Toronto Firefighters fired -- for tweets

[Boges]

Posting these quotes on a public forum where you identify your employer shows an immense lack of maturity and good judgement.

I do, however, believe that social media is being patrolled by outrage police that are looking to ruin people's lives because they don't fit their view of how the world should be.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Boges

[Argus]

It's always interesting that you always just happen to know someone who just happens to be able to confirm your world view. Convenient, even.

Here's a thought! Maybe my world view is based in large part on the people I know!

We've already established that, for you, being a guy means being an asshole. Which, I suppose, makes you a real guy's guy.

Leaving aside your instant resort to insults for lack of anything intelligent to say, let's examine your description of a firefighter you've never met and know nothing about other than he typed in a Southpark quote on his twitter one time. That seems to be all the evidence you require to denigrate him as an 'asshole', which says a lot more about what a bitter, intolerant, humourless person you are than it does about him.

[Bonam]

Someone who tells a racist, sexist or homophobic joke might not be racist, sexist or homophobic, but telling a racist, sexist or homophobic joke is exactly what someone who is racist, sexist or homophobic would do, so it's absolutely fair to believe someone telling a racist, sexist or homophobic joke is racist, sexist or homophobic unless you have evidence to the contrary.

Do you really not see the obvious logical fallacy in your own line of reasoning here? Here, let me illustrate:

Someone who breaths air might not be racist, sexist, or homophobic, but breathing air is exactly what someone who is racist, sexist or homophobic would do, so it's absolutely fair to believe someone breathing air is racist, sexist or homophobic unless you have evidence to the contrary.

[Black Dog]

Do you really not see the obvious logical fallacy in your own line of reasoning here? Here, let me illustrate:

Someone who breaths air might not be racist, sexist, or homophobic, but breathing air is exactly what someone who is racist, sexist or homophobic would do, so it's absolutely fair to believe someone breathing air is racist, sexist or homophobic unless you have evidence to the contrary.

Your analogy is nonsensical. Breathing is not an indicator that someone is racist, sexist, or homophobic. But telling a racist, sexist, or homophobic joke might well be just such a "tell." I'm not sure how you could dispute that.

[Bonam]

Your analogy is nonsensical. Breathing is not an indicator that someone is racist, sexist, or homophobic. But telling a racist, sexist, or homophobic joke might well be just such a "tell." I'm not sure how you could dispute that.

How can I dispute it? By posting that I dispute your assertion, right here. People joke about things all the time. There is in my opinion no correlation between the chance that someone uses a "that's what she said joke" and the chance that they are a sexist, nor any correlation between making a joke about Jews (a rabbi walks into a bar,,,) and an anti-semite, nor any other such things. No more correlation than between breathing and being racist/sexist.

In fact, if anything, it is the people who exhibit shock and outrage at "off-color" jokes that are likely to be racists... not the kind of racists you talk about, but real racists, those on the left, who engage in the dual racisms of low expectations and condescension towards non-whites, and the racist assumption that whites are inherently racist. It is people who are most easily offended by jokes about women, men, or gender that are most likely to be sexists... nor your kind of sexists, but real sexists, the ones who think women cannot stand up for themselves and need to be treated as infants, and who think that all men are likely to be rapists.

[Black Dog]

How can I dispute it? By posting that I dispute your assertion, right here. People joke about things all the time. There is in my opinion no correlation between the chance that someone uses a "that's what she said joke" and the chance that they are a sexist, nor any correlation between making a joke about Jews (a rabbi walks into a bar,,,) and an anti-semite, nor any other such things. No more correlation than between breathing and being racist/sexist.

This doesn't actually counter what I said at all since my original formulation, the one you took issue with through your moronic breathing analogy, left ample room for the possibility that someone could make a racist, sexist, homophobic joke and not actually be any of those things. In fact, it was the first thing I wrote:

Someone who tells a racist, sexist or homophobic joke might not be racist, sexist or homophobic...

But if, for example, I met someone at a party and they were cracking Jew jokes in the first five minutes, I'd assume they were bigots or lacking in basic social skills. For you, it seems, someone would actually have to go on about how Hitler had some great ideas before you would even think to look at them sideways.

In fact, if anything, it is the people who exhibit shock and outrage at "off-color" jokes that are likely to be racists...

Ah yes: the old "I know you are, but what am I" defense.

not the kind of racists you talk about, but real racists, those on the left, who engage in the dual racisms of low expectations and condescension towards non-whites, and the racist assumption that whites are inherently racist.

Yes real racists are people who talk about racism and not people who are racist. Gotcha.

