# How would you feel if a colleague told you they were gay?



## UnderAnOpenSky (Dec 3, 2012)

I've been asked this question in several job interviews recently. I can see why they may be asking, but you'd have to be pretty stupid to respond in a negative way I'd have thought.

Anyone else been asked this or is a new standard one along with talking about your strengths and weaknesses?


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

That's an odd one. I would never ask that, because, honestly, who cares?!?


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

Global Stoner said:


> I've been asked this question in several job interviews recently. I can see why they may be asking, but you'd have to be pretty stupid to respond in a negative way I'd have thought.
> 
> Anyone else been asked this or is a new standard one along with talking about your strengths and weaknesses?


Maybe the new haircut makes you look like a homophobe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2012)

it depends if they were coming out and you were the first person they told, in which case i'd be honoured to be so trusted, or if they're just generally saying when i'd be more so what?


----------



## Mapped (Dec 3, 2012)

What a strange question to ask, I'd never ask that. They might might have had problems with homophobes in the past and don't want to repeat them, but I doubt homophobes would out themselves in a job interview.

Or are you applying for a job in the Catholic Church? Where a different answer may be required.


----------



## fredfelt (Dec 3, 2012)

Global Stoner said:


> I've been asked this question in several job interviews recently. I can see why they may be asking, but you'd have to be pretty stupid to respond in a negative way I'd have thought.
> 
> Anyone else been asked this or is a new standard one along with talking about your strengths and weaknesses?


 
Maybe the new haircut makes you irrepressible and the interviewer was coming on to you.


----------



## Firky (Dec 3, 2012)

You do look like the kind of man that turns men gay and women insane. No?


----------



## killer b (Dec 3, 2012)

the correct answer is 'aroused'


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Dec 3, 2012)

'How would you feel if a colleague told you they were gay?'

<shrugs>


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 3, 2012)

_I'd be well chuffed.  I love The Gays, me.  I'd be like "coo-oool"._

Is that what they're after?


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> 'How would you feel if a colleague told you they were gay?'
> 
> <shrugs>


Yeah innit. Such an odd question since unless you have a problem with it one way or another the correct answer is 'meh'.


----------



## Roadkill (Dec 3, 2012)

That is a very weird question to ask, though it's easy to see why they might...

The honest answer from me would be, 'Depends if they're my type or not.'


----------



## Balham (Dec 3, 2012)

I don't I'd care, would I want to know even? Why would someone want to tell people they are gay. Do hetrosexual people tell people they are hetrosexual? A persons private live is . . . well . . . . private. It is almost like self discrimination.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Dec 3, 2012)

N1 Buoy said:


> What a strange question to ask, I'd never ask that. They might might have had problems with homophobes in the past and don't want to repeat them, but I doubt homophobes would out themselves in a job interview.


 
That would make sense, but it's two job interviews now.



Pickman's model said:


> it depends if they were coming out and you were the first person they told, in which case i'd be honoured to be so trusted, or if they're just generally saying when i'd be more so what?


 
On the second one I said I be happy that they felt they could tell me. Which I think was a good answer or I got the job in spite of it.


----------



## Roadkill (Dec 3, 2012)

Balham said:


> I don't I'd care, would I want to know even? Why would someone want to tell people they are gay. Do hetrosexual people tell people they are hetrosexual? A persons private live is . . . well . . . . private. It is almost like self discrimination.


 
No-one has to come out as heterosexual though.  That's the difference.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Sounds like a very basic screening question. It's about as likely to get an honest answer as most of the other unproveables they ask at job interviews. Some 'laddy doth protest too much' types probably would manage to 'out' themselves by adding an "as long as they don't come anywhere near my arse" sort of comment, just to make absolutely sure everyone knows they are most definitely heterosexual and not at all insecure about their sexuality.

Nice opportunity to suck up to the interviewers: _"_Delighted to be in a workplace where they didn't feel they had to hide it_."_


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 3, 2012)

Global Stoner said:


> That would make sense, but it's two job interviews now.


It's either the type of jobs you're going for, or it's you.  You maybe look intolerant.


----------



## Firky (Dec 3, 2012)

"It's you isn't it? I could tell by the way you shook my hand at the start of the interview."


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Dec 3, 2012)

How would you feel if a colleague told you they were ghey?


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

danny la rouge said:


> It's either the type of jobs you're going for, or it's you. You maybe look intolerant.


Oh, that's only of colleagues come out as fools.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 3, 2012)

Here's what to say:  "_I'd ask them for advice on soft furnishings, as I'm redecorating at the moment_."


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

I would wonder why he mentioned it.    It makes no difference.    

*shrugs*  Maybe he feels better saying it.   

Maybe he wants me to set him up with one of friends?????


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Some of you have apparently never witnessed homophobic bullying in the workplace. Or don't give a shit about it. Great stuff.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> Maybe he wants me to set him up with one of friends?????


 
Yes, if someone tells you they are gay, and you have a gay friend, you should say "ooh I have friend who is gay, I will give you their number and you guys can totally hook up!"


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> Yes, if someone tells you they are gay, and you have a gay friend, you should say "ooh I have friend who is gay, I will give you their number and you guys can totally hook up!"


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Some of you have apparently never witnessed homophobic bullying in the workplace. Or don't give a shit about it. Great stuff.


i answered the question in the op, not some different question you think i - or for that matter others - should have dealt with.


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Some of you have apparently never witnessed homophobic bullying in the workplace. Or don't give a shit about it. Great stuff.




No, I have never seen it.   I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just I've never witnessed it.   Bullying against religion or language, yes, but not homophobia.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

Balham said:


> I don't I'd care, would I want to know even? Why would someone want to tell people they are gay. Do hetrosexual people tell people they are hetrosexual? A persons private live is . . . well . . . . private. It is almost like self discrimination.


Similar thoughts to Roadkill. Certainly in lots of industries and until recently, gay people felt they had to keep it hidden. Or at least quiet. See lord Browne ex BP and that lib dem chap.... So for some this is sensitive and more difficult than for heterosexuals. 

Still an odd q for an interview IMHO- you just have a policy you sign when you join to establish that you won't discriminate etc


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> Yes, if someone tells you they are gay, and you have a gay friend, you should say "ooh I have friend who is gay, I will give you their number and you guys can totally hook up!"




I wonder how many people would actually do that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Still an odd q for an interview IMHO- you just have a policy you sign when you join to establish that you won't discriminate etc


 
Yep, that's what I would think. You don't ask people if they are homophobic - you _tell_ them that homophobic behaviour is not tolerated.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

Bit of an iffy question to ask at interview.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> I wonder how many people would actually do that.


 
You'd be surprised.


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> Bit of an iffy question to ask at interview.




Isn't that illegal to ask?


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> Isn't that illegal to ask?


Nope.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> i answered the question in the op, not some different question you think i - or for that matter others - should have dealt with.


I wasn't referring to your post (which I think is one of the best on this thread, as it happens). I can't even see why you'd think I was referring to you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> I wasn't referring to your post (which I think is one of the best on this thread, as it happens). I can't even see why you'd think I was referring to you.


ta for that: you did though refer to unnamed 'some people' apparently not having seen something not immediately under discussion. as one of the people on this thread, it was not to me clear to whom you were referring.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> Isn't that illegal to ask?


It's not illegal but at some point someone might claim that the question was inherently discriminatory.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's not illegal but at some point someone might claim that the question was inherently discriminatory.


not sure you could- would have to be discriminatory against the individual being questioned, and inferring someone is a homophobe isn't. 

Expressing myself v badly, hope you can make sense of that


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> Isn't that illegal to ask?


No, but it could arguably be used as a means to determine the interviewee's sexuality - a lot of gay people would come out in response to that question, especially if it took them off guard. I doubt that's the motivation behind the incidents in the OP, but it could easily lead to subconscious discrimination, or be used to deliberately discriminate.


----------



## Roadkill (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Similar thoughts to Roadkill. Certainly in lots of industries and until recently, gay people felt they had to keep it hidden. Or at least quiet. See lord Browne ex BP and that lib dem chap.... So for some this is sensitive and more difficult than for heterosexuals.
> 
> Still an odd q for an interview IMHO- you just have a policy you sign when you join to establish that you won't discriminate etc


 
I don't think the question itself is odd, particularly - as ymu says, it's just a basic screening question.  What I do find odd about it is why anyone thinks it's worth asking, since you'd have to be pretty fucking daft to come out with an answer like, 'The Lord made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve...'


----------



## Idaho (Dec 3, 2012)

So what is the perfect, non jokey, hr policy compatible answer? 

All of these would have seemed progressive 20 years ago but seem slightly outdated  now :

"I know loads of gays so it wouldn't bother me"
"live and let live is my motto"


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> ta for that: you did though refer to unnamed 'some people' apparently not having seen something not immediately under discussion. as one of the people on this thread, it was not to me clear to whom you were referring.


I was referring to people who were taking the piss out of what appears to be a genuine attempt to screen out people who were likely to make gay workmates feel uncomfortable and/or those who are so keen to tell us that they're not prejudiced that they think the question is entirely irrelevant and pointless to ask.


----------



## Roadkill (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> No, but it could arguably be used as a means to determine the interviewee's sexuality - a lot of gay people would come out in response to that question, especially if it took them off guard.


 
That's a point, actually.  Tbh I don't know what answer I'd give if the question took me by surprise, but it might well include outing myself.  I doubt that'd be much of a problem in my line of work, but could be for others...


----------



## Greebo (Dec 3, 2012)

@ Global Stoner IMHO the only acceptable answer is along the lines of:
"Thank you for feeling able to tell me, it makes no difference to your work, and I hope you haven't been discriminated against or made to feel unwelcome because you're gay."


