quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
bawbag

LMAO! I do love finding new words. Thanks, WM. I look forward to using it at work.

[:D] [:D] [:D] [:D]
[:D] [:D] [:D] [:D]

If there's one thing the Scots are good at, it's swearing...

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Federal law still applies, regardless of State laws.

the "discrimination" issue apparently being that someone else didn't get fired for some similar infraction.
if we want to go that route then employers aren't allowed distinctions between levels of offense. "this one i'll forgive, that one i'll fire someone for."
without knowing more details its impossible to know if she was fired largely because of her being a female, as opposed to just being a bigger offender than other people who didn't get fired. however, I lean towards the latter.
im pretty skeptical she was emboldened to give the motorcade the finger because some of her peers didn't get fired for their bad behavior.
the bottom line to me is, she should own the consequences of her behavior and not look for another other explanation than that.

quote:

But Briskman said what’s been particularly infuriating is that a male colleague kept his job after recently posting lewd comments on his Facebook page that featured Akima LLC as his cover photo. She said this colleague was reprimanded for calling someone “a fucking Libtard asshole” on Facebook, but was allowed to delete the post and keep his job.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Federal law still applies, regardless of State laws.

the "discrimination" issue apparently being that someone else didn't get fired for some similar infraction.
if we want to go that route then employers aren't allowed distinctions between levels of offense. "this one i'll forgive, that one i'll fire someone for."
without knowing more details its impossible to know if she was fired largely because of her being a female, as opposed to just being a bigger offender than other people who didn't get fired. however, I lean towards the latter.
im pretty skeptical she was emboldened to give the motorcade the finger because some of her peers didn't get fired for their bad behavior.
the bottom line to me is, she should own the consequences of her behavior and not look for another other explanation than that.

From the OP:

quote:

But Briskman said what’s been particularly infuriating is that a male colleague kept his job after recently posting lewd comments on his Facebook page that featured Akima LLC as his cover photo. She said this colleague was reprimanded for calling someone “a fucking Libtard asshole” on Facebook, but was allowed to delete the post and keep his job.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, and I haven't played one on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but it seems to me that flipping the President off isn't as lewd or obscene as the message her male colleague posted on his own social media page.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
From the OP:

quote:

But Briskman said what’s been particularly infuriating is that a male colleague kept his job after recently posting lewd comments on his Facebook page that featured Akima LLC as his cover photo. She said this colleague was reprimanded for calling someone “a fucking Libtard asshole” on Facebook, but was allowed to delete the post and keep his job.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, and I haven't played one on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but it seems to me that flipping the President off isn't as lewd or obscene as the message her male colleague posted on his own social media page.

It isn't, no.
But I'm sure they'll be able to spin their way around that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
i don't disagree, probably less lewd and less obscene, but perhaps nevertheless more offensive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

i suspect, much like "beauty", even though there are such things as aesthetic standards, "lewd and obscene" is in the eye of the beholder, in this case, the employer.

but I suspect the target of the gesture went a long way into making the decision to fire her also.

itd be good to see the actual language of the policy. the op is very limited on that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

i suspect, much like "beauty", even though there are such things as aesthetic standards, "lewd and obscene" is in the eye of the beholder, in this case, the employer.

quote:

The Forms are expounded upon in Plato's dialogues and general speech, in that every object or quality in reality has a form: dogs, human beings, mountains, colors, courage, love, and goodness. Form answers the question, "What is that?" Plato was going a step further and asking what Form itself is. He supposed that the object was essentially or "really" the Form and that the phenomena were mere shadows mimicking the Form; that is, momentary portrayals of the Form under different circumstances. The problem of universals – how can one thing in general be many things in particular – was solved by presuming that Form was a distinct singular thing but caused plural representations of itself in particular objects…

These Forms are the essences of various objects: they are that without which a thing would not be the kind of thing it is. For example, there are countless tables in the world but the Form of tableness is at the core; it is the essence of all of them.[14] Plato's Socrates held that the world of Forms is transcendent to our own world (the world of substances) and also is the essential basis of reality. Super-ordinate to matter, Forms are the most pure of all things. Furthermore, he believed that true knowledge/intelligence is the ability to grasp the world of Forms with one's mind.[15]…

It would be a mistake to take Plato's imagery as positing the intelligible world as a literal physical space apart from this one.[20][21] Plato emphasizes that the Forms are not beings that extend in space (or time), but subsist apart from any physical space whatsoever.[22] Thus we read in the Symposium of the Form of Beauty: "It is not anywhere in another thing, as in an animal, or in earth, or in heaven, or in anything else, but itself by itself with itself,"...

quote:

Plato mentions beauty as often as he speaks of any property that admits of philosophical conceptualization, and for which a Form therefore exists. Thanks to the features of Forms as such, we know that this entity being referred to must be something properly called beauty, whose nature can be articulated without recourse to the natures of particular beautiful things. (See especially Phaedo 79a and Phaedrus 247c on properties of this Form.)

Beauty is Plato's example of a Form so frequently for a pair of reasons. On one hand it bears every mark of the Forms. It is an evaluative concept as much as justice and courage are, and it suffers from disputes over its meaning as much as they do. The Theory of Forms mainly exists to guarantee stable referents for disputed evaluative terms; so if anything needs a Form, beauty does, and it will have a Form if any property does...

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: KevinJones87

There has been no discrimination, she isn't a hero, she didn't do anything noble, she just demonstrated that she can't control her impulses.

Like the president, e.g.

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Some people never grow up.

Like the president, e.g.

If we're making it about the tangerine bawbag, can anybody name an employee who got fired from their job for flipping the last guy the bird, rather than their employer threatening to fire them if they voted democrat (as one of our resident RWNJs was bragging that he had back in 2012)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

ive read a few works of plato and so im familiar with the concept of "Forms"---however, not so much so as to be able to eloquently speak off the top of my head about them, so I hunted up some help:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

ive read a few works of plato and so im familiar with the concept of "Forms"---however, not so much so as to be able to eloquently speak off the top of my head about them, so I hunted up some help:

I was just pointing up the fact that the lewdest gesture possible (according to Plato) is only a "copy" of the "Lewd" (or "lewdness", obviously) Form.

That any of our efforts are only weak attempts at the purest Forms.

In other words: I wish her company had given her a break.



Peace,


Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
Personally i don't see how employers have the right to impede on our freedom... especially when we're not 'on the clock'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

the questions of employer expectations on employees outside of work is an interesting and complex one isn't it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
i suspect, much like "beauty", even though there are such things as aesthetic standards, "lewd and obscene" is in the eye of the beholder, in this case, the employer.
but I suspect the target of the gesture went a long way into making the decision to fire her also.
itd be good to see the actual language of the policy. the op is very limited on that.

"Lewd and obscene" has nothing to do with it: the woman's been fired for a political gesture her employer finds unacceptable (aimed at a politician she finds unacceptable). They'd look a lot better over this if they admitted that, rather than spinning like Lynda Carter.

quote:

As the photo circulated online, Briskman decided to tell Akima’s HR department what was happening when she went to work on Monday. By Tuesday, her bosses called her into a meeting and said she had violated the company’s social media policy by using the photo as her profile picture on Twitter and Facebook.

“They said, ‘We’re separating from you,‘” said Briskman. “Basically, you cannot have ‘lewd’ or ‘obscene’ things in your social media. So they were calling flipping him off ‘obscene.’”


[Bold Mine]

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

the questions of employer expectations on employees outside of work is an interesting and complex one isn't it?