rednekcowboy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I agree we dont have the whole story, but if he went to HR im sure he would have had proof of the emails sent out or HR wouldnt agree to send a memo out about diversity. He is suing them you dont sue someone without proof. Again, you're assuming too much. We don't know that he even went to HR, this could just be a story he concocted because he got laid off. You're always talking about your relatives and how they were made redundant. How do we know this is just simply not the case here and he figured this was a good way to get some needed cash? This could've all started out that way, with him thinking he would get a quick payoff to make him go away and excalated to what it is today. People sue all the time without proof, just simply rely on their claims that they were wronged somehow and about the emails, if they do exist, how do we know that he didn't start by nicknaming himself this, or that he didn't talk about himself that way, therefore making it acceptable to do so. He has no other sources, at least in this article, to back up his claim, other than what he says. We have heard nothing from Lionhead or its employees on this. We have heard nothing to back up his claims either. You would think that a story of this magnitude, another employee would step forward and back him up? I simply don't have enough information either way. If in fact all he says is true, then I hope he gets everything he sues for. His coworkers should be disgusted with themselves. However, as I have said before, certain things don't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ID2 Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 How is that racist . . (?) Relax, I didn't mean you personally, I meant the hypothetical situation, " . . if someone sent memos/emails round ridiculing a black person in the office they would be instantly dismissed . . " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ID2 Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 What does being openly gay and not acting straight in fear of being discriminated against or beat up have to do with this guys case, . .? You're misrepresenting what we said. Just keep your shirt on and chill out. There's nothing wrong with being honest and open about your sexual orientation. What was said was this, "More often than not, harassment starts, right or wrong, when the gay personacts like an annoying fruit and wants to flutter around like some sort of queen, drawing attention to his sexuality by bringing it up at every oppurtunity.>Does that justify the harassment? No>. I'm just being honest here when I say this. I'm not a homophobe, I have gay friends, and I realize not all of them choose to act like this. But the ones that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Theres a difference between misconstruing something and discriminating against someone because he is gay forcing him into a depression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Lyons10 Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 See, this is where I have a problem with people on here. They chose to focus in on one point in a post and disregard the rest of the post. You do have to admit that, at least it seems to me, the world today has become a very PC kind of place? In fact, I believe that we may have gone to far in the other way. REGARDLESS OF RACE OR SEXUAL PREFERENCE, we are all HUMAN and deserve the EXACT same treatment. Regardless of why they started, the reason for them today is simply frivolous. I believe that gays would find a lot less discrimination if they didn't try to force there belief systems on other people. What gives them the right to shut down a city for hours to have a parade when, just because I'm not gay, I don't get one. No one says this, though, because, it wouldn't be politcaly correct to do so! My point is that no one should get preferential treatment, everyone should be treated equally. And we are not... You don't seem to get it. You are upset about a parade, when it's perfectly acceptable to you that gays be discriminated against. This argument is just bizarre. It certainly is not "simply frivolous", as gays are STILL not afforded the same rights and treatment as the heterosexual community just because they are gay. Not that other minorities don't get parades, but that is hardly an issue worth debating. I'm sorry that I can't feel sorry for you that you don't get a parade. This "All about You" argument is getting rather tedious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbba Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Well my take on this is, we don't really know what happened. I mean it's Microsoft's right to employee who they wish, if they don't want to employee gays/lesbians then I respect that. Fortunately the law doesn't... I am against homosexuality, I am tolerant of it, but against it. Being gay/lesbian isn't optional, being "against homosexuality" is like being against people breathing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted March 25, 2009 Veteran Share Posted March 25, 2009 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechn...homophobia.htmlExample of a decent title. FTW :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted March 25, 2009 Author Subscriber² Share Posted March 25, 2009 Title changed, now stop whining :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Lyons10 Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 you know, that just doesn't make sense though.. I mean come on, who would be STUPID enough to send an EMAIL with that kinda subject line or in the body, when you KNOW they can just forward it to a Manager/HR? I mean something just doesn't add up here. I thought the same thing, but you can't really underestimate the stupidity that's out there. People do some very stupid things... Another possibility, and I'm not saying that I think this is the case or not, I certainly