Balham said:


> I don't I'd care, would I want to know even? Why would someone want to tell people they are gay. Do hetrosexual people tell people they are hetrosexual? A persons private live is . . . well . . . . private. It is almost like self discrimination.


*my 2p lands on the table* Of course heterosexuals don't go round telling others that they're straight, any more than cultural Christians feel the need to say what their official religion is. Because in both cases, they're part of the perceived norm.

But, if you're not part of the norm, it's different. How do you tell the people you work with that the reason they've noticed you looking worried or being a bit distracted is because your same sex partner is seriously ill? Even "got any plans for the weekend?" can be problematic. IME it's difficult (while in the closet) to give an honest answer.

FWIW even now (and out as a Pagan) I'd feel uncomfortable telling people in a more or less christian group of any kind that the reason I looked tired was because Beltane had fallen midweek and the very early morning followed by a late night was taking its toll. Even without the risk of losing my job, I wouldn't exactly welcome the more ignorant comments.


----------



## Idaho (Dec 3, 2012)

It's going to be something like: 

"I believe we all have a right to feel accepted in the workplace. Good teams are built on diverse perspectives and backgrounds. "

You could then add:

" as long as they don't bring AIDS into the workplace. "


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> I don't think the question itself is odd, particularly - as ymu says, it's just a basic screening question. What I do find odd about it is why anyone thinks it's worth asking, since you'd have to be pretty fucking daft to come out with an answer like, 'The Lord made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve...'


Perhaps that's just what it is - an idiot test.



Idaho said:


> It's going to be something like:
> 
> "I believe we all have a right to feel accepted in the workplace. Good teams are built on diverse perspectives and backgrounds. "
> 
> ...


Don't care so long as it's not teh bad AIDS.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's not illegal but at some point someone might claim that the question was inherently discriminatory.


A Christian/Muslim who thinks homosexuality is wrong and claims protection for that belief as it is part of their religion?

Seems stupid to ask people how they would _feel_ about it.


----------



## yardbird (Dec 3, 2012)

I have been asked by a young gentleman who was in a group of similar coming toward me. Having stood back to let them by (I was concerned that one of them might trip over one of my sticks) I was then asked by said chappie -
"Are you a fucking poof? Eh, eh?"
I thought it better to say 'owt


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

Idaho said:


> So what is the perfect, non jokey, hr policy compatible answer?
> 
> All of these would have seemed progressive 20 years ago but seem slightly outdated  now :
> 
> ...


Not a prefect answer, but I would probably say something like 'I would be interested in why they had told me, whether they are concerned in some way about the working environment blah blah. Something like that. And would then be tempted to turn it back on the interviewer and ask why they had asked the question, was there issue they would need me to address as part of the role.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> I don't think the question itself is odd, particularly - as ymu says, it's just a basic screening question. What I do find odd about it is why anyone thinks it's worth asking, since you'd have to be pretty fucking daft to come out with an answer like, 'The Lord made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve...'


The truth doesn't really matter though. Employees are entitled to hold any views they like - as long as they don't express them inappropriately at work. If they can't answer that question without making a homophobic joke/raising any alarm bells, they probably can't manage to behave themselves at work either. And, having been asked the question at interview, they should realise that homophobia is unlikely to be tolerated so they're more likely to behave themselves from Day 1 if they get the job.


----------



## nogojones (Dec 3, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> I don't think the question itself is odd, particularly - as ymu says, it's just a basic screening question. What I do find odd about it is why anyone thinks it's worth asking, since you'd have to be pretty fucking daft to come out with an answer like, 'The Lord made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve...'


 
You'd be surprised. I've interviewed a few hundred people for posts. It was in a fairly liberal workplace and we'd often ask an equal opps question, or a question that would probe their attitudes. Sometimes we had to try really hard not to snigger at the responses.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

yardbird said:


> I have been asked by a young gentleman who was in a group of similar coming toward me. Having stood back to let them by (I was concerned that one of them might trip over one of my sticks) I was then asked by said chappie -
> "Are you a fucking poof? Eh, eh?"
> I thought it better to say 'owt


"I was, but you just turned me straight"?


----------



## Idaho (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Not a prefect answer, but I would probably say something like 'I would be interested in why they had told me, whether they are concerned in some way about the working environment blah blah. Something like that. And would then be tempted to turn it back on the interviewer and ask why they had asked the question, was there issue they would need me to address as part of the role.


I like it. Up the pressure on them. Always good to hit interviewers with a few tough questions.


----------



## Greebo (Dec 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A Christian/Muslim who thinks homosexuality is wrong and claims protection for that belief as it is part of their religion?
> 
> Seems stupid to ask people how they would _feel_ about it.


AFAIK a real Christian or Muslim is also supposed to recognise that every human being falls short of moral perfection in some way, including him/herself, and treat the failings of others with the same compassion which they hope for when they finally meet their maker.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> not sure you could- would have to be discriminatory against the individual being questioned, and inferring someone is a homophobe isn't.
> 
> Expressing myself v badly, hope you can make sense of that



It's (arguably) "associative" or perceived discrimination I.e. treating one group of people less favourably on the grounds (in this case) of their orientation I.e. heterosexual people's sexuality wouldn't be the subject of those types of personal/invasive questions to interviewees so why should homosexual people's sexuality be the subject. The Equality Act made associative discrimination unlawful for all the protected characteristics, but before then it was only explicit for race and religion/belief (and arguably orientation).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Not a prefect answer, but I would probably say something like 'I would be interested in why they had told me, whether they are concerned in some way about the working environment blah blah. Something like that. And would then be tempted to turn it back on the interviewer and ask why they had asked the question, was there issue they would need me to address as part of the role.


Yeah, I'd want to know why they feel the need to ask the question. Are there problems in the workplace I need to know about.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's (arguably) "associative" or perceived discrimination I.e. treating one group of people less favourably on the grounds (in this case) of their orientation I.e. heterosexual people's sexuality wouldn't be the subject of those types of personal/invasive questions to interviewees so why should homosexual people's sexuality be the subject. The Equality Act made associative discrimination unlawful for all the protected characteristics, but before then it was only explicit for race and religion/belief (and arguably orientation).


Ah ok, that makes sense.


----------



## Geri (Dec 3, 2012)

My colleague is gay. My former manager has not twigged, and has made ill - judged remarks. I wonder if I should tell him but I'm not sure if it's my place to do so.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

"How do you feel about women taking time off from the workplace for maternity leave? "

Another similar example of an iffy question.


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's not illegal but at some point someone might claim that the question was inherently discriminatory.



Well, it is illegal in Canada.  It has nothing to do with your ability to do the job.

Just like you can't ask age, marital status, number of children......


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's (arguably) "associative" or perceived discrimination I.e. treating one group of people less favourably on the grounds (in this case) of their orientation I.e. heterosexual people's sexuality wouldn't be the subject of those types of personal/invasive questions to interviewees so why should homosexual people's sexuality be the subject. The Equality Act made associative discrimination unlawful for all the protected characteristics, but before then it was only explicit for race and religion/belief (and arguably orientation).


Can you explain that a bit more? It doesn't have anything to do with the interviewee's sexuality, only their attitude to the sexuality of others. And the aim is to ensure that everyone gets treated equally, rather than gay employees having to put up with shit that straight ones do not.

If a workplace had a problem with heterophobic bullying, then I'd expect them to take similar steps.


----------



## yardbird (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> "I was, but you just turned me straight"?


I'm straight but often thought of as gay by those who don't know me - my normal answer if it's put to me is the hack
"Don't knock it 'til you've tried it"


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Geri said:


> My colleague is gay. My former manager has not twigged, and has made ill - judged remarks. I wonder if I should tell him but I'm not sure if it's my place to do so.


 
Your colleague may not have come out because of those ill judged statements, and may not want the hassle.  So yeah, I wouldn't do it on their behalf. 

At least personally speaking I would be really fucked off if my colleague outed me.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Geri said:


> My colleague is gay. My former manager has not twigged, and has made ill - judged remarks. I wonder if I should tell him but I'm not sure if it's my place to do so.


You can object to the ill-judged remarks on the basis that they offend you - your colleague does not have to be mentioned.

Unless you mean non-homophobic remarks based on assumptions about their being straight - in which case, it's up to your colleague if they want to correct them or not.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

Geri said:


> My colleague is gay. My former manager has not twigged, and has made ill - judged remarks. I wonder if I should tell him but I'm not sure if it's my place to do so.


You can challenge him on those remarks on your own behalf- quiet word to say you've felt a bit unco for table about so e remarks made and can he put a sock in it


----------



## Thora (Dec 3, 2012)

It is a bit of an odd question, but then I have also been asked in interviews for jobs working with children "have you ever used illegal drugs?" - surely no one ever says yes?

In answer to this question, I wouldn't feel anything in particular, but does it matter if other people feel aroused/uncomfortable so long as they behave professionally


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

Supplementary information to the question is required - am I trying to bone them?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

nogojones said:


> You'd be surprised. I've interviewed a few hundred people for posts. It was in a fairly liberal workplace and we'd often ask an equal opps question, or a question that would probe their attitudes. Sometimes we had to try really hard not to snigger at the responses.


 
Can you give some more examples of "equal ops" questions?

I would be very surprised to be asked this colleague is gay question at an interview, partly because I consider work to be a sexless environment, i.e. sex just does not come into the normal working day.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Can you explain that a bit more? It doesn't have anything to do with the interviewee's sexuality, only their attitude to the sexuality of others. And the aim is to ensure that everyone gets treated equally, rather than gay employees having to put up with shit that straight ones do not.
> 
> If a workplace had a problem with heterophobic bullying, then I'd expect them to take similar steps.


The sexuality of the interviewee doesn't have anything to do with it. You can't know/makes assumptions about why they are asking this question; it might not be for a positive reason. The point is that the interviewers are using one of the protected characteristics as the basis for their questioning which will always be iffy simply because you cannot predict whether someone will perceive it to be a discriminatory question, whether or not it's intended that way. "How would you feel if a colleague announced she was going on maternity leave shortly after she was recruited?" ... loads of examples of questions that are just wise not to ask.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Can you give some more examples of "equal ops" questions?
> 
> I would be very surprised to be asked this colleague is gay question at an interview, partly because I consider work to be a sexless environment, i.e. sex just does not come into the normal working day.


 
Yeah but it's not just about sex.  It's about being able to say what you're up to at the weekend without having to lie, it's not having to put up with derogatory comments about gay people and so on.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> I would be very surprised to be asked this colleague is gay question at an interview, partly because I consider work to be a sexless environment, i.e. sex just does not come into the normal working day.


 
It is certainly frowned upon during business hours at my place.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Yeah but it's not just about sex.  It's about being able to say what you're up to at the weekend without having to lie, it's not having to put up with derogatory comments about gay people and so on.


Or even not having your sexuality put to interviewees as a "what if" question.


----------



## nogojones (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Can you give some more examples of "equal ops" questions?
> 
> I would be very surprised to be asked this colleague is gay question at an interview, partly because I consider work to be a sexless environment, i.e. sex just does not come into the normal working day.


 

 It's been a couple of years so the exact wording will be a bit off. The post would have been for a manager of a social care team

Question : One of the members of your team refuses to work with a service user because of their sexuality. How would you deal with the situation?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Yeah but it's not just about sex. It's about being able to say what you're up to at the weekend without having to lie, it's not having to put up with derogatory comments about gay people and so on.


 
Yes, ok, but I can't see a bigot being stupid enough to out themselves in response to such a question.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Yes, ok, but I can't see a bigot being stupid enough to out themselves in response to such a question.


 
You would be amazed.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Yes, ok, but I can't see a bigot being stupid enough to out themselves in response to such a question.


Some bigots are fucking stupid, tbf.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Yeah but it's not just about sex.  It's about being able to say what you're up to at the weekend without having to lie, it's not having to put up with derogatory comments about gay people and so on.


Yeah, agree. It's not as difficult, I don't think (as a hetero, so possibly talking shit) when you are settled down/coupled up, but the young gay lifestyle- certainly as lived in some places, like round vauxhall- is so v different to the straight one, that its less people just not being bothered and more them being aware they may be saying things that can be seen as judgemental or negative. Some of it is just ignorance


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

nogojones said:


> It's been a couple of years so the exact wording will be a bit off. The post would have been for a manager of a social care team


 
Oh, ok, I imagine a social care team would be more careful and aware of such sensitivities than for example an engineering company.



nogojones said:


> Question : One of the members of your team refuses to work with a service user because of their sexuality. How would you deal with the situation?


 
Yup, that would present a problem and no mistake. I suppose it would depend on how easy it might be to permit them to avoid that person. If there was no one else to do that job it would be very difficult. I think there is no right not to serve a person because of sexuality.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Yeah, agree. It's not as difficult, I don't think (as a hetero, so possibly talking shit) when you are settled down/coupled up, but the young gay lifestyle- certainly as lived in some places, like round vauxhall- is so v different to the straight one, that its less people just not being bothered and more them being aware they may be saying things that can be seen as judgemental or negative. Some of it is just ignorance


 
With the greatest of respect, mate, what the fuck is 'the young gay lifestyle'?


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> With the greatest of respect, mate, what the fuck is 'the young gay lifestyle'?


I suspect it's similar to the 'young hetero lifestyle' but with less accidental pregnancy.


----------



## Thora (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Yeah, agree. It's not as difficult, I don't think (as a hetero, so possibly talking shit) when you are settled down/coupled up, but the young gay lifestyle- certainly as lived in some places, like round vauxhall- is so v different to the straight one, that its less people just not being bothered and more them being aware they may be saying things that can be seen as judgemental or negative. Some of it is just ignorance


It's not so much of a lifestyle thing, more that as a hetero person you can mention your sexuality 100 times a day without anyone batting an eyelid or thinking you are being in their face, whereas it's very difficult to actively hide your sexuality - more so if you are settled down and coupled up I would have thought.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I suspect it's similar to the 'young hetero lifestyle' but with less accidental pregnancy.


 
I'm just interested to know what lifestyle I am supposed to be leading as a young gay person.  I expect it's a lot less exciting than what Manter imagines.  

I might make a cup of tea in a minute and drink it out of a mug that says coffee.  I am that wild.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

Thora said:


> ...as a hetero person you can mention your sexuality 100 times a day without anyone batting an eyelid...


 
100 times a day? 

I'd perhaps think 'here we have one who protesteth a little too much'...


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

It's generally best to try and avoid stereotyping, too.


----------



## Thora (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> 100 times a day?
> 
> I'd perhaps think 'here we have one who protesteth a little too much'...


I chat with my colleagues all the day about my home life, kids, my partner, weekend plans, holidays, Christmas etc.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

Thora said:


> I chat with my colleagues all the day about my home life, kids, my partner, weekend plans, holidays, Christmas etc.


 
I have gay colleagues who do similar.

To be honest, I'd sack them for not pulling their weight, but I'm not the boss.


----------



## Thora (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> I have gay colleagues who do similar.


Not sure what your point is


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's what I would think. You don't ask people if they are homophobic - you _tell_ them that homophobic behaviour is not tolerated.


And what about those who insist that "it's just a joke" and therefore not offensive? Plenty of people have no clue what prejudiced behaviour actually is. There are good reasons to be  about this question, but it is likely to be effective at weeding out _some of_ the dickheads who will make others uncomfortable.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> With the greatest of respect, mate, what the fuck is 'the young gay lifestyle'?


Be gentle with me, I warned you I was talking shit today ;-)

Totally failing to express myself... Places and clubs and stuff that the young gay guys in our office refer to that are totally different to the clubs the straight grads are talking about. Including master u, and horse meat disco and stuff.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> And what about those who insist that "it's just a joke" and therefore not offensive? Plenty of people have no clue what prejudiced behaviour actually is. There are good reasons to be  about this question, but it is likely to be effective at weeding out _some of_ the dickheads who will make others uncomfortable.


Perhaps. Perhaps it would also catch some people off-guard and feeling that they had to say more than simply 'I wouldn't feel anything', which might be the truth, and so they might start to waffle in a way that makes them facepalm at themselves after the interview's over. It sounds like a question designed to catch people out to me.

Anyway, cesare's right, imo. Shite question and the 'correct' answer is to challenge the question.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

Thora said:


> Not sure what your point is


 
I was referring to what you seemed to be implying in post #81 - that gay people can't talk about what they're doing at the weekends/holidays/whatever. 

Though I'm sure workplaces differ in this regard.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> I'm just interested to know what lifestyle I am supposed to be leading as a young gay person.  I expect it's a lot less exciting than what Manter imagines.
> 
> I might make a cup of tea in a minute and drink it out of a mug that says coffee.  I am that wild.


Don't ruin my preconceptions. I want to believe you are out swinging for chandeliers, not drinking hot beverages....


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Dec 3, 2012)

"gay as  in your sexuality, or how the kids mean it?"

Ymu nailed it. Id feel glad to work in an inclusive and diverse workplace. If it was shared in confidence, I would be flattered that I was the trusted party, would keep any confidences, and would see if I  could help adress any workplace issues that might make them feel uncomfortable as a result of their sexuality, in a sensitive way.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> It's generally best to try and avoid stereotyping, too.


Yes, good call.  Consider myself reprimanded


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Yeah, agree. It's not as difficult, I don't think (as a hetero, so possibly talking shit) when you are settled down/coupled up, but the young gay lifestyle- certainly as lived in some places, like round vauxhall- is so v different to the straight one, that its less people just not being bothered and more them being aware they may be saying things that can be seen as judgemental or negative. Some of it is just ignorance


It's got fuck all to do with lifestyle and an awful lot to do with things like what pronoun you use to describe your partner, being able to mention your home life without picking your words carefully, not having people just assume that if you're going out with someone they will be of the opposite sex. You know, the kinds of things that heterosexuals take for granted.


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> It's got fuck all to do with lifestyle and an awful lot to do with things like what pronoun you use to describe your partner, being able to mention your home life without picking your words carefully, not having people just assume that if you're going out with someone they will be of the opposite sex. You know, the kinds of things that heterosexuals take for granted.


TBH homophobia is the one I come across least in the UK as has been mentioned. People are less likely to be bothered about someone being gay than about any of the other bigot faves like being disabled or foreign or a single mum.


----------



## Thora (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> I was referring to what you seemed to be implying in post #81 - that gay people can't talk about what they're doing at the weekends/holidays/whatever.
> 
> Though I'm sure workplaces differ in this regard.


The point is they can't easily talk about their partner etc if they want/need to hide their sexuality - whereas I have never heard anyone suggest that heterosexual people should keep their sexuality to themselves or not get in people's faces to avoid problems.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> I was referring to what you seemed to be implying in post #81 - that gay people can't talk about what they're doing at the weekends/holidays/whatever.
> 
> Though I'm sure workplaces differ in this regard.


This strand of the thread started in response to people wondering why anyone would bother coming out at work when work has nothing to do with sex. The answer being that they cannot talk easily about these things without coming out.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

Thora said:


> The point is they can't easily talk about their partner etc if they want/need to hide their sexuality - whereas I have never heard anyone suggest that heterosexual people should keep their sexuality to themselves or not get in people's faces to avoid problems.


 
Fair enough - I wasn't thinking in the context of someone wanting to deliberately stay below the radar - rather in the context of a liberal environment where everyone rubs along (not necessarily literally) happily enough where there could be the odd rogue heemaphone.

e2a -guess that also answers ymu's point...


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

Wonder what you think of this, it is mildly related ...

I worked with a nice woman who was engaged to be married, she was very happy about it. I met her husband to be in a nightclub. During the evening I discovered first that he was gay, and second that he had an active gay sex life about which I was pretty sure she did not know. He was basically being unfaithful to her with just about any man available.

I wondered if I should tell her? I figured it would be pretty devastating however she found out about it. What would you have done?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Wonder what you think of this, it is mildly related ...
> 
> I worked with a nice woman who was engaged to be married, she was very happy about it. I met her husband to be in a nightclub. During the evening I discovered first that he was gay, and second that he had an active gay sex life about which I was pretty sure she did not know. He was basically being unfaithful to her with just about any man available.
> 
> I wondered if I should tell her? I figured it would be pretty devastating however she found out about it. What would you have done?


 
Arrrggh!!  I think you'd first have to talk to him rather than her, assuming you don't want to stay out of it completely.

It's a car crash waiting to happen but you might be able to get him to see the inevitability of it and that it's a much cheaper car crash without wedding and divorce expenses on top.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

Yeah, talk to him before talking to her.


----------



## Thora (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Wonder what you think of this, it is mildly related ...
> 
> I worked with a nice woman who was engaged to be married, she was very happy about it. I met her husband to be in a nightclub. During the evening I discovered first that he was gay, and second that he had an active gay sex life about which I was pretty sure she did not know. He was basically being unfaithful to her with just about any man available.
> 
> I wondered if I should tell her? I figured it would be pretty devastating however she found out about it. What would you have done?


I would have told her, if I wasn't too bothered about her never speaking to me again.  People often shoot the messenger.


----------



## nogojones (Dec 3, 2012)

bone him?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

Thora said:


> I would have told her, if I wasn't too bothered about her never speaking to me again. People often shoot the messenger.


 
Yeah, if it's not a valuable friendship I suppose that's an option.  I'd feel fucking awful about it without going to him first, though.  Unless he was a Tory or something.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> Arrrggh!! I think you'd first have to talk to him rather than her, assuming you don't want to stay out of it completely.
> 
> It's a car crash waiting to happen but you might be able to get him to see the inevitability of it and that it's a much cheaper car crash without wedding and divorce expenses on top.


 
Hiya 8ball, it was a good few years ago now, I think talking to him would have been a good option but at the time I did not think of it. tbf I had no clue what to do or if I should in fact do anything and rather consider that it was just not my businesss. What I did was to talk to her best friend and tell him what I had discovered then leave it up to him as to whether to tell her or not. Needless to say, the best friend simply did not believe me.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> It's got fuck all to do with lifestyle and an awful lot to do with things like what pronoun you use to describe your partner, being able to mention your home life without picking your words carefully, not having people just assume that if you're going out with someone they will be of the opposite sex. You know, the kinds of things that heterosexuals take for granted.


So the issue is gay people feeling more comfortable? It think how comfortable they are depends on both them and the employer.... No matter how relaxed an environment is, if an individual doesn't want to come out they are going to have to watch the personal pronouns


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Hiya 8ball, it was a good few years ago now, I think talking to him would have been a good option but at the time I did not think of it. tbf I had no clue what to do or if I should in fact do anything and rather consider that it was just not my businesss. What I did was to talk to her best friend and tell him what I had discovered then leave it up to him as to whether to tell her or not. Needless to say, the best friend simply did not believe me.


 
What happened in the end?


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Wonder what you think of this, it is mildly related ...
> 
> I worked with a nice woman who was engaged to be married, she was very happy about it. I met her husband to be in a nightclub. During the evening I discovered first that he was gay, and second that he had an active gay sex life about which I was pretty sure she did not know. He was basically being unfaithful to her with just about any man available.
> 
> I wondered if I should tell her? I figured it would be pretty devastating however she found out about it. What would you have done?


Same as I'd do if he was straight and shagging around. Makes fuck all difference.

As to specific courses of action, that would depend on the specifics of the situation. Very, very difficult. I crashed at a workmate's house after a party and her boyfriend crawled into bed with me in the middle of the night. I gave him a very hard time about it, but did not tell her. I still don't know if I should have done. Horrible situation, however it arises.


----------



## Greebo (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Wonder what you think of this, it is mildly related ...<snip> I figured it would be pretty devastating however she found out about it. What would you have done?


In your shoes, I'd ask the bloke to either tell her or stop what he was doing behind her back.  And if he didn't, I'd tell her, for her own safety.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> What happened in the end?


 
I was made redundant and got a job in Germany so I lost contact, no idea what happenned.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> So the issue is gay people feeling more comfortable? It think how comfortable they are depends on both them and the employer.... No matter how relaxed an environment is, if an individual doesn't want to come out they are going to have to watch the personal pronouns


 
But there's a bigger and wider issue here about the fact gay people have to come out at all, the fact that gay people feel uncomfortable with their sexuality because society is so grossly heteronormative. 

I


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> ....
> As to specific courses of action, that would depend on the specifics of the situation. Very, very difficult. I crashed at a workmates house after a party and her boyfriend crawled into bed with me in the middle of the night. I gave him a very hard time about it, but did not tell her. I still don't know if I should have done. Horrible situation, however it arises.


 
Yes, on reflection I should have started by having a go at him. I was pretty young and innocent at the time - at least that is my excuse for not having done that.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> So the issue is gay people feeling more comfortable? It think how comfortable they are depends on both them and the employer.... No matter how relaxed an environment is, if an individual doesn't want to come out they are going to have to watch the personal pronouns


Once more, we're talking about this because some people could see no reason why you might want to come out at work. The reasons why you might want to are so that you don't have to self-censor all the time (and nothing at all to do with people disapproving of your debauched lifestyle).


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> But there's a bigger and wider issue here about the fact gay people have to come out at all, the fact that gay people feel uncomfortable with their sexuality because society is so grossly heteronormative.
> 
> I


I am not gay, so straying into areas of total ignorance here...

Do gay people still have to come out- ie at one point it's a secret and then they tell everyone? Or are you just having a chat and at some poi t they mention a pronoun or other and you vaguely register that means they are sleeping with a he or a she?


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> I am not gay, so straying into areas of total ignorance here...
> 
> Do gay people still have to come out- ie at one point it's a secret and then they tell everyone? Or are you just having a chat and at some poi t they mention a pronoun or other and you vaguely register that means they are sleeping with a he or a she?


 
Yes, of course gay people have to come out.  And sometimes the consequences of doing so are horrendous. 

Not all the time, like, it varies from situation to situation.  But yes, there are still plenty of people having to come out, instead of being able to just use the relevant pronoun.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Yes, on reflection I should have started by having a go at him. I was pretty young and innocent at the time - at least that is my excuse for not having done that.


It's not always that easy and I don't think you should feel bad about it.

It was very easy for me to have a go at him because he'd started undressing and groping me whilst I was asleep. I was entitled to bawl him out on my own behalf.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

I know it is not the same, but I have manic depression (bipolar I), Just looking at me you cannot tell but it is now quite a big part of what makes me me. I can divide my friends and associates between those that I have told, and those that I have not told. It would possibly be easier if everyone knew but in the workplace I would be discriminated against.


----------



## Pat24 (Dec 3, 2012)

Shortly after I joined my old job, one of my colleagues decided to come out whilst on holiday abroad. He used MSN to tell everyone on the team individually that he was out there holidaying with his boyfriend. I was like "dude, that's cool, have fun" - whereas others in the team reacted differently, from being shocked they didn't see it coming to "woah! he likes dudes uugh" but not openly saying so, mind.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> I know it is not the same, but I have manic depression (bipolar I), Just looking at me you cannot tell but it is now quite a big part of what makes me me. I can divide my friends and associates between those that I have told, and those that I have not told. It would possibly be easier if everyone knew but in the workplace I would be discriminated against.


Yeah, there's still a lot of stigma attached to mental illness.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 3, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> People are less likely to be bothered about someone being gay than about any of the other bigot faves like being disabled or foreign or a single mum.


 
You know this because you're gay and have never had much trouble when people find out?


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> I know it is not the same, but I have manic depression (bipolar I), Just looking at me you cannot tell but it is now quite a big part of what makes me me. I can divide my friends and associates between those that I have told, and those that I have not told. It would possibly be easier if everyone knew but in the workplace I would be discriminated against.




I told my boss, and then had my hours cut from 40/week to 16 hours.  I quit when the hours dropped to 8/2 week period.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> TBH homophobia is the one I come across least in the UK as has been mentioned. People are less likely to be bothered about someone being gay than about any of the other bigot faves like being disabled or foreign or a single mum.


 
I can't say that's my personal experience tbh.  But then I would prefer not to create a hierarchy of discrimination, it's all shit.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> I told my boss, and then had my hours cut from 40/week to 16 hours. I quit when the hours dropped to 8/2 week period.


What did you tell your boss spring-peeper? that you were gay or had bipolar? that sounds like a nasty reaction to it anyhow, hope you are in a better place now.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

Pat24 said:


> Shortly after I joined my old job, one of my colleagues decided to come out whilst on holiday abroad. He used MSN to tell everyone on the team individually that he was out there holidaying with his boyfriend. I was like "dude, that's cool, have fun" - whereas others in the team reacted differently, from being shocked they didn't see it coming to "woah! he likes dudes uugh" but not openly saying so, mind.


 
Just to say, that is quite a cool way to "come out" !! how did your colleagues treat him when he came back from holiday?


----------



## spring-peeper (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> What did you tell your boss spring-peeper? that you were gay or had bipolar? that sounds like a nasty reaction to it anyhow, hope you are in a better place now.



Bi-polar - Being gay wouldn't interfere with my work.   

I'm in a better place - I'm not working.    I stay at home with my retired hubby and my stress level is soooooo low right now


----------



## scifisam (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> I am not gay, so straying into areas of total ignorance here...
> 
> Do gay people still have to come out- ie at one point it's a secret and then they tell everyone? Or are you just having a chat and at some poi t they mention a pronoun or other and you vaguely register that means they are sleeping with a he or a she?


 
That _is_ coming out. Coming out doesn't mean only standing up and shouting that you're gay.


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 3, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> You know this because you're gay and have never had much trouble when people find out?


I'm not gay but I haven't noticed people getting shit for being gay, even people who are really flamboyantly and vociferously gay. 

IME bigots are far more likely to moan about 'scroungers' or 'immigrants' or somesuch. 

I'm not saying there's not plenty of anti-gay bigotry about but people seem to keep it better hidden than other bigotries these days.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 3, 2012)

spring-peeper said:


> Bi-polar - Being gay wouldn't interfere with my work.
> 
> I'm in a better place - I'm not working. I stay at home with my retired hubby and my stress level is soooooo low right now


 
We should form an Urban Bipolar Mafia 

Seriously my former psychiatrist also told me to avoid stress, all of the jobs I am qualified for are stressfull!!


----------



## scifisam (Dec 3, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I'm not gay but I haven't noticed people getting shit for being gay, even people who are really flamboyantly and vociferously gay.
> 
> IME bigots are far more likely to moan about 'scroungers' or 'immigrants' or somesuch.
> 
> I'm not saying there's not plenty of anti-gay bigotry about but people seem to keep it better hidden than other bigotries these days.


 
It depends on the field you're in. I had a LOT of prejudice directed towards me when teaching English at a private language college - by the owner, not my colleagues, who didn't care at all. The owner thought all gay people were paedophiles, which is a connection a lot of people make.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 3, 2012)

I can't be bothered to trawl this thread and do quotes, but...

Interesting interview question - I've never encountered it.  It could be a way of getting people to think about it and trying to identify people who actually mean it about the 'commitment to equalities' thing rather than those who are effectively saying 'yes, of course I say I go along with all this PC bullshit that we have to say we agree with'  (of course that could work either way depending on the prospective employer's attitude - one interview some years back, i did talk a bit when the equalities question came up, and I got the distinct impression I should have just said "yes of course I agree" and let the interviewer tick the box and move on...)

Regarding the 'need' to come out - so long as there are workplaces where gay people are wary of being out from day one, and so long as people tend to assume you're heterosexual, then yes there is going to be a need to 'come out' to some extent, and to keep doing so when new colleagues come to the workplace.  (if you introduce yourself as "hi, I'm John the resident poof" you'll be accused of "forcing it down peoples' throats", and if you introduce yourself as John and they subsequently find out they might accuse you of deceiving them...)

And having been shoved out of a few jobs in the past when it's come to the attention of someone in authority that I'm one of those queers, I'm inclined to be cautious.  (and yes, it was before the relevant equalities law, but it was never officially given as the reason for my departure / being sidelined to the extent where I got the hell out as soon as I could) 

In my last but one workplace, the only time I was aware that someone's sexuality was being questioned by colleagues, he went home for lunch that day and posted his resignation in.  It was that sort of place...  The luxury of not working somewhere like that is not one everyone can afford.

And as for the 'heterosexuals don't need to come out' argument - oh fuck, not that again...

Firstly, most peoples' default assumption is that you're hetero unless proven otherwise.

Now imagine a parallel universe where being straight is somewhere between a criminal offence and being seen as 'second best'.  Try going through a day without dropping the slightest hint you might be straight - not mentioning anything about a partner / children, an opinion about a celeb, thinking twice about saying anything about something that might be seen as a 'typically straight interest' and so on.  Straight people mostly do 'come out' several times a day.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

scifisam said:


> That _is_ coming out. Coming out doesn't mean only standing up and shouting that you're gay.


Maybe flu meds are making me a bit dim.... Someone earlier said that they didn't want to have to worry about coming out. If any acknowledgement of homosexuality is coming out, the alternative is hiding it (I guess) which has to be worse? Society is heteronormative, partly I'd have thought for historical reasons and partly sheer numbers. Is it really still a nightmare to be gay, or a mild social discomfort when someone gets it wrong (I have previous for making passes at gay men.... But that is mostly embarrassing then funny)

I know there are occasions and places where people are dreadful, bigoted, and even violent, but is that not unusual now?  

Sorry if I am being remarkably dim, but what is the issue/solution around coming out?


----------



## scifisam (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Maybe flu meds are making me a bit dim.... Someone earlier said that they didn't want to have to worry about coming out. If any acknowledgement of homosexuality is coming out, the alternative is hiding it (I guess) which has to be worse? Society is heteronormative, partly I'd have thought for historical reasons and partly sheer numbers. Is it really still a nightmare to be gay, or a mild social discomfort when someone gets it wrong (I have previous for making passes at gay men.... But that is mostly embarrassing then funny)
> 
> I know there are occasions and places where people are dreadful, bigoted, and even violent, but is that not unusual now?
> 
> Sorry if I am being remarkably dim, but what is the issue/solution around coming out?



My gf hides her sexuality because her closest (in terms of work roles) colleague is an evangelical christian who occasionally says homophobic things. It would be an utterly shit working environment if she knew my gf were gay. I've been fired for being gay before, so I'm a little tentative about it too.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> Maybe flu meds are making me a bit dim.... Someone earlier said that they didn't want to have to worry about coming out. If any acknowledgement of homosexuality is coming out, the alternative is hiding it (I guess) which has to be worse? Society is heteronormative, partly I'd have thought for historical reasons and partly sheer numbers. Is it really still a nightmare to be gay, or a mild social discomfort when someone gets it wrong (I have previous for making passes at gay men.... But that is mostly embarrassing then funny)
> 
> I know there are occasions and places where people are dreadful, bigoted, and even violent, but is that not unusual now?
> 
> Sorry if I am being remarkably dim, but what is the issue/solution around coming out?


Is homophobic violence and bullying still a problem these days? You seriously need to ask that?

As for the rest, you've had it explained at least 4 times now - most recently:



Puddy_Tat said:


> Try going through a day without dropping the slightest hint you might be straight - not mentioning anything about a partner / children, an opinion about a celeb, thinking twice about saying anything about something that might be seen as a 'typically straight interest' and so on. Straight people mostly do 'come out' several times a day.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Dec 3, 2012)

scifisam said:


> I've been fired for being gay before


 
Not explicitly, presumably?


----------



## Fedayn (Dec 3, 2012)

I wouldn't care, ive no negative interest in learning someone is gay. I don't think i've worked in a single place/company where there've been no gay men or lesbians. Just part ofbeing at work.


----------



## Fedayn (Dec 3, 2012)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Not explicitly, presumably?


 
Why not? Up until recently it was perfectly legal to fire someone for being gay. Sexuality was not part of equal rights legislation.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Is homophobic violence and bullying still a problem these days? You seriously need to ask that?
> 
> As for the rest, you've had it explained at least 4 times now - most recently:


I know a fair few gay people and I have never heard them talk about anything other than amusing fuck ups/misunderstandings. I'm not saying that dreadful b&b couple don't exist, or that the stabbing on the south bank didn't happen, just wondering aloud if it is common or less common, and whether it is only certain places or demographics you have to be wary of, or if it is still pervasive.  

And while you may feel you've explained everything to me, I am still not entirely certain what your point is. If straight people come out a couple of times a day, and so do gay people, then we just need people not to care who you're sleeping with, which, to my earlier point, I think many don't


----------



## maldwyn (Dec 3, 2012)

In a job I once had within a public organisation ('97)  a newly appointed manager was a born-again christian and a right homophobic wanker, eventually filling all new vacancies with his cronies and forcing out people like me.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

scifisam said:


> My gf hides her sexuality because her closest (in terms of work roles) colleague is an evangelical christian who occasionally says homophobic things. It would be an utterly shit working environment if she knew my gf were gay. I've been fired for being gay before, so I'm a little tentative about it too.


Ugh, fucking god botherers. I hope she says lots of very Darwinian stuff to provide a balance


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

Fedayn said:


> Why not? Up until recently it was perfectly legal to fire someone for being gay. Sexuality was not part of equal rights legislation.


Aye, it was only 9 years ago. Hardly any time in the scheme of things. and even then it didn't extend to goods and services.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 3, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I'm not gay but I haven't noticed people getting shit for being gay, even people who are really flamboyantly and vociferously gay.
> 
> IME bigots are far more likely to moan about 'scroungers' or 'immigrants' or somesuch.
> 
> I'm not saying there's not plenty of anti-gay bigotry about but people seem to keep it better hidden than other bigotries these days.


 
I am gay and white. I wouldn't like to comment on the levels of racial discrimination based on my experience of it, because I am aware from being gay that most discrimination happens without other people being aware of it.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> I know a fair few gay people and I have never heard them talk about anything other than amusing fuck ups/misunderstandings. I'm not saying that dreadful b&b couple don't exist, or that the stabbing on the south bank didn't happen, just wondering aloud if it is common or less common, and whether it is only certain places or demographics you have to be wary of, or if it is still pervasive.
> 
> And while you may feel you've explained everything to me, I am still not entirely certain what your point is. If straight people come out a couple of times a day, and so do gay people, then we just need people not to care who you're sleeping with, which, to my earlier point, I think many don't


 
It's still very pervasive.   Take a look at Stonewall's The School / Teachers Report for a start.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> It's still very pervasive.   Take a look at Stonewall's The School / Teachers Report for a start.


Never seen it- off to google!


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Key findings for you, @Manter:


Homophobic bullying is almost endemic in Britain's schools. Almost two thirds (65 per cent) of young lesbian, gay and bisexual pupils have experienced direct bullying. Seventy five per cent of young gay people attending faith schools have experienced homophobic bullying.
Even if gay pupils are not directly experiencing bullying, they are learning in an environment where homophobic language and comments are commonplace. Ninety eight per cent of young gay people hear the phrases “that’s so gay” or “you’re so gay” in school, and over four fifths hear such comments often or frequently.
Ninety seven per cent of pupils hear other insulting homophobic remarks, such as “poof”, “dyke”, “rug-muncher”, “queer” and “bender”. Over seven in ten gay pupils hear those phrases used often or frequently.
Less than a quarter (23 per cent) of young gay people have been told that homophobic bullying is wrong in their school. In schools that have said homophobic bullying is wrong, gay young people are 60 per cent more likely not to have been bullied.
Over half of lesbian and gay pupils don’t feel able to be themselves at school. Thirty five per cent of gay pupils do not feel safe or accepted at school.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Dec 3, 2012)

I went to an all boys school and it was a very homophobic environment. I left 13 years ago, but I'd be surprised if much had changed tbh.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> I know a fair few gay people and I have never heard them talk about anything other than amusing fuck ups/misunderstandings. I'm not saying that dreadful b&b couple don't exist, or that the stabbing on the south bank didn't happen, just wondering aloud if it is common or less common, and whether it is only certain places or demographics you have to be wary of, or if it is still pervasive.
> 
> And while you may feel you've explained everything to me, I am still not entirely certain what your point is. If straight people come out a couple of times a day, and so do gay people, then we just need people not to care who you're sleeping with, which, to my earlier point, I think many don't


Does it matter if it's more or less common? Do you think perhaps that gay people might have a diverse range of experiences, which will depend heavily on where they grew up, what their family's attitude is, what job they do, where they socialise and so on? Do you expect everyone to tell you about the most hurtful experiences?

The rest of your post has nothing whatsoever to do with the conversation we're having. To recap:

1. Several people on the thread wondered why in hell anyone would come out at work as it is not relevant.

2. You replied to one of those people speculating that it would be an issue for young gay people because straight people wouldn't understand their debauched lifestyle and older gay people wouldn't have the same problem.

3. Several people pointed out that you were talking utter garbage, offensive garbage at that, and have been trying to explain to you (and those you were responding to) that everyone 'comes out' several times a day during the course of normal social interaction. For heterosexuals this is never an issue, but gay people have to decide whether they want to come out or perpetually self-censor in order to keep the information private.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Also, Manter, do you not think that if society really was as accepting as you seem to think it is, do you not think we would be allowed to have the same ability to marry as straight people?

You can't really get much more pervasive than somebody being denied the same rights as somebody else.


----------



## Plumdaff (Dec 3, 2012)

Sorry haven't read every single post so this may be a repeat, but as an interviewer I have asked a version of this question. It was when I was a charge nurse on a inpatient ward working with young people with mental health problems, interviewing Health Care Assistants and newly qualified nurses. The questions was usually framed along the lines of; "You are approached by a patient you are keyworking who asks to have a chat. During the conversation they start crying and say that one of the reasons they are so unhappy is that they are considering coming out but are concerned about the reaction of friends, family and the community. What would you do and say?"

And the reason is needs to be asked is sadly, even now, many people do reply with, if not overt prejudice, then covert bullshit about that not being something to discuss with their nurse, to go away and not tell anyone else about it and even to pray to God than he will help them stay on a righteous path.  So it was a good, revealing and important question to ask potential health professionals!

Let's not even start on the discrimination people with mental health issues face in the workplace. Of course, even if you manage to get in without withholding information our national working culture is toxic to mental health, even (possibly particularly) in areas like the NHS and social care which should know better.

ETA - just seen some of the above. Society, despite having come a long way still has a long way to go and being a gay teenager is still, I suspect, often pretty awful.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Also, Manter, do you not think that if society really was as accepting as you seem to think it is, do you not think we would be allowed to have the same ability to marry as straight people?
> 
> You can't really get much more pervasive than somebody being denied the same rights as somebody else.


You have me there. While I can't imagine why anyone would want a priest anywhere near them at any time, I do think anyone should be able to get hitched in a church if they want to.  

I know there is stuff wrong with society, but thought it was better than it was. Guess I'm wrong


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Does it matter if it's more or less common? Do you think perhaps that gay people might have a diverse range of experiences, which will depend heavily on where they grew up, what their family's attitude is, what job they do, where they socialise and so on? Do you expect everyone to tell you about the most hurtful experiences?
> 
> The rest of your post has nothing whatsoever to do with the conversation we're having. To recap:
> 
> ...


Not quite my reading of the discussion, but whatever


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 3, 2012)

i wouldnt care, i feel as long as people are loving one another, doesnt matter what sex they are, besides i wouldnt feel threatened as im ugly enough not to be fancied by any gender


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> You have me there. *While I can't imagine why anyone would want a priest anywhere near them at any time*, I do think anyone should be able to get hitched in a church if they want to.
> 
> I know there is stuff wrong with society, but thought it was better than it was. Guess I'm wrong


Sorry to have another go but ... the bolded bit is just not necessary to make your point, and it's another unintended offence. This kind of comment is made all the time in discussions of gay rights; _who'd want to get married/join the military anyway?_

In the context of this discussion, no one gives a shit what you do or don't want to do with your life - some people do want to get married/join the military (.../have kids/not be fired/imprisoned because of who they have consensual sex with ...). This is about equal rights, not just the rights you happen to think matter.

I know you didn't mean to be offensive any more than you did earlier, but please just stop and think a bit yeah?


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

ruffneck23 said:


> i wouldnt care, i feel as long as people are loving one another, doesnt matter what sex they are, besides i wouldnt feel threatened as im ugly enough not to be fancied by any gender


See, that's the kind of answer that might lose you the job. Why the fuck should you feel threatened just because someone fancies you, and why is your first thought that they might just because you happen to be the same sex as they are?


----------



## maldwyn (Dec 3, 2012)

The person who subjected me to loads of homophobic harassment and forced me out of one job now works as a training officer with a large trade union. 

Bet he wasn't asked the coming out question at his interview.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 3, 2012)

Global Stoner said:


> I've been asked this question in several job interviews recently. I can see why they may be asking, but you'd have to be pretty stupid to respond in a negative way I'd have thought.
> 
> Anyone else been asked this or is a new standard one along with talking about your strengths and weaknesses?





Global Stoner said:


> I've been asked this question in several job interviews recently. I can see why they may be asking, but you'd have to be pretty stupid to respond in a negative way I'd have thought.
> 
> Anyone else been asked this or is a new standard one along with talking about your strengths and weaknesses?


 
If they aren't allowed to ask you in a job interview if you're gay, then why can they ask you how you'd feel if your colleague was gay?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> See, that's the kind of answer that might lose you the job. Why the fuck should you feel threatened just because someone fancies you, and why is your first thought that they might just because you happen to be the same sex as they are?


But that's why the question shouldn't be asked in the first place. And people make stupid jokes sometimes when they are made to feel awkward by stupid questions, because they can't think of anything else to say.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> . Why the fuck should you feel threatened just because someone fancies you,


 
How would you feel if your boss fancied you?


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But that's why the question shouldn't be asked in the first place. And people make stupid jokes sometimes when they are made to feel awkward by stupid questions, because they can't think of anything else to say.


I think screening out people who cannot act professionally when suddenly confronted with the idea of someone being gay is perfectly reasonable. That's not to ignore the other problems with the question identified on this thread, but the employer's first duty is to the workforce as a whole and not introducing disruptive individuals is part of that.

I don't know what the rules are for rejection letters, but if this was a key reason for not offering someone the job then I'd expect that to be explained in the rejection letter. When I was young and inexperienced at interviews, being given a reason why I didn't succeed at interview was really helpful. Much better for the offending individual to work out that they have to grow the fuck up _before_ they get sacked for being a moron.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> I think screening out people who cannot act professionally when suddenly confronted with the idea of someone being gay is perfectly reasonable. That's not to ignore the other problems with the question identified on this thread, but the employer's first duty is to the workforce as a whole and not introducing disruptive individuals is part of that.
> 
> I don't know what the rules are for rejection letters, but if this was a key reason for not offering someone the job then I'd expect that to be explained in the rejection letter. When I was young and inexperienced at interviews, being given a reason why I didn't succeed at interview was really helpful. Much better for the offending individual to work out that they have to grow the fuck up _before_ they get sacked for being a moron.


You talk about acting professionally, but if someone asks you an unprofessional question, what, exactly, is the 'professional' reply?


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> How would you feel if your boss fancied you?


That would depend on how they behaved (and whether or not I fancied them). Sex pests are threatening regardless of whether their sexuality matches yours or not.

Do you work with women? Does the thought of one of them fancying you make you feel threatened? Do you assume that the heterosexual ones will fancy you just because you're a bloke?


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> I think screening out people who cannot act professionally when suddenly confronted with the idea of someone being gay is perfectly reasonable. That's not to ignore the other problems with the question identified on this thread, but the employer's first duty is to the workforce as a whole and not introducing disruptive individuals is part of that.
> 
> I don't know what the rules are for rejection letters, but if this was a key reason for not offering someone the job then I'd expect that to be explained in the rejection letter. When I was young and inexperienced at interviews, being given a reason why I didn't succeed at interview was really helpful. Much better for the offending individual to work out that they have to grow the fuck up _before_ they get sacked for being a moron.


What questions would you suggest for the other protected characteristics?

Although ... yes I can see the point of some kind of sounding out as to attitudes, but perhaps less specific and also asked of everyone. Just off the top of my head "tell me about a time when you haven't been happy with the way that diversity issues were managed in the workplace" ... I'm sure there are better examples, but you see what I mean?


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> What questions would you suggest for the other protected characteristics?
> 
> Although ... yes I can see the point of some kind of sounding out as to attitudes, but perhaps less specific and also asked of everyone. Just off the top of my head "tell me about a time when you haven't been happy with the way that diversity issues were managed in the workplace" ... I'm sure there are better examples, but you see what I mean?


We ask 'tell me about a time when you've faced an ethical dilemma'. Always v interesting answers


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> That would depend on how they behaved (and whether or not I fancied them). Sex pests are threatening regardless of whether their sexuality matches yours or not.
> 
> Do you work with women? Does the thought of one of them fancying you make you feel threatened? Do you assume that the heterosexual ones will fancy you just because you're a bloke?


 
I work with: straight women; gay women; straight men; gay men. They can all fancy the hell out of me for all I care - in fact, given my age, it would probably be a treat to be fancied.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Sorry to have another go but ... the bolded bit is just not necessary to make your point, and it's another unintended offence. This kind of comment is made all the time in discussions of gay rights; _who'd want to get married/join the military anyway?_
> 
> In the context of this discussion, no one gives a shit what you do or don't want to do with your life - some people do want to get married/join the military (.../have kids/not be fired/imprisoned because of who they have consensual sex with ...). This is about equal rights, not just the rights you happen to think matter.
> 
> I know you didn't mean to be offensive any more than you did earlier, but please just stop and think a bit yeah?


I don't think everyone is quite so easily offended, actually. I made a thoughtless comment earlier, for which I have apologised. The comment about priests was wry, and people who post on here a lot will know I am no fan of religion. I don't think it's necessary to purge posts of all personality or external perspective just because its a sensitive subject, and I made very clear I support full gay marriage not just the civil partnerships we have now.  
I am guessing you aren't in the UK, as here you can join the military, you can have children, you can't be imprisoned just for being gay, so we may be talking at cross purposes.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> We ask 'tell me about a time when you've faced an ethical dilemma'. Always v interesting answers


Yes, kind of puts people a bit on the spot but also makes them think hard. Especially if it's industry specific!


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> Yes, kind of puts people a bit on the spot but also makes them think hard. Especially if it's industry specific!


I have had some really odd ones- 'I have never faced an ethical dilemma' was my favourite.  Couldn't decide if he was really really thick, or just really really arrogant


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Key findings for you, @Manter:
> 
> 
> Homophobic bullying is almost endemic in Britain's schools. Almost two thirds (65 per cent) of young lesbian, gay and bisexual pupils have experienced direct bullying. Seventy five per cent of young gay people attending faith schools have experienced homophobic bullying.
> ...


What are teachers doing about it? That's surely unacceptable by any criteria


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 3, 2012)

I've had to interview people before. Mostly, I ask them about their work history, and questions relating to their ability to do the job. Most people are well rehearsed on the answers to the tricky questions.

"How would you feel if your colleague came out of the closet?"  Stock answer: 'Wouldn't bother me'.

" How would you handle ethical dilemma X?" Answer: "I'd do the ethical thing".

"What do you consider a personal weakess or character flaw?" Answer: "I tend to be a bit on the stubborn side - I just keep digging at something, trying to find the answer".

etc


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You talk about acting professionally, but if someone asks you an unprofessional question, what, exactly, is the 'professional' reply?


There are issues with the question, but regardless of that, someone who answers it in an unprofessional manner is clearly not giving a 'professional' reply.

A couple of people have given examples of similar questions they have used at interview, and in some workplaces these sorts of screening question would have to be included because of the nature of the work. This example is clumsy (I don't know how verbatim the OP is), but I don't think that's an excuse for you to avoid the question. You appear to be arguing that someone who cannot answer sensibly doesn't deserve to be disadvantaged by their inability to avoid offending people over their sexuality, even when they're on their best behaviour at an interview. if that is what you're arguing, I strongly disagree. Discriminating against people for being offensive and/or immature fuckwits is not the same as discriminating against people for their sexuality.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> I don't think everyone is quite so easily offended, actually. I made a thoughtless comment earlier, for which I have apologised. The comment about priests was wry, and people who post on here a lot will know I am no fan of religion. I don't think it's necessary to purge posts of all personality or external perspective just because its a sensitive subject, and I made very clear I support full gay marriage not just the civil partnerships we have now.
> I am guessing you aren't in the UK, as here you can join the military, you can have children, you can't be imprisoned just for being gay, so we may be talking at cross purposes.


I am in the UK. My first sentence used contemporary examples - I extended the list later on to make a point. And it's not like this stuff is ancient history. Equal employment rights were only made law in, what 2002/3? The age of consent was only equalised in ... 2000? People on Gay Pride marches were being arrested and beaten up by the coppers in the 1960s for sure, and probably still were into the 1980s (it was still pretty hairy at the end of the 1980s which is when I started going on them). It's not like we're decades down the line from routine and all pervasive discrimination - a lot of that stuff is within living memory for all current adults in the UK (if they were paying attention).

And just the fact that you felt the need to mention that most of the things on that list are no longer true in the UK re-emphasises your attitude that the problem is solved, the only rights not already won are not worth having and teh gays have it dead easy now. You don't get to declare the post-homophobic society any more than a bunch of blokes get to declare the post-sexist society or a bunch of white people get to declare the post-racist society. If you cannot experience something directly, you need to listen to those who do - you have no hope of seeing beyond your bubble otherwise.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> See, that's the kind of answer that might lose you the job. Why the fuck should you feel threatened just because someone fancies you, and why is your first thought that they might just because you happen to be the same sex as they are?


 
oh ffs, i was insulting myself for the lols, hence the big grin.

My actual answer was ' I wouldnt care, i feel as long as people are loving one another, doesnt matter what sex they are' but you chose to ignore that and focus on the part of the statement that was meant to be funny, which it would seem wasnt , Why concerntrate on your own percieved negativeness when the crux of the post was extremely positive


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> There are issues with the question, but regardless of that, someone who answers it in an unprofessional manner is clearly not giving a 'professional' reply..


I don't see it quite like that - if you are judging me for my unprofessional response to your unprofessional question, you're necessarily playing a power game : 'I, as the interviewer, am allowed to be unprofessional because I've got a job; you, as the interviewee, have to suck it up if you want the job'. In reality, at best you're both in the gutter together.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> What questions would you suggest for the other protected characteristics?
> 
> Although ... yes I can see the point of some kind of sounding out as to attitudes, but perhaps less specific and also asked of everyone. Just off the top of my head "tell me about a time when you haven't been happy with the way that diversity issues were managed in the workplace" ... I'm sure there are better examples, but you see what I mean?


Yep - absolutely.

People with other protected characteristics don't need to come out - unless they have an invisible disability. I've been bullied out of every workplace I ever had due to an invisible disability - my life would be a million times better if employers routinely screened out fuckwits.


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

ruffneck23 said:


> oh ffs, i was insulting myself for the lols, hence the big grin.
> 
> My actual answer was ' I wouldnt care, i feel as long as people are loving one another, doesnt matter what sex they are' but you chose to ignore that and focus on the part of the statement that was meant to be funny, which it would seem wasnt , Why concerntrate on your own percieved negativeness when the crux of the post was extremely positive


Sorry - I know it was intended to be positive and self-deprecatory - but check the subtext.

Kids sing rap at my middle-aged partner because he's black and they think he's cool. It might be 'positive' but it still upsets him. He'd prefer not to have people react to the colour of his skin in any way at all. When that happens, he'll know he's finally seen as equal.

I'm sorry I expressed the point as an attack - but this is stuff that people who aren't on the receiving end of a particular form of discrimination need to understand, if they're genuinely interested in not perpetuating discriminatory attitudes.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Yep - absolutely.
> 
> People with other protected characteristics don't need to come out - unless they have an invisible disability. I've been bullied out of every workplace I ever had due to an invisible disability - my life would be a million times better if employers routinely screened out fuckwits.


Not all people who have had their gender assigned/reassigned are visible either. And not all race characteristics are visible. And yes, def invisible disabilities too. Etc. I suppose ultimately it's best not to make people feel (or exacerbate the feeling of being) "other" in a point it out/treat less favourably way, no matter which "protected characteristic" it is/might be.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> I am in the UK. My first sentence used contemporary examples - I extended the list later on to make a point. And it's not like this stuff is ancient history. Equal employment rights were only made law in, what 2002/3? The age of consent was only equalised in ... 2000? People on Gay Pride marches were being arrested and beaten up by the coppers in the 1960s for sure, and probably still were into the 1980s (it was still pretty hairy at the end of the 1980s which is when I started going on them). It's not like we're decades down the line from routine and all pervasive discrimination - a lot of that stuff is within living memory for all current adults in the UK (if they were paying attention).
> 
> And just the fact that you felt the need to mention that most of the things on that list are no longer true in the UK re-emphasises your attitude that the problem is solved, the only rights not already won are not worth having and teh gays have it dead easy now. You don't get to declare the post-homophobic society any more than a bunch of blokes get to declare the post-sexist society or a bunch of white people get to declare the post-racist society. If you cannot experience something directly, you need to listen to those who do - you have no hope of seeing beyond your bubble otherwise.


