Tesla Subjects Women to ‘Rampant Sexual Harassment,’ Suit Says
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
"Why does ur pp look like u just came?"
"Jack in the Box should do double duty as a sperm donor clinic... Wow, this mayo sure is salty!"
Let's put things in perspective here. The chair came up with an absolutely idiotic idea (just using "it's time for a billionaire's tax" without any explanation what that would look like (a "wealth tax"? Extremely mixed results based on evidence), much less why it is ethical. His tweet amounted to a base-pandering swipe against very successful individuals "just because". Hence Musk's mocking reply with a meme.
If you want one-percenters to pay more taxes, be mad at tax law, not those individuals. No one pays a dime more than they have to in taxes. Jealousy is not an argument. Want to raise capital-gains taxes? You're going to upset millions of retirees who factored that into their financial retirement plans. This is not a simple problem, and simply stating "durr hurr billionaire's tax" is thus not productive whatsoever (except to your less-intelligent voting constituents).
Furthermore, to prove that at least the concern for his lack of contribution to government waste was not lost on him, he sold a ton of stock. So now he will owe a gigantic amount of tax money that he could have reinvested into the prosperity of thousands more individuals.
When Musk is damned when he does and also damned when he doesn't, perhaps you have a bias on your hands.
Put your money where your mouth is and start regularly insulting people in meetings when they have a bad idea. I wonder how long it’ll be before you’re canned.
You won’t.
In general, where do you think those tax laws came from?
This kind of behavior is unacceptable, let alone from the CEO of a company like Tesla.
We're talking about a CEO who intentionally smeared the reputation of another man by publicly insinuating that the man was a pedophile. It's beyond the pale.
You should ask yourself, "Why am I defending the sexually degrading behavior of Tesla's CEO?"
Most of his comments are typical of netspeak. While it's definitely not professional, I have trouble finding it appalling and quite often get a good chuckle out of it.
Your personal values, sensitivities and comfort zone are not universal. You placing a label like "humiliation" on speech doesn't make that interpretation universally agreed upon, in the same way that someone labeling criticism of the Thai royalty or the prophet Mohamed as unacceptable speech may not be something you would agree with.
The internet brings in incredibly diverse viewpoints. Some people would censor referring to Taiwan as separate from China. Some people would censor stating that humans evolved from apes. Some people would censor sexual comments.
To be clear, I'm not defending Musk's comments. I'm trying to get more people to recognize that subjective assessments of what is offensive are deeply culturally and individually biased, and someone having different taboos or 'drawing the line' in a different place on the same taboo doesn't make them objectively bad or wrong.
A person who started it by telling him to "stick his submarine where it hurts". A person who also was known to visit, alone, countries that are known for freewheeling sexual tourism. Sometimes it's hard to take the high road:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/16/elon-musk...
> "Why am I defending the sexually degrading behavior of Tesla's CEO?"
Call me Gen-X, but this was standard locker-room talk in my world
> If you want one-percenters to pay more taxes, be mad at tax law, not those individuals
You need to make up your mind about whether identifying tax law as the source of the problem and proposing changes is (1) the proper response, or (2) something worthy of sexual humiliation. Because you seem to defending the position that it is #2 with the argument that it is #1, which suggests a bit of confusion on your part.
In any event, using an internet troll meme against someone is not "sexual humiliation"
Sexual humiliation is something like, ripping someone's pants off in front of other people.
An accusation of a small peepee coupled with a lack of evidence thereof is thus baseless and thus easily dismissed.
If he actually pointed at said (presumably exposed) peepee in public and laughed at how small it was, THAT would be actual sexual humiliation.
If not, it's just macho locker room bravado.
Becoming the richest person in the world seems to have affected him almost like dementia.
It’s not uncommon as people have less need to listen to people saying “no” to them for them to conform less to general social expectations.
Eventually he will get into real trouble.
I doubt that's doable. What if the CEO of Pfizer goes to antivax protests or suports them online(i.e on Twitter)? I'm pretty sure the board /shareholders would (rightfully) send him home the next day.
I don’t believe most of what you do outside of work should have any bearing on your job. Publicly disparaging your company, sure. Being convicted of a crime, sure. But being fired for a tweet in poor taste or attending a political protest is ridiculous.
If you want to express a "personal" opinion perhaps you should do it in private/restricted/personal groups not on a worldwide public channel(i.e public twitter).
Bad behaviour of employees outside of working hous definitwly affect the employer.
The simple examples are: police officers, lawyers and politicians. Same goes for private companies. If Tim Cook would argue against certain values I hold dear, on his personal account I would definitely stop buying Apple's products.
Off-topic: I've stopped buying Apple products but I keep getting the refreshed lines as gifts. It's a weird situation.
And TITS, always good for a laugh:
"Am thinking of starting new university: Texas Institute of Technology & Science ... It will have epic merch ... Universally admired"