There are a lot of real sexual harassment cases. This is just another example of how some people can twist around any situation to become the victim for the sake of attention.
If some one is stupid enough to think sexual harassment is a good idea, I don't think leaving blatant evidence is that far behind. I understand it's mostly a moral issue. However, there are much more effective ways of getting laid, and they don't jeopardize your job.
at first i thought cenk was sending sexually harrasing texts to that chick but then i remembered hes a liberal and therefore a faggot so i bet theres some queer there getting texts like "cenk wants sum man juice in butt"
Technically a liberal some one who believes things should be changed, and often to be more suitable for the times. However, this does sometimes get confused if Democrats want something to stay the same.
Yeah I know some underage people that take nude pictures and send them all over and sometimes the other person doesn't ask for them and they might be overage and you can go to jail for that!
I thinl laws like that like absurd. You can basically sue somebody for sending you an email you dont like. What about this thing called the freedom of speech?
I think the sexual harassment laws are stupid. You make someone pay you through the noise because they offended you. Total bullshit. What ever happened to beating the shit out of someone? I think laws like that contribute to the nerfing of society.
Easy for you to say. I had a co-worker text stalking me. He sent anonymous text messages including phrases like "peeking through your window and saw you naked," "bitch I'll kill you," "wetback whore leave town," etc. I know who it is because he's said similar things to other co-workers. But I'm glad I have some legal recourse against him.
I don't consider that sexual harassment, I consider that stalking and threatening you. That's completely different. When I'm talking about sexual harassment I'm talking about suing someone for like a $100,000 because they played grab ass or called you a cunt or bitch or something you know? I think its wrong that someone should have to pay tons of money just because they offended someone.
I'm a guy, the person who harassed and is harassing me is a guy. If he has problems with his sexuality that's too bad, but I'm not going to beat his ass for it. The guy gives me the creeps. I will file a complaint with the sheriff and take the bastard to Court
Your going to take him to take him to court and use the law to force him at the point of a gun to give you money because he gives you the creeps? you don't see what wrong with that?
it's not about being given the creeps. it's about extending some humane respect to the other people who are trying to make an honest living just like you. no man or woman should put up with that shit. no workplace should allow it. if a guy wants some pussy, he needs to find it someplace other than work. if a woman wants a boytoy, she needs to call deuce bigelow. if a gay person wants a partner, they can go to a melissa etheridge or patti labelle concert. but don't sexual harass.
If a coworker is being a disgusting asshole making you feel uncomfortable then they should be fired, if its your bose then find another job. I just think that being offended is hardly justification for legal extortion.
i agree. someone should find another job. however, if it's sexual harassment, you're asking for it. you're asking to willingly overpay severance, unemployment insurance & damages. again, it's 1 thing to offend someone's person. it's another thing if the nature of that offense is sexual. but again, the easiest way to avoid it is to not do it
"Nerfing of society"? What you mean CIVILIZATION? What would you prefer, we all settle out grievences by clubbing each other over the heads with dead branches like fucking neanderthals?
Yes and using the government to force you at the point of a gun to give someone money because you offended them is so much more civil right? Stupid fucking twat.
Enforcing laws to defend the weak from abuse by the strong is the definition of civilization, so YES it goddamned is civil.
Sorry we can't all live in your psycho's paradise where cruel men get to abuse helpless women all day long with no recourse except to beat the crap out of them/murder them but hey, them's the breaks.
What kind of asshole goes this far out of his way to defend other assholes for being ASSHOLES?
What exactly are they SUPPOSED to do? Smile and take it? Oh wait that's right, I forgot your brilliant "beat the shit out of them" solution. Stop one kind of assault with another kind, that's GENIUS.
Consider this smart guy; if they're sending them text messages and it's over a phone, then odds are they're getting BILLED for recieving the harrassment, so suing is restitution, not "extortion".
i'm a pretty smart guy but i'm not above beating the shit out of someone. check our thread. i think his issue is with the "minor" cases that get huge settlements. don't unload the whole magazine on him. try to hear him out 1st. i have a good feeling about this one. trust me capn.
Sorry bro, but I'm an Anarchist, I'll never agree that suing over offensive comments is justifiable it goes against everything I am. Words are words, actions are a different story on the other hand.
