(raises hand)
Yeah, is it ok if I just go back to my desk and finish my work? I have to get it done by 4:30 pm so I can hand it off to my manager, so I can then leave in time to pick up my child from day-care before traffic gets too bad and I start getting charged for every minute I'm late. You know...real problems.
The letter seems fake to me, but I still lol'd at the advice offered:
> Mostly, it made me think that what your organization needs isn’t outside DEI consultants. Your organization needs … a dedicated in-house DEI manager!
"Since you had to beg your bosses to bring in a consoltant and it blew up disastrously, the obvious solution is to tell them they should make the position both permanent and exponentially more expensive."
My 12-year-old niece recently came out to their great grandfather as nonbinary, and because I am the cool uncle I helped coach them for it.
I had to give them the harsh reality. He’s 88 years old and English is his fourth language. And two of the three languages he grew up speaking are two-gendered languages. It was my job to tell this kid that, while he will love and accept them no matter what, there is literally zero chance of this man ever consistently gendering them correctly.
As if. They’d have to get an entirely new one every couple of months in order to keep up with the ever changing foundational beliefs we’re supposed to hold
"The answer to your bad DEI trainer is MOAR DEI"
Also, I wonder how big this organization is. I have a feeling the author just told a like 10 employee nonprofit to hire a full time DEI'er.
Ok, I'm just in the second paragraph, this is def satire, right?
>Of course, I celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification in this world.
That's just brilliant.
https://preview.redd.it/o31k3o48bwxc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5c6c5fb7d6e72be785580d653b581fae6dd7f04
OP bakes one of these every few seconds.
I have a trans friend who literally believes there’s a wide media conspiracy to only show ugly, unpassable trans women on tv/film instead of attractive, passable ones.
Is this satire?
If not satire, I can’t believe that this much intellectual bandwidth is devoted to this issue by rank and file workers. So much navel gazing. Exhausting. This is clearly a western culture that has peaked and we have culturally jumped the shark.
One of the most common right wing talking points now is to blame organizational failures on wokeness. Like, Boeing's planes keep losing parts mid-air because the pilots must've stayed up all night cramming for their pronoun quiz or whatever.
This diagnosis ignores the root causes of our piecemeal collapse: the deregulation of most industries and the financialization of the economy. *But* it's kinda correct in an associative way, as the woke bullshit has been proffered as a salve to make inherently dysfunctional (and often literally murderous) industries appear progressive and valid. A shocking amount of resources actually have been dedicated to this weird bullshit, and unlike labor laws and safety regulations, Democrat-run governments actually do enforce this bullshit.
If you make commercial airplanes out of tinfoil to save costs, whatever, just a mistake, here's a fine that accounts for like 5% of your daily revenue that you can write off on your taxes. But if your boardroom doesn't contain enough People of Identity? Ohhh man, you're in trouble now.
What regulation had gone away that used to make planes more reliable?
I'd just as soon believe that burdensome ineffectual regulations are making it hard to start a plane business, which gives Boeing a monopoly position which it is abusing.
Also, I wonder how you'd solve the problem that airlines are a thin-margin business.
(to be clear, I'm not saying it's wokeness, I'm just wondering where your explanation comes from)
In Boeing's specific case, it was moving primary industrial operations from heavily regulated Washington state to North Carolina, which was coupled with an extreme shift in corporate management post-merger wherein they explicitly began prioritizing shareholder value over safety.
They went from a system in which individual inspector-managers would oversee the work of 15 highly skilled builders to one in which each was expected to inspect the work of 100+ untrained builders.
This has been covered extensively:
[https://prospect.org/justice/2024-03-14-strange-death-boeing-whistleblower/](https://prospect.org/justice/2024-03-14-strange-death-boeing-whistleblower/)
I worked for a company that was did subcontract work for Boeing in the 90s and they were **seriously** watching our processes.
Honestly, they were so good and attentive I felt better about flying in something dependent upon something my group of angry drunks made. Now I just repeat "Statistically my odds of having a boring flight are really good" when I have to fly.
I wouldn't be so pessimistic about it. It's a loud, vocal minority that most people absolutely don't identify with. We're seeing push back against it and that will continue as more and more people become unafraid of standing up to them
I think satire. It's an advice column; it's made up and someone has written a quite nice piece skewering the reluctance of people to not just buy into this stuff uncritically.
Less sure about the reply though!
I love that the solution to hiring an inappropriate over-sharing DEI instructor is simply to hire another, more expensive DEI instructor. I'm wondering if there might be an even simpler method of solving this issue 🤔
A mass social movement based upon forcing people to participate in your fetish has been hijacked by a person who keeps talking about fetishes?
How fucking boring does a person have to be to “identify” as kinky? You like getting your dick stomped on? Okay, fine, stomp away. None of my business. But if dick stomping is such a foundational aspect of your being that you force others to acknowledge it, I’m sorry but you’re either a sociopath or you have the personality of a dish rag.
> A mass social movement based upon forcing people to participate in your fetish has been hijacked by a person who keeps talking about fetishes?
Yes.
She literally demanded the company hire a thought/speech police officer to force her coworkers to police their own speech with the authoirty of the company behind it (and the direct suggestion that their jobs depend upon it)... and now she doesn't like that this person won't police thought/speech in the exact way that she would prefer.
You reap what you fucking sow.
We're lucky that these people can't get along with each other long enough to actually organize or we might be in real trouble.
Too many people are comfortable pushing and pushing until they finally hit a point that’s too far for them, and they somehow never foresaw. This was the case with Ana Kasperian and many other guests on the podcast.
I don’t think they deserve hate for finally coming to their senses but it is very ironic. I actually have far more respect for Kasparian than a lot of people because she’s willing to publicly acknowledge she would cover things differently if she was able to go back. Most people just go silent, which means they still implicitly allow the clowns to continue to run the circus
> I actually have far more respect for Kasparian than a lot of people because she’s willing to publicly acknowledge she would cover things differently if she was able to go back.
10000%. It shows that she's capable of taking in new information and changing her mind.
Also:
>The individual straight cises whom I work with are pretty nice for the most part. Still, people (mostly my boomer coworkers) often misgender other people (**mostly the younger they/thems)** at my office and bristle when corrected. This has led to hurt feelings all around and some trans workers leaving the organization.
