Tedesche

No, you define it.

Should an employee who advocates for abortion rights be able to be fired because their employer doesn’t like the optics of their statement? Should an employee who vouches for a particular political candidate be able to be fired for it? I think we can both agree that a person who advocates for the genocide of a people should be punished, but where do you draw the line? As much as I don’t really care for corporate interests, there are real consequences for companies that continue to employ people with controversial views; why would they want to continue to employ those people when they could win back public favor by firing them?

I don’t think I could define a line between what’s “accepted” political speech that’s protected against employer reprisal and what’s not. Unless we go old stand-bys, such as calls for violence, which are easy to evade. I’m not suggesting this is an easy or even a possible problem to solve; all I meant was that think employees should be protected from firing for reasonable political statements. What “reasonable” is defined as is a much more complicated question, and I concede I don’t have an answer for it.

Please see my response to the other person who responded to my comment.

https://lemmy.world/comment/25791834

By today’s standards, yes, this seems tame. But keep in mind the context. She had made numerous right-wing and fringe statements before (e.g. questioning the efficacy of COVID masks), and this is basically equalizing the treatment of Jews by the Nazis to people making hateful comments about MAGA. It’s a pretty insane and inappropriate comparison. I will say I think she had a point later, when she argued she was discriminated against because the network hadn’t fired other actors who compared Trump to Hitler. Both statements are similarly disrespectful to the victims of one of the worst atrocities in history (although I would also qualify that they’re not equally disrespectful—Trump does at least admire Hitler and arguably aspires to be him).

I guess I’m saying I can understand why they fired her. Part of me doesn’t agree with it—I think people should be allowed to make political statements outside of a work context without risking their jobs—but with our current societal norms siding with corporate image concerns, this does seem in-line with the norms of that approach. I don’t agree with her statements and think she should have had the right to say them without reprisals, but she also has no right to be surprised at the consequences in my view.

Yes. Yes it is.

Edit: Specifically, she was fired for making the following statements:

The actor continued to say, “Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/gina-carano-fired-from-mandalorian-after-social-media-post

Thank you. I’m a lefty myself, but leftists have such a hard time seeing that criticism of their own side actually has validity. I totally understand what this developer is saying about depicting a progressive topic without being “woke” (preachy) about it. I see the same thing in movies/shows that depict female heroes—there are some that just make the hero a woman, and then there are others that pump the “girl power” angle, overplay the female lead, make it explicitly clear she’s better than all the male characters, bloat the script with feminist jargon, blah, blah, blah. It’s stupid. You want to do the progressive thing? Fine. Just do that. Don’t brow-beat your audience with a political message about it.