my respect for ACLU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I put the ACLU and the SPLC in the same bucket.

They are both organizations that have lost their way and are no longer credible.

+1

I used to have regular donations scheduled for both, and have stopped because they have both lost their way. In fact, in the case of the ACLU, it’s become the exact opposite of what it used to be. It is now fighting for suppression of free speech, not in the defense of free speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

What to you seems coded about her speech?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put the ACLU and the SPLC in the same bucket.

They are both organizations that have lost their way and are no longer credible.

+1

I used to have regular donations scheduled for both, and have stopped because they have both lost their way. In fact, in the case of the ACLU, it’s become the exact opposite of what it used to be. It is now fighting for suppression of free speech, not in the defense of free speech.

I hope there is a huge backlash from supporters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

No, the ACLU said it would only be offensive to black people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put the ACLU and the SPLC in the same bucket.

They are both organizations that have lost their way and are no longer credible.

+1

I used to have regular donations scheduled for both, and have stopped because they have both lost their way. In fact, in the case of the ACLU, it’s become the exact opposite of what it used to be. It is now fighting for suppression of free speech, not in the defense of free speech.

I hope there is a huge backlash from supporters.

The ACLU used to care about small donors, and they defended people who could not possibly mount their own free speech defense.

But in recent years they have turned to relying on fewer and much wealthier donors. At the same time, they’ve abandoned their principles of defending free speech and engaged in speech suppression cases. It’s not a coincidence.

Unfortunately I do not think the loss of small donors will change the direction of the organization. They can rely upon and do the bidding of their extremely wealthy donors and survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put the ACLU and the SPLC in the same bucket.

They are both organizations that have lost their way and are no longer credible.

+1

I used to have regular donations scheduled for both, and have stopped because they have both lost their way. In fact, in the case of the ACLU, it’s become the exact opposite of what it used to be. It is now fighting for suppression of free speech, not in the defense of free speech.

I hope there is a huge backlash from supporters.

The ACLU used to care about small donors, and they defended people who could not possibly mount their own free speech defense.

But in recent years they have turned to relying on fewer and much wealthier donors. At the same time, they’ve abandoned their principles of defending free speech and engaged in speech suppression cases. It’s not a coincidence.

Unfortunately I do not think the loss of small donors will change the direction of the organization. They can rely upon and do the bidding of their extremely wealthy donors and survive.

I’m not trying to be dim but I don’t understand why any wealthy donor would want to continue to support the ACLU? Who stands to gain from it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

No, the ACLU said it would only be offensive to black people.

I don’t mean this specific scenario but rather in general. If a Latino or Asian person were to be offended in that work environment by something someone said, would that someone be punished as harshly as this lady?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put the ACLU and the SPLC in the same bucket.

They are both organizations that have lost their way and are no longer credible.

+1

I used to have regular donations scheduled for both, and have stopped because they have both lost their way. In fact, in the case of the ACLU, it’s become the exact opposite of what it used to be. It is now fighting for suppression of free speech, not in the defense of free speech.

I hope there is a huge backlash from supporters.

The ACLU used to care about small donors, and they defended people who could not possibly mount their own free speech defense.

But in recent years they have turned to relying on fewer and much wealthier donors. At the same time, they’ve abandoned their principles of defending free speech and engaged in speech suppression cases. It’s not a coincidence.

Unfortunately I do not think the loss of small donors will change the direction of the organization. They can rely upon and do the bidding of their extremely wealthy donors and survive.

I’m not trying to be dim but I don’t understand why any wealthy donor would want to continue to support the ACLU? Who stands to gain from it?

Plenty of wealthy donors want speech suppressed, and that’s the tactic the ACLU is taking these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

No, the ACLU said it would only be offensive to black people.

I don’t mean this specific scenario but rather in general. If a Latino or Asian person were to be offended in that work environment by something someone said, would that someone be punished as harshly as this lady?

Maybe. Was she fired for using racially coded language, or because they just didn't like her? Or because her supervisors are especially sensitive? Not sure.

Is there as much racially coded language directed towards a Latino or Asian person or does racism towards them tend to be more obvious/explicit? I'm not sure of that either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

No, the ACLU said it would only be offensive to black people.

I don’t mean this specific scenario but rather in general. If a Latino or Asian person were to be offended in that work environment by something someone said, would that someone be punished as harshly as this lady?

Maybe. Was she fired for using racially coded language, or because they just didn't like her? Or because her supervisors are especially sensitive? Not sure.

Is there as much racially coded language directed towards a Latino or Asian person or does racism towards them tend to be more obvious/explicit? I'm not sure of that either.

It sounds like her supervisors wanted to fire her and made up a bunch of crap to do it. The stated offenses are laughable on their face and would create an absurd and unworkable standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you guys work with robots or with humans? Do none of your colleagues ever use phrases that are not extremely bland? I just cannot believe these are considered unreasonable things to say, let alone racist. I guess if I overdosed on valium, maybe I could only say "I'm afraid I cannot do that, dave". Oops. I used "afraid". my bad.

This is what happens when DEI runs everything. It is all emotion and no facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

No, the ACLU said it would only be offensive to black people.

So black fragility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you guys work with robots or with humans? Do none of your colleagues ever use phrases that are not extremely bland? I just cannot believe these are considered unreasonable things to say, let alone racist. I guess if I overdosed on valium, maybe I could only say "I'm afraid I cannot do that, dave". Oops. I used "afraid". my bad.

This is what happens when DEI runs everything. It is all emotion and no facts.

I don't think this is about DEI in any way. They just used that as a fig leaf to exercise the power and privilege of upper management.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, it's both ... and... I think her language was definitely coded AND they had a toxic work environment that they did not manage.

Was it coded? And do other POC groups get to be offended as well? Bc I’m Latina and I’ve had co-workers of all backgrounds say things that are not overtly racist but make me raise my eyebrow. And in this case, they used only 2 incidents of wording to fire her. I absolutely think that racism is alive and well in the US but crap like this just gives RWNJs ammo to use against liberals.

No, the ACLU said it would only be offensive to black people.

So black fragility.

Yep.