Calling a Man Bald Counts as Sexual Harassment, UK Judge Rules (cnbc.com) 171
Calling a man bald can now be classed as sexual harassment, a U.K. employment tribunal judge has ruled. From a report: Three members of the tribunal who decided on the ruling, and alluded to their own experience of hair loss, said that baldness was more prevalent in men than women. Therefore, they argued that the use of the word "bald" as an insult related to a "protected characteristic of sex." The tribunal compared calling a man bald to commenting on the size of woman's breasts, based on a 1995 case. The ruling, published Wednesday, was made on a case where the insult was alleged to have been used against Tony Finn, while he worked as an electrician for the British Bung Manufacturing Company. Finn had worked at the company, which manufactures wooden cask closures for the brewing industry, in Yorkshire in the northeast of England, for nearly 24 years. He was fired last year and the circumstances around his dismissal were also part of the case. Finn claimed that he was called a "bald c---" and was also threatened by his shift supervisor, Jamie King, in a dispute in July 2019.
Fair enough (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Cash. Cold, hard, bald cash.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just more gender neutral, it also means something quite different when used colloquially.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand where the insulting part of it comes from.
Don't lots of people search the internet for 'ba*d **nts' all the time? And they seem to enjoy being in their presence.
Re:Fair enough (Score:5, Funny)
It's the motto of Australia's Northern Territory. CU in the NT.
Re: (Score:3)
Checking my copy of Rogers Profanisaurus, there doesn't appear to be a specific "bald c--" phrase. So the "c--" could be any noun for which the adjective "bald" can modify it without running afoul of the Queen's English gramatical rules.
Re: (Score:2)
So calling a woman bald like Rock did, is not sexual harassment.
Chris Rock was not Jada Smith's employer. Comedians can legally say things that bosses can not.
Re: (Score:2)
it's not even a specific sex-based trait
Neither are breasts, and that's the basis of the comparison at hand. That said, it's silly, as are many of these discussions where victim-hood is to a degree subjective.
Re: (Score:2)
it's not even a specific sex-based trait
Neither is the size of moobs but both can be used to harass people.
It just doesn't end... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now we seem to be having a world wide contest to see who can be offended by the smallest possible imagined slight. (If you spend all your time trying to frame your position in terms of victim hood don't be surprised when you end up as a victim of life.)
Seriously though. Offense is something that you TAKE not GIVE. Stop taking offense and suddenly you are impervious to it all.
(Duh!!!)
Re: (Score:2)
100%. It's one of those very rare cases when cliche motivational quotes actually happen to be applicable - "All the nevativity of the world can't put you down unless you allow it to get inside you."
imho, this is just the first solid tit for tat (Score:3)
Next up, I'll feel slighted if someone asks me for directions or physical help moving something heavy -- how dare they...
That funniness aside, I actually agree with you 100% -- this whole concept of self ascribed victimhood over word usage is silly as fuck. People say mean things all the time, and they don't always actually mean it. I catch myself saying all sorts of random shit during conversations with friends and coworkers, just testing out boundaries to figure out where they are as a means of clarifying
Re: (Score:2)
Next up, I'll feel slighted if someone asks me for directions or physical help moving something heavy -- how dare they...
How DARE they assume my neighborhood!
Re: imho, this is just the first solid tit for tat (Score:4, Informative)
The question is not âoeshould we be allowed to say mean things?â It is âoeIf you repeatedly say mean things, after having been asked not to, in an environment thatâ(TM)s meant to be professional, have you been being the bigger twat in causing the relationship to break down?â
The uk has some pretty strong employment laws that make it difficult to fire people just because. That stops people doing things like firing people because they think they can fill the same role cheaper by keeping everyone on their toes. If you allow employers to be twats to their staff, that opens up a hole in those protections. Donâ(TM)t fire people, just make their life hell until they snap back at you (a you âreasonâ(TM) to fire them), or quit. This, the laws ban so called constructive dismissal, where an employer makes it unreasonable difficult for someone to do their job in the hope that theyâ(TM)ll quit. Calling someone a bald cunt at every opportunity (a likely going out of your way to push their buttons) seems likely to constitute that kind of behaviour.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We used to tease people with "Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me". Seriously though. Offense is something that you TAKE not GIVE. Stop taking offense and suddenly you are impervious to it all.
On the other hand, MRI shows that brain activity after being verbally insulted is equivalent to brain activity after being hit. In other words the two have subjectively comparable impact. Moreover, the brain activity is involuntary. This suggests that neither of your adages stand up to evidence. (I'm sorry I can't cite this. I was told it in a neuroscience lecture about 15yrs ago and can't find my notes.)
