say the title on a corporate business card. Using that as a medium to advance personal views was and is inappropriate.
- AdrianB1 3y ago
  Using pronouns on business cards in 1999 or 1976 was also inappropriate. If you did that in 1976, people would consider you are a lunatic, according to my parents that did have business cards at that time.
  - UtopiaPunk 3y ago
    Instead we used Mr, Ms, Mrs. I don't know why listing one's preferred pronouns are somehow worse
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  Yup, and if someone tried to leverage corporate communication to force their coworkers to appease their ideology that would have been a pretty big deal.
kgwxd 3y ago
Allowed: "The part of speech that substitutes for nouns or noun phrases and designates persons or things asked for, previously specified, or understood from the context." Not allowed: Everything else. It's how words work.
- friend_and_foe 3y ago