I THINK I'M GOING TO GRIPE!

[caamora]

I don't know why I am posting this but it really ticked me off and at least I can gripe a little.

Earlier in the week, I brought a magazine to work for the other ladies to enjoy. This is a common practice at my work and we have many designer magazines, gossip magazines, etc. that people bring from home. Well, the one that I bought was the new Vanity Fair that had Tom Ford on the cover. This particular magazine has recently received some publicity because of the nudity of some of the actresses featured inside (nothing on the cover can be seen and it is not any different than any other magazine). WELL, apparently one of the religious zealots who work here has been going around telling everyone how offensive the magazine is to her. So far, everyone has told her that if it is offensive, don't look at it! However, she keeps on telling everyone who will listen how offended she is with it. (Several people have seen her reading the magazine. How is that for hypocrisy?)

Normally I would not care what this girl thought. Problem is, she is very, very close friends with one of the other ladies who is the eyes, ears, nose and throat of one of the VP's of our company. THIS lady will take it to her VP and I will be spoken to about the magazines being brought in. I know it willl happen, it is just a matter of time.

Now, I am a staunch Christian, go to church, etc. but I found nothing at all offensive in the magazine and I really hate these religious freaks imposing their will on everyone just because they may find this or that offensive. Because this girl will complain, MY life is going to have to change, at least at work. How stupid that is! Some free country, huh?

My sister lives in Salt Lake City - also a staunch Christian - and she can't stand the LDS's running everything up there and dictating what everyone else can do because of their religious convictions regardless that not everyone agrees with them.

Why can't these people understand that it is not alright to impose their brand of religiosity on everyone else? I am a Catholic and I don't go around expecting everyone to behave as I do!

This just kills me.

Thank you for your attention. I can relax now.

[Lord Mhoram]

I agree on religious "freaks" (heh), caam. If this really does affect your work life...well, that's just lousy. Let us know how it turns out?

[Cail]

This is exactly why I keep my faith to myself. If I find something offensive, I may complain about it, but I don't use my faith as a crutch.

Stuff like that really bugs me.

[duchess of malfi]

Stuff like that bothers me, too, Caam. One of my sisters-in-law is an extreme fundie, and is always on the back of everyone else in the family on their sinful ways (whether it is drinking beer or having sex outside of marriage or whatever her theme of the day is)...

Yet she never seems to notice that she drinks wine, and lived with her first husband for years before she married him, and with her second husband for months before she married him...

It's the hypocracy that bothers everyone as much as the constant nagging, bitching, and scolding.

[caamora]

It is hypocrisy, sadly enough.

[High Lord Tolkien]

Sorry, but the bigger issue is clearly *WHO* are the naked actresses and where can I see them?

Hmmm....
Ok, all joking aside, that really was my first reaction on reading your post.
So maybe it is a good idea to keep stuff like that out of work.

I'm the IT Manager at my work and I'm not supposed to let people see naked pics on thier computers, which, if you knew me, is kinda ironic actually

I know it seems harmless on your end, caamora, but the same case could be made for supermodel screensavers.
As annoying as that woman is and especially her reasons, she's got a point.

[duchess of malfi]

Well, the thing is...if you ever have a good look at many women's magazines (such as Marie Claire, Cosmo, Glamour, etc.)...a lot of the ads feature nude women (whether for perfume or razors).

So if you wanted to eliminate images of naked women, there would be a near endless list of publications...

[caamora]

Exactly the point, Duchess. All of these women's magazines have naked women in them. So, to fuss about it now seems kind of silly. If these kinds of things bothered her, she should have said something about it earlier. Either that or don't look at them. You HAVE to open the magazine to see the skin. She obviously looked inside. AGain, I think she should take responsibility for herself and not restrict the rest of us because she doesn't approve.

When I heard she was complaining about it, I went to the lunchroom and threw the magazine away. Some of the other girls dug it out of the trash because they wanted to look at it. Therefore, this is a matter of majority rule. Only one girl is complaining about it. Everyone else appreciates that I bring these fashion magazines in. They bring theirs in too for everyone to share. Seems to me like this chick needs to "turn the other cheek" and not look at the mags.

I realize that it may be improper to have naked women (supermodels) on your screensaver at work, etc., where everyone can see it but I put this magazine in with all the others in the lunchroom. Would I get in trouble if I had it in my desk? Not likely. Nothing distinguished it from the other fashion magazines other than the publicity of Scarlett Johanson's rear-end on the inside.

I just don't see why the rest of us have to abide by THEIR religious rules. I have enough of my own religious restrictions!

[Creator]

I agree with caam's sentiment. The problem is in today's environment a company has significant legal liability if they are accused of pemitting a "hostile" work environment. Hostile is defined as having anything "sexual" that offends "anyone", regardless of the reason.

Usually the groups pushing this agenda are NOW and the feminist organizations. After the "Bill Clinton" episode - and their "give the guy a break" reaction we have heard less about such things - but the laws still exist.