Sure I guess you can chose to train brain to desensitize itself on this, I guess like you can desensitiz
Re:It just doesn't end... (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, MRI shows that brain activity after being verbally insulted is equivalent to brain activity after being hit. In other words the two have subjectively comparable impact.
(I'm sorry I can't cite this. I was told it in a neuroscience lecture about 15yrs ago and can't find my notes.)
Just when you think you've heard it all someone invents nonsense like this to justify inherently ridiculous positions. The only "brain activity" an MRI is even capable of detecting are changes in blood flow.
Sure I guess you can chose to train brain to desensitize itself on this, I guess like you can desensitize yourself to the shock of an ice bath or to seeing graphic videos of beheadings. But... (1) I don't think there's a clear answer yet as to whether such desensitizing has other effects, (2) I'd rather not live in a society where such desensitization is a useful skill.
What's next? Someone called me a bad name and now I have PTSD.
I'd rather not live in a society that is so intolerant, petty and thin skinned that offense renders people "physically ill".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It just doesn't end... (Score:2)
Let's sit in a room together. Every five seconds, you get to call me some vile name and I get to hit or kick you.
Let's do this for say 12 hours or so.
And then you can tell me how MRIs show verbal abuse is just as bad as physical when you get out of the hospital.
Olympic abuse wrestling (Score:3)
An Olympic sport of abuse wrestling would be awesome. Competitors will just get a mic, and knock out their opponents to win. This will be one of the few sports in which women will kick men's ass.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, MRI shows that brain activity after being verbally insulted is equivalent to brain activity after being hit.
Unless you actually know what that brain activity represents to the conscious mind you're not actually saying anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Now we seem to be having a world wide contest to see who can be offended by the smallest possible imagined slight.
You completely missed the point of the situation. Here let me correct the saying for you: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but I will use your words against you if I can get a pay day out of it."
Don't confuse retribution with being offended. If someone gets fired and the circumstances of their firing leave it open for them to gain something out of it you can bet they'll take it to the judge without any offense required.
When a person in a position of power (Score:3)
When you force them to stop using those insults you tell them that they cannot exercise that power over you. This means that people further up the hierarchy than you lose some of their power and our society becomes more free and Democratic.
It's naive to think that words don't have any effect just because we're adults. If that wasn't the case nobody wo
Re: (Score:3)
Quite so.
If words are worthless them free speech has no value.
Words are the most powerful thing we have. No one caused genocide or overthrew tyranny with mere sticks and stones. Acts of that magnitude can only be achieved with words.
Re: When a person in a position of power (Score:2)
Just because words have value doesn't mean words are violence.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because words have value doesn't mean words are violence.
Uh oh, triggered!
Re: (Score:3)
Words don't have to be "violence" to be harmful.
We know words can harm people emotionally, we know that harm can be significant, we shouldn't permit people to use words specifically for the purpose of harming others without consequences. That's the same reason Slashdot has a "troll" mod. Just like Slashdot doesn't work properly if you let people troll too much, the wide world doesn't work properly if you let people insult people too much.
Yep, the line is fine, it's complicated, and it's hard to make rules t
You do know people routinely suicide (Score:2)
Yes, words used to cause harm are violence. Even if we ignore the fact that they implicitly carry the understanding that *actual* violence will follow if the words don't achieve the desired outcome.
From you're tone I'm guessing you lean to the right wing. e.g. you support and defer to authority. It's possible you're just being manipulated by the right
Re: (Score:2)
I like you! You're a funny guy!
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's the words that are the issue.
Words are the driving force. Without words people wouldn't have reason to assemble or a direction to coherently act in when they did assemble. Without the words there is no ability to organise. Without words, sticks and stones are random acts of undirected violence.
There's a reason that the first thing authoritarians do is crack down on free speech.
If words are of no consequence then there is nothing of value to protect.
Re: (Score:2)
Sticks and stones can break my bones, so I shoot you before you come too close.
What? I grew up in a pretty bad neighborhood.
Re: It just doesn't end... (Score:2)
Sticks and stones can break my bones and I don't think my insurance will cover that, so I'll die in a ditch instead if having to file medical bankruptcy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with you as an aspirational idea, though I don't think it's practical--the amount of mindfulness practice necessary to avoid taking offense is quite a high burden.
My first impression of this ruling is that it's a good thing--as a society, we want to back out of the dynamic we've developed where it's okay to harass or assault men, but not women.
Re: (Score:2)
Your post offended me. [grin]
Re: (Score:2)
Well if the words come in your work environment, especially from a superior, then they can definitely hurt your career.
yeah that saying is stupid (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We used to tease people with "Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me".
I'd love to see how long you last when a boss continually insults you to your face.
