I definitely see this as “we can’t get away with the boys club anymore” rather than a problem with Gen Z. Gen Z won’t hide their unhappiness with any of the -isms and will call it out instead of just keeping their head down.
Right, it’s not the lack of skills to disagree. What it is, is the bravery to not tolerate intolerance, and they stand for what they believe the world should be. Making mr grouper proud out here.
Yeah, I'm proud of the younger generation. I see them standing up against the kinda shit that my generation at the same age just accepted or perpetrated.
I'm a millennial but this reminds me of when I first got into the work force and was stuck in an office full of boomers with me being the youngest. I remember the boss would take turns taking shots at different people during meetings, making insensitive racial jokes about people. I eventually got tired of doing the uncomfortable fake laugh so I just sat there stone faced during his jokes. He halted the entire meeting to a stop to ask me why I wasn't laughing. This is the extent to which office culture must be obeyed and how insecure they get when you don't go along with it. It's so pathetic.
I’m also a millennial with a similar experience in my first job in 2004 or 2005, except instead of racial jokes, it was jokes about boobs, sexist rumors about another coworker moonlighting as a stripper, unwanted touching, etc, and when I reported it, I was told to “grow up” by my supervisor.
Ohhh yeah, there was that too, I can definitely recall one of my male managers making comments about a woman's body when she wasn't in the room. So gross.
"YoU CaNT sAy AnYtHiNg AnYMoRe"
"How am I supposed to compliment a woman these days?"
It's the same boomers that make those complaints whining about Gen Z
This is exactly it. I've seen this exact thing play out a bunch of times. It's a real threat to them, because so many of these people got to where they are because they know how to work that frat boy culture to their advantage, and now they suddenly have to deal with people who don't find their shit funny. The reality is that they don't actually have any real skills besides the politics of being loud and borish.
The thing is, if you say "black lives matter" they'll quietly run to HR and claim they don't feel comfortable and they don't want politics in the workplace. Then they'll turn right around and go back to talking fondly about their date rape days at Cornell
Fair enough. But if you don't tell someone why you are unhappy with them or the situation they control, then nothing improves for anyone.
I believe the impetus is on the bigot to figure their shit out. It is exhausting arguing with bigots, and it is not people's job to teach them how not to be a bigot. There is enough information out there now that you should know not to be an intolerant asshole, and if someone chooses instead to be a piece of shit, I'm comfortable with them being ostracized while they sort themselves out. And if they can't, I'm comfortable with them dying old, alone and confused wondering why nobody visits them.
This sounds like you are promoting an "I'm right, your wrong, and I have no responsibility to correct or educate." mentality. I'm not sure if trusting the people with opposing views to change on their own is the best approach. I think only deepens divides and entrenches opposition.
People with opposing ideas do exist in a vacuum and will have no problem putting the time in to recruiting others to their way of thinking and promoting similar thinkers to positions of power and influence. Ostracizing those you disagree can just as easily put you in a bubble of isolation, or an echo chamber, as them.
Not to mention that discussing opposing ideas improves understanding both by defending your views and by better understanding the why and origins of their ideas.
There's nothing wrong with having a "not my responsibility to correct or educate mentality". These assholes are grown adults. If they haven't figured things out by now then fuck em.
I think that there is something wrong with the "not my job" approach. I believe in the saying "The only thing evil needs to thrive is for good people to do nothing."
Assuming that everyone has shared in your socioeconomic upbringing and therefore has the same access to diverse ideas is flawed.
I am personally inspired by Daryl Davis, a black musician who, through simple conversation, has convinced grown adult Ku Klux Klan members to change their ways and renounce the KKK.
I believe that people should work towards the changes they want to see manifest in the world.
Yeah, I think you've got me right there. When it comes to being a bigot, I do believe in ostracizing and silencing, in order to put them in a tiny fringe echo chamber. That is much safer than having their ideas out in the open. Racists and bigots should be afraid of stating their opinion, this way their backwards-ass ideas die out with them. Because people aren't racist from well thought out rational thought. Their racist because of emotions like fear and anger. Something is going wrong in their life and it's easier to blame a marginalized group than it is it take responsibility. No amount of debate will fix that, and I'm tired of trying. Fuck them.
I also firmly believe in the paradox if tolerance. You cannot tolerate the intolerant, and part of that includes not treating their opinions as valid. Because they are not.
I understand the frustration and seeming futility in trying to change the minds of those with opposing views. It takes constant work and vigilance, but it is important challenge their ideas. Even if you make zero impact on them, you can reach other people. Especially if you have the discussion in a public venue, like an internet firum. Even if you don't change any minds, if you truly believe in something then you should continue to work towards it.
As for the "they should already know better" argument, I wonder if you are familiar with Daryl Davis, a black musician who would sit with members of the KKK and talk to them about their beliefs. He has well over 20 robes from former klansmen who have given him their robes after he changed their views with those conversations. Turns out that most of them have never had anybody calmly listen to and then dispute the racist claims that they grew up with and have heard repeated their whole lives.
Notice how I am talking about confronting and challenging ideas, not tolerating them.
The only thing evil needs to thrive is for good people to do nothing.
I know of him, and applaud him. If I were a better man, perhaps I could do as he did. However, I no longer have that energy in me to waste. What I can do is shut their voices out of my world and my family's world. From there, I hope the Daryl Davis's of the world help them heal. But it will not be me.
Not true: boomers will eventually die
I read this as Gen Z doesn’t tolerate the boomer/older Gen X intolerant/racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic bullshit that younger Gen X/Older Millennials had to, and a lot of folks receiving this deserved pushback don’t like it.
¯\(ツ)/¯
Nailed it, except that older Gen X and boomers who weren't part of the intolerant majority ALSO had to put up with all that bullshit.
Very good point that I should have included. Thanks!
Thus...proving the point? "If a person thinks I can't handle disagreement, I bet it's because they're some kind of asshole nazi or something! It would be wrong of me to tolerate a difference of opinion with them!"
If the only disagreement you can tolerate is irrelevant minutia, then you aren't actually tolerant. "I'm totally tolerant, as long as our opinions don't differ on race, culture, gender, sexual relations, work, religion, or politics" is pretty weak sauce.
Congrats you described the paradox of tolerance.
Yeah if someone thinks I and people I'm friends with shouldn't exist than I'm not gonna want to work with them. American Republicans are actively trying to remove any legal protections or rights trans (and LGBT in general) people have, and anybody who shares their views is helping them along. Why on god's green earth would I see that as anything less than an existential threat?
if you hold a view that is intolerant, I will not tolerate you. simple as. we don't have to agree but you can have basic fucking decency (don't be racist)
Interesting examples for irrelevant minutia. Pretty sure a lot of those things would be very important, particularly race, gender, and sexual orientation.
I mean those are pretty major things, especially if you're part of one of the affected minorities. If I were trans I wouldn't really want to work with a coworker who insists on misgendering me and makes a fuss out of me using the right bathroom.
If it doesn't come up, it doesn't come up. People can agree to disagree, also. But there are also cases where the disagreement is so fundamental that it makes it pretty hard to respect someone or even want to be in the same room as them.
Sure, it's supposed to be major things.
There was a point where Europeans were massacring and torturing each other over religious differences, for centuries. Protestants and Catholics considered each other literal heretics, and mortal enemies.
Then they developed this idea of tolerance, and decided that your religious beliefs were your own business. And that worked amazingly well! We can all just get on getting on. This was a huge deal, protestants tolerating catholics and vice versa was every bit as hard as trans people tolerating transphobic people. But it worked, and eventually the differences faded into irrelevance.
And it turned out that the same attitude was great for progress in general: who you love and who you sleep with is your business, and after a decade or two: you know, we've all got pretty used to the idea of people being gay. They wanna get married? Sure, I don't see why not. Tolerance was the basis of most progress in the past few centuries.
And now Gen-Z (or probably just terminally-online people, but as a ratio that's more of Gen-Z than any earlier group) wants to flip the table. Tolerating 'intolerance' is practically a crime! Intolerance, BTW, is when you don't have the correct set of opinions. People who don't have the right opinions are monsters, and must be harassed, deplatformed, fired, etc. The wrong opinions are violence.
I've seen reactions to 'bad' opinions that I would call hysterical.
I hate these generation based things. Some little time ago there was odd stuff about millennials everywhere. Now Gen-Z. In a few years Gen Alpha. Then whatever comes next and so on.
People just like to label people. And generations are just another option.
Agreed, but I see plenty of Millennials and Gen-Zers making plenty of criticisms and jokes about Boomers all the time. It's no better when we do it.
Man, I've started to see it happening between just the Millennials and the Gen-Z. I assume a good chunk of it is for rage bait/views, at least that's what I'm hoping for. It's so much better when we're working together to try to better the future.
Never seen this besides on algorithm driven social platforms tho...
I do see boomer hate every tho
Regardless of where it's seen, it's still a bad habit we all need to break. It only perpetuates in creating division.
Most of the internet traffic is bots paid for by bad actors ;)
Consider that fact when approaching online discussions
This whole thread is like, "Fuck YOU! We don't have communication problems! It's all you old fuckers!"
Well. Would you look at that.
Lmao I love how you guys are getting downvoted to hell for having differing opinions too
Oh the irony
Honestly this isn't a gen z thing, it's just a shit article thing. 70% of this piece is just this one fucking guy bitching about the "kids these days"
Ya, my boss is someone who always makes it about generation this and generation that.
