We can only speculate about the meaning to/intent of whoever drew it. The reality is that regardless of intent or personal interpretation, if anyone in the workplace recognizes those images as having that kind of meaning and is made uncomfortable by it, that constitutes workplace harassment, whether it's intentional or not. If the company doesn't take it seriously, they will be liable for legal action. At least in the US - I assume most other English-speaking countries have similar laws. So it's not really an overreaction - they need to protect themselves as much as their employees.
Whether you or I ascribe that meaning to the images or not is immaterial - clearly, someone does. Given that the images have nothing to do with work anyway, the only thing that matters is whether they genuinely bother people.
I mean...I didn't watch it either, but I can't picture a workplace where it would be considered acceptable and professional behavior to draw pictures of impaled women all over the place.
It's not really impostor syndrome - he really is unfit, he's not just imagining it. Definitely some kind of deep insecurity/inferiority complex or something along those lines, though.
I've always been too much of a lurker to go around posting things, but I can confirm that this egg_irl community was the one that finally shattered my shell, so there could be something to your theory.
That was an interesting analysis, thanks! I feel it also reinforces my original observation. The East India Company was nothing, if not a system of control that ultimately failed.
Probably, but history repeats itself. That conflict was not the first time the line between business and public interests was muddled with the result of large scale warfare and oppression, nor the last, so the same themes are relevant. And the meme has a very explicit focus on tea.
The first half of the description, combined with the unmentioned ambition of LotR, made me think of Star Citizen. But we'll have to wait another 5-10 years to find out if they manage to deliver on that ambition, and stand the test of time.
Glad to see this! I don't remember the password for my old lemm.ee account, but this was the only community I could think of that I would have missed from my subscriptions, so now you've saved me the effort of going looking for it.
The new analysis contradicts the social media platform’s claims that exposure to hate speech and bot-like activity decreased during Elon Musk’s tenure.
They might both be right. I know my exposure to hate speech and bot-like activity decreased since I stopped engaging with that platform.
I can't speak from real life experience, but one movie that actually handles this really well (as far as I can tell) is The Quiet Man, during a fight.
There's an example of an impromptu, casual bet between two individuals who are understood to trust one another, where they actually set the odds and agree formally, and it all happens very smoothly and naturally so as not to be boring:
"Five to one on the big chap"
"Given or taken?"
"Given"
"Taken"
Handshake
IIRC, they don't actually show them agreeing on the wager itself, but a later scene shows the outcome and lets you calculate it for yourself. These characters are established to know one another, so I figure they either have a known amount between them that they default to for casual bets, or they just determined that off camera.
There is also an example of the more chaotic, mass, unplanned betting, where a character who is already established to be a jack of all trades known to the community pulls out a notebook and takes on the role of bookie. I think they even show the odds being adjusted in real time as the fight progresses, but I don't recall for sure.
If I recall correctly, it's also the name of a horse in Robin Hood: Men in Tights. Thanks to this thread, I finally get the joke, all these years later.
We can only speculate about the meaning to/intent of whoever drew it. The reality is that regardless of intent or personal interpretation, if anyone in the workplace recognizes those images as having that kind of meaning and is made uncomfortable by it, that constitutes workplace harassment, whether it's intentional or not. If the company doesn't take it seriously, they will be liable for legal action. At least in the US - I assume most other English-speaking countries have similar laws. So it's not really an overreaction - they need to protect themselves as much as their employees.
Whether you or I ascribe that meaning to the images or not is immaterial - clearly, someone does. Given that the images have nothing to do with work anyway, the only thing that matters is whether they genuinely bother people.