Re: (Score:2)
We used to tease people with "Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me".
Now we seem to be having a world wide contest to see who can be offended by the smallest possible imagined slight. (If you spend all your time trying to frame your position in terms of victim hood don't be surprised when you end up as a victim of life.)
Seriously though. Offense is something that you TAKE not GIVE. Stop taking offense and suddenly you are impervious to it all.
(Duh!!!)
What utter bollocks. You must be the most retarded person ever.
Remember, offence is not something that is GIVEN, so you cant be offended as I describe how completely mentally deficient you are. To avoid TAKING offence, you must accept silently everything I've said about you.
Now that we've dealt with that. The "sticks and stones" thing we've long since accepted as being completely incorrect. Anyone who has been bullied, in any situation knows that... However let me hit you with some 2500 yr old wisdom
Re: (Score:2)
Note that the insult was actually calling him a "bald cunt". He stated that he was not particularly bothered by being called a cunt, only by the bald part. So this guy does not seem to be a snowflake who easily takes offence.
That said, I don't know why cunt is used as an insult. Cunts are highly desired by most men, extremely durable and very flexible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It just doesn't end... (Score:2)
:-O I am SEXUALLY OFFENDED!!!
*Calls 911* (or whatever the equivalent is in the UK. I think maybe it's: 0118 999 881 999 119 7253)
Re: (Score:2)
You know this is a civil case, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is also the UK and not the US.
Ok, let m gt this straight: (Score:5, Interesting)
The UK defines "sexual harassment" as "harassment involving sex/gender" and not "harassment by sexual behaviour" ?
Re: (Score:3)
The UK defines "sexual harassment" as "harassment involving sex/gender" and not "harassment by sexual behaviour" ?
No, calling it 'sexual harassment' is misleading. Sex is a protected characteristic under anti-discrimation laws; since baldness is more prevalent in men, mocking someone for being bald is indirect sexual discrimation. UK doesn't have 'at-will' employment laws, so you need to be careful what you say to someone before you fire their ass for whatever reason (justified or unjustified).
Re: (Score:2)
No, calling it 'sexual harassment' is misleading. Sex is a protected characteristic under anti-discrimation laws; since baldness is more prevalent in men, mocking someone for being bald is indirect sexual discrimation.
Don't say that shit in front of Will Smith, at least not while his Wife is there to give him a look
Re: (Score:2)
Of course. Why would anyone pick on a balding female in a society where that is considered faux pas? How tasteless can you be?
Re: (Score:2)
How tasteless can you be?
How do you unload a truck full of mixed dead babies and bowling balls?
Re: (Score:2)
It's actually quite a nuanced decision, if you read the whole thing. The relevant law is the Equalities Act 2010.
The guy was called a "bald cunt" by his superior. The judge acknowledged that the use of "industrial" language was common in that environment, and that the complainant was not complaining about being called a cunt. However, being called bald lead to him being treated differently than others working there, which is the specific part of the Equalities Act that was violated.
https://www.legislation. [legislation.gov.uk]
Re: judgment is sound (Score:2)
If you don't think women display their breasts, you might not have hit puberty yet.
Re: judgment is sound (Score:2)
The fact that you had to mention that a bald head is nothing unless it is on a woman invalidates your entire argument.
Re: judgment is sound (Score:2)
Re: judgment is sound (Score:2)
I'm sure you could probably find some woman in the world that has turned bald men into a fetish.
Re: (Score:2)
From my reading of the article what it comes down to is this:
1)The boss wanted to get rid of him.
2)They tried to pressure him to quit
3)This is not allowed under UK employment laws.
I.e this whole case is about UK employment and not about general speech.
Re: (Score:2)
From my reading of the article what it comes down to is this:
1)The boss wanted to get rid of him. 2)They tried to pressure him to quit 3)This is not allowed under UK employment laws.
I.e this whole case is about UK employment and not about general speech.
This. Please mod parent up!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Ok, let m gt this straight: (Score:2)
Dark Comic: Doctor says sadly to the family: we're sorry. The fetus was not strong enough to defeat the abortion equipment.
My turn (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: My turn (Score:2)
Okay, groomer.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Glad to see you're also against circumcision. That barbaric practice has to stop.
Re: (Score:2)
Perfectly normal response. You shouldn't be comfortable with chemically castrating and surgically mutilating children.
You shouldn't be comfortable banning having discussions about it.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, whenever someone calls me bald I assume they mean "I can't control myself any longer, I'm going to tear my clothes off, please do with me what you want."
It really does get a little distracting when you're just trying to make some bungs.
Lord Voldemort, is that you? (Score:2)
The guy on the cover photo looks like Lord Voldemort at the back of Quirrell's head in Harry Potter vol 1.
