Problem at work, need some quick advice....

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

Your confusion is prolific.
At no point has any girl been touched by any perverts.

The issue is the ops perception.
And yours with your macial insight to my thought processes.

Sorry but I don't think some of the words you're using now are actually English. What is macial? Can confusion be prolific?

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

Sorry, what is tancity?

The point is that as Val says, if you accept that A) is ok because of then you could easily argue that it's ok for someone to fondle/rape/kill/eat/etc because of some other belief their victim holds.

And yes I'm taking it to extremes, but only to prove the point.

Tenacity. Its your downfall as typeing on a phone is mine.
Your taking things to extremes doesnt prove the point, sadly it derives from the point your due to the extremes you take it to. Eat? Really?

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

Tenacity. Its your downfall as typeing on a phone is mine.
Your taking things to extremes doesnt prove the point, sadly it derives from the point your due to the extremes you take it to. Eat? Really?

You've lost me now.

Happy to discuss anything sensibly but frankly I don't even understand your posts any more.

I'm out.

ILW

Southend1 wrote: »

So do you think the "cure" OP needs is to be subjected to lots of back patting from those he considers inferior?

It doesn't matter whether you think OP is being touched inappropriately or it's just cameraderie. All that matters is he feels it is inappropriate therefore should ask for it to stop.

Otherwise someone could argue that a bit of bum pinching is just harmless fun. Or a bit of breast fondling. Or how about non consensual sex?

I believe all those would be classed as sexual assault, which is a criminal offence.

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

You've lost me now.

Happy to discuss anything sensibly but frankly I don't even understand your posts any more.

I'm out.

You dont speak english up the a127?:rotfl:

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

You dont speak english up the a127?:rotfl:

I did check my dictionary but tancity and macial weren't anywhere to be found!

Southend1

ILW wrote: »

I believe all those would be classed as sexual assault, which is a criminal offence.

Yes, exactly. So in order to avoid any confusion and out of respect for other people any kind of unsolicited (and probably solicited) touching in the workplace is best avoided.

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

I did check my dictionary but tancity and macial weren't anywhere to be found!

Tenacity would have been there. Maybe you should check it too.
And the the other word was magical. Which in no way derives from the point being made. But if your point is invalid you could always resort to pointing out spelling mistakes. Well done you.

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

Tenacity would have been there. Maybe you should check it too.
And the the other word was magical. Which in no way derives from the point being made. But if your point is invalid you could always resort to pointing out spelling mistakes. Well done you.

Sorry, while I am generally tolerant of typos and spelling mistakes, if there are so many, so bad that the post is unintelligible then I am not going to devote any time to trying to decipher it.

I'm sure tenacity is in my dictionary, and had I not known what it meant I would have looked it up, if that was what you had typed.

Do you mean derives from or detracts from?

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

Sorry, while I am generally tolerant of typos and spelling mistakes, if there are so many, so bad that the post is unintelligible then I am not going to devote any time to trying to decipher it.

I'm sure tenacity is in my dictionary, and had I not known what it meant I would have looked it up, if that was what you had typed.

Do you mean derives from or detracts from?

None of the posts are unintelligble,as well you know.;)