When I worked in London and Paris my European colleagues were amused at how "up tight" we Americans were!

All this being said, there have been legitimate excesses in the work environment (e.g., men leaving Playboy and Hustler around), ligitimate hostile environment issues that should be dealt with and dealt with promptly. It is unfortunate that it is difficult to make such judgement calls on the margin.

One question - what if several quiet girls were not hypocrites and were legitimately made uncomfortable by such magazines? Would they have the right to ask politely for a change in the enviroment? Should they? Tougher call when you replace the personality of the individual with someone more reasonable and keep the facts on the concern the same ....

I certainly don't have any easy answers!!

[However, it is nice to be able to vet with your friends! ]

[sgt.null]

well our son and his wife would preach us to us how moral they were and how we Catholics were going to burn in hell. meanwhile their private life would make Jerry Springer blush.

caamora
have you pointed out to your bosses that this is an over-the-counter mag and not the newest issue of Hustler?

[High Lord Tolkien]

I realize that it may be improper to have naked women (supermodels) on your screensaver at work, etc., where everyone can see it but I put this magazine in with all the others in the lunchroom. Would I get in trouble if I had it in my desk? Not likely. Nothing distinguished it from the other fashion magazines other than the publicity of Scarlett Johanson's rear-end on the inside.

I just don't see why the rest of us have to abide by THEIR religious rules. I have enough of my own religious restrictions!

Forget about religion for the moment.
Your company should have a "conduct" (or something like that) form that all employees signed before being hired.
Nudity is inappropriate whether it's in the lunch room or even *in* your desk.

If someone is porn surfing at my work, even if no one is there at the time, they will be spoken to probably be fired, depending.
Even though no one else sees it.
No harm, no foul but it's still not allowed.

And by the way, I've flipped through those women's mags and I've never seen "nudity".
Sure there's a lot of skin but I've never seen a nipple or bare ass or the baby making area exposed.
(I'm laughing while typing "baby making area").

Why am I reminded of the Seinfeld "The Contest" episode?


GEORGE: (Slowly shakes his head) My mother caught me.

JERRY: “Caught” you? Doing what?

GEORGE: You know. (All three give him blank stares) I was alone..

ELAINE: (Making a face of surprise) You mean..?!

GEORGE: (Nods) Uh-huh.

KRAMER: (Laughing) She caught you?

JERRY: Where?

GEORGE: (Not really wanting to embellish) ..I stopped by the house to drop the car off, and I went inside for a few minutes.. Nobody was there - they’re supposed to be working. (Jerry and Elaine look at each other - enjoying the story) My mother had a Glamour magazine, I started leafing through it..

JERRY: “Glamour”?

[caamora]

If I would have been asked politely to remove the magazine, I would have without any issue whatsoever. I am a very reasonable person and my intention was not to offend. Even if this particular girl asked me politely to take it home, I would have removed it and apologized profusely. (When I heard of her offense, I threw the magazine out immediately!) Instead, she decided to make a big issue out of it by complaining to everyone that it was offensive and getting someone else in trouble for it. So now, everyone else in the company who enjoyed having these magazines has to conform to please this one person who is offended for religious reasons.

As far as it being inappropriate at work, HLT, I agree that in most companies, any kind of nudity would be frowned upon. However, I have NEVER worked nor heard of a company that frowned upon fashion magazines. I work for a company that has a little more relaxed atmosphere and is family owned. We are even allowed to freely use the Internet and even the owner will email funny/risque emails to people. It is a nice, familiar company to work for and it would be unfortunate for one person to change all that for religious reasons.

Just as nudity is inappropriate at work, so is religion.

[Cail]

OK, here's my suggestion. Go through your magazines and cut out all the risque pictures and send them to me.

[caamora]

True, true - then that girl wouldn't get offended!!!

[Creator]

OK, here's my suggestion. Go through your magazines and cut out all the risque pictures and send them to me.

Oh Oh OH!! Copies for me too!!!

[High Lord Tolkien]

This is it?
This is what your co-worker is up in arms about?
The next hot summer day you guys should go out and shrink wrap her car for being such an a--hole.

Just for the record, though technically "nude" it's not to me and even passed my works firewall.

Someone help me out though.
The website I found this on mentions thatthere's a dude in the pic too but I don't see him.

[Cail]

This is going to sound horrible, but is that what passes for beauty nowadays? I don't think either of them is the least bit attractive in that photo.

[High Lord Tolkien]

What?
A woman with red lipstick covered in flour isn't attractive to you?


"beauty" is relative.
In this case it's a woman's magazine.
You really think you're going see someone in it that a guy thinks is beautiful?
Isn't it "what women would like to think guys think is attractive"?

[Cail]

Yeah, maybe if she was holding a beer, a cheesteak, and a remote control....

[High Lord Tolkien]

Yeah, maybe if she was holding a beer, a cheesteak, and a remote control....

without using her hands.