Non-Issue Issue: A New Low For Harassment And Other Poltical Agendas

I disdain being politically correct. Still, there others in this world that play both sides of the fence, while trying to maintain their innocence, in some cases naïveté. I don’t like to gripe too much, but tonight for a change I will and for good cause, so read on.

Take a situation at my workplace recently that occurred between myself and a co-worker, who claims to LOVE animals, claims that they (my co-worker) are so sensitive to varying remarks about them and so on and so forth. It went to a level in the workplace where it should have not gone to: that of being called into my supervisor’s office and being told that I was “being documented” for making insensitive remarks to them about about dead mice.

I was told that my co-worker wanted to be reassigned a seat elsewhere twice within the building, so they “wouldn’t be hurt again.” I didn’t have a choice in the matter and said I would resolve the problem by not speaking to them ever again.

Yet, I wasn’t allowed to do that and was forced against my will to “shake hands” with that person. I have kept my vow, however and chosen not to speak or associate myself with them ever again.

Now, let me tell you dear readers, where I work, there is in no way, shape or form related to any sort of animals and yet, under the rules and regulations of the company it gets treated as “harassment.” I have often wondered what constitutes “harassment,” even in this day and age when stuff like this happens. And since this is a non-issue issue that has nothing to do with work or anything else, why did it happen?

This co-worker & I have had previous conversations about the roaming mice in my apartment this past winter and I even took into consideration their ideas on how to set-up traps, using glue traps by suggestion was one of them and that didn’t work, because all the mice did was bite their legs & tails off of their bodies just so they could escape.

It was also suggested to me that I grab the mice “by their tails” and carry them “to safety,” to which I remember saying; “What do you expect me to do, sit around all day and wait for them?”

I also used to give this co-worker various articles regarding animal stories, both positive and negative, for balancing purposes. Those articles were accepted with no problems or remarks.

This co-worker of mine claims to be sensitive, especially in light of animals and does things like support causes like PETA (People (For The) Ethical Treatment (of) Animals), cat & dog shelters, spaying & neutering cats & dogs and in the past handed me literature that “portrayed” cruelty toward animals and even sent emails to me of “cute and cuddly” photos of animals.

Usually, I deleted the emails and threw away the literature, because I know it’s mostly propaganda. As far as PETA goes, it was reported this morning on CBS Newsradio 780 in Chicago that PETA will be demonstrating in front of the Ringling Bros Barnum & Bailey Circus on November 2 in Rosemont at the Rosemont Horizon (a suburb northwest of Chicago).

Nothing new there, however it was mentioned that PETA will be offering “gift cards” to the first 100 people to who show up to demonstrate. Handing out gift cards? I always thought if people who fought hard and rallied for their causes didn’t need incentives to demonstrate. That’s a new low for PETA and probably a sign of the times, that no one really cares about them anymore. Apathy is catching.

But back to the matter at hand; my accuser it turns out eats meat! The animal lover eats meat! Talk about being hypocritical! How dare they complain about my remark when they are eating the very flesh and blood they love!

Then there’s the issue of supporting spaying and neutering pets. What’s up with that? How would all those who call themselves animal lovers like it if they had their genitals cut off or tubes tied?

Maybe it’s not such a bad idea. It would definitely cut down on some of the excess world population and then there would one less cause to complain about. Let’s start first with animal lovers.

Those who say they are sticking up for the animals are wrong, absolutely wrong, for what they don’t tell you is their own motivations, their own hidden agendas and for that for simple reason, those agendas remain hidden, for if they were exposed, they’d be scoffed at and ridiculed for the same reasons those of us who eat meat and offer our opinions up during a conversation.

At what point does a conversation about someone's opinion get turned into a one-sided issue and the other person acts as if they were offended, but wasn't thinking about the possibilities against those that they spoke with? The same could be said for myself too, but this isn't about rights or wrongs here; no it's something deeper, which of course are those hidden agendas inside seemingly innocent conversations that we take so much for granted.

Though the incident has passed and they tried to apologize to me, I never accepted it. It’s a sad day indeed when words get twisted around and defined as harassment for personal agendas.

It’s sickening.