 
^ very much this.

the fact that things are demonstrably better in general than they were (say) 25 years ago doesn't mean the problem is completely solved and no longer exists.

things are broadly speaking less crap than they were 25 years ago as regards race relations in the UK, and race discrimination laws have been on the statute book for 40 years or so, but I don't think many people would argue that racism no longer exists in the UK.



ymu said:


> my life would be a million times better if employers routinely screened out fuckwits.


 
would tories argue that fuckwits need the same protection as other minorities, though?


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> Not all people who have had their gender assigned/reassigned are visible either. And not all race characteristics are visible. And yes, def invisible disabilities too. Etc. I suppose ultimately it's best not to make people feel (or exacerbate the feeling of being) "other" in a point it out/treat less favourably way, no matter which "protected characteristic" it is/might be.


Yeah, that's true enough.

You could use exactly the same question for all those scenarios though. "How would you feel if a colleague told you they had had a sex change/were Roma/couldn't undertake certain duties due to disability."

I see problems with the question but I also see a good reason to ask it. I'm not sure there's any need to dress it up in a more complicated scenario - although if the work involved dealing with members of the public, it might be better to put the question in that context (probably more useful/illuminating too).


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would tories argue that fuckwits need the same protection as other minorities, though?


Yes, yes they would. Because they are fuckwits. That is why they are Tories.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Yeah, that's true enough.
> 
> You could use exactly the same question for all those scenarios though. "How would you feel if a colleague told you they had had a sex change/were Roma/couldn't undertake certain duties due to disability."
> 
> I see problems with the question but I also see a good reason to ask it. I'm not sure there's any need to dress it up in a more complicated scenario - although if the work involved dealing with members of the public, it might be better to put the question in that context (probably more useful/illuminating too).


There are two main reasons for not putting the question in that way (as I see it)

1) potential liability for the employer and interviewer if the interviewee decided to construct a discrimination claim; and
2) because it's not necessary to specifically point to "other" in more than general sounding out of attitudes, unless (as you say) there's a specific work context


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 3, 2012)

Manter said:


> What are teachers doing about it? That's surely unacceptable by any criteria


 
Well they also did a report called The Teachers Report, which basically suggested that some teachers either thought it wasn't relevant or necessary to talk about homosexuality, or felt totally unconfident and unable to have a discussion about LGBT issues within the classroom. 

The Terrance Higgens Trust brought out a pack of resources aimed at teachers to help them raise homosexuality in every subject, helping to normalise it (so it gave suggestions of gay french films for example) but I have no idea the extent of the take up of that.


----------



## Manter (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Well they also did a report called The Teachers Report, which basically suggested that some teachers either thought it wasn't relevant or necessary to talk about homosexuality, or felt totally unconfident and unable to have a discussion about LGBT issues within the classroom.
> 
> The Terrance Higgens Trust brought out a pack of resources aimed at teachers to help them raise homosexuality in every subject, helping to normalise it (so it gave suggestions of gay french films for example) but I have no idea the extent of the take up of that.


I can imagine the Daily Mail's reaction....


----------



## 8ball (Dec 3, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> The Terrance Higgens Trust brought out a pack of resources aimed at teachers to help them raise homosexuality in *every* subject, helping to normalise it (so it gave suggestions of gay french films for example) but I have no idea the extent of the take up of that.


 
That must have taken some creativity. 
With maths you have set theory, then there's history, literature etc.

I'm struggling a bit with geology...


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> There are two main reasons for not putting the question in that way (as I see it)
> 
> 1) potential liability for the employer and interviewer if the interviewee decided to construct a discrimination claim; and
> 2) because it's not necessary to specifically point to "other" in more than general sounding out of attitudes, unless (as you say) there's a specific work context


Yes, I'm grappling with those problems.

Simplest thing might be to preface the question with a statement of policy on discrimination in the workplace. Gives some fair warning, and should still screen out the fuckwits who haven't worked out what is offensive yet.


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Yes, I'm grappling with those problems.
> 
> Simplest thing might be to preface the question with a statement of policy on discrimination in the workplace. Gives some fair warning, and should still screen out the fuckwits who haven't worked out what is offensive yet.


There are some bigoted fuckwit interviewers too


----------



## ymu (Dec 3, 2012)

cesare said:


> There are some bigoted fuckwit interviewers too


Yeah. You'd hope HR would pick up on that but they're often the most bigoted fuckwits of all ...


----------



## cesare (Dec 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Yeah. You'd hope HR would pick up on that but they're often the most bigoted fuckwits of all ...


Oh aye, for sure. More than a fair share there too.


----------



## Pat24 (Dec 3, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Just to say, that is quite a cool way to "come out" !! how did your colleagues treat him when he came back from holiday?


Not much was said collectively, though I do recall one of the guys in the team distancing himself from him, or perhaps that was my impression at the time.

He showed me a photo of his hot boyfriend and could totally understand his gayness


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 3, 2012)

I would think fuck all. Might wonder why I'd been told but only in the same way as it'd be odd if someone told me they were heterosexual.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 3, 2012)

I would vomit noisily onto the floor and have to curl into a foetal crouch while rocking back and forth making low moaning sounds.


----------



## JHE (Dec 3, 2012)

8ball said:


> That must have taken some creativity.
> With maths you have set theory, then there's history, literature etc.
> 
> I'm struggling a bit with geology...


 
Jenny lives with Eric and Martin.  Eric and Martin love each other very much.  They get rock hard.


----------



## tombowler (Dec 3, 2012)

I was working at one place a few years back and one lady told me she was a lesbian and I replied do you still want that lift then?
at the same place there was a very obv gay guy when he told me I acted all shocked and said "but you are so butch"! he said really? I said no! and we carried on smoking and chatting.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Dec 3, 2012)

tombowler said:


> I was working at one place a few years back and one lady told me she was a lesbian and I replied do you still want that lift then?
> at the same place there was a very obv gay guy when he told me I acted all shocked and said "but you are so butch"! he said really? I said no! and we carried on smoking and chatting.


 
Oh god. That reminds of my first "proper" job. I was 19 and working at the head office of a large bank, doing mundane shite. Thought my boss was a little camp when I started, but thought no more of it and got on with work. We were the only males on the team. About a year later and it's someones leaving do and we're down the pub. Making conversation I asked if his wife was also from Leicester. He looked at me funny and all the women started laughing. Sensing I said something wrong I said partner. He laughed and said yes GS, he's called Ian. I wanted the floor to swallow me up.


----------



## scifisam (Dec 4, 2012)

Maurice Picarda said:


> Not explicitly, presumably?


 
No, but she found out I was gay, told me all lesbians are paedophiles (and butch - said this to _me_; I'm really not butch), and took me off the roster days later. I'd had excellent appraisals and there was no-one else available to do the work, so it's hard to draw any other conclusion.


----------



## scifisam (Dec 4, 2012)

Manter said:


> You have me there. While I can't imagine why anyone would want a priest anywhere near them at any time, I do think anyone should be able to get hitched in a church if they want to.
> 
> I know there is stuff wrong with society, but thought it was better than it was. Guess I'm wrong


 
The right to marry isn't about getting married in a church, though - it's extremely unlikely that any change in the law will oblige churches to perform same-sex weddings. If people want a same-sex church 'wedding' (for the ceremony, doing the legal bits elsewhere) then there are a few churches happy to do it and have been so for ages.


----------



## RubyToogood (Dec 4, 2012)

Manter said:


> I know there is stuff wrong with society, but thought it was better than it was. Guess I'm wrong


 
The point is thought, that it's not just that people are, or aren't homophobic. It's that you don't know if they're going to be until you take the chance of coming out to them, and then if they are it's too late.


----------



## Manter (Dec 4, 2012)

RubyToogood said:


> The point is thought, that it's not just that people are, or aren't homophobic. It's that you don't know if they're going to be until you take the chance of coming out to them, and then if they are it's too late.


 And then the next issue is that (it would appear from earlier in the thread) they get away with being homophobic


----------



## billy_bob (Dec 4, 2012)

I think I'd struggle to answer the question on face value - I wouldn't have any feelings about it either way beyond being pleased if it was the sort of workplace where gay people were happy to be out to their colleagues.  But the fact that they asked the question would tend to make me more concerned that it wasn't - it suggests they've had a string of disastrously homophobic appointees in the past...


----------



## sim667 (Dec 10, 2012)

purenarcotic said:


> Well they also did a report called The Teachers Report, which basically suggested that some teachers either thought it wasn't relevant or necessary to talk about homosexuality, or felt totally unconfident and unable to have a discussion about LGBT issues within the classroom.
> 
> The Terrance Higgens Trust brought out a pack of resources aimed at teachers to help them raise homosexuality in every subject, helping to normalise it (so it gave suggestions of gay french films for example) but I have no idea the extent of the take up of that.


 
The stupid thing is in 2009 one of my colleagues was 'made to resign' by one of my employers over him suggesting looking at  Del LaGrace Volcano's work which deals in sexuality and gender, when she was doing a project about sexuality and gender.

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk...er-terrorist/story-11364652-detail/story.html

Of course the article conveniently misses out the fact the student in question was in her early-mid 20's too 

As a teacher you're damned if you do, damned if you dont tbh.


----------