It's not about generations, if baby boomers had the technology we have today they'd have done the same stupid shit.
Welp, Gen Z, it's your time in the furnace I guess.
I remember when "Millennials are ruining everything" articles were the fodder for lazy writers, now it's crap like this.
I remember when we killed Applebee's? That was a fun weekend.
To be fair, Applebee's needed to be ruined.
I agree but I'll still miss the quesadilla burger. It was the only half-decent item in their menu.
We just figured out we can microwave our own food
Now it's cap like this*
Let me paraphrase: Gen Z refuse to take any bullshit from deluded boomers.
Look, I don't care at all what views my coworkers might possess. And that's the problem. Because when one of these fuckwits starts going on a bigoted rant at work, I do NOT want to hear it, and I surely don't give a damn about it. So yeah, no, we can't work alongside fuckwits. If they knew how to shut up, we could.
Alternative headline: boomers* don’t have the skills to know what is or is not an appropriate work conversation to have.
*I’m aware many boomers do have this skill, just matching the ignorant and overly broad style of the original statement.
"I don't have conversation skills? Surely you are joking, sugar tits!"
We just reposting the same things from 10 years ago with “millennials” replaced by “gen z?”
Shut up you millennial gen z snowflake! You’ll take the recycled content and enjoyit
/s, if it wasn’t obvious….I’m noting that same trend myself.
Does that mean Gen Z are going to kill the diamond industry again?
Same thing as thousands of years ago.
Turgenev enters the chat . . .
No, there's a radical difference here. Yeah, some of these stories are "young people today" bullshit that will always be true. Gen Z truly got fucked by the pandemic and social media.
Judging by the comments here, there won't be any discussion. Which kinda proves the point.
Article ignores key factors of why people would behave in the office like that...
It is a disingenuous fake news.
There are NO factors for behaving like that in the office. If a young person doesn't have the basic social skill of shutting the fuck up about politics in the workplace, wouldn't you say they lack, at the very least, that one simple skill?
Watch these comments for more evidence. Anyone agreeing with the article's premise, or trying to add discussion/nuance, is getting downvoted with no reply.
In my experience, it's the boomers who can't shut the fuck up about politics in the workplace, so trying to lay blame the zoomers for not rolling over and taking it just reeks of more boomer entitlement. shrugs
In my experience, it's the boomers and fellow far right wing that talk politics in the workplace. Especially when they think it's a safe space for "locker room talk". Then they accuse the younger generation of being political because they dare to have LGTBQ+ pins, or don't want to participate with racism or don't look down on someone for having dyed hair.
Calling out someone for being racist, sexist or any of the other behaviors that are no longer acceptable isn’t political, despite one side often labeling it as such.
I'm thinking that a lot of the people commenting might work in pretty homogeneous environments.
I work with people from almost every group, and from every background. Calling people out on this horrendous behaviour maintains a safe work environment, and helps eliminate workplace toxicity. You can't insult a group without also insulting a coworker. Work culture wise, even if they aren't the target, people get very angry at the people who talk like that. "Why would you say that about Nimmy? Nimmy's awesome!". People should be able to earn their livelihoods in peace, imo.
At my job, if you insult a coworker through bigotry, you can expect (at minimum) a long talk with HR for the first offense. (Our HR department is also diverse.) A manager was just fired a few months ago for being bigoted. The best part? NO ONE misses them, not even the company a-holes.
Even from a completely corporate standpoint, it makes sense. You really don't want that kind of reputation if you want to keep your investors or a family friendly reputation. Media would chew them up and spit them out if they allowed bigotry like that.
Social media is the real world today. Yes, the pandemic put everyone’s life on hold for 3 years and that’s going to screw up people’s formative years, but this article hasn’t done much to separate that out from the gripes every new generation entering the workforce gets.
The problem is that the things they “disagree” about are sometimes basic scientific facts, like climate change, or beliefs which strongly affect people’s lives negatively, such as racism, anti-lgbt bigotry, or economic views like “it’s just fine to pay people such low wages they can barely afford to live and will never be able to buy a house”.
And why are these politics an issue in the workplace?
I'm 52 and have worked a wide variety of jobs. Nowhere I have been employed was it acceptable to talk politics, except on the down-low with people you knew well. If there was a political discussion where two people disagreed, they either agreed to disagree, or it was quickly dropped.
I'm the same age as you, so I've seen the same social and political changes as you have over the last 20 years or so. Some "politics" are just negative moral stances about other people. If your political/moral views make people feel excluded and you make sure we all know your views, whether through explicit political conversation or implicit comments, we are not going to "agree to disagree." We will be telling the shithead to STFU, and if they don't, we will be getting HR involved. We can't and won't tolerate intolerance in the workplace.
In my experience, in the 80s and 90s, intolerance was pretty commonplace, and racial and moral minorities mostly just had to suck it up. What's changed is that liberals have "woken up" to that long-standing intolerance, while conservatives want things to stay the same. Up until about 2016, the majority of these conservatives hid their intolerance. Little did we know that they were just seething inside. Then Trump made it okay to be vocally hateful again, and that seething mass of conservatives exploded into public discourse again.
I don't think Gen Z is incapable of disagreeing with their co-workers in a respectful way. I think they are seeing angry, usually older, conservatives raging about moral issues that they thought were already resolved. Or, they see boomers still denying climate change, which is a real slap in the face for the younger generation who will face the consequences long after those boomers are dead. It is very disconcerting and depressing for Gen Z, and as the father of a couple of Gen Z kids, I'm proud of them for taking a stand.
Because whether some people are allowed to exist is politics now, and gen z and others aren't going to quietly let bosses/coworkers banally brutalize people anymore without pushback.
The workplace is steeped in politics, like every other part of your life. The discussions dont have to be about politics day in day out, but somethings have to be addressed directly, work or not.
Basically, if youre workplace is fair and decent, then you likely wont hear anyhting about politics. if it's full of bigots/abuse, well, people arent putting up with it anymore.
I’m not really sure what the person in the article means. It says something about “lockdown-era students can’t hold down a heated discussion”… but why would they be having heated discussions? It also says
Miami University even organized a dinner with senior leaders in order to teach proper mealtime etiquette, such as how to engage in conversation on neutral topics.
which makes it sound like it’s older people who bring up inappropriate political topics in an inflammatory way.
That may be! But again, I have never seen anyone, of any age, bringing up politics. (EDIT: Didn't mean to say "never". Very rarely is more true.
In any case, if a coworker is being an argumentative ass, it's on the listener if they choose to fight back, be the bigger person. A workplace political disagreement doesn't rise to the level of being punched in the nose, you don't have to fight back. :)
The issue is that conservative, bigoted people don't view their hateful ideologies as political. They speak negatively of marginalized groups as if their opinion is banal fact instead of inflammatory hatefulness. I'm a middling Millennial and I've had Boomer and Gen X managers that spout misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, and racist bullshit like they're talking about the weather. Sometimes I called them out, and other times I kept my head down and just got out of the situation, but the steadfast way they hold on to their bigoted beliefs leads them to see their opinions as non-political and any disagreement as obscene and unacceptable.
don't view their hateful ideologies as political
But social media tells me, over and over again, that liberal ideas are simply "right", and are in no way political? I'm not about to "both sides" general politics, but yeah.
And where the hell have you worked that managers speak like this? I've had bottom-of-the-barrel shit jobs, and damned good jobs, mostly in highly conservative regions.
Hell, one place was owned and ran by conservative evangelicals. I can count twice that a superior brought up politics, and both times the topic was approached like, "Shalafi, you're liberal. What do you think of $X?" And we had a solid discussion. Also, no one questioned my religion or lack thereof. (I admit, that was probably an outlier of a company.)
I've pushed back a time or two over 30+ years, but I'm having a hard time getting my head around the idea that bigotry is a common workplace experience. I'd jump that sinking ship with the quickness. Those sorts of businesses tend to torpedo themselves, especially now days.
There are tons of liberal ideas that are considered political. But there's also a ton "liberal ideas" that should just be the standard.
For example, the very idea about not talking politics could be considered PC culture. Working together with people you disagree with is considered woke. Same with not being allowed to tell racist, sexist, homophobic jokes. These are only "liberal ideas" because conservatives made those topics political by being against them.
It was in the Bay Area in tech jobs. They would very casually be derisive about trans gender identity, calling it "attention seeking" and "a mental illness". The racist statements mostly came in the form of offensive stereotypes and deferential treatment of those that they did not think less of for their race. To them, it was normal behavior and casual conversation. They were more likely to get heated about their sports team than they would about acknowledging the intrinsic value and human rights of other people. It makes it very hard to call out when they say horrible things in casual, laid-back tones. There was no anger or passion in these statements, it was just a matter of fact that trans people aren't real, that women are inferior, that certain races are dirty criminals... like they were talking about how it was a cloudy or sunny day.
Because those aren’t politics. These are peoples lives. There’s no such thing as agreeing to disagree about if people get to have basic rights. What’s been labeled as political now is denying people the ability to live as they want, ironically taking away the freedom one side claims to love.
issue in the workplace
Think you're going to win hearts and minds by arguing at work? No, you won't, you'll only hurt yourself and cause the opposition to double down, lose more than you gain.
Worse if you're young and confronting an older coworker! "See, I knew these kids were full of shit. There goes another one."
Counterproductive, ain't it?
And no, just because one side holds heinous beliefs does not make those beliefs apolitical. Fair definition I found:
the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power
May I invoke Godwin's Law? :)
Hitler believed Jews were pests that should be exterminated. Many people agreed then and now. Of course that's a vile position. But it's still a political position because it guided governance.
Saying, "My opinion is morally correct and that absolves it from the politics descriptor.", is unhelpful at best. At worst makes the speaker harder to engage.
Why would I have a conversation with someone like that? Sounds like a conservative talking to me. Comes off like, "I'm morally superior and if you disagree, it's not 'mere politics', you are scum unworthy of engaging."
One more thought for y'all: You can, and should, push back on regressive opinions. But there are plenty of ways to say, "I'm not interested in hearing that bullshit.", without literally saying that. It's a social skill, and isn't the lack thereof among Gen Z the topic at hand?
(Here's something plain crazy; I'm upvoting your comment for adding to the conversation, even though I disagree.)
Like you, I've moved around the US quite a bit have have worked at a variety of companies. But I noticed that the article mentions Miami University, which is in southwestern Ohio. People around here have an odd idea of what constitutes rudeness or what should not be discussed at work.
They are ALL IN on politics.
Visitors to our work's Ohio location (from out of country or out of state) are completely freaked out by it. Locals have no idea that their behavior might be considered rude or inappropriate.
Long story short, I'm not even remotely surprised that a local school is trying to teach people manners.
Because scientific facts, or social and economic issues (that definitely affect and belong in the workplace) are not “politics” regardless of how much you'd like to label them as such so you can shove them under the rug and forget about them, you retrograde fossilized lich, and because “agreeing to disagree” with assholes who hold harmful opinions only serves to empower them and enable them to keep causing harm.
Go ahead, pick fights at work. See how that works out for you. According to the story, it ain't working out.
My current company is a Seattle based software dev, about as liberal as it gets. You come talking politics and arguing with people, even though you're on the "right" side, and you're fucking fired. Bye.
I read that as "they voice their opinions too much".
Yeah, this sounds like, “Gen Z won’t put up with the same levels of bullshit as their predecessors “
Or maybe it's because they have zero patience for people who can't understand the idea of basic human rights?
Let me guess. The "different views" are bigotry, hatred and fascism?
Have you ever watched channel 4? They're the least likely channel to have any of that in the office. It's not GBNews.
I think you just demonstrated the criticism being made.
How dare I criticize someone for being a terrible person
Criticizing someone for terrible behavior they actually exhibit is one thing; assuming someone is a terrible person because they disagree with you about something is bigotry.
I ain't gonna give any weight to a freaking anecdote from any one, let alone a manager. Show me the proof or sit down.
Personally I’m just not fond of working with geriatric, lead-poisoned nazis but that’s just me.
Some guy says some thing. This is no different from an out of touch boomer saying kids these days don't want to work.
I'm guessing someone got called out for being a right wing shit head and now his poor little feelings are hurt.
So you disagree then?
They must be gen z
Channel 4 are one of the most progressive channels in the UK and she's married to a man who works in renewable energy. I very much doubt she's particularly right leaning.
Well, Labour is legitimately sliding right, and it's become somewhat common among the so-called "left" in the UK to make a scapegoat out of trans people - it really wouldn't surprise me that an older, liberal woman in the UK would have some right-wing things to say.
I'm not a big fan of Starmer, but he's slid labour back from the far left to the centre, not to the right. I will accept your point on the trans issue though, otherwise left leaning women who should know better are acting as useful idiots for the right on that one.
The benefit cap is right wing.
Banning your MPs from joining picket lines is right wing.
Purging the left wing from your party -but leaving the right wing untouched- iis right wing.
You can only call Starmer centrist if your view is one from a right wing perspective.
The Overton window in the UK is too far to the right, as is our policy on almost every area. We need a strong push to the left to take us back to the centre, not a slightly watered down, more palatable version of Thatcherism.
Well, I didn't mean to say Labour is far-right or anything, just that they're sliding in the direction of the right.
Gen Z seem to lack the skillset to know their place. -boomer boss
nah never had that issue and I'm pretty fuckin opinionated. As a chef I argue more with old heads than gen z or millennials.
old fuckers think they know everything
Interesting way of saying "they won't bend over and spread their arse cheeks".
Meanwhile said CEO is the one that intentionally promotes 'clueless' people (Read overtly offensive) people as leaders and then paints the workers that are coerced to humor them as in the wrong when they don't put up with it.
Have you ever actually watched Channel 4? They're one of the more progressive voices in UK media, I very much doubt that their management are all secretly bigots behind the scenes.
Everyone in this thread is jumping to the conclusion that it's about politics, race, etc.
Meanwhile here's me wishing the office Zoomer would shut up about the way I drink my coffee.
Sounds like you haven't got the skills to disagree.
According to the OP, zoomer will never talk to you again if you disagree "hard enough."
Just say "Has it ever occurred to you that everyone else drinks coffee wrong? I am the world's best coffee drinker. Donald Trump and Elon Musk have both told me so on Twitter. In fact, Vogue magazine has been trying to schedule me doing a drink out for the last three years. I have denied going on the Joe Rogan Experience twice already out of principles. As you may have surmised, the topic would have been about the proper way to drink coffee. In fact, I know I was drinking coffee, correctly may I add, the exact moment of your conception. I know because that's how great at drinking coffee I am. But thank you for your concern."
Yeah but then you're first on the list when the office needs a scapegoat.
Steve: someone shit in the pinball machine!
Gen Z: I bet that fucking Millenial Nazi did it
Kim, the actual pinball shitter: yep, definitely someone older than us Zoomers
Yeah, I'll just say if I'm working, I just don't wanna hear politics brought up at all. I'd rather focus on work or maybe small talk. I don't wanna end up in a scenario where I expose my political views only to find I've made enemies with the wrong people in a company or group.
HA as much as im amused by the idea of being in the radical politics generation i agree with this, politics dont belong in the workplace & it's better to shut it down & not.
also jesus christ politics are polarized sometimes, why the hell would anyone LGBTQ want to befriend somebody who holds the opinion all trans people are pedos?
I do but only with people I've actually made friends with who I'm pretty sure will either agree with me or at least respect my point of view. I'll share mildly political articles in discussion groups for those specific things at work sometimes, but those are places where people have specifically opted in to hearing about them and are interested in the topics.
Out of all the Gen Z bashing headlines I've ever seen... this is the only one I am inclined to agree with. It doesn't even have to be a politically motivated disagreement; I've met too many young people that once you disagree with them on something, try to completely avoid talking to you and also do not take criticism of any kind well.
Don't worry, us millennials ruined toast apparently.
How much could avacado toast cost, Micheal? $100?
Yup. That’s how it goes for sure for many. Not all, but there is a very large segment. They’re used to blocking or pressuring others into mass blocking (e.g., cancelling) others. There’s a time and a place for it, but it also seems to be the norm for anything that doesn’t align with them exactly.
I’m a millennial and we have our own issues, but that is theirs.
I can’t read the article, so not sure if this is all politically motivated or not. If so, I guess I can see their side to not disagreeing - there are moral issues that must be upheld.
As a millenial, we at least made it to our teenage years before the internet and social media was ubiquitous. With Gen Z, those mechanics have been there their whole life.
Yup. I think that’s a big part of how/why they they are unwilling to disagree and keep a relationship even if you disagree - it’s easy to just block people and move on or organize a massive online movement against someone/something.
Maybe there's a degree of truth to this, but the issue doesn't only apply to Gen Z... I've had plenty of overgrown children in their 40s and 50s lose their shit in the workplace when the slightest bit of pushback comes up about anything. I'd say this is more of a general communication skills problem these days
When the "disagreement" is that your nosy Boomer Karen coworkers mis-gender you or disapprove of the way you live your life or think it's NBD that by the time you're their age we're going to be in the "find out" phase of the biggest disaster to hit Earth's biosphere in 65 million years, the problem isn't really with Gen Z.
Considering everyone who saw the headline and didn’t read the article jumped into the comments talking about Boomers being transphobic, racist, or science deniers, I actually am not surprised at all by the article (which is, of course, generalizing an entire generation and therefore erroneous, but not entirely without merit).
It’s not about the topics they’re disagreeing on, it’s about the ability to disagree congenially and effectively, which is an extremely important skill in any workplace.
You aren’t going to change any minds by saying, “You’re wrong. I’m right. I’m done talking to you about this.” You also aren’t going to have your mind changed if you’re wrong, as is very common in a workplace. My solution to a problem isn’t always the right one. Other times it is. I need to know how to disagree and have constructive discussions about topics I disagree with others on to reach the best solutions.
This is one of the reasons diversity is important to businesses. Diversity of thought and constructive disagreement leads to improvement. But if we outright reject those who do not think like we do we all stagnate in our respective bubbles.
Sure this can be applied to good faith dialogue on larger, more important topics as many here seem to be assuming, but it is essential on day-to-day smaller issues that people face in the workplace.
Uh, that's because the different views are fucking wild bad, and they're not just putting up with it.
If the social contact was the same as it was when today's old people were young, then today's young people would be much more willing to put up with shit.
Eh, this generational conflict stuff is nonsense. For years I’ve run teams of boomers, X, Y, and now Z. Have I had to punt some younger folks because they couldn’t work past some not-work-relevant difference with someone else in the office? Sure. But that’s not a Z thing at all.
Anyone who can’t check their personal baggage at the door and get work done as part of a team ends up being shown to the sidewalk. There’s no generational component to this, it’s happening to everyone of all ages.
I hope this guy's company can't adjust to reality & it's eaten by a Gen-Z owned competitor.
