Is it OK for Whites to Bash Blacks for Comedy Purposes?

theplaydrive said:

I guess we have to agree to disagree. When people talk about institutional racism/sexism/whatever, these are the actions that they're talking about - judging the individual against the people of arbitrary X based on the people of arbitrary X who they have encountered before them. I feel nothing for employers who reject someone because people before them of their race, sex, sexuality or culture, behaved a certain way.

Click to expand...

heh, if only everyone was a behavioral profiler.

Like I said in the other thread, comedians should be able to bash anyone or anything they choose, so long as it's funny. If it's not funny, if it's tacky, bad taste, etc., then they won't be around long anyway. As long as one group has to tiptoe on eggshells to avoid angering another group, then we are not a color-blind, fully-integrated society... which is what we should strive to be.

theplaydrive said:

And here we are, at the crux of the problem.

Click to expand...

Yeah - pretty much. Sad but true.

The hiring process is broken down into multiple stages to bridge the fact that you don't know these people at all. You do your best to pre-judge their work ethics and values and it's just really hard. It's much easier to avoid hiring someone who might bring a potential problem into the workplace than it is to hire said chancy individual and to find out - after you're on the hook for their livelihood - that they were a bad decision. If they aren't employed then *why* you didn't hire them isn't legally regulated and you don't have to speak for it. All they have is hurt feelings and suspicion. After they're hired you pay their wage, have to deal with them on a daily basis and rely on them to work well when you're not hovering. If they can't function well on the job then they are just a toxic asset and either way they cost quality and time - and that equals money.

My hiring points came from work experience over the years - the problems I had to deal with are what led to why I made choices that way. in a different work environment I would have to reasses my views from more experience and apply new knowledge - starting with a clean slate. Young and pippy might be ideal for a different setting.

My mother is employed at a hospital as a secretary for a surgical division. A lot of paperwork. She's head secretary, there, and has been there longer than others so she's consulted for every new-hire in the department. Her input to the pre-screening employment process is related to grammar and authoring skills. All of them will them colaborate on the Dr's authoring projects - writing articles, proofreading books - things like that, as well as maintaining and adding to patient records, writing letters and other such things. Since she's head secretary she has to give the final hand-over to the dr after they write things up. He might not read it and just send it in for publishing. Someone working under her who can't write very well will get her in hot water as has happened before. So she gives a written assignment for each potential new hire.

(afterthough The difficulty of hiring people that you dont' know is why some places have a trial-period - they hire you, you work for a few weeks, at the end of that time they'll assess how you did and what problems came up and decide to hire you based on that.