But if the person IS bald (Score:2)
then you are just reporting the truth. Once again the truth takes it in the shorts.
Re: (Score:2)
People who are offended about everything, aren't really concerned about the truth. Some people are offended if you use masculine or feminine pronouns without asking permission. If you look for something to be offended about, you will surely find something.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think he was offended? If someone called me a bald cunt while firing me you can bet your arse I'll take them to court for a payday. It's called "retribution" not "offense".
Re: (Score:2)
Going to court to get money because someone said mean things about you...
I call that greed. That's worse than being genuinely offended.
Re: But if the person IS bald (Score:2)
I am offended you ASSUME you'll find something I am offended about! :-P
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And if my female boss is a psychotic, screaming bitch from hell and everybody knows it, do I get to say it publicly? Didn't think so
Yep. You sure do. It might interfere with your employment, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you have to use the word bitch? Why not just say she is psychotic and screaming all the time?
It's the difference between having a genuine complaint about her behaviour, and unnecessarily bringing gender into it. The fact that you did bring gender into it suggests that you think her being a woman is somehow significant, which means you treat her differently due to her gender, which is illegal in the UK.
Re: (Score:3)
then you are just reporting the truth. Once again the truth takes it in the shorts.
There's a difference between saying "You're bald" and "You're a bald cunt". The use of words in sentences changes their meaning. The word bald itself only classified the kind of law being applied. It's the other words around it combined with the situation in which they were said which resulted in the ruling.
Context matters.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd object to being called a cunt before being called bald. That's why this ruling has me so baffled.
Re: But if the person IS bald (Score:2)
And if a woman had gigantic breasts, I'm just reporting the truth by calling her the "big titties girl".
In most cases, that's inappropriate. And in some cases, calling someone bald may be too. It's all about the context.
Although in this case, it seems to be more about highlighting that the employer is a cunt who derogatorily calls employees "bald cunts".
where's the line? (Score:2)
How dare they? (Score:3)
Balderdash (Score:2)
This is a very lame ruling and borders on retardation. OOps, I can't say retarded either.
How about cunty limey? That one is OK. Well alrighty then.
So now... (Score:2)
Observation of FACTUAL REALITY is treated the same as "C'mere and sit on my face!"???
These fuckers are nuts.
While we're at it (Score:2)
Please stop using the offensive term "balderdash" to mean nonsense. Yes, I know the term comes from the Danish balder meaning "noise", but all that matters is what it sounds like.
In fact, stop using "bald" at all. We prefer "persons without head hair", since that doesn't dehumanize us to a label.
Using the term "falling out" to describe a disagreement is also offensive to us persons without head hair.
And if you've used any of those terms in the past, you owe us an apology and compensation.
(Yes, I really am
Re: (Score:2)
(Yes, I really am bald. Which also means that I can freely use the term "bald", even though it would be gravely offensive for you to use it.)
What about those of us who are partly bald? You know, balding? Can we use that word?
Re: While we're at it (Score:2)
Lotsofhairdash?
Strange reactions here on /. (Score:2)
I'm bit surprised about the responses here. While i sort-of can understand people think it's over the top, it's also about context.
So, what if the person was being insulted for wearing glasses? Or missing a limb? Or not having children? Or having a german accent?
The thing is, bullying is not socially acceptable behavior. Has nothing to do with someone being a snowflake. In an employment relationship, both the employer and employee should behave professional. The judges drawn a clear line, that such insults
Re: (Score:2)
What's over the top is calling it sexual discrimination. Claiming it's sexual discrimination because only men go bald is fucking stupid because that's not true.
Harassment using sexual characteristics (Score:2)
Sexual harassment should be defined as harassment alluding to sex, not simply harassment using sexual characteristics. If his boss had said he wanted to rub his balls on his bald head, that should be sexual harassment.
Calling a women with big breasts a cowtit bitch as an insult shouldn't be sexual harassment either, casually calling her cowtits should be.
Ok, not bald (Score:2)
Follicularly challenged c*unt then.
Sexual harassment in the UK (Score:2)
By this standard, calling a man tall or a woman short is sexual harassment.
hoist, meet petard (Score:3)
what? (Score:2)
Women can't be bald?
Or are they relying on Will Smith to enforce that side?
Oh Britain. . . (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So a typical "that could have been me!" verdict.
Re: (Score:2)
It' s not a win for the Woke Cunts.
Insulting your workers as superior is simply discriminatory. And firing people for things like this is plain and simple illegal in almost all of the Western European countries.
Don't like it? Don't start a business here. And don't hire people like that and/or don't put them in leadership positions. That, or end up in jail. The freedom choices of life!