hope it is not, is that they were so brazen about it because it is acceptable at Lionhead and they knew nothing would happen... I would certainly hope that in this day and age something like this wouldn't be the case, but I've seen some appalling things at companies that were accepted by management in the past... Fortunately the law doesn't...Being gay/lesbian isn't optional, being "against homosexuality" is like being against people breathing. Good post bobbba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rednekcowboy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 And we are not... You don't seem to get it. You are upset about a parade, when it's perfectly acceptable to you that gays be discriminated against. This argument is just bizarre. It certainly is not "simply frivolous", as gays are STILL not afforded the same rights and treatment as the heterosexual community just because they are gay. Not that other minorities don't get parades, but that is hardly an issue worth debating. I'm sorry that I can't feel sorry for you that you don't get a parade. This "All about You" argument is getting rather tedious. You have no idea what is acceptable to me or not, so don't being to comment on what I BELIEVE. You missed the point of my post COMPLETELY. I never once said that it is ACCEPTABLE for anyone to be discriminated against. I believe that gays are afforded the same treatment as everyone else now, hence no need for a parade. Gays can adopt, get married, vote, sit wherever they want on the bus, go wherever they want, etc. In this thread, we are talking about gay people, not other minorities, hence the reason i did not include them in my parade scenario. As I have said many times before in this thread and I'll put it in caps this time so you read it, I BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME, REGARDLESS OF RACE OR SEXUALITY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I believe that gays are afforded the same treatment as everyone else now, hence no need for a parade. Gays can adopt, get married, vote, sit wherever they want on the bus, go wherever they want, etc. No, gays cannot adopt or get married. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leesmithg Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 If what happened is true, the guy should caim for ?2,000,000 at least. He could end up earning that during his years upto retirement. So if he is too unwell or feels it would be hard to work again or cannot find a new job as employers are reluctant to employ those that left a previous job due to court action, then he deserves every penny. Those responsible should be investigated and arrested as homophobia attacks are a crime in Britain. I say Britain as seeing how much in ?'s he is suing for I can only think Britain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbba Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 (edited) I BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME, REGARDLESS OF RACE OR SEXUALITY. As they are not treated the same by the law currently, next time there is a gay pride parade, you could demonstrate your beliefs and join them in campaigning for equality. :D . Edited March 25, 2009 by bobbba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rednekcowboy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 No, gays cannot adopt or get married. They may have to travel, but yes, they most certainly can get married! EVERYONE can adopt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Whats the point in travelling to get married when the marriage wouldnt be recognised by law wherever the couple live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rednekcowboy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 As they are not treated the same by the law currently, next time there is a gay pride parade, you could join them and campaign for equality with them. :D As I have said before, the parades stop being about rights a long time ago! If a friend of mine had been mistreated or discriminated against, I would most definitely fight tooth and nail until he or she got what he or she deserved. The problem I have is with people who think and act like people should bend over backwards to give them whatever they want because they are a minority. No one should get preferential treatment simply because they are the minority and I don't know about your country, but in mine (Canada), we have, imho, gone to far the other way to the point that minorities qualify for all sorts of things that the majority does not have access to. Whats the point in travelling to get married when the marriage wouldnt be recognised by law wherever the couple live? I'm not going to start debating THIS issue with you now, you simply said they couldn't, which you were mistaken. Besides that, this thread has gotten WAY off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 What the hell does that have to do with this article, he isnt claiming for hundreds of thousands or even millions of pounds, he isnt asking for anyone to bend over backwards to help him, he suing for part of his yearly wage while he has been off work depressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dischordiant Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 What the hell does that have to do with this article, he isnt claiming for hundreds of thousands or even millions of pounds, he isnt asking for anyone to bend over backwards to help him, he suing for part of his yearly wage while he has been off work depressed. Just a question, totally off-topic and if you don't feel comfortable answering it, please don't. But how long have you been out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rednekcowboy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 What the hell does that have to do with this article, he isnt claiming for hundreds of thousands or even millions of pounds, he isnt asking for anyone to bend over backwards to help him, he