Unfortunately, Channel 4 is currently a Crown corporation, so they're owned by the United Kingdom.
So run up until recently by the greatest generation still. Ugh
Take the world’s Big Four consulting firms, for example: Deloitte, PwC, KPMG, and EY are all offering incoming junior hires soft skills training, including lessons on how to speak up in meetings.
Thats how you het taken off the fucking assignement.... Jfc
Calling highers ups on what is likely purposeful corruption is no way to move up lol
No amount of fake training will fix this dynamic
A consultant who doesn’t speak up doesn’t keep their job very long.
OK boomer
It's fucking hilarious seeing a bunch of septics in here without a scooby about Channel 4 deciding it must be full of bigoted managers that the gen Z won't tolerate. When it's always been one of the most progressive channels in the UK and has been allowing diverse voices to shine for years.
Setting aside the fact that this is a generalization and thus naturally overstating things, I don't doubt that there's some truth to this.
There's a sort of rigidly intolerant moralizing that arose on the internet over the last decade or so, most exemplified by Tumblr, and gen z was right in the middle of it.
It puts me in mind of the Victorian era, with a group of people who absolutely and unequivocally condemn anyone and everyone who violates their rigid sense of propriety, or more precisely, the stereotypes that they substitute for those people. Of course, the biggest difference is that they have a completely different set of rules to which they insist that all submit - instead of a religious morality mostly concerned with sex they have a secular morality mostly concerned with social behavior. But they share that absolutism - the smug certainty that their way is the only way and that any who believe otherwise are not only wrong, but due to the fact that they believe otherwise, so monstrous as to be unfit to even judge.
That last is the trap - the thing that sets that extreme of moralizing apart and keeps it going when it takes hold. Those who come to believe in it end up believing not simply that they're right, but that believing as they do is the defining trait of people who are fit to judge the matter, so they then can and do reject any and all differing views out of hand on the basis that the mere act of holding a different view means that one is obviously an inferior being, and since one is an inferior being, whatever one believes is and can only be wrong. It becomes a closed loop, in which people aren't even capable of considering different viewpoints.
And that's presumably the quality that's being characterized, and with some accuracy, as them not having the skills to disagree.
I'd note though that this is just one manifestation of the problem. It's a new version of it, made possible by social media, and it appears to be notably widespread, and particularly in a relatively narrow age group, but the dynamic itself is likely as old as human civilization.
Y’know, I watched enough kids get shuttled to-and-from school in Chelsea tractors by their onni-present parents that I could actually believe this is a trend. Kids can’t develop resilience if you don’t give them any independence.
Hahahahahahahahaha. And WHO DOES?!?!?!
Social skills for all of us took a hit from the pandemic, but Gen Z truly got screwed. Combine that with whatever internet echo-chamber of choice, and no wonder they're less tolerant of differing opinions and struggle to communicate.
I have some young friends that got out of high school right before the pandemic hit. They seem perfectly fine. But the young folks I run into in public seem to have real communication issues.
And that's not just some old GenX guy's opinion. I'm seeing more and more articles and comment on the problem. Employers are noting it, universities are trying to deal with it. It's real.
EDIT: Oh god. The comments here. "Yeah, we're just not putting up with your bullshit you fucking Boomers!" Sigh...
I'm reading this thread comments and it seems that Gen Z has decided that it can't be their social skills - it must be the other older generation that is flawed.
Interesting.
Also a lot of comments how older generations have character flaws that do not exist in their own generation.
Even more interesting.
I guess gen Z is just the best generation so far, according to themselves. :)
OK boomer
As a millenial: yes they are the best so far.
It is hilarious that this thread proves the article right.
Cause you're seeing views you disagree with and can't handle it?
It literally does the opposite but ok
Proposition:
"Gen Z is bad at discussion"
Reaction:
"Gen Z isn't bad at discussion, everyone at the workplace has bad opinions and we shouldn't have to discuss"
Reality:
Offices aren't filled to the brim with evil people and yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level. Gen Z probably really does have issues with actual high level discussion because they've grown up their whole life surrounded by Internet echo chambers. This includes right wingers.
This is a continuation of the dance around what's being talked about. The reaction isn't that ‘other people's opinions are bad’. The reaction is that oppressive behavior being passed off as innocuous opinion is not genuine opinion, and cannot be tolerated in a peaceful society. But yeah, let's minimize the opposing view like a cable TV news anchor.
The reaction isn't that ‘other people's opinions are bad’. The reaction is that oppressive behavior being passed off as innocuous opinion
The assumption is that this is about oppressive behavior and you're entitled to hold firm in this mindset. The reality is that there's likely a genuine issue here and that issue is happily driven and worsened by these sort of assumptions.
Take some time to read up on the person making the claims. Female CEO of a large news network isn't exactly part of the old boys club.
Then they should provide examples. And not just talk in big general terms.
Offices aren't filled to the brim with evil people
It depends on what you mean here. If your politics say that LGTBQ+ people don't deserve to live, that some children just need to die (school lunches being cut), that it's ok to force raped children to give birth, then, yeah you'reat least a little evil. If you believe that women or people of a different skin color are less than you you're at least a little evil. Even if you're a pleasant conversationalist, even if you donate time and money, are kind to children and animals, if you have evil opinions, or support people who do, you are a little evil.
The article is an opinion piece that is intentionally leaving out what topics they claim are not being debated.
At a time when science has been politicized, it is safe to say these topics are not up for debate. Reality isn’t up for debate. Especially when it is evidence vs opinion.
Just to double check, your stance is that a minority should be forced to be cordial with somebody who hates them simply for existing?
Unfortunately for everybody, businesses will need to recruit and retain Gen Z employees. If that means that they have to change their company culture, then that's going to have to happen.
My stance is that the people in this thread, and you, are jumping to hilarious conclusions to justify your continued head-up-assery.
your stance is that a minority should be forced to be cordial with somebody who hates them simply for existing?
Like seriously. Read the article and read what I said. Find where exactly I said this.
Hint: I didn't.
My point is that this inability to debate and handle opinions you don't like extends well beyond dealing with some random bigot.
businesses will need to recruit and retain Gen Z employees. If that means that they have to change their company culture, then that's going to have to happen.
They also need to... do business. They need to have debates and discussion and decide on courses of action when two people feel strongly about how the company should behave, and echo chamber natives are very bad at actually articulating their thoughts and defending their points absent their peers backing them up.
Find where exactly I said this.
"yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level"
Your problem is that you're doing the fun game of pretending that "political differences" these days are still in the realms of disagreeing whether quantitative easing is sound economic practice, rather than disagreeing whether trans people should get to exist or not.
If you vote for a party based on their economic policy, and that party happens to be actively recruiting from the ranks of white supremacists, then congratulations: you've just voted at least in part for white supremacy, whether you realised it or not. If you vote for a party currently trying to win votes by campaigning on the grounds of climate change being a hoax, then congratulations, that's exactly what you voted for.
They need to have debates and discussion and decide on courses of action
Essentially all the discussion in this thread so far has basically been focused around being outspoken against bigotry, so I'd be really interested what industry you work in where there are transferable skills from lively debates on whether racism is a good thing or not.
What's an example of an opinion you think Bill from accounting could hold that your standard Gen-Z employee would find unacceptable?
Essentially all the discussion in this thread so far has basically been focused around being outspoken against bigotry,
Yeah, because the people in this thread didn't read the article and are making excuses for themselves.
What's an example of an opinion you think Bill from accounting could hold that your standard Gen-Z employee
It literally depends entirely on the people and the company, and the disagreements aren't cross generations exclusively. The point is that Gen Z is not equipped to handle disagreement in general. You all are the ones jumping to pin it on politics that are already by large literally illegal and heavily squeezed out of corporate spaces.
the people in this thread didn't read the article
the article is literally just "Gen Z can't hold a difference of opinion" repeated over and over with different phrasing
most people by now understand what that's code for, because the other side understands that giving examples would immediately out them as a bigot
otherwise you'd just, you know, give an example
It literally depends entirely on the people and the company
wow wild that you won't just, you know, give an example
you realise that the narrative of "cancel culture" has been going since long before the pandemic, right? this is the same exact thing just dressed up differently
Bootlicker spotted...
Have you worked in the office?!
I mean it's a problem with a lot of Gen Z in the west yes. But where I live someone's opinion does not affect how well you get along with them, probably because people aren't addicted to the internet as people are in the west. Also if anything you're the one who isn't accepting other's views lol.
Also if anything you're the one who isn't accepting other's views lol.
This is like textbook behavior from people who have a problem with discussion. Phrasing disagreement as if it's "not accepting my view".
I mean, all you're doing is saying anyone who disagrees with you is the problem.
You literally are though, you're acting as if my views are invalid. I fully respect your beliefs but from the way you're writing these replies, it doesn't seem like you're respecting mine
Actually no, this is not true at all. It's just that everyone who disagrees with me is either trolling, completely ignorant about basic, objective scientific facts, or is a hate-filled extermist. Our society will surely be destroyed if I pretend even for a second that these awful people's dangerous views are worth listening to or engaging with or being allowed to exist.
Actually no, this is not true at all. It's just that everyone who disagrees with me is either trolling, completely ignorant about basic, objective scientific facts, or is a hate-filled extermist. Our society will surely be destroyed if I pretend even for a second that these awful people's dangerous views are worth listening to or engaging with or being allowed to exist.