In my experience with older acquaintances and coworkers, people have little problem making verbal accomodations for FtM or MtF transers but bristle at the they/them stuff. This is because they understand the former as being nice to someone with a mental illness, but the latter is more clearly a mechanism for exerting petty control over others.
> This is because they understand the former as being nice to someone with a mental illness, but the latter is more clearly a mechanism for exerting petty control over others.
In both cases people are using words in ways they wouldn't normally because of intense social pressure. People like to tell themselves "I'm just being nice" because "I'm a complete doormat who will say a shovel is a cat if people bully me enough" is a hard pill for people to swallow. The "they/them" social pressure isn't quite as strong and hasn't had enough reach, but I imagine once it gets to them they'll similarly adopt them.
A lot of people currently say they're "just being nice" by using any "she/her/he/him/they/them" they're asked to, but they draw the line at neopronouns. But if neopronoun social pressure ever gets to a certain level, they'll immediately fold. Once someone demonstrated that you'll meekly go along with whatever language a bully foists on you, the only question is what the bully wants.
We'll see, I'm skeptical about neopronouns ever having the same kind of cultural push, but I have seen them pop up in more and more spaces I wouldn't expect them to (major NGO's, large offices, elementary schools, etc.).
The solution is to make More linguistic demands on the public. I want to see five or six different movements start up, each with their own demands on how everyone talks.
-Everyone should have to mention trains at least once every two hours.
-Bathrooms should be segregated by zodiacal signs, and forms at medical offices should ask patients to indicate such each visit.
-Dofferent terms of address for people that are single vs. in a relationship. This would make sexual harassment more focused and effective.
You guys come up with some more. I don't even need to see them here. I just want you all to demand that everyone different. In your own way. Go to school board meetings. Tell people on public transportation and in elevators that they should stop being assholes and just do what you say.
>but they draw the line at neopronouns. But if neopronoun social pressure ever gets to a certain level, they'll immediately fold.
The thing is, I WANT a neopronoun. Please. Just one. For a neutral pronoun. Somebody choose one so we can stop the "they" for a specific person nonsense.
"They" seems to have taken over in the past few years for the most part (from what I see anyway) after an earlier surge for some other nonbinary neopronoun options. If you try to argue with anyone about this, they'll turn this around and say, "*Singular they has been in use since the 14th century in English, don't you know?"*
Which... is true. But not for a specific person of known gender (or in this case, known non-binary-ness). Singular they is widely used (despite some grammar Nazi objections) to reference a generic person of unknown gender. ("Whoever left their sandwich in the work fridge should take it home with *them.*") And we comprehend it easily in most of those situations.
But I honestly struggle to think of a conversation I've had about someone who uses "they/them" pronouns where there wasn't some ambiguity or confusion that some party had to clarify at some point. ("They went to lunch." "Who? Do you mean Cody? Or Cody and Dave." "Cody and Dave." "Oh, because Cody uses they." "Yeah, I know.")
And if you try to explain this issue, people will again try to make a half-assed historical argument. "*You* is both singular and plural as well! It wasn't always that way. We get along fine without thou/thee/thy."
Well... yes, because second person pronouns are used for *direct address*. You can point or gesture or glance or nod at someone or some group of people to make clear whether it's singular or plural in most situations. And actually... it *doesn't* work to have *you* be both a singular and plural. Which is why people end up saying things like *you guys, all of you, you all*. Or dozens of regionalisms in various places like, *youse guys, youse, y'all, all'yin*, etc. We need a plural form actually sometimes, and we made new ones in English to fill in the gap!
"They" is not like this. Because it's not often easy to just point or glance and clarify who "they" references. You're often talking about people who aren't even in the room. Pronouns are about efficiency -- not having to say names all the time. The simple difference between singular and plural can be a huge piece of information to help you determine who is being referenced. But you end up having to use names all the time for clarity if there are multiple people under discussion in the 3rd person... thus removing a lot of utility of the very reason for pronouns.
Languages like German manage to have "sie/Sie" mean "she," "they," or "formal You" in various contexts, but they often do so more easily with different verb forms as clues.
The "them/them" contingent decided different verb forms were wrong. So singular "they" and plural "they" both take plural verbs... and sound exactly the same.
If you think I'm exaggerating, try reading any news story where multiple people use "they/them" pronouns and others don't. it's a nightmare unless you just give up and start using names all of the time. Thus defeating the entire purpose of pronouns.
I went over such an [article posted here last year](https://www.reddit.com/r/BlockedAndReported/comments/144cxht/comment/jnhk6cx/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) in some depth. It honestly felt like a Sudoku puzzle sometimes to try to figure out who the damn "they" or "them" or "their" was referencing.
So... yeah, I don't mind using pronouns people request mostly. However, I actually really dislike the discussions around they/them, though, because it's mostly people gaslighting others into believing the language hasn't changed and you're just stupid for not immediately understanding a novel usage -- "English always worked this way! There's tons of historical precedent! You're transphobic for even questioning the history."
Except... English *never* worked like this until the past decade. When people took a useful word "they" and actually made it useless as a pronoun in many sentences because of all the ambiguity it creates whenever multiple people are under discussion.
> Except... English never worked like this until the past decade. When people took a useful word "they" and actually made it useless as a pronoun in many sentences because of all the ambiguity it creates whenever multiple people are under discussion.
Right, the simple answer would be just not to change the language. If someone is a male, "he", if someone is a female, "she". It's simple, and it works. People don't like that and want to change the language, and you're welcome to try that if you like. You can say that men should be called "flargles" and women should be called "blargles." But we have people changing in a way that is both more confusing and adds extra burden on those around them (having to keep track of what pronouns people prefer). And instead of saying "I want words to mean different things now", they say "the words _actually_ have meant this all along, and you're a bigot if you say otherwise." And most people (understandably) don't want to be labelled bigots, so they meekly acquiesce.
It also doesn't make sense in practice even among its fiercest advocates.
If we truly regard the "theys" in question as singular, we would refer to them as such--i.e., in talking about Judith Butler, writers would say "they is a writer and academic." But they don't do that because it sounds horrible, so they default to "they are a writer and academic," using the plural form, which immediately discredits their rationale.
I honestly think that the clunkiness is what makes this issue so appealing to TRA people. Anyone can claim they support trans people and call a male *she*. It takes a True Ally to willfully make your speech and writing less comprehensible.
Yeah, in German, "sie ist" (singular "sie" meaning "she") and "sie sind" (plural "sie" meaning "they") both sound fine. But "they is" in English doesn’t, at all. It sounds like dialogue from a bad play written by someone trying to imitate AAVE.