It is people who are most easily offended by jokes about women, men, or gender that are most likely to be sexists... nor your kind of sexists, but real sexists, the ones who think women cannot stand up for themselves and need to be treated as infants, and who think that all men are likely to be rapists.

This is another Straight White Dude Bingo square: "Why are you being offended at the thing I said that was intended to be offensive? Stop being so sensitive!"

[Bonam]

Yes real racists are people who talk about racism and not people who are racist. Gotcha.

Chances are people who spend most of their time and energy thinking about race and racism might be racist. Certainly at least as good as your unsourced correlation about the kinds of jokes people make. The person I'd be least likely to suspect of racism is someone who goes through life not thinking about, noticing, or caring about race at all.

left ample room for the possibility that someone could make a racist, sexist, homophobic joke and not actually be any of those things

You're still missing the point. There is no correlation, therefore it's just as related as breathing (which obviously also has zero correlation). If you think there is a correlation between making not politically correct jokes and being a racist/sexist, provide some evidence to support it. The possibility exists that ANYONE could be racist/sexist, that doesn't mean you should assume that they are (or maybe it does in leftist ideology?)

But if, for example, I met someone at a party and they were cracking Jew jokes in the first five minutes, I'd assume they were bigots or lacking in basic social skills.

I'd be more likely to assume the lack of basic social skills. Just like the firefighters in question in this thread lacked a basic understanding of the politically correct nature of modern society and its utter intolerance for any off-color comment on social media.

Edited November 27, 2014 by Bonam

[Black Dog]

Chances are people who spend most of their time and energy thinking about race and racism might be racist.

Your IKYABWAI game is strong.

Certainly at least as good as your unsourced correlation about the kinds of jokes people make. The person I'd be least likely to suspect of racism is someone who goes through life not thinking about, noticing, or caring about race at all.

Seem to me a person like that would be likely to accept common stereotypes and generalizations about people based on things like race, sexuality etc. Because, IMO, racism is just that: intellectual laziness.

You're still missing the point. There is no correlation, therefore it's just as related as breathing (which obviously also has zero correlation).

So racist people don't make racist jokes?

If you think there is a correlation between making not politically correct jokes and being a racist/sexist, provide some evidence to support it. The possibility exists that ANYONE could be racist/sexist, that doesn't mean you should assume that they are (or maybe it does in leftist ideology?)

Indeed someone shouldn't assume someone is racist or sexist or whatever unless given some kind of evidence to suggest they are. Like, for example, telling a racist joke maybe?

I'd be more likely to assume the lack of basic social skills.

Which doesn't preclude being racist. The mistake you're making is thinking that racism etc is some kind of binary: you are are you aren't. Of course it doesn't work that way.

Just like the firefighters in question in this thread lacked a basic understanding of the politically correct nature of modern society and its utter intolerance for any off-color comment on social media.

Yeah, like you, they don't understand why people take offense at things intended to offend. It is a great mystery.

[Bonam]

So racist people don't make racist jokes?

Both racist and non-racist people make racist jokes. You say there is a correlation, I say there is not until you provide evidence thereof. If the chance of a racist person and a non-racist person making a racist joke is the same, then someone making a racist joke provides no statistical insight as to whether or not they are racist. Therefore, if you want to use racist jokes as an indication that someone might be racist, you must provide evidence that shows that racist people make racist jokes more often than non-racist people.

Otherwise your argument is nothing but an elementary logical fallacy.

[Black Dog]

Both racist and non-racist people make racist jokes. You say there is a correlation, I say there is not until you provide evidence thereof.

OK, then you go back to your fantasy world where only racist people get mad at racist jokes.

If the chance of a racist person and a non-racist person making a racist joke is the same, then someone making a racist joke provides no statistical insight as to whether or not they are racist.

Why assume it is?

Therefore, if you want to use racist jokes as an indication that someone might be racist, you must provide evidence that shows that racist people make racist jokes more often than non-racist people.

Yeah, again: being racist isn't like being pregnant. It;'s a set of beliefs, assumptions and behaviours, not a state of being. And telling a racist joke is on a continuum of racist behaviours, but it's not like there's a certain threshold to meet before the guy in the lab coat walks in and says "Congratulations, you're not a racist!" A lot depends on context.

Otherwise your argument is nothing but an elementary logical fallacy.

Which one, specifically? Is it a strawman like your "anti racists are the real racists"? Or is it begging the question like your "everyone tells racists jokes, therefore noone who tells a racist joke is racist"?

[Bonam]

Why assume it is?