Yeah I agree, the guy who thinks I should solve this database file location issue by standardizing the call and making a change in every class we have to prevent future work, but necessitating lots of testing, is a hate-filled extremist.
Obviously my position that we should take the existing structure and write a simple base-class level method to handle it and then assume future edge cases may pop up is the only ethically correct stance. Maybe he’s trolling.
😁
He's a fucking Nazi that's what he is.
LOL, no lie. Well, let's see how that pans out for them socially and in the workplace. We'll have a Social Darwinism kind of experiment, see who gets along best in the long run.
I definitely see this as “we can’t get away with the boys club anymore” rather than a problem with Gen Z. Gen Z won’t hide their unhappiness with any of the -isms and will call it out instead of just keeping their head down.
Right, it’s not the lack of skills to disagree. What it is, is the bravery to not tolerate intolerance, and they stand for what they believe the world should be. Making mr grouper proud out here.
Yeah, I'm proud of the younger generation. I see them standing up against the kinda shit that my generation at the same age just accepted or perpetrated.
I'm a millennial but this reminds me of when I first got into the work force and was stuck in an office full of boomers with me being the youngest. I remember the boss would take turns taking shots at different people during meetings, making insensitive racial jokes about people. I eventually got tired of doing the uncomfortable fake laugh so I just sat there stone faced during his jokes. He halted the entire meeting to a stop to ask me why I wasn't laughing. This is the extent to which office culture must be obeyed and how insecure they get when you don't go along with it. It's so pathetic.
I’m also a millennial with a similar experience in my first job in 2004 or 2005, except instead of racial jokes, it was jokes about boobs, sexist rumors about another coworker moonlighting as a stripper, unwanted touching, etc, and when I reported it, I was told to “grow up” by my supervisor.
Ohhh yeah, there was that too, I can definitely recall one of my male managers making comments about a woman's body when she wasn't in the room. So gross.
"YoU CaNT sAy AnYtHiNg AnYMoRe"
"How am I supposed to compliment a woman these days?"
It's the same boomers that make those complaints whining about Gen Z
This is exactly it. I've seen this exact thing play out a bunch of times. It's a real threat to them, because so many of these people got to where they are because they know how to work that frat boy culture to their advantage, and now they suddenly have to deal with people who don't find their shit funny. The reality is that they don't actually have any real skills besides the politics of being loud and borish.
The thing is, if you say "black lives matter" they'll quietly run to HR and claim they don't feel comfortable and they don't want politics in the workplace. Then they'll turn right around and go back to talking fondly about their date rape days at Cornell
Fair enough. But if you don't tell someone why you are unhappy with them or the situation they control, then nothing improves for anyone.
I believe the impetus is on the bigot to figure their shit out. It is exhausting arguing with bigots, and it is not people's job to teach them how not to be a bigot. There is enough information out there now that you should know not to be an intolerant asshole, and if someone chooses instead to be a piece of shit, I'm comfortable with them being ostracized while they sort themselves out. And if they can't, I'm comfortable with them dying old, alone and confused wondering why nobody visits them.
This sounds like you are promoting an "I'm right, your wrong, and I have no responsibility to correct or educate." mentality. I'm not sure if trusting the people with opposing views to change on their own is the best approach. I think only deepens divides and entrenches opposition.
People with opposing ideas do exist in a vacuum and will have no problem putting the time in to recruiting others to their way of thinking and promoting similar thinkers to positions of power and influence. Ostracizing those you disagree can just as easily put you in a bubble of isolation, or an echo chamber, as them.
Not to mention that discussing opposing ideas improves understanding both by defending your views and by better understanding the why and origins of their ideas.
There's nothing wrong with having a "not my responsibility to correct or educate mentality". These assholes are grown adults. If they haven't figured things out by now then fuck em.
I think that there is something wrong with the "not my job" approach. I believe in the saying "The only thing evil needs to thrive is for good people to do nothing."
Assuming that everyone has shared in your socioeconomic upbringing and therefore has the same access to diverse ideas is flawed.
I am personally inspired by Daryl Davis, a black musician who, through simple conversation, has convinced grown adult Ku Klux Klan members to change their ways and renounce the KKK.
I believe that people should work towards the changes they want to see manifest in the world.
Yeah, I think you've got me right there. When it comes to being a bigot, I do believe in ostracizing and silencing, in order to put them in a tiny fringe echo chamber. That is much safer than having their ideas out in the open. Racists and bigots should be afraid of stating their opinion, this way their backwards-ass ideas die out with them. Because people aren't racist from well thought out rational thought. Their racist because of emotions like fear and anger. Something is going wrong in their life and it's easier to blame a marginalized group than it is it take responsibility. No amount of debate will fix that, and I'm tired of trying. Fuck them.
I also firmly believe in the paradox if tolerance. You cannot tolerate the intolerant, and part of that includes not treating their opinions as valid. Because they are not.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance#:~:text=The%20paradox%20of%20tolerance%20states,or%20destroyed%20by%20the%20intolerant.
I understand the frustration and seeming futility in trying to change the minds of those with opposing views. It takes constant work and vigilance, but it is important challenge their ideas. Even if you make zero impact on them, you can reach other people. Especially if you have the discussion in a public venue, like an internet firum. Even if you don't change any minds, if you truly believe in something then you should continue to work towards it.
As for the "they should already know better" argument, I wonder if you are familiar with Daryl Davis, a black musician who would sit with members of the KKK and talk to them about their beliefs. He has well over 20 robes from former klansmen who have given him their robes after he changed their views with those conversations. Turns out that most of them have never had anybody calmly listen to and then dispute the racist claims that they grew up with and have heard repeated their whole lives.
Notice how I am talking about confronting and challenging ideas, not tolerating them.
The only thing evil needs to thrive is for good people to do nothing.
I know of him, and applaud him. If I were a better man, perhaps I could do as he did. However, I no longer have that energy in me to waste. What I can do is shut their voices out of my world and my family's world. From there, I hope the Daryl Davis's of the world help them heal. But it will not be me.
Not true: boomers will eventually die
I read this as Gen Z doesn’t tolerate the boomer/older Gen X intolerant/racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic bullshit that younger Gen X/Older Millennials had to, and a lot of folks receiving this deserved pushback don’t like it.
¯\(ツ)/¯
Nailed it, except that older Gen X and boomers who weren't part of the intolerant majority ALSO had to put up with all that bullshit.
Very good point that I should have included. Thanks!
Thus...proving the point? "If a person thinks I can't handle disagreement, I bet it's because they're some kind of asshole nazi or something! It would be wrong of me to tolerate a difference of opinion with them!"
If the only disagreement you can tolerate is irrelevant minutia, then you aren't actually tolerant. "I'm totally tolerant, as long as our opinions don't differ on race, culture, gender, sexual relations, work, religion, or politics" is pretty weak sauce.
Congrats you described the paradox of tolerance.
Yeah if someone thinks I and people I'm friends with shouldn't exist than I'm not gonna want to work with them. American Republicans are actively trying to remove any legal protections or rights trans (and LGBT in general) people have, and anybody who shares their views is helping them along. Why on god's green earth would I see that as anything less than an existential threat?
if you hold a view that is intolerant, I will not tolerate you. simple as. we don't have to agree but you can have basic fucking decency (don't be racist)
Interesting examples for irrelevant minutia. Pretty sure a lot of those things would be very important, particularly race, gender, and sexual orientation.
I mean those are pretty major things, especially if you're part of one of the affected minorities. If I were trans I wouldn't really want to work with a coworker who insists on misgendering me and makes a fuss out of me using the right bathroom.
If it doesn't come up, it doesn't come up. People can agree to disagree, also. But there are also cases where the disagreement is so fundamental that it makes it pretty hard to respect someone or even want to be in the same room as them.
Sure, it's supposed to be major things.
There was a point where Europeans were massacring and torturing each other over religious differences, for centuries. Protestants and Catholics considered each other literal heretics, and mortal enemies.
Then they developed this idea of tolerance, and decided that your religious beliefs were your own business. And that worked amazingly well! We can all just get on getting on. This was a huge deal, protestants tolerating catholics and vice versa was every bit as hard as trans people tolerating transphobic people. But it worked, and eventually the differences faded into irrelevance.
And it turned out that the same attitude was great for progress in general: who you love and who you sleep with is your business, and after a decade or two: you know, we've all got pretty used to the idea of people being gay. They wanna get married? Sure, I don't see why not. Tolerance was the basis of most progress in the past few centuries.
And now Gen-Z (or probably just terminally-online people, but as a ratio that's more of Gen-Z than any earlier group) wants to flip the table. Tolerating 'intolerance' is practically a crime! Intolerance, BTW, is when you don't have the correct set of opinions. People who don't have the right opinions are monsters, and must be harassed, deplatformed, fired, etc. The wrong opinions are violence.
I've seen reactions to 'bad' opinions that I would call hysterical.
I hate these generation based things. Some little time ago there was odd stuff about millennials everywhere. Now Gen-Z. In a few years Gen Alpha. Then whatever comes next and so on.
People just like to label people. And generations are just another option.
Agreed, but I see plenty of Millennials and Gen-Zers making plenty of criticisms and jokes about Boomers all the time. It's no better when we do it.
Man, I've started to see it happening between just the Millennials and the Gen-Z. I assume a good chunk of it is for rage bait/views, at least that's what I'm hoping for. It's so much better when we're working together to try to better the future.
Never seen this besides on algorithm driven social platforms tho...
