To think this isn’t appropriate work conversation?

[AllIDoIsFloat]

Sat at work and on my lunch break while two colleagues discuss that they are anti-LGBT. In its entirety. They believe lesbians and gay people are going against “gods will” and that trans people are just mentally unwell and the surgery should be illegal.

Now I’m somewhat gender critical myself but certainly don’t believe that the surgery should be illegal. And in any event, I don’t think it’s appropriate for work? They don’t know what other people are going through, how they or their family identify. It just makes me sad that they think this is appropriate. I’m

But why would anyone need to have a quiet word if these people are just expressing their opinions? Is it not your view that people should be free to say whatever they like, regardless of whether it offends?

Your approach seems to be that people can choose not to get upset. That's fine in theory, but in reality, people cannot always just choose not to be upset. That simply isn't how human emotions work, and I suspect you probably know that.

Your next suggestion is that the upset person should challenge the offending person directly. That assumes that the upset person has the confidence to be able to do this. That there are no power imbalances or other dynamics that might make this difficult. That there is no fear that they will be victimised as a result of speaking up, or that they might be accused of bullying the offender like a pp on this thread when she tried to address the offending behaviour herself. It's the kind of suggestion that can only really come from a place of privilege, where you don't have any need to fear the consequences of raising an issue directly.

I take a different view. I don't think people should have to deal with offensive shit in the workplace, and I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to ask their employers to deal with this shit as and when it arises.

For those saying nothing unlawful has happened, remember that interpretation of the law is a matter for the courts. Not the company or organisation itself, not the police, not the public, not even MN!

It is also my view that the person who has been upset by the comments has a perfect right to tell people that they've been upset by the comments.

The problem with what you are suggesting is that you want to be able to define what is and is not acceptable for other people to say. Who is going to be deciding where that line is drawn? We've already had the nonsense of recording non-crime hate speech, and the Police wasting a huge amount of resources on policing hurtywords. It doesn't take a huge amount of imagination to see where this ends up.

So people have a right to say that they're upset by the comments, but if they aren't able to do that for some of the reasons that I have already suggested, or indeed any other reason, then they should just suck it up?

And yes, having some limits on free speech in order to protect the freedoms and the dignity of other people does involve decisions about what people can and can't say. Where this is set out in legislation, it is decided by our elected politicians. Employers may have their own policies which complement the legal framework.

The alternative, where everyone goes round trying never to upset anyone else, is worse. Before we even get to who is going to be appointed to decide what can and cannot be said.

If it's illegal, it can't be said. That doesn't apply to an opinion about the morality of skirt length and it never should, but that's where we're heading.

Life isn't always fair or nice. We don't have a right not to hear things we don't agree with. People do have to work out how to deal with a little adversity

In a place of work, it is perfectly legitimate for the employer to determine a code of conduct and to set out certain expectations around behaviour, and indeed to enforce those expectations.

Employees can vote with their feet if they don't like the policies, or they can challenge them via a tribunal if they believe that they're unlawful.

Indeed it is but whether that should extend to preventing people from talking about deeply held religious beliefs is a moot point.

Well, that's for the employer to decide, isn't it?

As long as they stay within the law, each employer will need to consider how best to balance free speech with the need to provide a positive and inclusive environment in which the majority of their staff are most likely to be able to do their best work.

For some, there may well be a moral aspect to it, and they will feel a duty to create a certain type of culture within the company. For others, it will be a more of a practical consideration as to how they are most likely to recruit and retain the best people for their business.

In my experience, the types of people who like to spout controversial and potentially offensive opinions in the workplace don't tend to be the best workers in any case - they typically lack self awareness, judgement and basic interpersonal skills, which are all qualities that tend to be important in a workplace setting.

So from a purely practical perspective, there simply wouldn't be any operational benefit in me pandering to the people who want to express controversial opinions because that would mean potentially losing the more talented staff who would prefer for me to do something about this kind of behaviour. It would make no business sense to just let people carry on spouting offensive shit and doing nothing to address it.

If other businesses feel that the offensive staff are actually the ones that add the most value to the team, then they may choose to implement a much more relaxed policy that is focused on doing the bare minimum within the requirements of the law. And if they lose other staff in the process because of the toxic work culture, they're presumably happy to suck that up.

I am bemused that you would think that I would disagree with that. You are trying to pick an argument with me where there isn't one.

I'm not trying to pick an argument with you at all. I just don't understand the point that you're trying to make.

But they didnt keep their homophobic thoughts inside their heads did they? They expressed them, hardly call that contributing to a "harmonious workplace"

It’s absolutely inappropriate for the work place.

I have a female colleague who is married to a woman (l went to her wedding, it was lovely), how is she supposed to work alongside someone who says things like that.

The same way someone else whose whole sense of the community they grew up in and belong to is that this is immoral is supposed to accept working alongside someone who talks about marrying her girlfriend?

By accepting that people are allowed to hold differing opinions?

One of those things is not like the other.

The issue is not the holding of different opinions (but let’s not act as if somebody choosing to marry is an “opinion” akin to loathing somebody for who they choose to be).

The issue is voicing those opinions in the workplace

Next time just speak up. Tell them you were upset at overhearing their conversation and could they keep it for the pub as other people may be offended too. Don't go running to the boss when you are new. Most world religion are Homophobic but its not okay to voice those views professionally. They are probably co religionists and didn't think before opening their gobs! Pretty stupid.

You can hold different opinions, but you cannot bring discriminatory language against something legal into the workplace. That is akin to bullying. Likewise you (rightfully) cannot do so because of the colour of someone’s skin.

I’m partial to a glass or 3 of wine, l have another colleague who doesn’t drink. She doesn’t tell me or tell others l should not drink, likewise l don’t say she should. It’s about acceptance and tolerance.

If two kkk members were discussing black people being animals would that be ok? Using the N word?

Or how women shouldn’t be allowed in the work place?

These would be ok?

What do you mean by “ opinion “? Being gay isn’t a choice.Do you have opinions on people being born black?

You clearly don’t understand what free speech is, and that’s ok.

It has never meant being able to say whatever you want without social consequence. Many (most) employers will have codes of conduct and absolutely can fire people for what they say in the workforce. It’s not about how they “think”. It’s what they choose to express aloud in the workplace.
Nobody wants to work in a hostile work environment.

I didn't mention anything about being gay being a choice. The discussion was about the fact that there is a huge population, both in this country and in the wider world, who hold a protected religious belief that living a sexually active gay lifestyle is a sin. Not being gay. Living a sexually active gay life.

I don't agree with them, but they do have a right to both hold that belief and to talk about it.

Agreed. Walking on eggshells at your place of work is worse.
People get upset by all sorts of things. what happens? Nothing!