No women allowed In this guys BJJ class

[jobo]

I've very clearly said I'm for equality. Others are for segregation. It's not very difficult to see the problem here.

I also highly doubt you destroyed anyone with logic, because I've yet to see you do that to anyone.

QED ,

 

[skribs]

you dont seem capable of any thought outside of well rehearsed rhetoric

we live in a very unfair society, its unfair to lot of people for lots of reasons, but mostly because its a capitalised society which are unfair by definition, however counties that have rejected capitalism seem to end up unfair as well, its maybe not a solvable problem

any attempt to make it less unfair for any particular demographic will have other demographics complaining that its now unfair for them

the UK police forces attempt to be more inclusive of gender race and sexual orientation has, meant its now accused of race, gender and sexual orientation discrimination for people who dont now fit the quota system

and of course it is unfair, but is it a better unfairness than the one it replaced,,, dont know, but at least they are trying

I've clearly said we should address that unfairness without resorting to more racism in the form of segregation.

If you think me calling racism evil is just "rhetoric", there's no point talking to you.

 

[jobo]

I've clearly said we should address that unfairness without resorting to more racism in the form of segregation.

If you think me calling racism evil is just "rhetoric", there's no point talking to you.

no your callibg someone else idea to end racial injustice evil, i agree with you its misguided, and will cuase as many problems as it solves, that of course just means it misguided and not intrinsically evil, there need to be shades of grey in this discussion and not postions of evangelical right and wrong

 

[drop bear]

I don't know all of the particulars of the situation, only what has been shared in this thread. In the USA, though, "sexual harassment" is a workplace issue. While it can occur outside of work, I don't believe it can ever be unrelated to work. Doesn't mean she wasn't harassed, just that it's not a "sexual harassment" issue. Of course, that's by the by if she worked for the school and taught classes. People in the USA throw the term around a lot, like, "I was at the grocery store and the clerk sexually harassed me." That's not a thing.

And disclaimer, I am only talking about if this happened in the USA. I don't know the rules in other countries.

Sexual assult? Outside the workplace.

 

[Steve]

well if he was at work, its a workplace issue.

it doesnt have to be your place of work, just somebodies who is involved in it

That might be true in the UK. But in the USA, that's not quite how it works. You can be sexually assaulted, but for it to be "sexual harassment" you have to be either an employee or an applicant for employment.

 

[jobo]

That might be true in the UK. But in the USA, that's not quite how it works. You can be sexually assaulted, but for it to be "sexual harassment" you have to be either an employee or an applicant for employment.

cant you be someone retirning a libary book, being sexualy harressed by the librarian?

 

[skribs]

That might be true in the UK. But in the USA, that's not quite how it works. You can be sexually assaulted, but for it to be "sexual harassment" you have to be either an employee or an applicant for employment.

Or a customer, student, etc.

 

[Steve]

cant you be someone retirning a libary book, being sexualy harressed by the librarian?

Not in the USA, unless you're applying for an assistant librarian position.

 

[Steve]

Or a customer, student, etc.

I don't think that's how the law works. I know you can be sexually harassed BY a customer, but I'm pretty sure a customer can't be sexually harassed by you (i.e., an employee). Sexual harassment is an inherently workplace oriented issue. There has to be a nexus to employment involved (nexus for the person who is alleging harassment).

Now, to be clear, this is a complex area. I'm happy to reconsider if you guys can show me something credible that says otherwise. I'm not a lawyer. But I am more than passingly familiar with the subject.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

@gpseymour I had a ton of respect for you until today.

That’s such crap. And you’ve spread a lot of that lately.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i think you maybe taking this discussion far to seriously.

as a cogent adult you should be able to separate a person from their opinions and maintain your respect for them even if you fundamentally disagree with them over some point.

in my numerous interactions with gerry, ive found him to be mostly wrong about nearly everything. however i respect both him and his right to be wrong

this attitude of personal attacks on character rather than focusing on the point is what is wrong with our world in general and the forum in particular .people just seem to want an echo chamber where nobody disagrees with them, which makes the choice of a public forum with a range of views a bizarre choice of hang out ?

I love you too, man.

 

[Steve]

I love you too, man.

Naww... the two most prolific posters on the site have bonded.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

If someone feels "forced" to see a white doctor, they're racist. I don't think we should pander to that. I'm not even going to entertain that as an acceptable request.

How would it sound if I said "I don't want to be forced to be served by black people. I only trust whites." That would be horrible.

It would be horrible if there was no reason for it. If there's evidence that black people were somehow treating you badly, and it lead to a greater chance of your death, it wouldn't be horrible. The horrible thing would be that evidence, and we should do what's safest for your life until we can figure out a way to fix the racism that's making it more likely that you'll die.