Because you've provided no evidence to the contrary, and in the absence of any evidence, the null hypothesis is the default one.

telling a racist joke is on a continuum of racist behaviours

Everything is "on the continuum" since by definition such a continuum would span from non-racist to extremely racist. Where on the continuum is it? If you want to claim it's not on the zero part of the continuum, please provide evidence thereof.

[Black Dog]

Because you've provided no evidence to the contrary, and in the absence of any evidence, the null hypothesis is the default one.

Everything is "on the continuum" since by definition such a continuum would span from non-racist to extremely racist. Where on the continuum is it? If you want to claim it's not on the zero part of the continuum, please provide evidence thereof.

You're aware this isn't statistics class, yeah? And that, like, human behaviour is not something one can graph?

Edited November 27, 2014 by Black Dog

[Argus]

This is another Straight White Dude Bingo square: "Why are you being offended at the thing I said that was intended to be offensive? Stop being so sensitive!"

This is a guy who put a Southpark quote on his twitter, which was followed by a few dozen people, mostly his buddies. I have no doubt he figured it would just get a laugh.

You remind me of the episode of The Simpsons when Homer is taken to court for harassment because he put a cartoon with a caterpillar trying to mate with a crinkle cut french fry on the bulletin board and some woman was offended by it.

Some people are just reeeeal easy to offend, and reeeaalll indignant when they get offended. And it's NEVER their fault! Oh no!

[guyser]

This is a guy who put a Southpark quote on his twitter, which was followed by a few dozen people, mostly his buddies. I have no doubt he figured it would just get a laugh.

He probably did think it would get a laugh but he utterly failed to realize a bunch of things.

One, he is in uniform of the TFD.

Two, slapping the back of the head to re-set the brain is funny? Bitch ass make me a sammich is funny?

I grant it CAN be funny, in tightly controlled conditions and said verbal to the people around you who know you and the the such.

And frankly fine...however he wasnt fired for the tweets. They were fired for posting something they knew they shouldnt put on social media and as such they broke the rules for the TFD's policy on social media.

So be it South Park , Simpsons or Family Guy, it doesnt matter, they broke what are considered the rules on that and voila, no job.

Some people are just reeeeal easy to offend, and reeeaalll indignant when they get offended. And it's NEVER their fault! Oh no!

Some people are really stupid and think the rules dont apply to them .

Those who think that way are now out of a job. I have no worries about this.

[guyser]

that's pretty pathetic, honestly.

Sorry, no can do.

What pathetic is not knowing why they got fired, and wetting your pants over something else.

But hey, knock yourself out.

[WestCoastRunner]

I do, however, believe that social media is being patrolled by outrage police that are looking to ruin people's lives because they don't fit their view of how the world should be.

Social media is available to everyone for viewing. If someone thinks they can post a sexist or racist comment on social media and think there will be no consequences are simply deluding themselves. Honestly, you think we have an 'outrage police force' out there looking to get people fired and ruin their lives? Who is paying this police force and who are they reporting to?

[Black Dog]

The guy who got canned said he didn't realize his comments would be able to be seen by the public. In other words, he was using Twitter without actually having any idea how Twitter works. What a dummy.

[Argus]

And frankly fine...however he wasnt fired for the tweets. They were fired for posting something they knew they shouldnt put on social media and as such they broke the rules for the TFD's policy on social media.

So be it South Park , Simpsons or Family Guy, it doesnt matter, they broke what are considered the rules on that and voila, no job.

So suddenly you're in favour of draconion punishments for first time offenders without regard to circumstances?

He broke a rule! Off with his head!

To me I see a guy who in all innocence, without any idea he was doing anything wrong, and no intention to cause offense or harm, gets his life destroyed for doing something which, let's face it, caused no harm whatsoever.

[Argus]

Social media is available to everyone for viewing. If someone thinks they can post a sexist or racist comment on social media and think there will be no consequences are simply deluding themselves. Honestly, you think we have an 'outrage police force' out there looking to get people fired and ruin their lives? Who is paying this police force and who are they reporting to?

Ah that's the beauty of it! The PC police are all volunteers! Extremely zealous volunteers determined to root out and destroy any comments which offend them!

[Argus]

The guy who got canned said he didn't realize his comments would be able to be seen by the public. In other words, he was using Twitter without actually having any idea how Twitter works. What a dummy.

I have managed to keep myself pretty much out of the loop regarding twitter. I have never used it, and cannot imagine ever using it. My understanding is you make stupid, innocuous little posts, and those who are 'follow you' can see them. I presume he figured since only a few dozen people he knew followed him he wasn't exactly broadcasting to the nation.

