Your title fails to mention the most interesting part: she’s a female psychopath that was caught and convicted of major financial fraud. I would have led with that.

deleted by creator

No, you define it.

Should an employee who advocates for abortion rights be able to be fired because their employer doesn’t like the optics of their statement? Should an employee who vouches for a particular political candidate be able to be fired for it? I think we can both agree that a person who advocates for the genocide of a people should be punished, but where do you draw the line? As much as I don’t really care for corporate interests, there are real consequences for companies that continue to employ people with controversial views; why would they want to continue to employ those people when they could win back public favor by firing them?

I don’t think I could define a line between what’s “accepted” political speech that’s protected against employer reprisal and what’s not. Unless we go old stand-bys, such as calls for violence, which are easy to evade. I’m not suggesting this is an easy or even a possible problem to solve; all I meant was that think employees should be protected from firing for reasonable political statements. What “reasonable” is defined as is a much more complicated question, and I concede I don’t have an answer for it.

Please see my response to the other person who responded to my comment.

https://lemmy.world/comment/25791834

By today’s standards, yes, this seems tame. But keep in mind the context. She had made numerous right-wing and fringe statements before (e.g. questioning the efficacy of COVID masks), and this is basically equalizing the treatment of Jews by the Nazis to people making hateful comments about MAGA. It’s a pretty insane and inappropriate comparison. I will say I think she had a point later, when she argued she was discriminated against because the network hadn’t fired other actors who compared Trump to Hitler. Both statements are similarly disrespectful to the victims of one of the worst atrocities in history (although I would also qualify that they’re not equally disrespectful—Trump does at least admire Hitler and arguably aspires to be him).

I guess I’m saying I can understand why they fired her. Part of me doesn’t agree with it—I think people should be allowed to make political statements outside of a work context without risking their jobs—but with our current societal norms siding with corporate image concerns, this does seem in-line with the norms of that approach. I don’t agree with her statements and think she should have had the right to say them without reprisals, but she also has no right to be surprised at the consequences in my view.

Yes. Yes it is.

Edit: Specifically, she was fired for making the following statements:

The actor continued to say, “Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/gina-carano-fired-from-mandalorian-after-social-media-post

IMO, it’s only cultural appropriation if you’re making a shit ton of money off of something you copied from another culture, while the people from that culture that are involved with thing aren’t.

People who get pissed at White people for having dreads are idiots. Same for a Mexican wearing a kilt. Grow up and let people dress how they want.

If you like it, wear a bonnet.

It is the best kind of true: technically.

Why would they do that? That would be like taking responsibility for a previous administration’s fuckery. The best thing the next president could do would be to do everything they can force Red States to improve their education systems so that the next generation grows up able to think critically and have things like good judgment of character.

Not enough of them though. Hence, #leopardsatemyface.

Oh, man, I’m not even going to try to tackle everything that’s wrong with what you just wrote. But, seriously…”lesser men?” LOL.

Banning money lending has historically been about as effective as banning alcohol/drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc. People are going to do it, no matter what, so you might as well make it legal and regulate it well.

Maybe not quite what you were looking for, but my first year in college, some students held a “Love Your Body” parade, which involved students marching around campus completely nude. Of course, the only people who participated were those most people probably would have passed on seeing naked. Just a whole bunch of folks with body image issues (mostly women, but a few men too) and way too much courage. Bizarre.

I last read Blindsight by Peter Watts and it was great. His writing style is a bit obtuse at times but there’s a neat idea on practically every single page, and the core concepts he explores are truly fascinating.

deleted by creator

I work in mental health and I’ve definitely met patients who have low IQ scores. However, even without getting into clinically significant low IQ ranges, I can virtually guarantee you that you’ve met people who have sub-100 IQs. 100 is the average human IQ score. You haven’t gone through life this far without meeting people who fall a few points below it, just as you haven’t failed to meet people who score above it. A person with a 95 IQ is not going to be able to be distinguished from a person with a score of 105 by someone who doesn’t have substantial training in assessing IQ (and even then, most experts would have to formally test people to detect subtle differences like that).

I never put my seat back and consider it rude when other people do it. There was even one instance in which I made a stink I demanded the person in front of me put their seat back up (thankfully, they complied).

As others have pointed out, this is a situation created by the airlines and their shitty business models.

I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.

It’s not that predatory entities don’t exist anymore, it’s that modern systems help make porn stars more independent if they want to be.

2013? Dude, I’m haunted by 1996.