suing for part of his yearly wage while he has been off work depressed. I never said the above statement was in regards to HIM, hence the thread getting off topic. For someone who preaches acceptance and tolerance for others, you sure seem to have little of either yourself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treemonkeys Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 This is what ****es me off: "As of right now, Jamie has been off work for depression for seven months, and now he is seeking damages." If your work conditions are unfavorable, get a new job and move on, sue those responsible and profit down the road. This sounds like he is just trying to use his gayness to get a 7 month paid vacation. Microsoft is responsible for how their employees act to some degree (if they did not deal with those who made fun of him then the are responsible) but they shouldn't be responsible if he decides to be a cry baby and completely stop working over it. Pathetic. He is making stupid decisions to purposefully increase the so called "damages". I lost a job once because I wasn't mexican, I didn't stop working after that because I had to keep a roof over my head, life goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Just a question, totally off-topic and if you don't feel comfortable answering it, please don't. But how long have you been out? I dont subscribe to the "out" and "closeted" nonsense, my sexuality doesnt define me and i dont even mention it unless people press me on the subject, or things like these when people get my goat up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rednekcowboy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 This is what ****es me off: "As of right now, Jamie has been off work for depression for seven months, and now he is seeking damages." If your work conditions are unfavorable, get a new job and move on, sue those responsible and profit down the road. This sounds like he is just trying to use his gayness to get a 7 month paid vacation. Microsoft is responsible for how their employees act to some degree (if they did not deal with those who made fun of him then the are responsible) but they shouldn't be responsible if he decides to be a cry baby and completely stop working over it. Pathetic. He is making stupid decisions to purposefully increase the so called "damages". I lost a job once because I wasn't mexican, I didn't stop working after that because I had to keep a roof over my head, life goes on. This also leads me to believe that he may not be telling the whole truth or we're not getting the whole story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 This also leads me to believe that he may not be telling the whole truth or we're not getting the whole story. Probably sensationalist reporting trying to make Microsoft look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_Guy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 he's dealing with a company once lauded by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation for their treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered employees As far as I know, Microsoft has always had a good reputation in this department. It will be interesting to see how this story unfolds. Lashing out against someone for their sexual preference is merely a sign of your own deep-seated psychological troubles. You have to wonder how people like that get hired for a job in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartsOfWar Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 one of three things happened: This entire complaint is a lie... Some workers 'guessed' he was gay and started to sexually harass him The gentleman suing Microsoft was open about his sexuality at work and was sexually harassed two of the three possibilities involve sexual harassment, but only one is 100% the fault of the employees; however, the other would be 50% fault on both parties. If you're willing to talk / flaunt your sexuality at work, you're making a private matter public and setting yourself up to those that prey on it. At the same time, it's wrong to sexually harass anyone for any reason, and thus the reason the employees should be equally responsible for their actions. If Microsoft didn't respond in a timely fashion, they too should be jointly responsible. What i said is exactly the stance the U.S. Military takes, "Dont ask, don't tell". Now, I am going to jump on a soapbox even further though... Every person should be afforded the same and equal rights as the next (without a doubt). The #1 problem today when most homosexuals discuss their rights being abused, they're referring to the inability to marry. The problem with this 'right to marry' is that marriage originated from religion, and the government has no business encroaching upon this sacrament. We have separation of Church and State in the U.S. for reasons... I have no problem with homosexuals being allowed the same legal rights afforded to heterosexual married couples; however, I do have a problem with homosexuals using the term 'marriage'. Homosexuals aren't doing this on purpose, it's a product of how the government borrowed from religion when it shouldn't have; however, in my religion 'marriage' is the definition of the church providing their blessing. In other words, the government should only be allowed to recognize 'civil unions', and any person should be allowed to enter into a 'civil union' with another to receive the same legal benefits; however, 'marriage' should be reserved for those whose religion affords them the right to marry. Once again, a christian heterosexual married couple would have the same legal rights as that of a homosexual couple under a 'civil union'; however, the christian heterosexual married couple would NOT have the same religious rights as that of a homosexual couple... and vice verse, depending on the religions involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts