BobFromAccounting
Bogey Member
Great business plan, Diss-craft. Nice job in losing an intelligent and 5x winner, who helped lay the foundation of your business.
Well done!
Well done!
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Elaine Kings leaves Discraft due to not receiving a signature disc
- Thread starter BlazedOrangeHat
- Start date
bhadella
* Ace Member *
And her first action of being a non-Sponsored player is adding two Innova discs to her bag. Hmm......
puck'n'disc5
Par Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2012
- Messages
- 237
I'm not sure what you mean by culture in this context. However, I do suggest taking a look at what is happening in the country of Saudi Arabia.
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
10 second google search: http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswi...ch-says-about-the-consequences-of-p-c-culture
Last edited:
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
Last link wasn't to the study...http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1921&context=articles
If it isn't apparent to you living in our meltingpot/breadbasket society, I don't know how a "documented instance" is going to change your mind. At least you're succinct. Less **** for me to read.
joecoin
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2013
- Messages
- 2,335
Talk about less **** to read, that study is 48 pages of pure unadulterated bias aimed at getting the result they wanted. They could have boiled it down to 1 paragraph, but hat would upset their academic sensibilities and give them less of a sense of their own over blown self worth.
Regardless, I'm looking ofr a real world example, not a predetermined biased academic study.
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
^^^ No it wasn't and you did that wrong, ****-for-brains.
Last edited:
Hampstead
* Ace Member *
Looking like that just might stick.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I buy that making people in mixed groups talk politely gets better results than in groups where you have sexist or condescending comments. BTW, I've been in meetings where both men and women are condescending, in non sexually oriented fashions. Fun times. It should also be noted that mixed group projects tend to get better results, period. Harvard Business School study.
But all that has nothing to do with sexism. In general, treating people condescendingly gets bad results. That has to be separated from being condescending because you're a sexist pig or simply put, being sexist. This study doesn't show that. Yes, they tell a subset not to make sexist comments, but there's no control or determiner to insure sexist behavior in their uncontrolled groups. Telling people to be sensitive, whether PC or non sexist, should get a better result. It's hard to distinguish.
The study only really proves that in mixed groups, if you treat each other with respect, you get better outcomes. Duh.
Going back to the original supposition, that stopping the treatment of women with condescension addresses sexual harassment still hasn't been shown. Non condescension should improve the lot of all people, simply because everyone wants respect. I maintain, if you're interested in sexism, you should address sexism and sexual commentary. In general, we should have low tolerance for condescension. But on a site, with few women, that is rife with it, that seems a hard row to how...
As an aside, prior to the introduction of the interweb, I thought most condescension came from women. That's where I saw it. The internet cured me of that notion. I suspect many men don't condescending face to face since it might get you a nose ache. The web is hard to punch through.
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
^^^A study of how men and women work together when instructed to operate under a PC norm with no sexist language or behavior has nothing to do with sexism or Joecoin's response to tbird888?
Whatever...it didn't fit joecoin's narrative, so he now wants a "real world example" which I've already given. Language changes the way people think, and it's the same for any social group being disparaged. If joecoin can't see how him being called ****-for-brains for the rest of his life would affect the quality of his life, I don't know how the plethora of peer-reviewed information a 10 second Google-Scholar search returns, is going to change his mind. He'd probably say it was biased.
Whatever...it didn't fit joecoin's narrative, so he now wants a "real world example" which I've already given. Language changes the way people think, and it's the same for any social group being disparaged. If joecoin can't see how him being called ****-for-brains for the rest of his life would affect the quality of his life, I don't know how the plethora of peer-reviewed information a 10 second Google-Scholar search returns, is going to change his mind. He'd probably say it was biased.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I didn't disagree with you, I simply posed the question, what evidence do you have that there was sexist language in the control group? Is it your supposition that men automatically degrade to sexist language with women if they aren't told not to? The paper doesn't address this so either it didn't happen, or they are very sloppy researchers who didn't properly write out this part of their protocol or even worse, didn't document the actual conversations.
I buy the underlying notion that creating a positive work environment is productive.
I'm not interested in joecoin's narrative. But I don't agree with him regardless. The notion that a sexist environment makes women uncomfortable and thus less productive is a no-brainer. But a condescending environment of any sort has a similar result. Distinguishing between the two in the example given is essential. If you can't, then the results don't support the author's premise. They simply support the premise that a work environment sans rude behavior is a more productive one. Duh.
In our all sensitivity to protect women from condescending behavior, one might hypothesize that we are acting in a sexist manner. Must protect women...
I propose that neither Discette nor Pnova needs my protection from condescension, or sexism for that matter (they being the only women I know who come here). That women should be free from sexism, in general, should be a human right, but condescension isn't always sexism. Sometimes it's just rude behavior. If you are supporting the notion that it is, I disagree. If you are proposing that men should solve the problem of male on female condescension, I disagree. If you are proposing that we should act in general to be less condescending, I very much agree. It is killing national discord. But that is a very different matter indeed than sexism.
The assumption that all condescension is sexual in nature is a mistake in my opinion. The notion that some condescension that is sexual isn't is also a mistake. Classic example. Ever talk to a married woman about her husband's shopping behavior? Ever talk to a husband about his wife's shopping behavior. Each conversation is likely to be sexually condescending, in different ways.
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
^^^ well said. I can dig it.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
BTW - some of my replies are only in the context of this forum. Sexism in the workplace, or at Playboy mansion, is a different matter. In those settings, I might feel that I should comment on sexist behavior on behalf of a woman. But that is, of course, situational and only if it is clear she isn't comfortable confronting the situation on her own or asked for my participation.
:clap::clap::clap:
^now imagine there are coconuts in those hands. In fact, why isn't that an emoji for this site?
AzteC
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Messages
- 549
PC 'culture' inherently stifles ALL thought. When you are afraid to say something for fear of 'offending' somebody, important dialogue could be completely left off the table.. Lets remember, offensive speech is what pushes the boundaries of society and what is normatively acceptable. Suffrage? Gay rights and civil rights? That type of speech offended many people and wasn't the norm. But because people chose to be 'politically incorrect' at the time, they were paving the ground for a more free society. Authoritarianism IS NOT the answer.
Last edited:
AzteC
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Messages
- 549
Thinking like this is how people start to get their freedoms slowly stripped away.
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
The study I linked above contests that, but dismiss it if you like.
And yes, people like me hate freedoms.
I wish people in this country (USA) would focus on the idea of live & let live as much as they focus on looking for reasons to be offended about something...
F. Howl
* Ace Member *
I wish the other group of people would realize that people are genuinely offended by some things and no one actively searches for reasons to be offended.
Offense is an emotion. Much like anger, love, hate..... Honestly, the individual is responsible for their own emotions, not the object of that emotion. If someone cuts me off in traffic and I get angry, the anger is mine. It is not the fault of the guy who cut me off. If you are offended by something, understand it, work with it and it will cause you less anguish. Nobody is going to change someone else.
Latest posts
-
-
HOD 5/23/2024: Monroe Township Community Park Hole #1 Mechanicsburg, PA- Latest: BuiltTooLong
-
-
-
-
-