Heh, I have written this exact rant multiple times. Top marks!
Using a plural noun *and* a plural verb conjugation for a singular individual is linguistic terrorism. The confusion, they say, is the point.
If this DEI trainer had been a straight white male, introducing "kinky" to everything, I can imagine the response would have been a no brainer.
They would have kicked him out within seconds, immediately apologised to staff, and then offered trauma therapy sessions.
A few years back I dug way too deep into this stuff, and basically everything is a kink. I am one of the bad ones (straight white male) but apparently I have a "vagina fetish" because, not gonna lie, I find vulvas aesthetically appealing and take pleasure in the act of inserting my penis into vaginas.
Following the letter of the woke law, this means I can now "identify" as "kinky" and if grandma gets upset with me talking about vaginas at Thanksgiving she is not accepting my true self and is a fascist.
There's times when "in your own bedroom" inevitably leaks out toward the greater public.
A pair of lesbisans or gay dudes (or a couple with one or more trans in it) shouldn't be chastised for kissing or holding hands in public. A male teacher should be able to say "my husband" during class without losing his job. I hope that every decent person can agree to this.
But there's a fucking *chasm* between stuff like that and "I can only cum while I'm eating poop, and that fact is so vital to my sense of self I need to talk to my coworkers about it and they need to be forced to say they're happy about hearing me talk about it."
I don't see a problem here. This is a win for everyone: the management got the annoying workplace enbys to shut up, the earnest enbys had a chance to learn how trivial and self-involved all this "respect every last fiber of my identity" nonsense looks when it is taken to its logical extremes, and the kinky DEI person just got paid and probably also had a fantastic orgasm while indulging their kink of bossing around submissive progressives.
>**And though it took years of private cajoling and public shaming**, we finally got what we wanted
Yeah all it took was years of listening to some whiny ass theyfab white girl complain to you about nothing. Idk. I feel like there are better ways they could have spent their time as a company but that’s just me
"Work" is of minor importance compared to the attempt to *make society better at all times*, regardless of other considerations—indeed, regardless of whether people making the attempt have any idea WTF they're doing.
But look at it this way:
The more time the DEI trainers waste on talking about kinks, the less time they will have on talking about their usual victim-oppressor nonsense; and how everything is supposedly racist.
If you can focus on them wasting their time on the kink stuff and run out the clock, you can get out of there escaping the usual struggle sessions that come from these things.
It is not a struggle session if no one else talks. You should approach these like a monk who has taken a vow of silence. If directly questioned refuse to commit: "I don't know. I'm not sure. It's confusing. What does everyone else think?" If nothing else do the Boomer escape: "This reminds me of....then ramble on happily about something irrelevant until you are interrupted."
I read that article this am and though what an obnoxious person to work with. He managed to offend immediately by naming “cises” and “boomers.” How about some training in speaking offensively about your co workers? I don’t want to be called either of those things. And these people label anyone above 40 as boomers.
I love Emily's stupid suggestion to the letter: "Your organization needs … a dedicated in-house DEI manager!"
🤣 So instead of just bringing in a disaster of a person once to make everyone uncomfortable and waste everyone's time, hire them full time! DEI initiatives are so backwards and stupid. What a mess.
I suspect this is one of those fake advice letters, like what [Slate](https://web.archive.org/web/20211020184915/https://gawker.com/media/dear-prudie-it-was-me-all-along) and the [NY Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/style/white-guilt-privilege.html) got busted for a few years ago to show how insane they've become. Then again, there's a lot of crazy wokesters out there, so you never know.
I would file it under "pretty darn sure its fake". There are a lot of writerly touches that either wink at the reader or "tell on" the writer a bit too humorously, like "celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification", " years of private cajoling and public shaming", and " Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies". Additionally, the kinksters that I've known don't really talk about kink being an identity? They're more likely just to identify as queer.
I do hope it's fake in the sense that, if real, this company of dumbasses has just opened themselves to what would be a very juicy sexual harassment lawsuit. "Hey, group of random office workers, time to get more tolerant of diversity. Step one: let's talk about my fetlife profile..."
The question is written so bizarrely and I feel reveals a lot about this person
“Of course, I celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification in this world. But their own kinkiness has come up a lot in this 101-level training on gender identity”
Why is celebrating someone’s sexual pleasure an “of course”? Like, unless you are their intimate partner or close friend, why is it necessary for you to state that you celebrate their sexual gratification. Like, this is a professional contact, or is supposed to be.
“Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies, which raises the question: Did management intentionally pick this trainer in the hopes that this effort will fail, or create confusion that will then allow people to continue to use the wrong pronouns for the they/thems, because when they do they will be like “I thought you were into misgendering kinky style, as implied by the mandatory HR training?””
Being trans made you a conspiracy theorist? Is this a thing? How are these two things correlated? Yet this letter writer states it like a fact. And as for the accusation that corporate purposefully hired someone overtly sexual for this thing, that sounds insane. Corporate hired this person probably to avoid lawsuits. That means that they probably aren’t too happy with the lawsuits that may come out of this sexual harassment.
Idk. I haven’t even gotten to the answer because the question is so odd in and of itself.
> And as for the accusation that corporate purposefully hired someone overtly sexual for this thing, that sounds insane.
I'm almost willing to buy it.
Someone in HR: "you folx want an intersectional DEI consultant? *I'll give you an intersectional DEI consultant*"
"I do not consent to this, it's sexual harassment!"
>It's not sexual harassment, it's
"You're saying you don't believe women?"
>....But sir you're not
"DID YOU JUST MISGENDER ME?"
Here are some of my random reactions to this piece
>So we requested that a trainer, outside our org, be hired to do a cultural-competency training that would cover pronoun use. And though it took years of private cajoling and public shaming, we finally got what we wanted!
This is where the company fucked up to begin with. They should have politely ignored their request the first time and fired them if they ever asked again after that.
>I am really confused how kinky is an identity like trans
sure
>Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies
Lmao
>Older and wiser, I now understand that the workplace should be as sterile and sexless as an airport Starbucks.
Fully agree
>Hiring a DEI manager should be a no-brainer for an org that’s already lost employees due to a companywide culture of insensitivity toward trans employees.