I do see boomer hate every tho
Regardless of where it's seen, it's still a bad habit we all need to break. It only perpetuates in creating division.
Most of the internet traffic is bots paid for by bad actors ;)
Consider that fact when approaching online discussions
This whole thread is like, "Fuck YOU! We don't have communication problems! It's all you old fuckers!"
Well. Would you look at that.
Lmao I love how you guys are getting downvoted to hell for having differing opinions too
Oh the irony
Honestly this isn't a gen z thing, it's just a shit article thing. 70% of this piece is just this one fucking guy bitching about the "kids these days"
Ya, my boss is someone who always makes it about generation this and generation that.
It's not about generations, if baby boomers had the technology we have today they'd have done the same stupid shit.
Welp, Gen Z, it's your time in the furnace I guess.
I remember when "Millennials are ruining everything" articles were the fodder for lazy writers, now it's crap like this.
I remember when we killed Applebee's? That was a fun weekend.
To be fair, Applebee's needed to be ruined.
I agree but I'll still miss the quesadilla burger. It was the only half-decent item in their menu.
We just figured out we can microwave our own food
Now it's cap like this*
Let me paraphrase: Gen Z refuse to take any bullshit from deluded boomers.
If you want to be friends then why aren't you friendly?
This millennial can’t either.
Look, I don't care at all what views my coworkers might possess. And that's the problem. Because when one of these fuckwits starts going on a bigoted rant at work, I do NOT want to hear it, and I surely don't give a damn about it. So yeah, no, we can't work alongside fuckwits. If they knew how to shut up, we could.
Alternative headline: boomers* don’t have the skills to know what is or is not an appropriate work conversation to have.
*I’m aware many boomers do have this skill, just matching the ignorant and overly broad style of the original statement.
"I don't have conversation skills? Surely you are joking, sugar tits!"
We just reposting the same things from 10 years ago with “millennials” replaced by “gen z?”
Shut up you
millennialgen z snowflake! You’ll take the recycled content and enjoy it/s, if it wasn’t obvious….I’m noting that same trend myself.
Does that mean Gen Z are going to kill the diamond industry again?
Same thing as thousands of years ago.
Turgenev enters the chat . . .
No, there's a radical difference here. Yeah, some of these stories are "young people today" bullshit that will always be true. Gen Z truly got fucked by the pandemic and social media.
Judging by the comments here, there won't be any discussion. Which kinda proves the point.
Article ignores key factors of why people would behave in the office like that...
It is a disingenuous fake news.
There are NO factors for behaving like that in the office. If a young person doesn't have the basic social skill of shutting the fuck up about politics in the workplace, wouldn't you say they lack, at the very least, that one simple skill?
Watch these comments for more evidence. Anyone agreeing with the article's premise, or trying to add discussion/nuance, is getting downvoted with no reply.
In my experience, it's the boomers who can't shut the fuck up about politics in the workplace, so trying to lay blame the zoomers for not rolling over and taking it just reeks of more boomer entitlement. shrugs
In my experience, it's the boomers and fellow far right wing that talk politics in the workplace. Especially when they think it's a safe space for "locker room talk". Then they accuse the younger generation of being political because they dare to have LGTBQ+ pins, or don't want to participate with racism or don't look down on someone for having dyed hair.
Calling out someone for being racist, sexist or any of the other behaviors that are no longer acceptable isn’t political, despite one side often labeling it as such.
I'm thinking that a lot of the people commenting might work in pretty homogeneous environments.
I work with people from almost every group, and from every background. Calling people out on this horrendous behaviour maintains a safe work environment, and helps eliminate workplace toxicity. You can't insult a group without also insulting a coworker. Work culture wise, even if they aren't the target, people get very angry at the people who talk like that. "Why would you say that about Nimmy? Nimmy's awesome!". People should be able to earn their livelihoods in peace, imo.
At my job, if you insult a coworker through bigotry, you can expect (at minimum) a long talk with HR for the first offense. (Our HR department is also diverse.) A manager was just fired a few months ago for being bigoted. The best part? NO ONE misses them, not even the company a-holes.
Even from a completely corporate standpoint, it makes sense. You really don't want that kind of reputation if you want to keep your investors or a family friendly reputation. Media would chew them up and spit them out if they allowed bigotry like that.
Social media is the real world today. Yes, the pandemic put everyone’s life on hold for 3 years and that’s going to screw up people’s formative years, but this article hasn’t done much to separate that out from the gripes every new generation entering the workforce gets.
The problem is that the things they “disagree” about are sometimes basic scientific facts, like climate change, or beliefs which strongly affect people’s lives negatively, such as racism, anti-lgbt bigotry, or economic views like “it’s just fine to pay people such low wages they can barely afford to live and will never be able to buy a house”.
And why are these politics an issue in the workplace?
I'm 52 and have worked a wide variety of jobs. Nowhere I have been employed was it acceptable to talk politics, except on the down-low with people you knew well. If there was a political discussion where two people disagreed, they either agreed to disagree, or it was quickly dropped.
I'm the same age as you, so I've seen the same social and political changes as you have over the last 20 years or so. Some "politics" are just negative moral stances about other people. If your political/moral views make people feel excluded and you make sure we all know your views, whether through explicit political conversation or implicit comments, we are not going to "agree to disagree." We will be telling the shithead to STFU, and if they don't, we will be getting HR involved. We can't and won't tolerate intolerance in the workplace.
In my experience, in the 80s and 90s, intolerance was pretty commonplace, and racial and moral minorities mostly just had to suck it up. What's changed is that liberals have "woken up" to that long-standing intolerance, while conservatives want things to stay the same. Up until about 2016, the majority of these conservatives hid their intolerance. Little did we know that they were just seething inside. Then Trump made it okay to be vocally hateful again, and that seething mass of conservatives exploded into public discourse again.
I don't think Gen Z is incapable of disagreeing with their co-workers in a respectful way. I think they are seeing angry, usually older, conservatives raging about moral issues that they thought were already resolved. Or, they see boomers still denying climate change, which is a real slap in the face for the younger generation who will face the consequences long after those boomers are dead. It is very disconcerting and depressing for Gen Z, and as the father of a couple of Gen Z kids, I'm proud of them for taking a stand.
Because whether some people are allowed to exist is politics now, and gen z and others aren't going to quietly let bosses/coworkers banally brutalize people anymore without pushback.
The workplace is steeped in politics, like every other part of your life. The discussions dont have to be about politics day in day out, but somethings have to be addressed directly, work or not.
Basically, if youre workplace is fair and decent, then you likely wont hear anyhting about politics. if it's full of bigots/abuse, well, people arent putting up with it anymore.
I’m not really sure what the person in the article means. It says something about “lockdown-era students can’t hold down a heated discussion”… but why would they be having heated discussions? It also says
which makes it sound like it’s older people who bring up inappropriate political topics in an inflammatory way.
That may be! But again, I have never seen anyone, of any age, bringing up politics. (EDIT: Didn't mean to say "never". Very rarely is more true.
In any case, if a coworker is being an argumentative ass, it's on the listener if they choose to fight back, be the bigger person. A workplace political disagreement doesn't rise to the level of being punched in the nose, you don't have to fight back. :)
The issue is that conservative, bigoted people don't view their hateful ideologies as political. They speak negatively of marginalized groups as if their opinion is banal fact instead of inflammatory hatefulness. I'm a middling Millennial and I've had Boomer and Gen X managers that spout misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, and racist bullshit like they're talking about the weather. Sometimes I called them out, and other times I kept my head down and just got out of the situation, but the steadfast way they hold on to their bigoted beliefs leads them to see their opinions as non-political and any disagreement as obscene and unacceptable.
But social media tells me, over and over again, that liberal ideas are simply "right", and are in no way political? I'm not about to "both sides" general politics, but yeah.
And where the hell have you worked that managers speak like this? I've had bottom-of-the-barrel shit jobs, and damned good jobs, mostly in highly conservative regions.
Hell, one place was owned and ran by conservative evangelicals. I can count twice that a superior brought up politics, and both times the topic was approached like, "Shalafi, you're liberal. What do you think of $X?" And we had a solid discussion. Also, no one questioned my religion or lack thereof. (I admit, that was probably an outlier of a company.)
I've pushed back a time or two over 30+ years, but I'm having a hard time getting my head around the idea that bigotry is a common workplace experience. I'd jump that sinking ship with the quickness. Those sorts of businesses tend to torpedo themselves, especially now days.
There are tons of liberal ideas that are considered political. But there's also a ton "liberal ideas" that should just be the standard.
For example, the very idea about not talking politics could be considered PC culture. Working together with people you disagree with is considered woke. Same with not being allowed to tell racist, sexist, homophobic jokes. These are only "liberal ideas" because conservatives made those topics political by being against them.
It was in the Bay Area in tech jobs. They would very casually be derisive about trans gender identity, calling it "attention seeking" and "a mental illness". The racist statements mostly came in the form of offensive stereotypes and deferential treatment of those that they did not think less of for their race. To them, it was normal behavior and casual conversation. They were more likely to get heated about their sports team than they would about acknowledging the intrinsic value and human rights of other people. It makes it very hard to call out when they say horrible things in casual, laid-back tones. There was no anger or passion in these statements, it was just a matter of fact that trans people aren't real, that women are inferior, that certain races are dirty criminals... like they were talking about how it was a cloudy or sunny day.
Because those aren’t politics. These are peoples lives. There’s no such thing as agreeing to disagree about if people get to have basic rights. What’s been labeled as political now is denying people the ability to live as they want, ironically taking away the freedom one side claims to love.
