Meanwhile… #Colbert #LSSC #Comedy
Boomers: You kids get triggered so easily. Millennial: Okay boomer. Boomer: WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY TO ME?!?!?!
I’m a Boomer and proud of it. We still rock, Baby.😂😂😂😂😂💕💕💕💕💕💕💕
Should have said boomer please.
That’s still the only good thing that’s ever happened in football
That insult is the least they deserve. Boomers have ruined most of America.
OK, Boomer….answer, OK your poor and I’m not…..
Just watch the Cookie Monster hire SpaceX to go after those space Cookies.
Murikkkans need to stop demonising workplace relationships, stop thinking every superior – underlying relationship is wrong. Did anybody ask the opinion of the woman? Do you realise that a rich man is actually quite a catch for women? She might have caught a big fish and now her partner is unemployed and has a taint in his career
If it does become the new N-word, this video will come to haunt him
Boomers are such snowflakes, they can dish out criticism towards the younger generations all day, but when they get it in return they throw a fit
and this, kids, is how American football makes some sense :- ) I loved the commentator who saw the chance for some fun. The “Oh, there is a cat on the field. moving. silly cat.” solution would have been way less fun in this situation
Go to bed gramps.
Stories like this one about the McDonald’s CEO are starting to bother me. If both parties are saying it is consensual, what is the problem? I know some will argue, like Colbert implied, that because of the power dynamic of one being the boss, consent is not enough, or that consent can’t be given, but that is horsesh*t. It is taking away agency from the employee (in this case a woman)- are modern feminists now trying to say that women don’t have agency to make their own decisions about what they do with their own bodies? Don’t get me wrong, if there is a situation where promotions/raises are contingent on sexually pleasing the boss, or some sort of unwanted advance toward the employee, then that is indeed wrong and should cost the boss their job (at the very least). However, are we now acting like coworkers hooking up is wrong? That power isn’t an aphrodisiac? What about situations in which the employee initiates the sexual contact; is the boss still taking advantage/forcing them? I mean people tend to hook up with people that they are close to and see on a regular basis, which often includes coworkers. Especially when you reach certain levels of success, it becomes harder and harder to pursue more traditional routes of meeting people (going to parties, bars, clubs, etc.), so the people that you spend the majority of your time with tend to be your entire “dating pool” of candidates- which at that level is mostly coworkers.
Again, it would be different if one party says that it wasn’t consensual, but that isn’t the case in some of these instances, and that is what I am talking about here. As long as there is no extortion or harassment involved, I have no problem with coworkers (even boss/employee pairings) hooking up. This seems to be one of those cases of an otherwise positive movement going too far, which will end up losing them credibility. Saying that people are victims, even when they themselves say that there is no problem, delegitimizes both other victims and the movement.
And this isn’t just because the CEO is male; take Katie Hill for example. She also resigned because she was sleeping with an employee. Again, as long as there is no extortion or harassment (which doesn’t seem to be the case there either), and because she was a politician, as long as there was no use of taxpayer money to fund their romance (vacations, gifts, etc.), then there should be no problem, and they shouldn’t have to resign or be fired. I am talking about the principle involved, and the gender of both the boss and employee is of no consequence. People who work together sometimes f*ck, and as long as everything is consensual, and there is no corruption involved, then there really is no problem; this idea that a power dynamic can invalidate consent is bullsh*t, and insulting to the employee and their own agency (ability to make decisions for themselves).
Also, it denies part of human sexuality- that the same power dynamic that they are so upset about can actually be a turn-on to many people (both male and female). Both the McD’s and Hill scandal involve female employees, but there was a local case where I live of a female politician sleeping with her male employee, and if that scandal had not involved tax-payer money funding vacations and gifts (which was the case in that instance), I would have had no problem with them hooking up- the only problem that I had was the corrupt use of tax funds (not a female boss sleeping with her male employee). But again, the gender of the parties doesn’t matter to me; it is the principle. Unfortunately, the same feminists that call for this CEO’s resignation, and the resignation of other male bosses consensually sleeping with female employees, do not hold that same “principles over gender politics” idea as true, and defended both Hill and that local female politician, even though they decry the same situation when the genders of the parties are reversed. But don’t get me started on the hypocrisy of modern feminism- I could go on for days about that movement has lost its way, and is no longer about actual equality, but instead about portraying every woman as a victim and every man as a victimizer.
The funny thing is, I don’t think that modern feminists calling for the punishment of bosses for consensual sex with employees realize that they are patronizing those employees (which often are women), and denying them the agency over their own body- which real feminists (of previous “waves” of feminism) fought so hard to secure. If a woman makes a decision to sleep with her boss, and most especially if she initiates the sexual contact, who are modern feminists to take away her choice, and say that she has no agency because of the power dynamic involved? Maybe she, like many women, get off on the idea of a sleeping with a powerful man; are they trying to slut-shame her for what turns her on? Again, the metoo movement started out great, and I think it is an important movement that has, and can still do, a lot of good;; however, there are instance like this where I think it goes too far, and loses credibility because, in trying to do the right thing, it ignores certain realities that most people accept. It makes it look to many people like the movement is going too far, being too sensitive, or overreacting. That will end up hurting the very cause that they are trying to support.
P.S. As I eluded to in this post, there are other similar situations, in which modern feminism goes too far or is hypocritical, which I will gladly discuss with anyone interested; this one post is already rather long, however, and I wanted to focus on this one type of incident. If you want to discuss those other situations, though, feel free to inquire about them. Like I said, I could on for days about how this modern, 4th wave feminism has lost its way, and no longer represents the principles/goals that real feminists (1st-3rd waves) represented- actual equality.
OK Boomer is just the new “OK Computer” – thanks Radiohead.
Yes, it is OK to say OK Boomer to ignorant boomers.
Trendy hipsters say “ok boomer”.
Your email address will not be published.
Current ye@r *
Leave this field empty
© Late Night TV website by Super Blog Me