Here's a video I'm afraid we'll be seeing more of - a young man from Massachusetts fired from his job for objecting to a coworker's announcement that she was going to marry her same-sex partner.
The key legal issue (like that matters) is whether he is correct that she was harassing him throughout the day, or whether he is offering a self-serving version of events. Either could be true. I'm skeptical that his employer would have fired him for a single incident like this on a single day, but those are questions to be investigated (not like anyone will care). He could be right that the coworker was taunting him.
But two things about the video jumped out at me. First, and overwhelmingly, I was struck by how immediately his joy at a coworker's happiness turned into sour judgementalism. Are his religious beliefs really so harsh that they have this effect on his normal human emotions, ecstatic for his co-worker one moment, and disgusted the next? Is it the role of religion to transform the joy we feel for other people into an emotional menace?
Second, his repeated argument in the first two-thirds of the tape warning people in other states about how they, too, could suffer this kind of joy-deficit if their state passes same-sex marriage completely dissolves before our eyes when he intently criticizes the employee training tape about expressing opposition to someone of the same-sex making a pass at you. If that's actually what the tape says (and this seriously undercuts his credibility, in my eyes - I honestly can't imagine this not falling under the rubric of sexual harassment, at least if it were repeated) then his concern about gay marriage laws is the smallest part of his concern. As with so many other arguments purporting to be about same-sex marriage, the real concern he has is with open homosexuals in the workplace he shares with them. And if he thinks stopping gay marriage will halt that, too, he has another think coming.
Again, I doubt any of this will actually matter as the tape make the rounds of the right wing sites. But I couldn't help noticing.
{ 64 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Debrah-
A woman moved is like a fountain troubled,-
Muddy, ill-seeming, thick, bereft of beauty.
I am ashamed that women are so simple
To offer war where they should kneel for peace.
The Taming of the Shrew, 5. 2
“A woman moved is like a fountain troubled…..”
*************************
No, Jimmy.
You’ve got me all wrong.
When I’m “troubled”, I move rather like a volcano.
That way there’s no ambiguity. No one’s time is wasted trying to figure things out.
“I am ashamed that women are so simple….
To offer war…..”
*****************************
Don’t be “ashamed” of war. War and winning them are what allow both of us our freedom to kibitz and moan….and contemplate the strange.
But let me make a suggestion while you’re doling out veiled insults.
Take a stroll over to some of the better-known gay websites (as well as other blogs which used this sorry episode and should have known better) and revisit the posts as well as the comments about the 20-ish imbecilic former Ms. California.
If you want to see middle-aged gay men—most twice the age of this unfortunate woman, who has breast implants (LOL!) and will probably be a has-been in about a year–acting like loose-lipped hags, check them out. You’ll witness WAR.
And all because this empty vessel expressed herself on the gay marriage issue.
Even allegedly intelligent gay men—no doubt angry because someone didn’t give high praise for bent-over-bareback-breeding—jumped on her in what can only be described as WAR-LIKE attacks.
Pot, kettle, black.
“In my estimation, there’s very little difference, methodically, in the whipped-up religious right and the nauseating eructations from the gay-free-to-be-me contingent.”
—Well, I agree with that, both groups portray themselves as the victim and the other group as the oppressor. While I woudln’t want a return to the virulent homophobia of the past, I’m not interested in a new christianphobia either. A society that cannot tolerate vigorous debate is doomed to failure. I know one gay couple that’s been together for 25 years, they would have never demanded the firing of that HR guy.
Speaking of bias, in one of the conservative blogs I frequent I found that comedian Kate Clinton has been accused of hate speech for saying the following:
“Sometimes I wake up . . . and all I want to do is smoke cigarettes and spit at Christian fundamentalists . . . nut jobs that I want to spit at . .”
While I happen to like Kate Clinton it’s obvious that political correctness benefits one group while harming another. It reminds me of a quote from Henry Ford – “You can have it any color you want as long as it’s black.”
And that’s why the right is so upset, the left only wants to have it black.
Debrah -
Carrie took it upon herself to pick a side in a culture war. Then she accepted the role as pin-up girl for the traditionalist movement. Her complaining about darts thrown at her likeness by those who disagree, on every talk-show that will book her, is laughable. People of any age, gay or straight, mocking her in the blogosphere is exactly what she invited.
Judging from the vile nature of posters over at Wingnutdaily and FreeRepublic, which a couple of your characterizations mirror (a strange preoccupation), no one has the market cornered on war-like attacks.
Bobby-
Clinton is catholic. When one christian insults another christian, it’s called Christianity.
Let me reiterate…..again and again……in bold relief……that I am not, and have never been, an apologist or defender of Prejean. In all honesty, I wish the woman had never been made into an issue of this magnitude.
The gay community really picked a highbrow enemy in that one. LOL!!!
That’s what’s so sick about it all. It shows how feverish and ready for a fight some people are.
“Carrie took it upon herself to pick a side in a culture war.”
*************************************
No, she didn’t “take it upon herself”.
Perez Hilton—a “man” who always appears to have just emerged from a train tunnel carrying around a bad Liberace impression—knew all about the woman’s views and her “Christianity” and he ambushed her on national TV. (I suppose some people still watch that archaic crap.)
Then some people I had previously thought were too dignified and smart to participate, took part in using this issue as a war-like expression of their gayness and their hostility and intolerance toward anyone in disagreement.
Lastly, I really don’t think some of you can quite understand the shock in seeing who planted themselves solidly inside the camp of the pathetic Perez Hilton.
Something like this changes opinions.
Debrah-
“Perez Hilton—a “man” who always appears to have just emerged from a train tunnel carrying around a bad Liberace impression—knew all about the woman’s views and her “Christianity” and he ambushed her on national TV.”
There was no ambush. She picked the pre-submitted question at random.
I didn’t think you were an apologist for Prejean, but you brought her up in the conversation. She is a public figure now, something she embraces, so she’s fair game.
Many of your posts contain some mean spirited jabs at gay men in general and I wonder where that’s coming from, beyond the politics. What’s the not-so-subtle hostility all about?
“Many of your posts contain some mean spirited jabs at gay men in general and I wonder where that’s coming from, beyond the politics.”
*************************************
Hmmmm…..”hostility”?
Perhaps you’re just not used to naked candor. In several previous comments, under previous posts, I elaborated on all this to some extent.
Your question is a loaded one and one which will take a lot of time and discussion.
This topic could even be made into an actual post…..if someone has the guts for some open and honest discussion.
This topic, IMO, holds some of the elements which give people pause regarding their opinions about gay marriage.
As I said, it’s loaded.
If I’m hard on gay men, it’s because I love men.
They often give me great pleasure. And in many respects, I think like a man.
Why would I want to waste all that on women?
Wow. Firstly, would one expect to state that they do not approve of black people to a black boss and not get fired. Secondly, she only mentioned it four times! She’s just gotten engaged! That definitely qualifies as holding back.
Also, is it wrong that I think he’s kind of cute? I feel like being in a video like that should definitely “de-cute” someone, but I have to say, he’s not half bad.
“Wow. Firstly, would one expect to state that they do not approve of black people to a black boss and not get fired”
—It’s not the same, while blackness is obvious sexual orientation isn’t. A woman can go from gay to straight and back to gay, we’ve seen it happen with prominent “lesbians.”
Moreover, if people are going to get fired everytime they say something offensive this will stiffle free speech, creativity, and turn the office into a stuffy, politically correct prison.
Firing people should be a last resort, specially when the person fired is talented as his job. It would be better to have mediate/counseling between both parties, either way, all this incident does is create more homophobia and paranoia about gays.
“Wow. Firstly, would one expect to state that they do not approve of black people to a black boss and not get fired”
—It’s not the same, while blackness is obvious sexual orientation isn’t. A woman can go from gay to straight and back to gay, we’ve seen it happen with prominent “lesbians.”
Moreover, if people are going to get fired everytime they say something offensive this will stiffle free speech, creativity, and turn the office into a stuffy, politically correct prison.
Firing people should be a last resort, specially when the person fired is talented as his job. It would be better to have mediate/counseling between both parties, either way, all this incident does is create more homophobia and paranoia about gays.
I totally agree with Bobby’s last comments. If someone at my ever said “I think homosexuality is wrong” (as the guy on the video did) my response would be “I think your religion is wrong – deal with it” rather than whinging to the boss.
In other words, my colleagues have free speech but they still have to deal with the consequences of free speech. And so do I.
Anyone saw friday’s episode of Ugly Better? The flaiming queen character has a very interesting approach when it comes to people who disaprove of him. He told Betty’s nephew that when someone makes fun of you the thing to do is return the joke to them. The best part of when the nephew is named Queen of the prom and instead of walking away, takes the crow and gives a speech. Those characters had 1000 times more courage than that lesbian.
And I like the response David Skidmore would give: “I think your religion is wrong – deal with it.” If we responded like that then the anti-gay people woudln’t be able to say that we’re insecure and seekign special protections in the workplace. Firing that HR manager does nothing to improve the workplace, I’m sure he had friends and all those friends are going to be hating the lesbian that got him fired. And if the lesbian has people who supervise her and didn’t agree with what happened, they will be checking out her work closely and the minute she makes a mistake she will be fired.
Thus in the end the lesbian loses.
I would agree with you had the exchange between these two people happened outside of the professional work environment. But, employers have the right to place limits on speech and have an interest in holding people accountable for a policy they accepted when they became an employee.
Arguments were somewhat convincing initially but later you seemed to have lost track and releid on emotive thinking. this emotive thinking took you away from reality and influenced you to come up with recommendations (most) that are unrealistic.Otherwise a very well written article
← Previous Comments