Just to double check, your stance is that a minority should be forced to be cordial with somebody who hates them simply for existing?
Unfortunately for everybody, businesses will need to recruit and retain Gen Z employees. If that means that they have to change their company culture, then that’s going to have to happen.
My stance is that the people in this thread, and you, are jumping to hilarious conclusions to justify your continued head-up-assery.
your stance is that a minority should be forced to be cordial with somebody who hates them simply for existing?
Like seriously. Read the article and read what I said. Find where exactly I said this.
Hint: I didn’t.
My point is that this inability to debate and handle opinions you don’t like extends well beyond dealing with some random bigot.
businesses will need to recruit and retain Gen Z employees. If that means that they have to change their company culture, then that’s going to have to happen.
They also need to… do business. They need to have debates and discussion and decide on courses of action when two people feel strongly about how the company should behave, and echo chamber natives are very bad at actually articulating their thoughts and defending their points absent their peers backing them up.
“yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level”
Your problem is that you’re doing the fun game of pretending that “political differences” these days are still in the realms of disagreeing whether quantitative easing is sound economic practice, rather than disagreeing whether trans people should get to exist or not.
If you vote for a party based on their economic policy, and that party happens to be actively recruiting from the ranks of white supremacists, then congratulations: you’ve just voted at least in part for white supremacy, whether you realised it or not. If you vote for a party currently trying to win votes by campaigning on the grounds of climate change being a hoax, then congratulations, that’s exactly what you voted for.
They need to have debates and discussion and decide on courses of action
Essentially all the discussion in this thread so far has basically been focused around being outspoken against bigotry, so I’d be really interested what industry you work in where there are transferable skills from lively debates on whether racism is a good thing or not.
What’s an example of an opinion you think Bill from accounting could hold that your standard Gen-Z employee would find unacceptable?
Essentially all the discussion in this thread so far has basically been focused around being outspoken against bigotry,
Yeah, because the people in this thread didn’t read the article and are making excuses for themselves.
What’s an example of an opinion you think Bill from accounting could hold that your standard Gen-Z employee
It literally depends entirely on the people and the company, and the disagreements aren’t cross generations exclusively. The point is that Gen Z is not equipped to handle disagreement in general. You all are the ones jumping to pin it on politics that are already by large literally illegal and heavily squeezed out of corporate spaces.
the article is literally just “Gen Z can’t hold a difference of opinion” repeated over and over with different phrasing
most people by now understand what that’s code for, because the other side understands that giving examples would immediately out them as a bigot
otherwise you’d just, you know, give an example
It literally depends entirely on the people and the company
wow wild that you won’t just, you know, give an example
you realise that the narrative of “cancel culture” has been going since long before the pandemic, right? this is the same exact thing just dressed up differently
Just to double check, your stance is that a minority should be forced to be cordial with somebody who hates them simply for existing?
Unfortunately for everybody, businesses will need to recruit and retain Gen Z employees. If that means that they have to change their company culture, then that’s going to have to happen.
My stance is that the people in this thread, and you, are jumping to hilarious conclusions to justify your continued head-up-assery.
Like seriously. Read the article and read what I said. Find where exactly I said this.
Hint: I didn’t.
My point is that this inability to debate and handle opinions you don’t like extends well beyond dealing with some random bigot.
They also need to… do business. They need to have debates and discussion and decide on courses of action when two people feel strongly about how the company should behave, and echo chamber natives are very bad at actually articulating their thoughts and defending their points absent their peers backing them up.
“yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level”
Your problem is that you’re doing the fun game of pretending that “political differences” these days are still in the realms of disagreeing whether quantitative easing is sound economic practice, rather than disagreeing whether trans people should get to exist or not.
If you vote for a party based on their economic policy, and that party happens to be actively recruiting from the ranks of white supremacists, then congratulations: you’ve just voted at least in part for white supremacy, whether you realised it or not. If you vote for a party currently trying to win votes by campaigning on the grounds of climate change being a hoax, then congratulations, that’s exactly what you voted for.
Essentially all the discussion in this thread so far has basically been focused around being outspoken against bigotry, so I’d be really interested what industry you work in where there are transferable skills from lively debates on whether racism is a good thing or not.
What’s an example of an opinion you think Bill from accounting could hold that your standard Gen-Z employee would find unacceptable?
Yeah, because the people in this thread didn’t read the article and are making excuses for themselves.
It literally depends entirely on the people and the company, and the disagreements aren’t cross generations exclusively. The point is that Gen Z is not equipped to handle disagreement in general. You all are the ones jumping to pin it on politics that are already by large literally illegal and heavily squeezed out of corporate spaces.
the article is literally just “Gen Z can’t hold a difference of opinion” repeated over and over with different phrasing
most people by now understand what that’s code for, because the other side understands that giving examples would immediately out them as a bigot
otherwise you’d just, you know, give an example
wow wild that you won’t just, you know, give an example
you realise that the narrative of “cancel culture” has been going since long before the pandemic, right? this is the same exact thing just dressed up differently