Grex Scruples Conference

View Responses

Grex Scruples Item 103: Bambi vs. Thumper
Entered by aruba on Sat Feb 18 14:46:54 UTC 1995:

   Someone you work with has pictures of a hunting trip on his desk.
One of the pictures shows his wife holding up the severed head of a deer.
   Someone else you work with has a playboy calendar on his desk, which
includes pictures of nude women.
   Which, if either, of these offends you?  What lengths, if any, would you
go to to have them removed?

18 responses total.

#1 of 18 by mgout on Sat Feb 18 20:17:55 1995:

neiter offends me

#2 of 18 by omni on Sat Feb 18 23:16:13 1995:

 Playboy calendars are inappropriate in the workplace, as it demeans
the equality of the women who work there.

#3 of 18 by carson on Sat Feb 18 23:58:44 1995:

I wouldn't want to look at either sets of pictures, and I wouldn't
have to. As long as I can turn my head, close my eyes, walk away,
or take any number of physically evasive manuevers, I don't have to.
I don't think it would be necessary for the pictures to be removed,
nor would I be so self-righteous as to ask them to be removed. It's
my personal opinion that I'd rather know what people are like rather
than forcing them to hide it from others.

#4 of 18 by chelsea on Sun Feb 19 14:49:49 1995:

(Gawd, what that man said!)

#5 of 18 by popcorn on Sun Feb 19 15:04:58 1995:

This response has been erased.

#6 of 18 by aruba on Mon Feb 20 01:02:09 1995:

Pictures of dead animals make me a lot omre uncomfortable, just as I am
more disturbed by violence in movies than sex.

#7 of 18 by popcorn on Mon Feb 20 02:56:20 1995:

This response has been erased.

#8 of 18 by carson on Mon Feb 20 14:31:41 1995:

same here...

#9 of 18 by zook on Mon Feb 20 19:28:27 1995:

Ditto.  It would also depend on how prominent the pictures were.  If you
really had to strain to look at them (eg. tucked behind something), they
would be less potentially offensive.  I wouldn't ask for them to be
removed, even if prominent, because of what Carson was explaining.  But, if
I were the boss, I might, because of the professionalism issue (eg. bad
for business if a customer came in and saw disagreeable [to them] pictures).

#10 of 18 by simcha on Tue Mar 14 15:38:43 1995:

In the fed workplace, playboy is verboten.  hunting is okay, even an
appropriate male bonding activity.
OTOH, I am more upset by the hunting picture

#11 of 18 by aruba on Wed Mar 15 00:59:39 1995:

   I looked a little closer at the picture recently, and the deer head isn't
actually severed, like I said in #0.  It's dead, though.
   What if the person with the hunting pictures were your boss, rather than
your co-worker?  Would that change anyone's opinion of the suituation?

#12 of 18 by popcorn on Fri Mar 17 08:10:42 1995:

This response has been erased.

#13 of 18 by simcha on Mon Mar 20 17:12:20 1995:

No, but I used to have a boss who had playboys out on his coffee table.  
Sometimes they got buried under magazines like Gov't Exec!

#14 of 18 by aruba on Tue Mar 21 04:16:29 1995:

Hmmm, that's an amusing image.  I can just imagine them getting mixed up.
The "boys of the Secret Service" fold-out might be a little boring, though. :)

#15 of 18 by phreakus on Tue Jun 13 16:13:15 1995:

"Men in Black Bare All"? No thanx!

#16 of 18 by madpoet on Sun Jul 23 09:14:29 1995:

Hey, hunting and sex are two primal urges. What's so wrong about fulfilling
innate drives like food and procreation? Maybe that's not the issue...
in the workplace: WHICH workplace? what about the other people who work
there? Do these offend me ? NO not at all, but I'm not the only employee
now am I?

#17 of 18 by aruba on Wed Aug 2 05:11:48 1995:

Well, I think there can be a LOT wrong with fulfilling primal urges in the 
wrong manner.  But that's my opinion, of course.

#18 of 18 by ewhisam on Thu Dec 28 03:50:27 1995:

Both are edible items, I dont know

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.