I dunno man, encouraging the correction of shitty behaviour with yet more shitty behaviour is not a ring I can easily throw my hat in.
Not that I'm in favour of mindless litigation over ANYTHING of course but those laws exist for a reason. And before you respond, imagine if the victim were your gf/wife, sister or even mother.
Ultimately it's not up to us to decide what is and isn't a "minor" offence, it's down to the rules of the workplace and the letter of the law.
oh no, a beatdown is a last resort. it's never physical unless it's the last resort of self defense. i'm speaking metaphorically. i put quotes on "minor" because there are qualitative differences & more importantly, people file frivilous lawsuits. believe me, i used the "what if i did that to your wife" hypothetical with machinelegion. we're gonna reach common ground. trust me.
trust in people's inherent goodness & intelligence. in a way, he's right. america is pussified now. part of it is because of bs lawsuits. heaven's knows how much time has been wasted in sensitivity training workshops. BUT he's not seeing the progression from a stare to a remark to demanding sex. i'll get him there. trust me. but in the interim, we don't have to bushwhack the cat. remember, we're the good guys.
horse shit. you don't want to get sued, don't harass anyone. those laws protect women from the kinds of coercive rapes that happened to ona in "the jungle". it also prevents bullying in the workplace.
You don't want to get sued, don't harass anyone? That would be like Lenin saying you don't want to be shot agree with me. Using the strong arm of the law to extort money from another person as a way to get revenge because they offended you is fucking terrible. "it also prevents bullying in the workplace" If that were true people wouldn't be getting sued left and right. The law is not a deterrent.
lenin? that's a lousy analogy. i'm talking about actively harassing someone & the punitive effects of that action versus passively leaving people alone. if you don't want to be sued, leave people alone. it's not about a simple, personal offense. this is an issue of unwanted advances & or remarks about someone's gender or sexuality. but there's a common denominator: don't start none; won't be none.
If a coworker is making unwanted sexual advances toward you or anyone else then they should be fired. And yes, it is an issue over personal offense. I think suing someone is justifiable is they say run you over and you need to pay medical bills, but to extort money from them because they disgust you or make you feel uncomfortable, I just think that's wrong.
i think (i don't know) that the judgments are designed as deterrent. the thinking (again, this is my personal belief) is that it will deter people. but most of all, it prevents coercive rapes. and yes, they happen. but like i said, leave people alone altogether & you don't have to worry about it. right?
I think someone coercing you into having sex is terrible, but I don't consider that sexual harassment, I think that falls more into the category of idk, exploitation. When I think sexual harassment, I think of some asshole saying "hey Betty, nice tits." I don't think someone should be sued for thousands and thousands of dollars because they make some disgusting comments to a woman or man in the office.
so coercion or intimidation of sexual nature isn't sexual harassment? if i walked up to your wife, grabbed her crotch & breast then tried to kiss her using brute force, would that be considered sexual assault in your estimation?
yes. betty's tits aren't worth $10K; that's excessive. BUT if you leave betty alone unless it's about material work, betty & her tits are hunky-dory. but saying "betty show me your tits or you're fired", that's sexual harassment.
"if i walked up to your wife, grabbed her crotch & breast then tried to kiss her using brute force, would that be considered sexual assault in your estimation?" Key word, ASSAULT.
Also if the boss were to fire Betty because she didn't show her tits I think she has every right to sue, she got fired because she refused to degrade her self. But to get sued because he said "Nice tits Betty" is bullshit. And thats what sexual harassment, is harassment, disgusting fucking comments.
well if you agree with the parameters of assault, you can draw some parallels in the behaviors that are implicit harassment.
either way, betty's tits need to be left out of conversation. c'mon man, you know how it is. women need to be protected. that's why we have laws. that's why we have precedents.
The reason such a law is in place is because bosses will take advantage of their position by using sex as a way for their employees to get higher in the business. And if those employees refuse the bosses advances then that boss can just go off and fire them. Considering how hard it is to find a job (especially now), it's not so easy as "Leave if you don't like it". Most bosses won't do shit like that, but for those that do they deserve to get their asses sued.
If a boss lowers pay or fires you then that's a completely different thing, sue away if that happens, but to sue someone over WORDS I find to be horrible and unjustifiable.
The thing is that sexual harassment cases more times than not involve someone trying to use their position as a way to get sex from someone. It's usually not as simple as making lewd comments. This is because it's much more difficult to have a case go to court if it's just some random person doing it (of course those can happen, especially with solid proof). But most of the time it's involving someone in a position of power using that to leverage their sexual advances.
I guess we're just arguing over definition then. I consider sexual harassment to be things like lewd comments. I think a boss trying to use his position to take advantage of you is a perfectly justifiable reason to sue him, he's putting your livelihood in danger.
it usually starts with a suggestive comment then a lewd 1 then comments become part of the culture then betty's labeled a tease then the boss is asking for sex then he's demanding it.
My Mom had to go threw a shit load of sexual harassment when she worked at a roofing company once. Her boss and the manager would tell her about their thoughts of fucking her and all kinds of disgusting shit. but what it was, was just lewd comments, he never demanded anything. I don't think he should be robbed by the state just for some sort of revenge.
your ma should have sued the hell out of that guy. robbed for every dollar? no way. but enough award to let him know not to do it again. enough that his customers know who they're retaining. no one has to deal with that shit. i made the mistake of fucking my boss then breaking it off. you can only imagine the siege after that decision.
no the gov't shouldn't take all his dough. that's true. BUT, they should take enough to know what he's doing wrong. this is america, you fuck with people the wrong way & you get sued. i don't exactly like that but otherwise, offensive pricks would run roughshod over people whom they think are inferior. i hope your ma got every dime.
that sounds like a lawyer. in truth, the lawyers are to blame for the excessive judgments. but my saying that doesn't mean that the offensive pricks don't need to pay for their trespasses.
if that was my mother putting up with that kind of bullshit, i would have been down there within the hour to rip that fuckers head off and shove it up his ass. after i was finished with him he would wish that his his only punishment was to be "robbed by the state"
if you were in the 3rd grade i'll let you off the hook in the balls department. my objection to your post was that you're willing to let an ass who sexually harrassed your own mother off the hook because you dont think people should be punished for being obnoxious. lets see what you think about this, most people arrested for drunk driving haven't caused an accident or killed someone, there just behaving obnoxiously, do you advocate not punishing drunk drivers, they too are "robbed by the state"
I don't think he should be let off the hook, I just think he should be forced at the point of a gun to give my mom money over disgusting comments. Also, a drunk driver is not robbed the state, they're punished by government (dunno why I said state last time, I mean government). I am for that. The point to punishing someone for drunk driving is so they learn not to drive while they're drunk because they're a danger when they do so.
exactly my point, you punish the dumbass for sexually harrassing your mother so that he learns not to do that any more, because unrestrained there is a danger that this jackass will soon be telling your mother that she has to fuck him in exchange for keeping her crappy job
If he told her she had to fuck him to keep her job then I think she should by all means sue his ass, but I just think suing someone over disgusting comments is wrong. When you sue someone because they say something that pisses you off or makes you feel uncomfortable you are using the government to rob them for some little slice of revenge.
now if she was to sue him because the boss treated to fire her if she didn't fuck him I think that is a justifiable reason to sue because hes putting her livelihood at stake in order to exploit her.
if it's a black person, is it textual chocolate? if it's a mexican is it text-mext? do wnba players say "we got text!"? if you're trying to find a position line, do you use a textant? my favorite rap group was text-n-effects.
These laws are a slap in the face of freedom of speech. At the core, the government is telling people what you can and can't say, but somehow that's OK because it happens in "the workplace"?
these lawyers are the biggest scumbags. advising clients against making harassing statements through texts, rather they should make them verbally in person. lmao jesus
This has been flagged as spam show
Getting thru a work day should not be a sex tactical war zone.
WorkLikeAProstitute 2 months ago
I could go for some textual healing....
Bladewing10 2 years ago
Lets see the anchorwoman in undies
poppad23 2 years ago
There are a lot of real sexual harassment cases. This is just another example of how some people can twist around any situation to become the victim for the sake of attention.
NobodyBelievesYou 2 years ago
it is possible to send a text message to ppl from a different phone number than you'r own so this is just stupid -.-
funnycatsvid 2 years ago
So now there is textual harassment? Something else for women to complain about.
jxsilicon9 2 years ago
When are people going to learn to stop sexually abusing those poor letters of the alphabet? XD
bobdrantz 2 years ago 3
iddd fuck thee shit ottaa that girll
JJsoFRESH 2 years ago
If some one is stupid enough to think sexual harassment is a good idea, I don't think leaving blatant evidence is that far behind. I understand it's mostly a moral issue. However, there are much more effective ways of getting laid, and they don't jeopardize your job.
tvontheradiohead 2 years ago 2
Textual harrassment?
What an amazing phrase.
ColombianGamecube 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
at first i thought cenk was sending sexually harrasing texts to that chick but then i remembered hes a liberal and therefore a faggot so i bet theres some queer there getting texts like "cenk wants sum man juice in butt"
jogeryjogo 2 years ago
wtf?
hakar 2 years ago
what's a liberal?
IrishGodThe4th 2 years ago
Technically a liberal some one who believes things should be changed, and often to be more suitable for the times. However, this does sometimes get confused if Democrats want something to stay the same.
tvontheradiohead 2 years ago 2
Middle schoolers repeating their abusive father's "opinions" FTW.
Coolness127 2 years ago
Ana is so hot. Someone give her a raise!
MyRightHandSaysHi 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Do you think that perhaps speech therapy would help you stop speaking through your nose Ana?
maybe that or give your snoze a good clean out before you start spouting off!
percy357 2 years ago
I can never find where 2 watch da live show or clips on their website. Does anybody know how??
nobodycares456 2 years ago
ANA you can text me some dirty stuff any time..
LoBoExtreme 2 years ago 2
You could make a lot of peoples lives a living hell with a few key placed text messages... My mind races with thoughts
of future crimes connected to technology.
Imagine conviction based on a prank gone wrong...
atrocityexhibition12 2 years ago 3
just say someone else was using ur phone....
econchick 2 years ago 2
and that's textual harrassment,
and it makes me a sa-a-a-a-d panda
sheeeesh1 2 years ago
tex-tual harr-ass-ment...PANDA
seestickglue232 2 years ago 12
Oh great, now that tune will be stuck in my head all day!
Boxurian 2 years ago
haha. i was thinking the same!
SawViking 2 years ago
That's an insane amount of money for harassment
StewieSwan 2 years ago
Comment removed
frankgrimes17 2 years ago
That's why you use code words in texting! Lol.
IndependentEsse 2 years ago
Yeah I know some underage people that take nude pictures and send them all over and sometimes the other person doesn't ask for them and they might be overage and you can go to jail for that!
IndependentEsse 2 years ago
I'll never have that problem because my phone is 7 years old and it does not send or receive text messages.
nico3641 2 years ago
I thinl laws like that like absurd. You can basically sue somebody for sending you an email you dont like. What about this thing called the freedom of speech?
Nestedspit 2 years ago 4
This is what I've been arguing about for the past 3 hours lol.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
Textual harassment? Or half a hook up?
dukenthaylor 2 years ago
Clearly this calls for one thing and one thing only: Textual Harrassment Panda!
Capng123 2 years ago 2
lmao!!!! XD
Alansr10 2 years ago
Ana's so cute. ^_^
GamertownUSA 2 years ago
what the fuck suck my motherfucking cox you fucking cunt
darkalchemistninja 2 years ago
You commie pinko fuck! You're worse than Rick Sanchez.
NoCussingClub 2 years ago
I think the sexual harassment laws are stupid. You make someone pay you through the noise because they offended you. Total bullshit. What ever happened to beating the shit out of someone? I think laws like that contribute to the nerfing of society.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
Easy for you to say. I had a co-worker text stalking me. He sent anonymous text messages including phrases like "peeking through your window and saw you naked," "bitch I'll kill you," "wetback whore leave town," etc. I know who it is because he's said similar things to other co-workers. But I'm glad I have some legal recourse against him.
Tanfeliz 2 years ago 2
I don't consider that sexual harassment, I consider that stalking and threatening you. That's completely different. When I'm talking about sexual harassment I'm talking about suing someone for like a $100,000 because they played grab ass or called you a cunt or bitch or something you know? I think its wrong that someone should have to pay tons of money just because they offended someone.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
I'm a guy, the person who harassed and is harassing me is a guy. If he has problems with his sexuality that's too bad, but I'm not going to beat his ass for it. The guy gives me the creeps. I will file a complaint with the sheriff and take the bastard to Court
menthol5 2 years ago
Your going to take him to take him to court and use the law to force him at the point of a gun to give you money because he gives you the creeps? you don't see what wrong with that?
MachineLegion 2 years ago
it's not about being given the creeps. it's about extending some humane respect to the other people who are trying to make an honest living just like you. no man or woman should put up with that shit. no workplace should allow it. if a guy wants some pussy, he needs to find it someplace other than work. if a woman wants a boytoy, she needs to call deuce bigelow. if a gay person wants a partner, they can go to a melissa etheridge or patti labelle concert. but don't sexual harass.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
If a coworker is being a disgusting asshole making you feel uncomfortable then they should be fired, if its your bose then find another job. I just think that being offended is hardly justification for legal extortion.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
i agree. someone should find another job. however, if it's sexual harassment, you're asking for it. you're asking to willingly overpay severance, unemployment insurance & damages. again, it's 1 thing to offend someone's person. it's another thing if the nature of that offense is sexual. but again, the easiest way to avoid it is to not do it
upabittoolate 2 years ago
Yes, words don't do anything, now if the prick boss actually fires the lady, or cuts pay, than yes sue to the pants.
stratelite 2 years ago
"Nerfing of society"? What you mean CIVILIZATION? What would you prefer, we all settle out grievences by clubbing each other over the heads with dead branches like fucking neanderthals?
Grow the fuck up.
Capng123 2 years ago
Yes and using the government to force you at the point of a gun to give someone money because you offended them is so much more civil right? Stupid fucking twat.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
Enforcing laws to defend the weak from abuse by the strong is the definition of civilization, so YES it goddamned is civil.
Sorry we can't all live in your psycho's paradise where cruel men get to abuse helpless women all day long with no recourse except to beat the crap out of them/murder them but hey, them's the breaks.
Capng123 2 years ago
Holy fuck you're completely straw manning me. Someone OFFENDING you does not justify extorting money from them with help from the government.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
What kind of asshole goes this far out of his way to defend other assholes for being ASSHOLES?
What exactly are they SUPPOSED to do? Smile and take it? Oh wait that's right, I forgot your brilliant "beat the shit out of them" solution. Stop one kind of assault with another kind, that's GENIUS.
Consider this smart guy; if they're sending them text messages and it's over a phone, then odds are they're getting BILLED for recieving the harrassment, so suing is restitution, not "extortion".
Capng123 2 years ago
i'm a pretty smart guy but i'm not above beating the shit out of someone. check our thread. i think his issue is with the "minor" cases that get huge settlements. don't unload the whole magazine on him. try to hear him out 1st. i have a good feeling about this one. trust me capn.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
Sorry bro, but I'm an Anarchist, I'll never agree that suing over offensive comments is justifiable it goes against everything I am. Words are words, actions are a different story on the other hand.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
I dunno man, encouraging the correction of shitty behaviour with yet more shitty behaviour is not a ring I can easily throw my hat in.
Not that I'm in favour of mindless litigation over ANYTHING of course but those laws exist for a reason. And before you respond, imagine if the victim were your gf/wife, sister or even mother.
Ultimately it's not up to us to decide what is and isn't a "minor" offence, it's down to the rules of the workplace and the letter of the law.
Capng123 2 years ago
oh no, a beatdown is a last resort. it's never physical unless it's the last resort of self defense. i'm speaking metaphorically. i put quotes on "minor" because there are qualitative differences & more importantly, people file frivilous lawsuits. believe me, i used the "what if i did that to your wife" hypothetical with machinelegion. we're gonna reach common ground. trust me.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
You keep going if you like... I wouldn't hold my breath though.
Capng123 2 years ago
trust in people's inherent goodness & intelligence. in a way, he's right. america is pussified now. part of it is because of bs lawsuits. heaven's knows how much time has been wasted in sensitivity training workshops. BUT he's not seeing the progression from a stare to a remark to demanding sex. i'll get him there. trust me. but in the interim, we don't have to bushwhack the cat. remember, we're the good guys.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
horse shit. you don't want to get sued, don't harass anyone. those laws protect women from the kinds of coercive rapes that happened to ona in "the jungle". it also prevents bullying in the workplace.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
You don't want to get sued, don't harass anyone? That would be like Lenin saying you don't want to be shot agree with me. Using the strong arm of the law to extort money from another person as a way to get revenge because they offended you is fucking terrible. "it also prevents bullying in the workplace" If that were true people wouldn't be getting sued left and right. The law is not a deterrent.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
lenin? that's a lousy analogy. i'm talking about actively harassing someone & the punitive effects of that action versus passively leaving people alone. if you don't want to be sued, leave people alone. it's not about a simple, personal offense. this is an issue of unwanted advances & or remarks about someone's gender or sexuality. but there's a common denominator: don't start none; won't be none.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
If a coworker is making unwanted sexual advances toward you or anyone else then they should be fired. And yes, it is an issue over personal offense. I think suing someone is justifiable is they say run you over and you need to pay medical bills, but to extort money from them because they disgust you or make you feel uncomfortable, I just think that's wrong.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
i think (i don't know) that the judgments are designed as deterrent. the thinking (again, this is my personal belief) is that it will deter people. but most of all, it prevents coercive rapes. and yes, they happen. but like i said, leave people alone altogether & you don't have to worry about it. right?
upabittoolate 2 years ago
I think someone coercing you into having sex is terrible, but I don't consider that sexual harassment, I think that falls more into the category of idk, exploitation. When I think sexual harassment, I think of some asshole saying "hey Betty, nice tits." I don't think someone should be sued for thousands and thousands of dollars because they make some disgusting comments to a woman or man in the office.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
so coercion or intimidation of sexual nature isn't sexual harassment? if i walked up to your wife, grabbed her crotch & breast then tried to kiss her using brute force, would that be considered sexual assault in your estimation?
yes. betty's tits aren't worth $10K; that's excessive. BUT if you leave betty alone unless it's about material work, betty & her tits are hunky-dory. but saying "betty show me your tits or you're fired", that's sexual harassment.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
"if i walked up to your wife, grabbed her crotch & breast then tried to kiss her using brute force, would that be considered sexual assault in your estimation?" Key word, ASSAULT.
Also if the boss were to fire Betty because she didn't show her tits I think she has every right to sue, she got fired because she refused to degrade her self. But to get sued because he said "Nice tits Betty" is bullshit. And thats what sexual harassment, is harassment, disgusting fucking comments.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
well if you agree with the parameters of assault, you can draw some parallels in the behaviors that are implicit harassment.
either way, betty's tits need to be left out of conversation. c'mon man, you know how it is. women need to be protected. that's why we have laws. that's why we have precedents.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
The reason such a law is in place is because bosses will take advantage of their position by using sex as a way for their employees to get higher in the business. And if those employees refuse the bosses advances then that boss can just go off and fire them. Considering how hard it is to find a job (especially now), it's not so easy as "Leave if you don't like it". Most bosses won't do shit like that, but for those that do they deserve to get their asses sued.
TokyoNiGHTS1 2 years ago
If a boss lowers pay or fires you then that's a completely different thing, sue away if that happens, but to sue someone over WORDS I find to be horrible and unjustifiable.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
The thing is that sexual harassment cases more times than not involve someone trying to use their position as a way to get sex from someone. It's usually not as simple as making lewd comments. This is because it's much more difficult to have a case go to court if it's just some random person doing it (of course those can happen, especially with solid proof). But most of the time it's involving someone in a position of power using that to leverage their sexual advances.
TokyoNiGHTS1 2 years ago
I guess we're just arguing over definition then. I consider sexual harassment to be things like lewd comments. I think a boss trying to use his position to take advantage of you is a perfectly justifiable reason to sue him, he's putting your livelihood in danger.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
it usually starts with a suggestive comment then a lewd 1 then comments become part of the culture then betty's labeled a tease then the boss is asking for sex then he's demanding it.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
My Mom had to go threw a shit load of sexual harassment when she worked at a roofing company once. Her boss and the manager would tell her about their thoughts of fucking her and all kinds of disgusting shit. but what it was, was just lewd comments, he never demanded anything. I don't think he should be robbed by the state just for some sort of revenge.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
your ma should have sued the hell out of that guy. robbed for every dollar? no way. but enough award to let him know not to do it again. enough that his customers know who they're retaining. no one has to deal with that shit. i made the mistake of fucking my boss then breaking it off. you can only imagine the siege after that decision.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
She eventually sued him, but for a different reason. I don't think he should be robbed by the government because he's an offensive prick.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
no the gov't shouldn't take all his dough. that's true. BUT, they should take enough to know what he's doing wrong. this is america, you fuck with people the wrong way & you get sued. i don't exactly like that but otherwise, offensive pricks would run roughshod over people whom they think are inferior. i hope your ma got every dime.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
Lawyers tried fucking her out of a lot of money but she got most of it.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
that sounds like a lawyer. in truth, the lawyers are to blame for the excessive judgments. but my saying that doesn't mean that the offensive pricks don't need to pay for their trespasses.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
what a wimp you are "machinelegion"
if that was my mother putting up with that kind of bullshit, i would have been down there within the hour to rip that fuckers head off and shove it up his ass. after i was finished with him he would wish that his his only punishment was to be "robbed by the state"
grow a set of balls for god sake
drdonn1 2 years ago
I was in the third grade dip shit.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
if you were in the 3rd grade i'll let you off the hook in the balls department. my objection to your post was that you're willing to let an ass who sexually harrassed your own mother off the hook because you dont think people should be punished for being obnoxious. lets see what you think about this, most people arrested for drunk driving haven't caused an accident or killed someone, there just behaving obnoxiously, do you advocate not punishing drunk drivers, they too are "robbed by the state"
drdonn1 2 years ago
I don't think he should be let off the hook, I just think he should be forced at the point of a gun to give my mom money over disgusting comments. Also, a drunk driver is not robbed the state, they're punished by government (dunno why I said state last time, I mean government). I am for that. The point to punishing someone for drunk driving is so they learn not to drive while they're drunk because they're a danger when they do so.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
Shouldn't*
MachineLegion 2 years ago
exactly my point, you punish the dumbass for sexually harrassing your mother so that he learns not to do that any more, because unrestrained there is a danger that this jackass will soon be telling your mother that she has to fuck him in exchange for keeping her crappy job
drdonn1 2 years ago
If he told her she had to fuck him to keep her job then I think she should by all means sue his ass, but I just think suing someone over disgusting comments is wrong. When you sue someone because they say something that pisses you off or makes you feel uncomfortable you are using the government to rob them for some little slice of revenge.
MachineLegion 2 years ago 5
now if she was to sue him because the boss treated to fire her if she didn't fuck him I think that is a justifiable reason to sue because hes putting her livelihood at stake in order to exploit her.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
your mom musta been smoking HOTTT !!!
NeoQuello 2 years ago
if it's a black person, is it textual chocolate? if it's a mexican is it text-mext? do wnba players say "we got text!"? if you're trying to find a position line, do you use a textant? my favorite rap group was text-n-effects.
i got nothing else.
upabittoolate 2 years ago
Freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of abuse.
Freedom of speech means no one is putting a muzzle on you. You still are responsible for what comes out of our mouth and what you type.
Just as freedom of movement doesn't mean you are allowed to run over little old ladies.
Frets200 2 years ago
By that logic there's no such thing as totalitarianism. If someone tells you what you can and can't say then there is no freedom of speech.
MachineLegion 2 years ago
Machine, that's your logic, not his. You are the one saying if you don't have 100% you have 0%.
TheGiantRobot 2 years ago
Where was your backround profile image taken at
6Nutsack9 2 years ago
Are you textually harassing me?
It's the Ghibli Museum, Tokyo, Japan.
TheGiantRobot 2 years ago
ANA you gorgeous
LoBoExtreme 2 years ago 6
Watch out Textual Harassment...
UndeadLight 2 years ago
this is so seinfeld
eltimmy 2 years ago 3
These laws are a slap in the face of freedom of speech. At the core, the government is telling people what you can and can't say, but somehow that's OK because it happens in "the workplace"?
mazemaster225 2 years ago
thanks @clock for not saying first comment
xsabbathgamer 2 years ago 3
these lawyers are the biggest scumbags. advising clients against making harassing statements through texts, rather they should make them verbally in person. lmao jesus
clockworkorange1986 2 years ago 2