Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67

Thread: Required to attend LGBT training at colleges.. right or wrong?

  1. #11
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Here's an idea: the school no longer mandates LGBT tolerance courses. This, of course, leaves the school more vulnerable to litigation. So if an incident occurs on campus, whatever it costs the school gets equally divided among the students who did not attend the course and it gets added to their tuition. So now we've got freedom of choice!
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dayon, Ohio
    Posts
    1,244
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Here's an idea: the school no longer mandates LGBT tolerance courses. This, of course, leaves the school more vulnerable to litigation. So if an incident occurs on campus, whatever it costs the school gets equally divided among the students who did not attend the course and it gets added to their tuition. So now we've got freedom of choice!
    Here's the thing. I understand the classes are a CYA thing but even that is a symptom of the problem. You are in HR so you can appreciate this story. My dad was in HR for a company that made fiberglass sleepers for tractor-trailers. They hired lots of temp employees because no one really enjoys working in a fiberglass plant. Anyways, when the employees were spraying fiberglass they would wear full body zip up suits sorta like AF flight suits. The suits were kind of a pain to get off because particles of fiber glass would get caught in there and what not. Anyways, they hire a female temp employee. She's finishing up her shift and about to take her suit off. The zipper is jammed. She turns to a supervisor who is walking by carrying some supplies. She says, "Hey, can you unzip me?" He looks down (hands full) looks at her and says, "With what, my teeth?"

    She sues the company for sexual harrassment. She somehow fucking wins in court because the company couldn't prove it trained employees about sexual harrassment.

    Maybe this also proves what you are saying Rusty, but it also brings up a larger issue. First off, the remark was in jest and clearly not meant in a sexual way. The woman who sued was jobless and looking for money. Third, even if the supervisor meant it in a sexual way, he would have known it was wrong and no amount of training would change that.

    So I guess the point Sandsjames is making is that you shoudln't need classes to teach people right and wrong. All of the sensitivty training is strictly a CYA thing based on frivelous lawsuits.

  3. #13
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    So, if a college has a problem with sexual assault, you don't think they should be able to make education as part of their solution?

    Crazy.
    They should absolutely be able to make it part of the solution, as long as they make it a prerequisite/orientation type thing. And, as has been mentioned before, don't fool yourself into thinking it's about education. It's all about CYA.

  4. #14
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Here's an idea: the school no longer mandates LGBT tolerance courses. This, of course, leaves the school more vulnerable to litigation. So if an incident occurs on campus, whatever it costs the school gets equally divided among the students who did not attend the course and it gets added to their tuition. So now we've got freedom of choice!
    How about this. How about organizations quit getting held responsible for the stupidity of it's people. How 'bout the lawsuits take place against the individual. Of course, that would mean that all these companies/colleges/hospitals would be able to drop their prices and we'd be able to afford them, so we can't have that.

    Punish the people involved. Don't fuck everyone else for the stupidity of some. I know that's hard to imagine after being in the military, but it is a viable option.

    edit: Just noticed that the same point was made above...

  5. #15
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,554
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    They should absolutely be able to make it part of the solution, as long as they make it a prerequisite/orientation type thing.
    How is that directly related to a degree? I'm not sure what you mean by "as long as it is a prerequisite/orientation type of thing"...how else would it be delivered that you would think is "wrong?" What if the problem came up in 2104, and they gave it to all students and faculty at that time?

    Is it "wrong" in this case to require the leaders of student organizations to attend some leadership training? Why can't that leadership training include the proper ways to address and deal with GLBT people?

    And, as has been mentioned before, don't fool yourself into thinking it's about education. It's all about CYA.
    Still not seeing the downside.

    By CYA...you mean being able to demonstrate to a court/jury/arbitrator that the company/school/supervisor, etc. made a clear stance opposing mistreatment/harassment/discrimination, etc. against a potentially injured person.

    Why would you want to prohibit that, again?

    Kind of like the old Commander's Safety Policy letters...I've yet to see one that says, "as commander, safety isn't really that important to me"...yes, those letters are to document that the commander told you he values safety, the documentation is solely for CYA, I'm sure.
    The Voice of Reason

  6. #16
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Why can't that leadership training include the proper ways to address and deal with GLBT people?
    Why can't it be used to address the proper ways to deal with ALL people? Quit turning specific groups into victims.

    Still not seeing the downside.

    By CYA...you mean being able to demonstrate to a court/jury/arbitrator that the company/school/supervisor, etc. made a clear stance opposing mistreatment/harassment/discrimination, etc. against a potentially injured person.[

    Why would you want to prohibit that, again?

