This user has been banned.
I’m gonna jaywalk and demand the death penalty.
what the guy did was worse than jaywalking, but I agree his sentence should be overturned. There was clear bias.
DOMA did at least concern federal benefits that states don’t naturally have the authority over, so it wasn’t clearly a 10th Amendment violation.
It defined marriage as between a man and woman, something you, Ferris and many other states rights conservatives have repeatedly said was up to the states to decide. If gay marriage is truly up to the states to decide, I don’t know how you could justify a federal law that defines marriage. I think I even brought up federal benefits to argue that the feds had to have some say over marriage, I forget the argument that you and/or Ferris used against me. If it weren’t so hard to search this site, I’d try to find the conversation.
Of course, it was voted into law by most Democrats and signed by a Democratic president,
oops. *embarrassed emoticon*
https://deadspin.com/minnesota-uniteds-collin-martin-comes-out-as-gay-1827243688
Minnesota United midfielder Collin Martin became the only active openly gay man in American sports on Friday, coming out publicly with a message on Twitter and a very cool photo ahead of his team’s Pride Night game.
From the note:
“I have been out as a gay man for many years to my family and friends, and this includes my teammates. I have played Major League Soccer for 6 seasons: 4 seasons with DC United and 2 seasons with Minnesota United. Today, I’m proud that my entire team and the management of Minnesota United know that I am gay. I have received only kindness and acceptance from everyone in Major League Soccer and that has made the decision to come out publicly that much easier.”
While this is a cool story, he better hurry up if he wants to get married to another man.
Minnesota allowed gay marriage starting in 2013. I don’t see what would change that.
A Supreme Court, maybe.
State’s Rights Conservatives only give a shit about state’s rights when the state agrees with their position.
Youre painting with an awfully broad brush. I don’t know who said what to make you think that.
In the case of gay marriage, he is not far from the truth. How else do you explain the defense of marriage act? Anyone who truly cared about states rights and the 10th amendment would have to oppose the act. Yet was it or was it not supported by many conservatives?
There are bits of truth in everyone’s posts on the 5 second rule (some more than others, granted).
5 seconds of just staring at someone is a long time but if it were a rule it could be abused or lead to misunderstanding.
Mostly I agree with Jay and mfm that we live in a messed up culture that finds this kind of standard reasonable.
I think many people are increasingly rule-bound in their thinking and that’s a problem.
If any of you have sons, consider helping them show interest in girls in ways other than staring at them. It’s a thin line between bashful and creep.
I think it’s sad that we live in a messed up culture that still encourages victim blaming.
oh ffs. Now because I think 5 seconds is to short a time, I’m victim blaming and/or encouraging victim blaming.
was that post about you?
I’m sure I was included.
There are bits of truth in everyone’s posts on the 5 second rule (some more than others, granted).
5 seconds of just staring at someone is a long time but if it were a rule it could be abused or lead to misunderstanding.
Mostly I agree with Jay and mfm that we live in a messed up culture that finds this kind of standard reasonable.
I think many people are increasingly rule-bound in their thinking and that’s a problem.
If any of you have sons, consider helping them show interest in girls in ways other than staring at them. It’s a thin line between bashful and creep.
I think it’s sad that we live in a messed up culture that still encourages victim blaming.
oh ffs. Now because I think 5 seconds is to short a time, I’m victim blaming and/or encouraging victim blaming.
thin line between bashful and creep?
I have been staring at this thread for about 60 seconds in pure agony.
three pages ago it was revealed (to no-ones surprise) that of course netflix HR did not create a rule about how long you can stare at someone.
the argument continues because it seems that some would be in favor of such an insane rule and act like five seconds = five minutes or “all day”
The irony is, i am sure the statement came about like this.
HR: “… and remember that staring at someone can be construed as harassment, we want to have a friendly and welcoming workplace.”
Man 1: “but i look around the office all the time, and like to see what is going on, when does it become too long?”
HR: (I can’t believe i have to explain this) “A good rule of thumb is probably 5 seconds, if you are looking at someone, but not engaging with them in any other way, then anything longer than 5 seconds is probably going to make the other person uncomfortable”JEDIT: puggo posted at the same time.
I agree it is more reasonable as a rule of thumb, a guild line, but not a hard and fast rule.
man, staring at someone and looking at the direction someone’s in is very clearly and very noticeably different.
How would you quantify that legally?
Who is talking about legal definitions? Wasn’t this 5-second-rule just part of a guideline to provide a rule of thumb? Why is everyone talking like this is a proposal for an actual law?
People love getting offended.
Especially by people staring at them.
If it’s a dispute between someone staring and someone being stared at, I’m definitely falling down on the side of the person being stared at. Didn’t know this was a controversial position to have. I thought everyone knew that staring is a weird and rude thing to do but guess not.
It is, but has been being talked about here is whether or not there ought to be a hard and fast rule that says you can’t look at someone for more than 5 seconds.
I’m almost a 100% misanthrope at this point, which next to no expectations of good behavior from my fellow man, and even I am amazed at how little the American people care about the massacre that just happened.
While I may be a snowflake because I don’t want you guys rapestaring at your female coworkers, I did post about that earlier.
I didn’t call you a snowflake.
Rapestaring?
and even I am amazed at how little the American people care about the massacre that just happened.
unfortunately, we’ve become desensitized.
man, staring at someone and looking at the direction someone’s in is very clearly and very noticeably different.
How would you quantify that legally?
Who is talking about legal definitions? Wasn’t this 5-second-rule just part of a guideline to provide a rule of thumb? Why is everyone talking like this is a proposal for an actual law?
People love getting offended.
Especially by people staring at them.
For five seconds.
all day.
five seconds ≠ all day
You continue to miss the point.
You continue to act like we are talking about five minutes, not five seconds.
all day.
five seconds ≠ all day
I can understand having a rule about how long one can look at someone.
Really? What’s the correct length of time allowed then?
Not exactly sure but certainly longer than 5 seconds. Perhaps 30 seconds?(note I am not saying that just beaue someone stares for less time should automatically mean they don’t get in trouble: context, circumstances, etc would depend)
30 seconds? Ha. Stare at your watch for 30 seconds. See how long it really is.
it is 30 seconds long.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTlVc_hKi2M
“People do not have internal chronometers.”
true.
Staring at someone for 5 full seconds is longer than long enough when given no reason to stare.
I was under the mistaken impression that
I can understand having a rule about how long one can look at someone.
Really? What’s the correct length of time allowed then?
Not exactly sure but certainly longer than 5 seconds. Perhaps 30 seconds?(note I am not saying that just beaue someone stares for less time should automatically mean they don’t get in trouble: context, circumstances, etc would depend)
30 seconds? Ha. Stare at your watch for 30 seconds. See how long it really is.
it is 30 seconds long.
You’ve missed the point again.
If you say so. Nonetheless, 30 seconds is 30 seconds.
If you stared at a woman for 20 seconds you’d creep her right the fuck out.
Maybe, it depends upon the women, the circumstances, context, etc.
Of course. And a lot of dudes think they know what the woman thinks and what the circumstances is. And they’re wrong a lot of the time. Talk to a few women about this and you’ll hear lots of stories about dudes who are oblivious to how they’re making the woman feel.
Maybe that is something that needs to be talked about. Maybe these men should be taught about the circumstances and etc, and rules should be make regarding same, instead of simply setting a hard and fast time limit as small as 5 five seconds (which is what I originally thought Netflix had done).
What if you suspect they are doing something bad(like stealing or something), and you are keeping an eye on them as a result?
So you’d keep an eye on them by staring directly at them? All day?
not all day but maybe for longer than 5 seconds.
I’m starting to think you’ve never stared at someone for five full seconds.
considering that you think it is bad to stare at someone for five seconds or longer, it would be a good thing that I’ve never stared at someone for a five full seconds, right?
I can understand having a rule about how long one can look at someone.
Really? What’s the correct length of time allowed then?
Not exactly sure but certainly longer than 5 seconds. Perhaps 30 seconds?(note I am not saying that just beaue someone stares for less time should automatically mean they don’t get in trouble: context, circumstances, etc would depend)
30 seconds? Ha. Stare at your watch for 30 seconds. See how long it really is.
it is 30 seconds long.
If you stared at a woman for 20 seconds you’d creep her right the fuck out.
Maybe, it depends upon the women, the circumstances, context, etc.
What if you suspect they are doing something bad(like stealing or something), and you are keeping an eye on them as a result?
So you’d keep an eye on them by staring directly at them? All day?
not all day but maybe for longer than 5 seconds.
Quartz reached out to Netflix to confirm whether the company, one of the most powerful new forces in Hollywood, had truly adopted a “no staring for more than five seconds rule.” A spokeswoman clarified there is no such “rule” at Netflix. However, she confirms that the recommendation was, in fact, discussed in an anti-harassment training session, though it’s not an official guideline.
So neither shithole nor insane.
Ok, I was mistaken it is not a rule, it was merely something discussed. I stand corrected.
Don’t be creepy. Simple rule to follow but some people need it spelled out, so among other things, don’t stare at someone for five seconds if you aren’t talking to them.
What if you suspect they are doing something bad(like stealing or something), and you are keeping an eye on them as a result?
I can understand having a rule about how long one can look at someone.
Really? What’s the correct length of time allowed then?
Not exactly sure but certainly longer than 5 seconds. Perhaps 30 seconds?(note I am not saying that just beaue someone stares for less time should automatically mean they don’t get in trouble: context, circumstances, etc would depend)
Netflix continues to be a shithole:
https://ijr.com/2018/06/1103557-new-netflix-harassment-policies/
So now people there can’t look at each other for more than five seconds‽ That’s insane.
I know it sounds insane, but think about how long five seconds is.
It’s five seconds. Not long at all.
If you were a young woman and an old creepy dude was staring at you for five solid seconds, I guarantee it would creep you right the fuck out.
The basic idea of the rules is “don’t be a fucking creep”
Looking at someone for more than five seconds doesn’t make one a “f______ creep”.
but since people (mostly men) can’t stop doing it, they have to try and spell it out. The only thing that is insane is that these people actually need stupid rules like this because they can’t just not do it on their own.
I can understand having a rule about how long one can look at someone. Making it as short as five seconds is insane.
I don’t know about you, but when I hold a conversation with someone, I usually look at them. I guess no conversations lasting more than five seconds.
Netflix continues to be a shithole:
https://ijr.com/2018/06/1103557-new-netflix-harassment-policies/
So now people there can’t look at each other for more than five seconds‽ That’s insane.
Butt judges.
oh.
Either that or it was a typo and I left out the second “t.” (I hope DE offers no insight on that.)
I sorry, but I don’t get this either.
But judges?
I don’t understand.