Think you're going to win hearts and minds by arguing at work? No, you won't, you'll only hurt yourself and cause the opposition to double down, lose more than you gain.
Worse if you're young and confronting an older coworker! "See, I knew these kids were full of shit. There goes another one." Counterproductive, ain't it?
And no, just because one side holds heinous beliefs does not make those beliefs apolitical. Fair definition I found:
May I invoke Godwin's Law? :)
Hitler believed Jews were pests that should be exterminated. Many people agreed then and now. Of course that's a vile position. But it's still a political position because it guided governance.
Saying, "My opinion is morally correct and that absolves it from the politics descriptor.", is unhelpful at best. At worst makes the speaker harder to engage.
Why would I have a conversation with someone like that? Sounds like a conservative talking to me. Comes off like, "I'm morally superior and if you disagree, it's not 'mere politics', you are scum unworthy of engaging."
One more thought for y'all: You can, and should, push back on regressive opinions. But there are plenty of ways to say, "I'm not interested in hearing that bullshit.", without literally saying that. It's a social skill, and isn't the lack thereof among Gen Z the topic at hand?
(Here's something plain crazy; I'm upvoting your comment for adding to the conversation, even though I disagree.)
Like you, I've moved around the US quite a bit have have worked at a variety of companies. But I noticed that the article mentions Miami University, which is in southwestern Ohio. People around here have an odd idea of what constitutes rudeness or what should not be discussed at work.
They are ALL IN on politics.
Visitors to our work's Ohio location (from out of country or out of state) are completely freaked out by it. Locals have no idea that their behavior might be considered rude or inappropriate.
Long story short, I'm not even remotely surprised that a local school is trying to teach people manners.
Because scientific facts, or social and economic issues (that definitely affect and belong in the workplace) are not “politics” regardless of how much you'd like to label them as such so you can shove them under the rug and forget about them, you retrograde fossilized lich, and because “agreeing to disagree” with assholes who hold harmful opinions only serves to empower them and enable them to keep causing harm.
Go ahead, pick fights at work. See how that works out for you. According to the story, it ain't working out.
My current company is a Seattle based software dev, about as liberal as it gets. You come talking politics and arguing with people, even though you're on the "right" side, and you're fucking fired. Bye.
I read that as "they voice their opinions too much".
Yeah, this sounds like, “Gen Z won’t put up with the same levels of bullshit as their predecessors “
Or maybe it's because they have zero patience for people who can't understand the idea of basic human rights?
Let me guess. The "different views" are bigotry, hatred and fascism?
Have you ever watched channel 4? They're the least likely channel to have any of that in the office. It's not GBNews.
I think you just demonstrated the criticism being made.
How dare I criticize someone for being a terrible person
Criticizing someone for terrible behavior they actually exhibit is one thing; assuming someone is a terrible person because they disagree with you about something is bigotry.
I ain't gonna give any weight to a freaking anecdote from any one, let alone a manager. Show me the proof or sit down.
Personally I’m just not fond of working with geriatric, lead-poisoned nazis but that’s just me.
Some guy says some thing. This is no different from an out of touch boomer saying kids these days don't want to work.
I'm guessing someone got called out for being a right wing shit head and now his poor little feelings are hurt.
So you disagree then?
They must be gen z
Channel 4 are one of the most progressive channels in the UK and she's married to a man who works in renewable energy. I very much doubt she's particularly right leaning.
Well, Labour is legitimately sliding right, and it's become somewhat common among the so-called "left" in the UK to make a scapegoat out of trans people - it really wouldn't surprise me that an older, liberal woman in the UK would have some right-wing things to say.
I'm not a big fan of Starmer, but he's slid labour back from the far left to the centre, not to the right. I will accept your point on the trans issue though, otherwise left leaning women who should know better are acting as useful idiots for the right on that one.
The benefit cap is right wing.
Banning your MPs from joining picket lines is right wing.
Purging the left wing from your party -but leaving the right wing untouched- iis right wing.
You can only call Starmer centrist if your view is one from a right wing perspective.
The Overton window in the UK is too far to the right, as is our policy on almost every area. We need a strong push to the left to take us back to the centre, not a slightly watered down, more palatable version of Thatcherism.
Well, I didn't mean to say Labour is far-right or anything, just that they're sliding in the direction of the right.
Gen Z seem to lack the skillset to know their place. -boomer boss
nah never had that issue and I'm pretty fuckin opinionated. As a chef I argue more with old heads than gen z or millennials.
old fuckers think they know everything
Interesting way of saying "they won't bend over and spread their arse cheeks".
Meanwhile said CEO is the one that intentionally promotes 'clueless' people (Read overtly offensive) people as leaders and then paints the workers that are coerced to humor them as in the wrong when they don't put up with it.
Have you ever actually watched Channel 4? They're one of the more progressive voices in UK media, I very much doubt that their management are all secretly bigots behind the scenes.
Everyone in this thread is jumping to the conclusion that it's about politics, race, etc.
Meanwhile here's me wishing the office Zoomer would shut up about the way I drink my coffee.
Sounds like you haven't got the skills to disagree.
According to the OP, zoomer will never talk to you again if you disagree "hard enough."
Just say "Has it ever occurred to you that everyone else drinks coffee wrong? I am the world's best coffee drinker. Donald Trump and Elon Musk have both told me so on Twitter. In fact, Vogue magazine has been trying to schedule me doing a drink out for the last three years. I have denied going on the Joe Rogan Experience twice already out of principles. As you may have surmised, the topic would have been about the proper way to drink coffee. In fact, I know I was drinking coffee, correctly may I add, the exact moment of your conception. I know because that's how great at drinking coffee I am. But thank you for your concern."
Yeah but then you're first on the list when the office needs a scapegoat.
Steve: someone shit in the pinball machine!
Gen Z: I bet that fucking Millenial Nazi did it
Kim, the actual pinball shitter: yep, definitely someone older than us Zoomers
Yeah, I'll just say if I'm working, I just don't wanna hear politics brought up at all. I'd rather focus on work or maybe small talk. I don't wanna end up in a scenario where I expose my political views only to find I've made enemies with the wrong people in a company or group.
HA as much as im amused by the idea of being in the radical politics generation i agree with this, politics dont belong in the workplace & it's better to shut it down & not. also jesus christ politics are polarized sometimes, why the hell would anyone LGBTQ want to befriend somebody who holds the opinion all trans people are pedos?
I do but only with people I've actually made friends with who I'm pretty sure will either agree with me or at least respect my point of view. I'll share mildly political articles in discussion groups for those specific things at work sometimes, but those are places where people have specifically opted in to hearing about them and are interested in the topics.
Out of all the Gen Z bashing headlines I've ever seen... this is the only one I am inclined to agree with. It doesn't even have to be a politically motivated disagreement; I've met too many young people that once you disagree with them on something, try to completely avoid talking to you and also do not take criticism of any kind well.
Don't worry, us millennials ruined toast apparently.
How much could avacado toast cost, Micheal? $100?
Yup. That’s how it goes for sure for many. Not all, but there is a very large segment. They’re used to blocking or pressuring others into mass blocking (e.g., cancelling) others. There’s a time and a place for it, but it also seems to be the norm for anything that doesn’t align with them exactly.
I’m a millennial and we have our own issues, but that is theirs.
I can’t read the article, so not sure if this is all politically motivated or not. If so, I guess I can see their side to not disagreeing - there are moral issues that must be upheld.
As a millenial, we at least made it to our teenage years before the internet and social media was ubiquitous. With Gen Z, those mechanics have been there their whole life.
Yup. I think that’s a big part of how/why they they are unwilling to disagree and keep a relationship even if you disagree - it’s easy to just block people and move on or organize a massive online movement against someone/something.
Maybe there's a degree of truth to this, but the issue doesn't only apply to Gen Z... I've had plenty of overgrown children in their 40s and 50s lose their shit in the workplace when the slightest bit of pushback comes up about anything. I'd say this is more of a general communication skills problem these days
When the "disagreement" is that your nosy Boomer Karen coworkers mis-gender you or disapprove of the way you live your life or think it's NBD that by the time you're their age we're going to be in the "find out" phase of the biggest disaster to hit Earth's biosphere in 65 million years, the problem isn't really with Gen Z.
Considering everyone who saw the headline and didn’t read the article jumped into the comments talking about Boomers being transphobic, racist, or science deniers, I actually am not surprised at all by the article (which is, of course, generalizing an entire generation and therefore erroneous, but not entirely without merit).
It’s not about the topics they’re disagreeing on, it’s about the ability to disagree congenially and effectively, which is an extremely important skill in any workplace.
You aren’t going to change any minds by saying, “You’re wrong. I’m right. I’m done talking to you about this.” You also aren’t going to have your mind changed if you’re wrong, as is very common in a workplace. My solution to a problem isn’t always the right one. Other times it is. I need to know how to disagree and have constructive discussions about topics I disagree with others on to reach the best solutions.
This is one of the reasons diversity is important to businesses. Diversity of thought and constructive disagreement leads to improvement. But if we outright reject those who do not think like we do we all stagnate in our respective bubbles.
Sure this can be applied to good faith dialogue on larger, more important topics as many here seem to be assuming, but it is essential on day-to-day smaller issues that people face in the workplace.
Uh, that's because the different views are fucking wild bad, and they're not just putting up with it.
If the social contact was the same as it was when today's old people were young, then today's young people would be much more willing to put up with shit.
Eh, this generational conflict stuff is nonsense. For years I’ve run teams of boomers, X, Y, and now Z. Have I had to punt some younger folks because they couldn’t work past some not-work-relevant difference with someone else in the office? Sure. But that’s not a Z thing at all.
Anyone who can’t check their personal baggage at the door and get work done as part of a team ends up being shown to the sidewalk. There’s no generational component to this, it’s happening to everyone of all ages.
I hope this guy's company can't adjust to reality & it's eaten by a Gen-Z owned competitor.
Unfortunately, Channel 4 is currently a Crown corporation, so they're owned by the United Kingdom.
So run up until recently by the greatest generation still. Ugh
Take the world’s Big Four consulting firms, for example: Deloitte, PwC, KPMG, and EY are all offering incoming junior hires soft skills training, including lessons on how to speak up in meetings.Thats how you het taken off the fucking assignement.... Jfc
Calling highers ups on what is likely purposeful corruption is no way to move up lol
No amount of fake training will fix this dynamic
A consultant who doesn’t speak up doesn’t keep their job very long.
OK boomer
It's fucking hilarious seeing a bunch of septics in here without a scooby about Channel 4 deciding it must be full of bigoted managers that the gen Z won't tolerate. When it's always been one of the most progressive channels in the UK and has been allowing diverse voices to shine for years.
Setting aside the fact that this is a generalization and thus naturally overstating things, I don't doubt that there's some truth to this.
There's a sort of rigidly intolerant moralizing that arose on the internet over the last decade or so, most exemplified by Tumblr, and gen z was right in the middle of it.
It puts me in mind of the Victorian era, with a group of people who absolutely and unequivocally condemn anyone and everyone who violates their rigid sense of propriety, or more precisely, the stereotypes that they substitute for those people. Of course, the biggest difference is that they have a completely different set of rules to which they insist that all submit - instead of a religious morality mostly concerned with sex they have a secular morality mostly concerned with social behavior. But they share that absolutism - the smug certainty that their way is the only way and that any who believe otherwise are not only wrong, but due to the fact that they believe otherwise, so monstrous as to be unfit to even judge.
That last is the trap - the thing that sets that extreme of moralizing apart and keeps it going when it takes hold. Those who come to believe in it end up believing not simply that they're right, but that believing as they do is the defining trait of people who are fit to judge the matter, so they then can and do reject any and all differing views out of hand on the basis that the mere act of holding a different view means that one is obviously an inferior being, and since one is an inferior being, whatever one believes is and can only be wrong. It becomes a closed loop, in which people aren't even capable of considering different viewpoints.
And that's presumably the quality that's being characterized, and with some accuracy, as them not having the skills to disagree.
I'd note though that this is just one manifestation of the problem. It's a new version of it, made possible by social media, and it appears to be notably widespread, and particularly in a relatively narrow age group, but the dynamic itself is likely as old as human civilization.
Y’know, I watched enough kids get shuttled to-and-from school in Chelsea tractors by their onni-present parents that I could actually believe this is a trend. Kids can’t develop resilience if you don’t give them any independence.
Hahahahahahahahaha. And WHO DOES?!?!?!
Social skills for all of us took a hit from the pandemic, but Gen Z truly got screwed. Combine that with whatever internet echo-chamber of choice, and no wonder they're less tolerant of differing opinions and struggle to communicate.
I have some young friends that got out of high school right before the pandemic hit. They seem perfectly fine. But the young folks I run into in public seem to have real communication issues.
And that's not just some old GenX guy's opinion. I'm seeing more and more articles and comment on the problem. Employers are noting it, universities are trying to deal with it. It's real.
EDIT: Oh god. The comments here. "Yeah, we're just not putting up with your bullshit you fucking Boomers!" Sigh...
I'm reading this thread comments and it seems that Gen Z has decided that it can't be their social skills - it must be the other older generation that is flawed.
Interesting.
Also a lot of comments how older generations have character flaws that do not exist in their own generation.
Even more interesting.
I guess gen Z is just the best generation so far, according to themselves. :)
OK boomer
As a millenial: yes they are the best so far.
It is hilarious that this thread proves the article right.
Cause you're seeing views you disagree with and can't handle it?
It literally does the opposite but ok
Proposition:
"Gen Z is bad at discussion"
Reaction:
"Gen Z isn't bad at discussion, everyone at the workplace has bad opinions and we shouldn't have to discuss"
Reality:
Offices aren't filled to the brim with evil people and yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level. Gen Z probably really does have issues with actual high level discussion because they've grown up their whole life surrounded by Internet echo chambers. This includes right wingers.
This is a continuation of the dance around what's being talked about. The reaction isn't that ‘other people's opinions are bad’. The reaction is that oppressive behavior being passed off as innocuous opinion is not genuine opinion, and cannot be tolerated in a peaceful society. But yeah, let's minimize the opposing view like a cable TV news anchor.
The assumption is that this is about oppressive behavior and you're entitled to hold firm in this mindset. The reality is that there's likely a genuine issue here and that issue is happily driven and worsened by these sort of assumptions.
Take some time to read up on the person making the claims. Female CEO of a large news network isn't exactly part of the old boys club.
Then they should provide examples. And not just talk in big general terms.
It depends on what you mean here. If your politics say that LGTBQ+ people don't deserve to live, that some children just need to die (school lunches being cut), that it's ok to force raped children to give birth, then, yeah you'reat least a little evil. If you believe that women or people of a different skin color are less than you you're at least a little evil. Even if you're a pleasant conversationalist, even if you donate time and money, are kind to children and animals, if you have evil opinions, or support people who do, you are a little evil.
The article is an opinion piece that is intentionally leaving out what topics they claim are not being debated.
At a time when science has been politicized, it is safe to say these topics are not up for debate. Reality isn’t up for debate. Especially when it is evidence vs opinion.
Just to double check, your stance is that a minority should be forced to be cordial with somebody who hates them simply for existing?
Unfortunately for everybody, businesses will need to recruit and retain Gen Z employees. If that means that they have to change their company culture, then that's going to have to happen.
My stance is that the people in this thread, and you, are jumping to hilarious conclusions to justify your continued head-up-assery.
Like seriously. Read the article and read what I said. Find where exactly I said this.
Hint: I didn't.
My point is that this inability to debate and handle opinions you don't like extends well beyond dealing with some random bigot.
They also need to... do business. They need to have debates and discussion and decide on courses of action when two people feel strongly about how the company should behave, and echo chamber natives are very bad at actually articulating their thoughts and defending their points absent their peers backing them up.
"yes you do have to talk to people you disagree with on a high level"
Your problem is that you're doing the fun game of pretending that "political differences" these days are still in the realms of disagreeing whether quantitative easing is sound economic practice, rather than disagreeing whether trans people should get to exist or not.
If you vote for a party based on their economic policy, and that party happens to be actively recruiting from the ranks of white supremacists, then congratulations: you've just voted at least in part for white supremacy, whether you realised it or not. If you vote for a party currently trying to win votes by campaigning on the grounds of climate change being a hoax, then congratulations, that's exactly what you voted for.
Essentially all the discussion in this thread so far has basically been focused around being outspoken against bigotry, so I'd be really interested what industry you work in where there are transferable skills from lively debates on whether racism is a good thing or not.
What's an example of an opinion you think Bill from accounting could hold that your standard Gen-Z employee would find unacceptable?
Yeah, because the people in this thread didn't read the article and are making excuses for themselves.
It literally depends entirely on the people and the company, and the disagreements aren't cross generations exclusively. The point is that Gen Z is not equipped to handle disagreement in general. You all are the ones jumping to pin it on politics that are already by large literally illegal and heavily squeezed out of corporate spaces.
the article is literally just "Gen Z can't hold a difference of opinion" repeated over and over with different phrasing
most people by now understand what that's code for, because the other side understands that giving examples would immediately out them as a bigot
otherwise you'd just, you know, give an example
wow wild that you won't just, you know, give an example
you realise that the narrative of "cancel culture" has been going since long before the pandemic, right? this is the same exact thing just dressed up differently
Bootlicker spotted...
Have you worked in the office?!
I mean it's a problem with a lot of Gen Z in the west yes. But where I live someone's opinion does not affect how well you get along with them, probably because people aren't addicted to the internet as people are in the west. Also if anything you're the one who isn't accepting other's views lol.
This is like textbook behavior from people who have a problem with discussion. Phrasing disagreement as if it's "not accepting my view".
I mean, all you're doing is saying anyone who disagrees with you is the problem.
You literally are though, you're acting as if my views are invalid. I fully respect your beliefs but from the way you're writing these replies, it doesn't seem like you're respecting mine
Actually no, this is not true at all. It's just that everyone who disagrees with me is either trolling, completely ignorant about basic, objective scientific facts, or is a hate-filled extermist. Our society will surely be destroyed if I pretend even for a second that these awful people's dangerous views are worth listening to or engaging with or being allowed to exist.
Yeah I agree, the guy who thinks I should solve this database file location issue by standardizing the call and making a change in every class we have to prevent future work, but necessitating lots of testing, is a hate-filled extremist.
Obviously my position that we should take the existing structure and write a simple base-class level method to handle it and then assume future edge cases may pop up is the only ethically correct stance. Maybe he’s trolling.
😁
He's a fucking Nazi that's what he is.
LOL, no lie. Well, let's see how that pans out for them socially and in the workplace. We'll have a Social Darwinism kind of experiment, see who gets along best in the long run.