But I continue to find it interesting how the Left can find deep and abiding understanding and sympathy for murderers, terrorists and all manner of other offenders, but turn into the Spanish Inquisition towards anyone who dares to utter a phrase they find offensive.

[Black Dog]

I have managed to keep myself pretty much out of the loop regarding twitter. I have never used it, and cannot imagine ever using it. My understanding is you make stupid, innocuous little posts, and those who are 'follow you' can see them. I presume he figured since only a few dozen people he knew followed him he wasn't exactly broadcasting to the nation.

Then he's a dummy for not understanding the medium he was using. Unless you set your profile to private, anyone who happens upon your profile can see your tweets. Twitter 101.

But I continue to find it interesting how the Left can find deep and abiding understanding and sympathy for murderers, terrorists and all manner of other offenders, but turn into the Spanish Inquisition towards anyone who dares to utter a phrase they find offensive.

*makes wanking motion*

[Argus]

Then he's a dummy for not understanding the medium he was using. Unless you set your profile to private, anyone who happens upon your profile can see your tweets. Twitter 101.

Right, and I can post something outrageous on my web site (if I had a web site) but since virtually no one ever comes to my web site but a few friends, the odds of anyone else happening upon it and it getting to the media are pretty damned slim

Edited November 28, 2014 by Argus

[guyser]

So suddenly you're in favour of draconion punishments for first time offenders without regard to circumstances?

Not particularly. The circumstances do however make it hard for the bosses to ignore.

He put himself out there in uniform and was caught out. Had he not, maybe.....just maybe the bosses might not have heard of it, may have called him in and had him take it down immediately.

He broke a rule! Off with his head!

Sometimes ...yes. I will explain why in a sec.

To me I see a guy who in all innocence, without any idea he was doing anything wrong, and no intention to cause offense or harm, gets his life destroyed for doing something which, let's face it, caused no harm whatsoever.

You see it that way. Ok

I see an idiot who didnt know wtf he was doing and didnt have a clue he had a copy of the social media policy and didnt read it. Lets callit the Rob Ford defence then.

The bosses at TFD are caught in a pickle. They have staff (women) who have to work alongside this moron, they want to recruit more women, they want to be seen as open and free of hassle in the workplace.

Had they let this grow and fester, they well could have a some sort of suit on their hands.

[Argus]

I see an idiot who didnt know wtf he was doing and didnt have a clue he had a copy of the social media policy and didnt read it. Lets callit the Rob Ford defence then.

Where I used to work (CRA) virtually no one knew much of anything about the rules regarding electronic usage. That includes managers. Oh, they knew not to send porn or hate literature. But no one really understood they couldn't send jokes back and forth, say. One day the agency dragged a whole pack of people before disciplinary hearings with their directors for essentially, sending some jokes back and forth.

It rapidly became clear no one knew much of anything about the 'electronic networks policy' including managers and directors. It had grown and evolved year by year without anyone paying any attention to it. The agency held mandatory teaching sessions for all staff on the policy, but nevertheless, despite acknowledging a vast lack of understanding on the part of staff, continued to discipline those employees it had already found. Ignorance of the rules, as arcane and difficult to find as they were, was no excuse.

Rules are rules! Punishment must be meted out!

It struck me then as it does now that punishing people for doing something they didn't know wasn't allowed, and who hadn't caused any harm, was brainless and stupid.

The bosses at TFD are caught in a pickle. They have staff (women) who have to work alongside this moron, they want to recruit more women, they want to be seen as open and free of hassle in the workplace.

And as long as guys aren't sending tweets about south park all of them can convince themselves that most of the guys in those trucks aren't macho types who tell ribald jokes from time to time. Gotcha.

Had they let this grow and fester, they well could have a some sort of suit on their hands.

Here's an idea. How about they just tell him that if he's going to tweet stuff he shouldn't identify himself as a firefighter. Wouldn't that solve the problem? Or do you think firing him is going to change the temperament of a bunch of young macho guys?

[Bonam]

But I continue to find it interesting how the Left can find deep and abiding understanding and sympathy for murderers, terrorists and all manner of other offenders, but turn into the Spanish Inquisition towards anyone who dares to utter a phrase they find offensive.

Isn't it obvious? Murderers and terrorists are likely people with troubled childhoods who suffered at the hands of big, bad, whitey, and therefore we must have compassion for them. Meanwhile people who utter non-PC phrases are likely big bad whitey themselves and should have the full force of authority applied against them.