In space, no one can hear you nagging

[Ed Anger]

Martinus wears a cape of dicks.

That's only partially true.  It's made of foreskins he gets from the hospital.

And draped with severed feet.

[crazy canuck]

I haven't heard any complaints from anyone who works with him

And you would defiitely be the person who they would go to first.

[Berkut]

No, my issue has nothing to do with "dress sense", just with basic empathy with others. I don't think he was a dick because he was not dressed up enough, I think he was a dick for wearing a shirt with graphics that most reasonable people would recognize as very likely offensive to some people to work.

Most people don't work where he works.  I haven't heard any complaints from anyone who works with him, just complaints from people who don't even know him, or what people normally wear where he works.

Whether anyone complains or not, he is still kind of a dick for wearing something that is likely to be offensive. Not being a dick means you don't wear something that is likely to offend, whether someone complains or not. People often do not complain about things like that because they don't want to be seen as being a bitch or complainer, that doesn't mean it is cool to wear something overtly sexual and arguably demeaning.

I think it is in poor taste and shows a disregard for your co-workers, and in such a way that it is likely to make some of them uncomfortable. If I was his boss I would quietly tell him that his dress was not appropriate for work for that reason alone.

Hell, my first post-college job was at Hewlett Packard where the dress code was "don't let any part of your naught bits show". People literally came to work dressed in togas. At least, I thought it was a toga. I loved it.

Most people would be offended if their co-workers showed up in togas.
[/quote]

Not at Hewlett Packard. I think I can reasonable conclude in fact that nobody at HP was offended, or that there would be any reason to believe anyone would be offended by someone wearing a toga.

I do not think this is an apples to apples comparison - wearing imagery that is overtly sexual in nature and arguably demeaning to women is not at all similar to wearing a toga.

The toga was used as an illustration, in fact, that my objection had nothing to do with how casual his dress was, but rather the specific imagery it was displaying. Sorry you missed that point, maybe I should have made it somehow more clear.

Your co-workers showed disrespect to co-workers, and you loved it.  Okay.  Extend that courtesy to others.

No, I said I loved working there and their very casual dress code - I didn't say I loved showing disrespect to anyone. Of course, that is clear from what I wrote, and I know that, and you know that, so I am unsure why you would re-word what I wrote in that manner when we both know it isn't what I said.

[grumbler]

Not at Hewlett Packard. I think I can reasonable conclude in fact that nobody at HP was offended, or that there would be any reason to believe anyone would be offended by someone wearing a toga.

People often do not complain about things like that because they don't want to be seen as being a bitch or complainer, that doesn't mean it is cool to wear something overtly sexual and arguably demeaning.

The toga was used as an illustration, in fact, that my objection had nothing to do with how casual his dress was, but rather the specific imagery it was displaying. Sorry you missed that point, maybe I should have made it somehow more clear.

And my argument is, and has been all along, that his shirt was surely in bad taste, but that it may well have been perfectly acceptable (and indeed encouraged) in his workplace, just like your toga, because not everyone sees sex in everything.  He surely displayed poor judgement for granting an interview (even with a web site he'd never heard of) wearing such a shirt, but, for all we know, his co-workers may have encouraged him to wear the "lucky shirt" (which may have been made by one of them, for all we know) on his big day, and it wasn't even his idea.

The rush to judgement (to the point of calling him an asshole, in the extreme case) is what I find so interesting.  You assume you know far more about his workplace and his reasons for wearing the shirt than it seems to me you could possibly know.

No, I said I loved working there and their very casual dress code - I didn't say I loved showing disrespect to anyone. Of course, that is clear from what I wrote, and I know that, and you know that, so I am unsure why you would re-word what I wrote in that manner when we both know it isn't what I said.

You couldn't know what others considered disrespectful.  You loved a dress code that certainly allowed "disrespectful" dress as far as someone was concerned, but you "loved it" because you think you knew the environment well enough to judge that no one was offended.  You have no such knowledge when it comes to this ESA workplace, but you forge ahead with your condemnations anyway.  There's a word for that.