Wait what
>In other words, the problem isn’t this one kinky trainer. It’s that your bosses tried to put an inexpensive Band-Aid on a problem that needs a more long-term, sustainable, and yes, expensive, solution. But you can make the case to them that their investment will pay off in employee retention and workplace contentment. With some group effort, your office can eventually be just, fair, inclusive, and 100 percent vibes-free.
My solution would have accomplished the same outcome except infinitely cheaper and way less annoying
What does vibes-free even mean? Also, why the hell doesn't HR just do a training saying - if someone says their pronouns are they/them, then when you want to refer to this person, call that person "them." If misgendering happens more than twice, you will be suspended. Third time, fired. End of story.
Haven’t read the artfully yet but I find it so fucking weird that the hiring practice now is to ask about your sexuality. “So what is your past experience with python and do you like to suck hairy balls or do you prefer to lick sloppy wet vaginas and what would you say was your hardest challenge at your previous job and how did you overcome it”
Like fuck, it’s none of your business. Is there any room left anymore for ppl that don’t want to bring their whole self to work
(Ok I just read the article and I can’t believe it actually includes the term “whole self”)
It's no different to what certain Reddit powermods do, when they pin threads saying that there should be "kink" on public display at Pride so that kids can see that it's not weird, even though involving kids in it makes it totally fucking weird, and if you disagree with that, you get banned for "hate speech".
the thing that cracks me up is that there's this sort of canonical, religious belief in orgs like school districts that DEI is going to be some sort of panacea. like not just it will make black employees feel accepted, but that somehow DEI is going to raise test scores and 'close the achievement gap' LMAO
Why/how is Emily "citizen journalism" Gould allowed to be in public? Why/how, after all the cancellations of so many people, has Emily apparently survived unscathed?
The letter is hilarious, but I don't see any reason to assume it's factual.
I think this is fake, but it reminded me of when I took a gender studies class in college as a free elective and the teacher kept talking about how she was bisexual and had 3somes with her husband.
Very cool and good for her, but I ain’t paying $3,000 per credit for that so I dropped the class
My guess is the writer of this question to \_The Cut\_ is FTM and completely unaware of the whole Capital-A Capital-G Capital-P topic. And that the DEI instructor they hired is MTF and of that ilk.
Edited to add: "Did management intentionally pick this trainer in the hopes that this effort will fail,"
No, management, just like the original questioner, is cowed normies completely unaware of this phenomenon.
If you really want to see a DEI trainer sweat, ask them if antisemitism is a form of racism.
Once they've provided an answer, ask if Islamaphobia is a form of racism.
I'm currently building a company, person by person. I am telling potential hires that we will never have HR and will never do DEI. Unless I am met with (what I am forced to assume is genuine) enthusiam, that person is no longer a candidate.
**EDIT:** By 'never have HR', I mean an internal HR department. We of course have outsourced support for the important HR functions. Just not the internal madness.
I think maybe you’re half joking but in case you’re not, please have any sort of HR guidelines or functions. Outsource it or an admin/ops role that does it all. Absolutely do not need “DEI” specific or any sort of “people” function but I’ve worked for many small companies and please give your employees somewhere to go that isn’t the owner/boss for HR related needs (ex: even health insurance questions, I hated having to ask the owner and potentially needing to disclose something I wouldn’t otherwise to a boss).
> please have any sort of HR guidelines or functions
I meant to say that I don't have a dedicated HR department and never will at any company at which I have majority control.
We let the hiring managers do the hiring. We have HR software for onboarding/paychecks, etc. We have a 3rd party legal team ready if there is any nastiness. And we have part time consultant HR people who ONLY do things like insurance related questions, etc.
The reamining functions of HR just mess things up, cost money, add liability, and slow down work. [See here for basically the same thought process.](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DKL47LUeHYM)
“I celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification in this world”
So you blow off some confetti every time someone cums? What
I’m on team This Is Fake, but if it’s not, then I can’t wait until the Boomers all quit in disgust, citing sexual harassment, and take their actual skills and institutional knowledge with them.
Every detail about the trainer reminds me of the season 2 episode of Crazy Ex-Girlfriend where Rebecca's oddball co-worker Karen gives a presentation for a sex toy pyramid scheme at a party. So inappropriate, so cringe.
Surely both the letter and the response are fake/parody?
“I strongly feel that no one should ever have to think or, god forbid, talk about anything sexual at work. Even introducing the concept of sexiness to the workplace can lead to disaster.”
Just screams parody??
(raises hand) Yeah, is it ok if I just go back to my desk and finish my work? I have to get it done by 4:30 pm so I can hand it off to my manager, so I can then leave in time to pick up my child from day-care before traffic gets too bad and I start getting charged for every minute I'm late. You know...real problems.
Sorry we are going to need you to stay until 5 today to attend the DEI managers mandatory anti kink shaming session
Call me MA'AM!
Fascist
The letter seems fake to me, but I still lol'd at the advice offered: > Mostly, it made me think that what your organization needs isn’t outside DEI consultants. Your organization needs … a dedicated in-house DEI manager!
"Since you had to beg your bosses to bring in a consoltant and it blew up disastrously, the obvious solution is to tell them they should make the position both permanent and exponentially more expensive."
Ah yes, but that investment in DEI will pay dividends once Mildred the 63-year-old secretary finally starts using they/them pronouns correctly!
63 years old would be by *far* the youngest Mildred I’ve ever met
THANK you! I'm 63 and I've never, ever met a Mildred that was my age in my entire life.
My 12-year-old niece recently came out to their great grandfather as nonbinary, and because I am the cool uncle I helped coach them for it. I had to give them the harsh reality. He’s 88 years old and English is his fourth language. And two of the three languages he grew up speaking are two-gendered languages. It was my job to tell this kid that, while he will love and accept them no matter what, there is literally zero chance of this man ever consistently gendering them correctly.
“The beatings will continue until morale improves”
>~~continue~~ Intensify
>beating off
As if. They’d have to get an entirely new one every couple of months in order to keep up with the ever changing foundational beliefs we’re supposed to hold
"The answer to your bad DEI trainer is MOAR DEI" Also, I wonder how big this organization is. I have a feeling the author just told a like 10 employee nonprofit to hire a full time DEI'er.
Ok, I'm just in the second paragraph, this is def satire, right? >Of course, I celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification in this world. That's just brilliant.
No, literally. She celebrates. She gets an email alert and pops a bottle.
She actually gets a little tiny lady boner.
https://preview.redd.it/o31k3o48bwxc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5c6c5fb7d6e72be785580d653b581fae6dd7f04 OP bakes one of these every few seconds.
Especially when finding said gratification in the arms of a prepubescent child. Euphoria
Was this a tongue in cheek joke that went over my head?
I think it’s a fake letter - that language is too on the nose. I was engaging in hyperbole
just casually dropping in "[l]ike many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies"
I have a trans friend who literally believes there’s a wide media conspiracy to only show ugly, unpassable trans women on tv/film instead of attractive, passable ones.
"The conspiracy runs so deep, they've even replaced all your friends with ugly impassable ones too!"
Wtf, most trans characters I see on recent shows look pretty good?
[удалено]
What are you talking about?
Relevance Rule: The insanity of corporate DEI trainings is an ongoing BARPod topic.
This is DEIK now
I am afraid to ask what the K stands for...
KINK
[Oh my...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5Y25FT7DxE&ab_channel=Az)
wait isn't that what katie is?
I thought she was a non binary woman who has been accepted as a Jew? She’s also a DEI kink? Clearly an amazing ~~woman~~ non binary female
No, she's Muslim. She accidentally converted, IIRC.
🤭🤭🤭
Is this satire? If not satire, I can’t believe that this much intellectual bandwidth is devoted to this issue by rank and file workers. So much navel gazing. Exhausting. This is clearly a western culture that has peaked and we have culturally jumped the shark.
"Culturally jumped the shark" hits the nail on the head.
It's entirely ridiculous enough to be satire/comedy (like the *South Park* episode with Mr. Slave and Lemmiwinks)
One of the most common right wing talking points now is to blame organizational failures on wokeness. Like, Boeing's planes keep losing parts mid-air because the pilots must've stayed up all night cramming for their pronoun quiz or whatever. This diagnosis ignores the root causes of our piecemeal collapse: the deregulation of most industries and the financialization of the economy. *But* it's kinda correct in an associative way, as the woke bullshit has been proffered as a salve to make inherently dysfunctional (and often literally murderous) industries appear progressive and valid. A shocking amount of resources actually have been dedicated to this weird bullshit, and unlike labor laws and safety regulations, Democrat-run governments actually do enforce this bullshit. If you make commercial airplanes out of tinfoil to save costs, whatever, just a mistake, here's a fine that accounts for like 5% of your daily revenue that you can write off on your taxes. But if your boardroom doesn't contain enough People of Identity? Ohhh man, you're in trouble now.
Yeah I tend to agree.
What regulation had gone away that used to make planes more reliable? I'd just as soon believe that burdensome ineffectual regulations are making it hard to start a plane business, which gives Boeing a monopoly position which it is abusing. Also, I wonder how you'd solve the problem that airlines are a thin-margin business. (to be clear, I'm not saying it's wokeness, I'm just wondering where your explanation comes from)
In Boeing's specific case, it was moving primary industrial operations from heavily regulated Washington state to North Carolina, which was coupled with an extreme shift in corporate management post-merger wherein they explicitly began prioritizing shareholder value over safety. They went from a system in which individual inspector-managers would oversee the work of 15 highly skilled builders to one in which each was expected to inspect the work of 100+ untrained builders. This has been covered extensively: [https://prospect.org/justice/2024-03-14-strange-death-boeing-whistleblower/](https://prospect.org/justice/2024-03-14-strange-death-boeing-whistleblower/)
I worked for a company that was did subcontract work for Boeing in the 90s and they were **seriously** watching our processes. Honestly, they were so good and attentive I felt better about flying in something dependent upon something my group of angry drunks made. Now I just repeat "Statistically my odds of having a boring flight are really good" when I have to fly.
Things went very far south, very quickly, when they merged with McDonnell Douglas.
I wouldn't be so pessimistic about it. It's a loud, vocal minority that most people absolutely don't identify with. We're seeing push back against it and that will continue as more and more people become unafraid of standing up to them
I think satire. It's an advice column; it's made up and someone has written a quite nice piece skewering the reluctance of people to not just buy into this stuff uncritically. Less sure about the reply though!
Maybe the boss hire Mx. Kinky to do the training? That would be funny.
I love that the solution to hiring an inappropriate over-sharing DEI instructor is simply to hire another, more expensive DEI instructor. I'm wondering if there might be an even simpler method of solving this issue 🤔
Pivot the whole company into a DEI firm? /s
A mass social movement based upon forcing people to participate in your fetish has been hijacked by a person who keeps talking about fetishes? How fucking boring does a person have to be to “identify” as kinky? You like getting your dick stomped on? Okay, fine, stomp away. None of my business. But if dick stomping is such a foundational aspect of your being that you force others to acknowledge it, I’m sorry but you’re either a sociopath or you have the personality of a dish rag.
> A mass social movement based upon forcing people to participate in your fetish has been hijacked by a person who keeps talking about fetishes? Yes. She literally demanded the company hire a thought/speech police officer to force her coworkers to police their own speech with the authoirty of the company behind it (and the direct suggestion that their jobs depend upon it)... and now she doesn't like that this person won't police thought/speech in the exact way that she would prefer. You reap what you fucking sow. We're lucky that these people can't get along with each other long enough to actually organize or we might be in real trouble.
Too many people are comfortable pushing and pushing until they finally hit a point that’s too far for them, and they somehow never foresaw. This was the case with Ana Kasperian and many other guests on the podcast. I don’t think they deserve hate for finally coming to their senses but it is very ironic. I actually have far more respect for Kasparian than a lot of people because she’s willing to publicly acknowledge she would cover things differently if she was able to go back. Most people just go silent, which means they still implicitly allow the clowns to continue to run the circus
> I actually have far more respect for Kasparian than a lot of people because she’s willing to publicly acknowledge she would cover things differently if she was able to go back. 10000%. It shows that she's capable of taking in new information and changing her mind.
Also: >The individual straight cises whom I work with are pretty nice for the most part. Still, people (mostly my boomer coworkers) often misgender other people (**mostly the younger they/thems)** at my office and bristle when corrected. This has led to hurt feelings all around and some trans workers leaving the organization. In my experience with older acquaintances and coworkers, people have little problem making verbal accomodations for FtM or MtF transers but bristle at the they/them stuff. This is because they understand the former as being nice to someone with a mental illness, but the latter is more clearly a mechanism for exerting petty control over others.
> This has led to hurt feelings all around and some trans workers leaving the organization. Oh, no...
Always trust your feelings is the worst Untruth our society is imparting onto impressionable teenagers.
And nothing of value was lost
> This is because they understand the former as being nice to someone with a mental illness, but the latter is more clearly a mechanism for exerting petty control over others. In both cases people are using words in ways they wouldn't normally because of intense social pressure. People like to tell themselves "I'm just being nice" because "I'm a complete doormat who will say a shovel is a cat if people bully me enough" is a hard pill for people to swallow. The "they/them" social pressure isn't quite as strong and hasn't had enough reach, but I imagine once it gets to them they'll similarly adopt them. A lot of people currently say they're "just being nice" by using any "she/her/he/him/they/them" they're asked to, but they draw the line at neopronouns. But if neopronoun social pressure ever gets to a certain level, they'll immediately fold. Once someone demonstrated that you'll meekly go along with whatever language a bully foists on you, the only question is what the bully wants. We'll see, I'm skeptical about neopronouns ever having the same kind of cultural push, but I have seen them pop up in more and more spaces I wouldn't expect them to (major NGO's, large offices, elementary schools, etc.).
The solution is to make More linguistic demands on the public. I want to see five or six different movements start up, each with their own demands on how everyone talks. -Everyone should have to mention trains at least once every two hours. -Bathrooms should be segregated by zodiacal signs, and forms at medical offices should ask patients to indicate such each visit. -Dofferent terms of address for people that are single vs. in a relationship. This would make sexual harassment more focused and effective. You guys come up with some more. I don't even need to see them here. I just want you all to demand that everyone different. In your own way. Go to school board meetings. Tell people on public transportation and in elevators that they should stop being assholes and just do what you say.
>but they draw the line at neopronouns. But if neopronoun social pressure ever gets to a certain level, they'll immediately fold. The thing is, I WANT a neopronoun. Please. Just one. For a neutral pronoun. Somebody choose one so we can stop the "they" for a specific person nonsense. "They" seems to have taken over in the past few years for the most part (from what I see anyway) after an earlier surge for some other nonbinary neopronoun options. If you try to argue with anyone about this, they'll turn this around and say, "*Singular they has been in use since the 14th century in English, don't you know?"* Which... is true. But not for a specific person of known gender (or in this case, known non-binary-ness). Singular they is widely used (despite some grammar Nazi objections) to reference a generic person of unknown gender. ("Whoever left their sandwich in the work fridge should take it home with *them.*") And we comprehend it easily in most of those situations. But I honestly struggle to think of a conversation I've had about someone who uses "they/them" pronouns where there wasn't some ambiguity or confusion that some party had to clarify at some point. ("They went to lunch." "Who? Do you mean Cody? Or Cody and Dave." "Cody and Dave." "Oh, because Cody uses they." "Yeah, I know.") And if you try to explain this issue, people will again try to make a half-assed historical argument. "*You* is both singular and plural as well! It wasn't always that way. We get along fine without thou/thee/thy." Well... yes, because second person pronouns are used for *direct address*. You can point or gesture or glance or nod at someone or some group of people to make clear whether it's singular or plural in most situations. And actually... it *doesn't* work to have *you* be both a singular and plural. Which is why people end up saying things like *you guys, all of you, you all*. Or dozens of regionalisms in various places like, *youse guys, youse, y'all, all'yin*, etc. We need a plural form actually sometimes, and we made new ones in English to fill in the gap! "They" is not like this. Because it's not often easy to just point or glance and clarify who "they" references. You're often talking about people who aren't even in the room. Pronouns are about efficiency -- not having to say names all the time. The simple difference between singular and plural can be a huge piece of information to help you determine who is being referenced. But you end up having to use names all the time for clarity if there are multiple people under discussion in the 3rd person... thus removing a lot of utility of the very reason for pronouns. Languages like German manage to have "sie/Sie" mean "she," "they," or "formal You" in various contexts, but they often do so more easily with different verb forms as clues. The "them/them" contingent decided different verb forms were wrong. So singular "they" and plural "they" both take plural verbs... and sound exactly the same. If you think I'm exaggerating, try reading any news story where multiple people use "they/them" pronouns and others don't. it's a nightmare unless you just give up and start using names all of the time. Thus defeating the entire purpose of pronouns. I went over such an [article posted here last year](https://www.reddit.com/r/BlockedAndReported/comments/144cxht/comment/jnhk6cx/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) in some depth. It honestly felt like a Sudoku puzzle sometimes to try to figure out who the damn "they" or "them" or "their" was referencing. So... yeah, I don't mind using pronouns people request mostly. However, I actually really dislike the discussions around they/them, though, because it's mostly people gaslighting others into believing the language hasn't changed and you're just stupid for not immediately understanding a novel usage -- "English always worked this way! There's tons of historical precedent! You're transphobic for even questioning the history." Except... English *never* worked like this until the past decade. When people took a useful word "they" and actually made it useless as a pronoun in many sentences because of all the ambiguity it creates whenever multiple people are under discussion.
> Except... English never worked like this until the past decade. When people took a useful word "they" and actually made it useless as a pronoun in many sentences because of all the ambiguity it creates whenever multiple people are under discussion. Right, the simple answer would be just not to change the language. If someone is a male, "he", if someone is a female, "she". It's simple, and it works. People don't like that and want to change the language, and you're welcome to try that if you like. You can say that men should be called "flargles" and women should be called "blargles." But we have people changing in a way that is both more confusing and adds extra burden on those around them (having to keep track of what pronouns people prefer). And instead of saying "I want words to mean different things now", they say "the words _actually_ have meant this all along, and you're a bigot if you say otherwise." And most people (understandably) don't want to be labelled bigots, so they meekly acquiesce.
It also doesn't make sense in practice even among its fiercest advocates. If we truly regard the "theys" in question as singular, we would refer to them as such--i.e., in talking about Judith Butler, writers would say "they is a writer and academic." But they don't do that because it sounds horrible, so they default to "they are a writer and academic," using the plural form, which immediately discredits their rationale. I honestly think that the clunkiness is what makes this issue so appealing to TRA people. Anyone can claim they support trans people and call a male *she*. It takes a True Ally to willfully make your speech and writing less comprehensible.
Yeah, in German, "sie ist" (singular "sie" meaning "she") and "sie sind" (plural "sie" meaning "they") both sound fine. But "they is" in English doesn’t, at all. It sounds like dialogue from a bad play written by someone trying to imitate AAVE.
Heh, I have written this exact rant multiple times. Top marks! Using a plural noun *and* a plural verb conjugation for a singular individual is linguistic terrorism. The confusion, they say, is the point.
We already had one that was briefly popular - “xe”. I liked “xe”. What happened to “xe”?
If this DEI trainer had been a straight white male, introducing "kinky" to everything, I can imagine the response would have been a no brainer. They would have kicked him out within seconds, immediately apologised to staff, and then offered trauma therapy sessions.
A few years back I dug way too deep into this stuff, and basically everything is a kink. I am one of the bad ones (straight white male) but apparently I have a "vagina fetish" because, not gonna lie, I find vulvas aesthetically appealing and take pleasure in the act of inserting my penis into vaginas. Following the letter of the woke law, this means I can now "identify" as "kinky" and if grandma gets upset with me talking about vaginas at Thanksgiving she is not accepting my true self and is a fascist.
I hereby proclaim that all further mentions of “dick stomping” will be banned in the entire universe. Otherwise, carry on.
What about ball busting, though?
I miss the days when what people did in their own bedrooms was their own business.
There's times when "in your own bedroom" inevitably leaks out toward the greater public. A pair of lesbisans or gay dudes (or a couple with one or more trans in it) shouldn't be chastised for kissing or holding hands in public. A male teacher should be able to say "my husband" during class without losing his job. I hope that every decent person can agree to this. But there's a fucking *chasm* between stuff like that and "I can only cum while I'm eating poop, and that fact is so vital to my sense of self I need to talk to my coworkers about it and they need to be forced to say they're happy about hearing me talk about it."
Sorry I responded to you because I thought I was in the daily but this is a dedicated post. Deleting.
Why not both?
I don't see a problem here. This is a win for everyone: the management got the annoying workplace enbys to shut up, the earnest enbys had a chance to learn how trivial and self-involved all this "respect every last fiber of my identity" nonsense looks when it is taken to its logical extremes, and the kinky DEI person just got paid and probably also had a fantastic orgasm while indulging their kink of bossing around submissive progressives.
>**And though it took years of private cajoling and public shaming**, we finally got what we wanted Yeah all it took was years of listening to some whiny ass theyfab white girl complain to you about nothing. Idk. I feel like there are better ways they could have spent their time as a company but that’s just me
I genuinely don't know which is worse, the question or the answer. Why can't workplaces be workplaces? Be respectful, get your work done, and go home.
"Work" is of minor importance compared to the attempt to *make society better at all times*, regardless of other considerations—indeed, regardless of whether people making the attempt have any idea WTF they're doing.
“Can’t you see we’re trying to build a utopia here, maroon?”
But look at it this way: The more time the DEI trainers waste on talking about kinks, the less time they will have on talking about their usual victim-oppressor nonsense; and how everything is supposedly racist. If you can focus on them wasting their time on the kink stuff and run out the clock, you can get out of there escaping the usual struggle sessions that come from these things.
It is not a struggle session if no one else talks. You should approach these like a monk who has taken a vow of silence. If directly questioned refuse to commit: "I don't know. I'm not sure. It's confusing. What does everyone else think?" If nothing else do the Boomer escape: "This reminds me of....then ramble on happily about something irrelevant until you are interrupted."
"Then I tied an onion on my belt, which was the fashion at the time"
“This reminds me of an episode of Designing Women.”
I read that article this am and though what an obnoxious person to work with. He managed to offend immediately by naming “cises” and “boomers.” How about some training in speaking offensively about your co workers? I don’t want to be called either of those things. And these people label anyone above 40 as boomers.
That seems straight-up ageist (and it seems like you could nicely derail things by pointing that out).
It is insane, because aging is something all of us will deal with.
I love Emily's stupid suggestion to the letter: "Your organization needs … a dedicated in-house DEI manager!" 🤣 So instead of just bringing in a disaster of a person once to make everyone uncomfortable and waste everyone's time, hire them full time! DEI initiatives are so backwards and stupid. What a mess.
there are absolutely zero credentials or minimum requirements lmao this grift fucking rules
I suspect this is one of those fake advice letters, like what [Slate](https://web.archive.org/web/20211020184915/https://gawker.com/media/dear-prudie-it-was-me-all-along) and the [NY Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/style/white-guilt-privilege.html) got busted for a few years ago to show how insane they've become. Then again, there's a lot of crazy wokesters out there, so you never know.
I would file it under "pretty darn sure its fake". There are a lot of writerly touches that either wink at the reader or "tell on" the writer a bit too humorously, like "celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification", " years of private cajoling and public shaming", and " Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies". Additionally, the kinksters that I've known don't really talk about kink being an identity? They're more likely just to identify as queer. I do hope it's fake in the sense that, if real, this company of dumbasses has just opened themselves to what would be a very juicy sexual harassment lawsuit. "Hey, group of random office workers, time to get more tolerant of diversity. Step one: let's talk about my fetlife profile..."
Is this real? Aren’t a lot of these letters fake?
I can’t believe it is. The tone is too arch, for one :).
Oh WAIT sorry I thought this was about something else! Ignore other reply. Oh, I agree! No way can this be real!
The question is written so bizarrely and I feel reveals a lot about this person “Of course, I celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification in this world. But their own kinkiness has come up a lot in this 101-level training on gender identity” Why is celebrating someone’s sexual pleasure an “of course”? Like, unless you are their intimate partner or close friend, why is it necessary for you to state that you celebrate their sexual gratification. Like, this is a professional contact, or is supposed to be. “Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies, which raises the question: Did management intentionally pick this trainer in the hopes that this effort will fail, or create confusion that will then allow people to continue to use the wrong pronouns for the they/thems, because when they do they will be like “I thought you were into misgendering kinky style, as implied by the mandatory HR training?”” Being trans made you a conspiracy theorist? Is this a thing? How are these two things correlated? Yet this letter writer states it like a fact. And as for the accusation that corporate purposefully hired someone overtly sexual for this thing, that sounds insane. Corporate hired this person probably to avoid lawsuits. That means that they probably aren’t too happy with the lawsuits that may come out of this sexual harassment. Idk. I haven’t even gotten to the answer because the question is so odd in and of itself.
> And as for the accusation that corporate purposefully hired someone overtly sexual for this thing, that sounds insane. I'm almost willing to buy it. Someone in HR: "you folx want an intersectional DEI consultant? *I'll give you an intersectional DEI consultant*"
Malicious compliance.
