3 ms·

Your things are very specific to your situation, yet you yourself easily generalize them to "most people". What about people who don't have wives or children? W

Your things are very specific to your situation, yet you yourself easily generalize them to "most people". What about people who don't have wives or children? What if their social circles are mostly concentrated at the office (as often happens with young people in startups)? What if they have a crush on their manager, or their attractive co-worker? These are real things that happen, and just forbidding them from ever being spoken of is not a very good strategy in my opinion. And I think Bentham's thoughts are very applicable in this regard.

delinka 12y ago
Who said anything about forbidding these topics? I simply express a lack of understanding about why such things would be relevant to a place that has nothing to do with such topics. People want to talk about this stuff at work? Fine let's talk. But at some point, we need to get our jobs done. If sex and gender are an obstacle to getting work done (you know, the actual reason we're even getting paid to be in this office), then sex and gender discussions are a priority. As it stands, they're not critical to doing my job. If you're standing around the water cooler for hours a day discussing football, cinema, the symphony, and/or sex, you're not getting your job done unless you work for a company whose business revolves around these things. Are these things taboo at the office? Certainly not. Are they relevant to the jobs of most people in the US? I doubt it, but certainly I could be swayed by actual data on the subject.
- parennoob 12y ago
  > "People want to talk about this stuff at work?......water cooler for hours a day discussing football, cinema, the symphony, and/or sex..." Either you misunderstand my point, or you're making a straw man argument. I was talking about discussion on here (HN), not sitting around water coolers in the office for several hours. See how my previous comment has been downvoted without explanation? I'm talking about that sort of thing, reflexive "Ewww, he said sex!" behaviour. > "If sex and gender are an obstacle to getting work done (you know, the actual reason we're even getting paid to be in this office...." Well, it isn't an obstacle to work every day, but it can be. You might have heard of the github incident recently, or if you haven't, you might want to read the details.

delinka 12y ago

Who said anything about forbidding these topics? I simply express a lack of understanding about why such things would be relevant to a place that has nothing to do with such topics. People want to talk about this stuff at work? Fine let's talk. But at some point, we need to get our jobs done. If sex and gender are an obstacle to getting work done (you know, the actual reason we're even getting paid to be in this office), then sex and gender discussions are a priority. As it stands, they're not critical to doing my job. If you're standing around the water cooler for hours a day discussing football, cinema, the symphony, and/or sex, you're not getting your job done unless you work for a company whose business revolves around these things. Are these things taboo at the office? Certainly not. Are they relevant to the jobs of most people in the US? I doubt it, but certainly I could be swayed by actual data on the subject.

parennoob 12y ago
> "People want to talk about this stuff at work?......water cooler for hours a day discussing football, cinema, the symphony, and/or sex..." Either you misunderstand my point, or you're making a straw man argument. I was talking about discussion on here (HN), not sitting around water coolers in the office for several hours. See how my previous comment has been downvoted without explanation? I'm talking about that sort of thing, reflexive "Ewww, he said sex!" behaviour. > "If sex and gender are an obstacle to getting work done (you know, the actual reason we're even getting paid to be in this office...." Well, it isn't an obstacle to work every day, but it can be. You might have heard of the github incident recently, or if you haven't, you might want to read the details.