 

[skribs]

It would be horrible if there was no reason for it. If there's evidence that black people were somehow treating you badly, and it lead to a greater chance of your death, it wouldn't be horrible. The horrible thing would be that evidence, and we should do what's safest for your life until we can figure out a way to fix the racism that's making it more likely that you'll die.

The problem is these bandaid fixes become the solution, and then we tread further down.

 

[skribs]

That’s such crap. And you’ve spread a lot of that lately.

I've only spoken the truth, as well as I know it.

In fact, the fact I can't put you on ignore, I may end up leaving this site for good. I put the other racist posters on ignore, but I can't for you. So I may have to be done.

I have other martial arts sites I can go to. They weren't as good as Martial Talk, but they've gotten better, and this site has gone way downhill.

I'm sad to see what's become of this site.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The problem is these bandaid fixes become the solution, and then we tread further down.

But you still need the bandaid until you get to the solution. If someone is hurt, and after bandagint them the emts just leave them alone, the issue isn't bandaging them, it's stopping at that.

 

[geezer]

...In fact, the fact I can't put you on ignore, I may end up leaving this site for good.....

Weak as water. Good God man, learn to ignore people on your own! I have no trouble ignoring people and have no need for an "ignore" feature. Just use the willpower that God gave you and ignore whatever you don't like ...and some day you will find that you can do it as effortlessly, as do I. It's all about will. Practice until someday you too can say that you are willfully ignorant.

Wait, that didn't come out right. Never mind.

 

[geezer]

Now, to be clear, this is a complex area. I'm happy to reconsider if you guys can show me something credible that says otherwise. I'm not a lawyer. But I am more than passingly familiar with the subject.

Honestly, It seems like the definitions of "sexual harassment" are very fluid these days ...and have been expanded greatly.

I remember many years back hearing "experts" on the subject insisting that it was all about abuse of power in workplace relationships. If someone in a position of power over another engaged in unwanted sexual advances, made unwelcome innuendos, jokes, references, etc. that was sexual harassment. So that would imply anyone in your workplace, or possibly other area of your life, who misused their power over you to gain sexual favors, or as a way to make you uncomfortable or intimidated.

These days, at least according to the god-awful video course on sexual harassment we are required to watch every year (along with other idiotic videos on everything else from blood-borne pathogens and workplace safety, to professional dress and hygiene expectations), sexual harassment now applies to unwanted interactions between bosses and employees, teachers and their students and parents, vendors and customers.... students with students... in short any unwanted and repeated sexual advances, innuendos, texts, emails... anything unwanted that might be termed inappropriate and objectionable from anybody to anybody.

Especially, if you are low on the totem pole and don't have powerful friends... and....

Especially, if you somehow cause embarrassment, bad publicity, or worst of all, legal action to be taken against the company/agency/district/entity you work for.

These are my employers definitions, no doubt fueled by fears of bad publicity and litigation. I have no idea about the actual legal definitions in my state. I just do my job, try to be considerate and professional, and hope for the best.

 

[Steve]

Honestly, It seems like the definitions of "sexual harassment" are very fluid these days ...and have been expanded greatly.

I remember many years back hearing "experts" on the subject insisting that it was all about abuse of power in workplace relationships. If someone in a position of power over another engaged in unwanted sexual advances, made unwelcome innuendos, jokes, references, etc. that was sexual harassment. So that would imply anyone in your workplace, or possibly other area of your life, who misused their power over you to gain sexual favors, or as a way to make you uncomfortable or intimidated.

These days, at least according to the god-awful video course on sexual harassment we are required to watch every year (along with other idiotic videos on everything else from blood-borne pathogens and workplace safety, to professional dress and hygiene expectations), sexual harassment now applies to unwanted interactions between bosses and employees, teachers and their students and parents, vendors and customers.... students with students... in short any unwanted and repeated sexual advances, innuendos, texts, emails... anything unwanted that might be termed inappropriate and objectionable from anybody to anybody.

Especially, if you are low on the totem pole and don't have powerful friends... and....

Especially, if you somehow cause embarrassment, bad publicity, or worst of all, legal action to be taken against the company/agency/district/entity you work for.

These are my employers definitions, no doubt fueled by fears of bad publicity and litigation. I have no idea about the actual legal definitions in my state. I just do my job, try to be considerate and professional, and hope for the best.

A lot of people use it incorrectly as a general description of any inappropriate behavior.

 

[dunc]

Well tbh if what was said about a false claim of sexual assault is true then I feel it’s absolutely justified. If it wasn’t true then the guys name was dragged through the mud because of a liar and I can absolutely understand him not wanting to teach women because of this

Really? So if a man made a false claim of say assault then you should ban all men from class?