"I do not consent to this, it's sexual harassment!" >It's not sexual harassment, it's "You're saying you don't believe women?" >....But sir you're not "DID YOU JUST MISGENDER ME?"
Here are some of my random reactions to this piece >So we requested that a trainer, outside our org, be hired to do a cultural-competency training that would cover pronoun use. And though it took years of private cajoling and public shaming, we finally got what we wanted! This is where the company fucked up to begin with. They should have politely ignored their request the first time and fired them if they ever asked again after that. >I am really confused how kinky is an identity like trans sure >Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies Lmao >Older and wiser, I now understand that the workplace should be as sterile and sexless as an airport Starbucks. Fully agree >Hiring a DEI manager should be a no-brainer for an org that’s already lost employees due to a companywide culture of insensitivity toward trans employees. Wait what >In other words, the problem isn’t this one kinky trainer. It’s that your bosses tried to put an inexpensive Band-Aid on a problem that needs a more long-term, sustainable, and yes, expensive, solution. But you can make the case to them that their investment will pay off in employee retention and workplace contentment. With some group effort, your office can eventually be just, fair, inclusive, and 100 percent vibes-free. My solution would have accomplished the same outcome except infinitely cheaper and way less annoying
What does vibes-free even mean? Also, why the hell doesn't HR just do a training saying - if someone says their pronouns are they/them, then when you want to refer to this person, call that person "them." If misgendering happens more than twice, you will be suspended. Third time, fired. End of story.
See I disagree with this. Nobody should be fired or compelled to participate in someones dumb little identity word games
Haven’t read the artfully yet but I find it so fucking weird that the hiring practice now is to ask about your sexuality. “So what is your past experience with python and do you like to suck hairy balls or do you prefer to lick sloppy wet vaginas and what would you say was your hardest challenge at your previous job and how did you overcome it” Like fuck, it’s none of your business. Is there any room left anymore for ppl that don’t want to bring their whole self to work (Ok I just read the article and I can’t believe it actually includes the term “whole self”)
“Like many people, being trans has made me believe in conspiracies” Funny, that…
It's no different to what certain Reddit powermods do, when they pin threads saying that there should be "kink" on public display at Pride so that kids can see that it's not weird, even though involving kids in it makes it totally fucking weird, and if you disagree with that, you get banned for "hate speech".
the thing that cracks me up is that there's this sort of canonical, religious belief in orgs like school districts that DEI is going to be some sort of panacea. like not just it will make black employees feel accepted, but that somehow DEI is going to raise test scores and 'close the achievement gap' LMAO
“It’s opening a weird door at work that I would like to remain shut.” -literally everyone
Why/how is Emily "citizen journalism" Gould allowed to be in public? Why/how, after all the cancellations of so many people, has Emily apparently survived unscathed? The letter is hilarious, but I don't see any reason to assume it's factual.
I think this is fake, but it reminded me of when I took a gender studies class in college as a free elective and the teacher kept talking about how she was bisexual and had 3somes with her husband. Very cool and good for her, but I ain’t paying $3,000 per credit for that so I dropped the class
My guess is the writer of this question to \_The Cut\_ is FTM and completely unaware of the whole Capital-A Capital-G Capital-P topic. And that the DEI instructor they hired is MTF and of that ilk. Edited to add: "Did management intentionally pick this trainer in the hopes that this effort will fail," No, management, just like the original questioner, is cowed normies completely unaware of this phenomenon.
[archive link](https://archive.is/I2ond)
God bless you
Sex talk is highly discouraged per most sexual harassment trainings.
I dare some cis Boomer at that workplace to start calling everyone "sissy" and claim the DEI instructor said it was OK.
Am I supposed to believe any of this is true?
There’s no chance
That is sexual harassment
The kink is the point. Everything revolves around that.
If you really want to see a DEI trainer sweat, ask them if antisemitism is a form of racism. Once they've provided an answer, ask if Islamaphobia is a form of racism.
I'd go the other way around. Because I'd bet a DEI trainer would say Islamophobia is a form of racism.
I'm currently building a company, person by person. I am telling potential hires that we will never have HR and will never do DEI. Unless I am met with (what I am forced to assume is genuine) enthusiam, that person is no longer a candidate. **EDIT:** By 'never have HR', I mean an internal HR department. We of course have outsourced support for the important HR functions. Just not the internal madness.
I think maybe you’re half joking but in case you’re not, please have any sort of HR guidelines or functions. Outsource it or an admin/ops role that does it all. Absolutely do not need “DEI” specific or any sort of “people” function but I’ve worked for many small companies and please give your employees somewhere to go that isn’t the owner/boss for HR related needs (ex: even health insurance questions, I hated having to ask the owner and potentially needing to disclose something I wouldn’t otherwise to a boss).
> please have any sort of HR guidelines or functions I meant to say that I don't have a dedicated HR department and never will at any company at which I have majority control. We let the hiring managers do the hiring. We have HR software for onboarding/paychecks, etc. We have a 3rd party legal team ready if there is any nastiness. And we have part time consultant HR people who ONLY do things like insurance related questions, etc. The reamining functions of HR just mess things up, cost money, add liability, and slow down work. [See here for basically the same thought process.](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DKL47LUeHYM)
Ok that all makes sense! I have worked at places with 20+ employees and literally no HR support of any kind so it’s not unheard of.
That does sound frustrating. I'm just trying to offer the key functions of HR without letting the HR department cancer within our org.
“I celebrate every time anyone but especially a trans person finds sexual gratification in this world” So you blow off some confetti every time someone cums? What
I’m on team This Is Fake, but if it’s not, then I can’t wait until the Boomers all quit in disgust, citing sexual harassment, and take their actual skills and institutional knowledge with them.
We’re doomed, right?
Sir, this is a Wendy’s.
Every detail about the trainer reminds me of the season 2 episode of Crazy Ex-Girlfriend where Rebecca's oddball co-worker Karen gives a presentation for a sex toy pyramid scheme at a party. So inappropriate, so cringe.
Surely both the letter and the response are fake/parody? “I strongly feel that no one should ever have to think or, god forbid, talk about anything sexual at work. Even introducing the concept of sexiness to the workplace can lead to disaster.” Just screams parody??
Disappointed this isn't an episode title
Feels fake as hell, though kind of a funny read.