[Berkut]

Not at Hewlett Packard. I think I can reasonable conclude in fact that nobody at HP was offended, or that there would be any reason to believe anyone would be offended by someone wearing a toga.

People often do not complain about things like that because they don't want to be seen as being a bitch or complainer, that doesn't mean it is cool to wear something overtly sexual and arguably demeaning.

And yet a reasonable person can judge that in fact a toga is not overtly sexual or arguably demeaning to anyone. Again, you are comparing apples and oranges.

The toga was used as an illustration, in fact, that my objection had nothing to do with how casual his dress was, but rather the specific imagery it was displaying. Sorry you missed that point, maybe I should have made it somehow more clear.

And my argument is, and has been all along, that his shirt was surely in bad taste, but that it may well have been perfectly acceptable (and indeed encouraged) in his workplace,

If we agree it is in bad taste (ie kind of a dick thing to wear) then in fact we don't disagree on much.

just like your toga,

No, a toga, again, is not the same at all. It is just kind of weird, but doesn't have any sexual implication nor does it potentially demean anyone.

because not everyone sees sex in everything.

Not everyone does, but enough people see "sex" in scantily clad women that it is reasonable to think that some might find it offensive. The shirt he was wearing was overtly sexual in nature. It is not prudish to see "sex" in a shirt that is rather specifically designed to be titillating.

He surely displayed poor judgement for granting an interview (even with a web site he'd never heard of) wearing such a shirt, but, for all we know, his co-workers may have encouraged him to wear the "lucky shirt" (which may have been made by one of them, for all we know) on his big day, and it wasn't even his idea.

Possible, but if my co-workers think my racist shirt (for example) is lucky, it doesn't make me (or them) less of dicks if I wear it. Whether or not anyone actually complains about it. Even if the shirt can be argued to NOT be racist by someone trying hard to do so.

The rush to judgement (to the point of calling him an asshole, in the extreme case) is what I find so interesting.  You assume you know far more about his workplace and his reasons for wearing the shirt than it seems to me you could possibly know.

I don't think I need to work at his workplace to judge that wearing a shirt like that is likely to be offensive to women. I suppose it is possible there is something unique and special about his workplace that somehow makes pictures of comic book type sexualized females appropriate, but that would be an argument someone would have to make - does he work in a comic book writing place, for example? No?

I don't have to work there to make reasonable judgement's about how people should act or dress at work. If there is something exceptional about his work environment that makes objectifying women somehow more acceptable than the norm, then someone would need to mention that in order for me to give him a pass for wearing something like that.

No, I said I loved working there and their very casual dress code - I didn't say I loved showing disrespect to anyone. Of course, that is clear from what I wrote, and I know that, and you know that, so I am unsure why you would re-word what I wrote in that manner when we both know it isn't what I said.

You couldn't know what others considered disrespectful. 

Of course I can - we make reasonable judgement's about that all the time. I make all kinds of choices about what I say, do, act, display based on reasonable judgements about what I think people will find acceptable in a variety of places and situations.

For example, wearing a Penfield High School Patriots (my kids school) polo shirt to work is perfectly reasonable in my workplace. But wearing that same shirt when I am going to another school to officiate a game is not so reasonable. That is a judgement that I make when I choose how to dress.

You loved a dress code that certainly allowed "disrespectful" dress as far as someone was concerned,

Except not the case at all - there was no reason for anyone to believe that the examples I've given were considered disrespectful by anyone at HP. Nor are you even trying to argue that they were - just that someone could have theoretically been offended, for no reason at all.

We know exactly why some people might be offended by his shirt, so again, apples and oranges.

but you "loved it" because you think you knew the environment well enough to judge that no one was offended.  You have no such knowledge when it comes to this ESA workplace, but you forge ahead with your condemnations anyway.  There's a word for that.

Yeah, it is called reasonable judgement. Wearing a shirt that overtly sexualizes women is easily judged to be likely to be found offensive by women in most any work environment that isn't a strip club.

I don't need to work at the ESA to be able to reasonably make that judgement.

[Martinus]

Ah, a line-by-line Berkut vs. grumbler debate. The staple of Languish.

[Berkut]

Yeah, I am already exhausted though.

Basically, if you can't see how his shirt is pretty obviously potentially offensive then I suppose you are fine with it.

If you can, then you have varying levels of "That guys is a kind of a dick" for wearing it.

I am sure he is a great guy otherwise. But if I was at work, and someone wore that in even the most casual of work environments, I would think he was kind of a dick, and would feel badly for my female co-workers.

Maybe that makes ME kind of a dick for judging the poor man. I can live with that I suppose.

[Barrister]

I think throwing labels around like "dick" or "asshole" aren't really helpful.  I don't know the guy, I can't really judge him by one shirt on one day.

But what I think I can say is that shirt was inappropriate on that occasion.  No moral judgment involved.

[grumbler]

And yet a reasonable person can judge that in fact a toga is not overtly sexual or arguably demeaning to anyone. Again, you are comparing apples and oranges.

that's a subjective judgement, dependent entirely on the toga worn and how its worn.  No company I have direct experience with would allow their employees to wear togas to work, for fear of such wear becoming overly sexualized, not because they hate the look of the Roman Senate.

If we agree it is in bad taste (ie kind of a dick thing to wear) then in fact we don't disagree on much.

I think we disagree on the meaning of the verb 'to be a dick," but if you mean it to be "to dress in bad taste" I can certainly live with that definition of being a dick.  Like wearing a toga is being a dick.

No, a toga, again, is not the same at all. It is just kind of weird, but doesn't have any sexual implication nor does it potentially demean anyone.

But wearing one is being a dick.

Not everyone does, but enough people see "sex" in scantily clad women that it is reasonable to think that some might find it offensive. The shirt he was wearing was overtly sexual in nature. It is not prudish to see "sex" in a shirt that is rather specifically designed to be titillating.

Cite?  or mind reading?

Possible, but if my co-workers think my racist shirt (for example) is lucky, it doesn't make me (or them) less of dicks if I wear it. Whether or not anyone actually complains about it. Even if the shirt can be argued to NOT be racist by someone trying hard to do so.

No, we have agreed that to wear shirts with cartoon women and to wear togas is to be a dick.  Your shirt (whatever it is) fits in the "be a dick" category as well.

I don't think I need to work at his workplace to judge that wearing a shirt like that is likely to be offensive to women.

All women?  Some women?  What if the women who would be offended by the shirt never saw it?  Would it be a dick to wear the shirt in his own closet, where no one ever saw him?

Again, the shirt is tacky, but wearing tacky shit like togas or this shirt is a tradeoff.  You don't agree with his tradeoff, fine.  I'm much less convinced, also fine.  I don't believe in blanket judgements on topics like this, though.  To condemn the guy requires meeting a higher bar for me than for you (and for you to unconditionally condemn him and call him an asshole requires a far higher bar than for Tamas), that's all.  Puritans and I agree on little.

I suppose it is possible there is something unique and special about his workplace that somehow makes pictures of comic book type sexualized females appropriate, but that would be an argument someone would have to make - does he work in a comic book writing place, for example? No?

No, he works in a science lab.  Bad dress sense is allowed there.  Sometimes, even dress that would offend non-employees.  The key is to not let non-employees see how silly the lab (or the toga-wearing-software-writers) are.

I don't have to work there to make reasonable judgement's about how people should act or dress at work. If there is something exceptional about his work environment that makes objectifying women somehow more acceptable than the norm, then someone would need to mention that in order for me to give him a pass for wearing something like that.

Okay.  Like I said, this just reflects different standards of evidence required for condemnation.

[grumbler]

Ah, a line-by-line Berkut vs. grumbler debate. The staple of Languish.

I don't think intellectual debate is a staple of Languish at all.  I think your hysterical hyperbole, CC's ad homs, and The Brain's hilarious non sequiturs are more the staples here.

[Ed Anger]

And Tim bashing.

[derspiess]

I like turtles.

[Barrister]

I like turtles.

http://products.nestle.ca/en/brands/chocolates/turtles.aspx

???

[derspiess]

[CountDeMoney]

I like turtles.

Unfortunately for the turtles, so do the Chinese.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29563810