    Kind of like the old Commander's Safety Policy letters...I've yet to see one that says, "as commander, safety isn't really that important to me"...yes, those letters are to document that the commander told you he values safety, the documentation is solely for CYA, I'm sure.
    Yes, that's exactly what I mean. It's all the bullshit that they feed you making it sound like they actually give a damn, whether Commanders or colleges. It's so false that everyone sees through it and it makes it meaningless, in addition to making it not get taken seriously.

    Cut out the lawsuits. Make individuals responsible for their actions. Quit making everyone into a victim. Everything else will take care of itself.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,554
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Why can't it be used to address the proper ways to deal with ALL people? Quit turning specific groups into victims.
    Maybe their aren't as many issues with the treatment of ALL people.

    Yes, that's exactly what I mean. It's all the bullshit that they feed you making it sound like they actually give a damn, whether Commanders or colleges.
    Some people actually do give a damn. There is also the possibility that the leadership of GWU genuinely and sincerely wants to make GLBT students feel welcome and respected in student organizations...I mean, they are liberals afterall.

    It's so false that everyone sees through it and it makes it meaningless, in addition to making it not get taken seriously.
    Maybe, maybe not. I think I genuinely care about the people I work with, while at the same time protecting myself and my company. It's true that some of my actions serve the second purpose moreso than the first.

    Cut out the lawsuits. Make individuals responsible for their actions. Quit making everyone into a victim. Everything else will take care of itself.
    While tort reform is a lofty goal, it is hardly within the span of control of GWU. Individuals responsible for the actions, sure...but, do you think organizations are never culpable? Certainly, we can all post numerous court decisions that seem to go against common sense, yada yada yada...and I have some of my own personal horror stories with the civil litigation process...and the end of the day though, most of those decisions are made by a jury of ordinary people. Either way, a single organization has very little control over that, but must rather operate within the system.
    The Voice of Reason

  8. #18
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,554
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    How about this. How about organizations quit getting held responsible for the stupidity of it's people. How 'bout the lawsuits take place against the individual. Of course, that would mean that all these companies/colleges/hospitals would be able to drop their prices and we'd be able to afford them, so we can't have that.

    Punish the people involved. Don't fuck everyone else for the stupidity of some. I know that's hard to imagine after being in the military, but it is a viable option.

    edit: Just noticed that the same point was made above...
    Yes, tort reform is an interesting and totally separate subject, certainly outside the immediate control of GWU or any of us here. I do think there are times when organizations are culpable and should be suject to litigation.
    The Voice of Reason

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,326
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    On the flip side...why not?

    Why shouldn't a private college be able to teach the things they find valuable? Whether it is a Catholic University teaching the 10 commandments, or a secular University, let's say, teaching against them?
    If they are receiving public/govt funds though how can they claim to be private though?

    Quote Originally Posted by SomeRandomGuy View Post
    Here's the thing. I understand the classes are a CYA thing but even that is a symptom of the problem. You are in HR so you can appreciate this story. My dad was in HR for a company that made fiberglass sleepers for tractor-trailers. They hired lots of temp employees because no one really enjoys working in a fiberglass plant. Anyways, when the employees were spraying fiberglass they would wear full body zip up suits sorta like AF flight suits. The suits were kind of a pain to get off because particles of fiber glass would get caught in there and what not. Anyways, they hire a female temp employee. She's finishing up her shift and about to take her suit off. The zipper is jammed. She turns to a supervisor who is walking by carrying some supplies. She says, "Hey, can you unzip me?" He looks down (hands full) looks at her and says, "With what, my teeth?"

    She sues the company for sexual harrassment. She somehow fucking wins in court because the company couldn't prove it trained employees about sexual harrassment.

    Maybe this also proves what you are saying Rusty, but it also brings up a larger issue. First off, the remark was in jest and clearly not meant in a sexual way. The woman who sued was jobless and looking for money. Third, even if the supervisor meant it in a sexual way, he would have known it was wrong and no amount of training would change that.

    So I guess the point Sandsjames is making is that you shoudln't need classes to teach people right and wrong. All of the sensitivty training is strictly a CYA thing based on frivelous lawsuits.
    First off i loved that story. And secondly, i agree, all these courses etc wouldn't be needed if Frivelous lawsuits were nipped in the butt.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,554
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    If they are receiving public/govt funds though how can they claim to be private though?
    They are private. They can also accept public money...there's nothing wrong with that. Just because someone/something accepts assistance from the govt. does not mean they give up their liberty.

    Do you still claim to be a private citizen if you driven on public roads? Took advantage of a govt. tax credit? etc.

    Or do you really want to live in a country where the govt. has the right to control everything and everyone it has given money to?

    First off i loved that story. And secondly, i agree, all these courses etc wouldn't be needed if Frivelous lawsuits were nipped in the butt.
    There are already laws/penalties for frivilous litigation.
    The Voice of Reason

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •