The homophobic thread :>

Generally an unmoderated forum for discussion of pretty much any topic. The focus however, is usually politics.
Post Reply
JTA
Commander
Posts: 3898
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:04 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by JTA »

Mr.B wrote:
Vrede wrote:"I'm not sure that Chick-Fil-A customers are that smart..."
Image


How Chick-fil-A Hires: The Christian Way

The chicken chain’s hiring practice is long and controversial; but it’s hard to argue with results. Credit: J. Reed

There are a few things you need to become a franchisee operator of a Chick-fil-A.

A commitment to the company. A strong belief in “wholesome values”. A willingness to endure a year-long vetting process. And it helps if you are married.

What don’t you need? A lot of money.

Chick-fil-A is, store-for-store, the most successful fast food restaurant in America, despite all of its locations being closed once a week (Sundays).
And yet, to become a franchise operator, a person only needs $5,000, compared to the $1.9 million it takes to open a KFC.

Rather than looking for operators with cash, S. Truett Cathy – the company’s founder – has always focused on finding people committed to the company’s mission statement. And what is that?

“To glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us,” it reads. “To have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.”

The Hiring Process

Chick-fil-A gets between 10,000 to 25,000 applicants a year from aspiring franchise operators to fill the 60 to 70 open slots that open up each year, according to http://www.ajc.com. As part of the application, Chick-fil-A asks candidates to disclose their marital status, number of dependents and their involvement in community, civil and religious organizations, according to southernstudies.com.

The company’s vetting process can include more than a dozen interviews with an applicant – some lasting hours – and the applicant’s family, including with their children, according to Forbes.Cathy told the magazine he is looking for married candidates (he believes they are more industrious) who are loyal, wholesome and treat their families well.

“If a man can’t manage his own life, he can’t manage a business,” Cathy said, according to Forbes.

Chick-fil-A’s hiring practices have been met with opposition, as the company has been sued at least 12 times on charges of employment discrimination, according to Forbes. And yet that has done little to stop the company from becoming the most successful fast food restaurant in America on a per-store basis.

The average Chick-fil-A store produced $2.7 million in revenue in 2010, which was $300,000 more than second-place McDonald’s, according to http://www.ajc.com. And turnover at Chick-fil-A stores for both franchise operators and hourly workers are both far below industry averages, according to Forbes.

One quick note, unlike many fast food chains, Chick-fil-A owns all of its stores and has franchise operators instead of owners. The setup seems to be mutually beneficial, as the average Chick-fil-A franchise operator makes $190,000 a year, more than most franchise owners, according towww.ajc.com.

The Bottom Line

Chick-fil-A’s hiring process is like Zappos in same ways: it has a very clear culture and makes cultural fit a top priority. The results are hard to argue with, as the company is one of the most successful restaurant chains in America, despite Forbes reporting that its closed-on-Sunday edict costs the company $500 million a year.

Saying that, there are many critics to the restaurant’s hiring practices and it seems to be a lawsuit-magnet. And by looking for a certain profile, the company is potentially excluding great candidates.

Ultimately though, what makes the company successful is its top-down commitment to one, clear vision, whether you agree with it or not. And that is epitomized in its hiring practice.
Chick-fil-A has the best fast food chicken sandwhiches. One thing I can't stand is the workers having to say "How may I serve you". I know it's trivial, and I know me not liking that is irrational. But it just irks the hell out of me for some reason. Maybe it's done for the old folks. They like that make-believe wholesome stuff even if it's forced. Oh well. Those waffle fries!
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by Mr.B »

JTA wrote: "One thing I can't stand is the workers having to say "How may I serve you"? "
Sure beats going into MickeyD's and hearing 'em ask " 'ep ye?".....

or any restaurant and hearing when you and the Missus walk in the door, "two of you guys today?".... "what will you guys have today?".... "you guys wantsomore tea?" grrrrrr!

definition of 'guy': (Webster)
(1)...A person of queer looks or dress. (queer: odd, strange)
(2)...A man or young man; a fellow
(3)...A person that dresses like, has the characteristics of, or looks like a man

I know they think they're being cool, when in fact they're being lame-brained, especially when a couple in their eighties walk in and some twit young enough to be their great-great calls them 'guys'....grrrr!

JTA
Commander
Posts: 3898
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:04 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by JTA »

Mr.B wrote:
JTA wrote: "One thing I can't stand is the workers having to say "How may I serve you"? "
Sure beats going into MickeyD's and hearing 'em ask " 'ep ye?".....

or any restaurant and hearing when you and the Missus walk in the door, "two of you guys today?".... "what will you guys have today?".... "you guys wantsomore tea?" grrrrrr!

definition of 'guy': (Webster)
(1)...A person of queer looks or dress. (queer: odd, strange)
(2)...A man or young man; a fellow
(3)...A person that dresses like, has the characteristics of, or looks like a man

I know they think they're being cool, when in fact they're being lame-brained, especially when a couple in their eighties walk in and some twit young enough to be their great-great calls them 'guys'....grrrr!
That's almost as bad as saying "ya'll".
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.

JTA
Commander
Posts: 3898
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:04 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by JTA »

Vrede wrote:Mr.B, your post discusses Chick-fil-A corporate policy and franchise operators and not Chick-Fil-A customers at all. So, I fail to see how your article is a sensible response to my post. Does that mean that you are a Chick-Fil-A customer?

Anyhow, the full context of my post:
Vrede wrote:
Chick-Fil-A: Stop bullying Eat More Kale!

Petition Text:

Chick-fil-A: Stop bullying small business owners and retract opposition to Eat More Kale t-shirts."

...As intelligent consumers, we can tell the difference between a piece of chicken and green, leafy kale...
I'm not sure that Chick-Fil-A customers are that smart, but I signed anyhow.
The mention of customers was just a joke. The real point is how Chick-fil-A glorifies "God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us,” and has "a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A," by spiteful bullying of small business owners/artists and itself claiming that its own customers are so dumb as to confuse “Eat Mor Chikin” and “Eat More Kale”.

Btw, Webster's Definition of guy continues with:
"4. A member of a group of either sex, usually a friend or comrade; - usually used in the pl.; as, tell the guys to come inside; are any of you guys interested in a game of tennis?."

Did you not notice or did you think that we would not be smart enough to check? It's just a friendly form of address, don't be such a curmudgeon.
I think we can all agree that the use of "you's" is the most elegant form of address.
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by Mr.B »

Vrede wrote:"Were you too "lame-brained"..blah, blah, blah..."
I used your Chick-fil-A snark to post corporate policies of same just because you said their customers are dumb, and CFA bullies small business.
Bullmalarkey. CFA is one of the very few companies who cherish their roots and continue to put their faith before business. $500 million ain't nothing to sneeze at, but they seem to manage to be successful without it. Agree?

You also said "The mention of customers was just a joke"...yeah right. Get called out and suddenly it's a joke.

Yes...I'm one of the dumb CFA customers. What of it?

If a door greeter or a wait person has never seen me before, I'm not a 'comrade' or 'friend'. Calling others, especially elderly people "you guys" is showing a lack of respect, which in this country, is a thing of the past.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »

Just wondering, Mr.B - if the server isn't going to use the grammatically correct collective "you" - as almost nobody in the US does - how would you and the missus prefer to be addressed collectively? I'm thinking "maybe "you two" as in, "would you two like something else," but that seems a bit awkward. What would you like?

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by Mr.B »

The "you" part don't bother me; I've heard "you two" , "you folks", etc. The part that that fries my socks is when my wife and myself are referred to "you guys", "you gois" and and any other cutesy , lamebrained names. It doesn't ruin my day; I accept their ignorance and move on.

(hey O...check your pm)

Vrede, my post about CFA is just that, a post about CFA. I used your quote because you are anti-big business, anti-religion in business, and anti anything else that comes along. In essence, it was an "in your face" post that shows how successful CFA is despite the "gay" boycotts, the religious ridicule, and the accusations of bullying.

I didn't edit out anything, nor was I responding to anything in particular.

I'm not fond of "sugar/darling/honey" either, but Sir/Ma'am shows respect, something I learned years ago as a child; by my parents, and by my teachers in school when they were allowed to teach respect and etiquette. If someone calls you sir or ma'am, accept it as their showing respect for you.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »

Mr.B wrote:The "you" part don't bother me; I've heard "you two" , "you folks", etc. The part that that fries my socks is when my wife and myself are referred to "you guys", "you gois" and and any other cutesy , lamebrained names. It doesn't ruin my day; I accept their ignorance and move on.

.
Your dictionary may be a little dated, Mr.B. "Guys" has been a widely used, and apparently not even colloquial, unisex term for decades.

For example, Merriam Webster includes, "a : man, fellow
b : person —used in plural to refer to the members of a group regardless of sex <saw her and the rest of the guys>

Oxford Dictionary offers... (guys) People of either sex:
you guys want some coffee?

McMillan: guys [PLURAL] SPOKEN used for talking to a group of people
Hey, guys, what's happening?

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »

"Sir" or "Madam" (Ma'am") might but don't necessarily show respect, but they always show subservience. I can't think of any example off hand where the more powerful in a relationship refers to the less powerful as "sir." Yes, I know - there is the general issue of common etiquette where everyone "sirs" each other as a formality of speech - but ultimately it's a power - not respect - issue.

User avatar
neoplacebo
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 12690
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:42 pm
Location: Kingsport TN

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by neoplacebo »

O Really wrote:"Sir" or "Madam" (Ma'am") might but don't necessarily show respect, but they always show subservience. I can't think of any example off hand where the more powerful in a relationship refers to the less powerful as "sir." Yes, I know - there is the general issue of common etiquette where everyone "sirs" each other as a formality of speech - but ultimately it's a power - not respect - issue.
Why do cops tend to call folks "sir" or "ma'am" while they're demonstrating their power over them? I guess it must be a cop rule or something.....

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »

neoplacebo wrote:
O Really wrote:"Sir" or "Madam" (Ma'am") might but don't necessarily show respect, but they always show subservience. I can't think of any example off hand where the more powerful in a relationship refers to the less powerful as "sir." Yes, I know - there is the general issue of common etiquette where everyone "sirs" each other as a formality of speech - but ultimately it's a power - not respect - issue.
Why do cops tend to call folks "sir" or "ma'am" while they're demonstrating their power over them? I guess it must be a cop rule or something.....
Yep. It's a cop rule - be polite to the citizens in words while also being condescending and intimidating. Same rule applies to other government workers or anyone in the bureaucracy, but will less condescension.

User avatar
Ombudsman
Ensign
Posts: 1268
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 1:03 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by Ombudsman »

Mr.B wrote:The "you" part don't bother me; I've heard "you two" , "you folks", etc. The part that that fries my socks is when my wife and myself are referred to "you guys", "you gois" and and any other cutesy , lamebrained names. It doesn't ruin my day; I accept their ignorance and move on.
You ever considered looking for fewer things to be offended about? Or at least enrolling in a remedial English class?
Wing nuts. Not just for breakfast anymore.

User avatar
neoplacebo
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 12690
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:42 pm
Location: Kingsport TN

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by neoplacebo »

I bet this will put an end to Tillis' ads touting how he was instrumental in delivering this abortion in the first place.

User avatar
neoplacebo
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 12690
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:42 pm
Location: Kingsport TN

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by neoplacebo »

O Really wrote:
neoplacebo wrote:
O Really wrote:"Sir" or "Madam" (Ma'am") might but don't necessarily show respect, but they always show subservience. I can't think of any example off hand where the more powerful in a relationship refers to the less powerful as "sir." Yes, I know - there is the general issue of common etiquette where everyone "sirs" each other as a formality of speech - but ultimately it's a power - not respect - issue.
Why do cops tend to call folks "sir" or "ma'am" while they're demonstrating their power over them? I guess it must be a cop rule or something.....
Yep. It's a cop rule - be polite to the citizens in words while also being condescending and intimidating. Same rule applies to other government workers or anyone in the bureaucracy, but will less condescension.
Yep, it's sort of like that kinder, gentler machine gun hand concept except on a local level.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »


Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by Mr.B »

Ombudsman wrote:"You ever considered looking for fewer things to be offended about? Or at least enrolling in a remedial English class?"
Dang! You again? I thought you, Stinger, & Homerfobe flew the coop for a ménages à trois! :lol: :lol: :shock:

Anyhoo....welcome back, not that you were really missed or nothin'....... :roll:

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by Mr.B »

Vrede wrote: "Soon, Dixie may be able to wed Dixie in Dixie."
Soon, Dixie may be able to wed Dixie and Dixie.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »

My first serious love was a nice Jersey girl named Dixie. :)

User avatar
neoplacebo
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 12690
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:42 pm
Location: Kingsport TN

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by neoplacebo »

O Really wrote:My first serious love was a nice Jersey girl named Dixie. :)
My 3rd grade girlfriend (Ellen) ended up going to Harvard Law School and now lives in Hawaii. We used to ride bicycles together. I wonder if she thinks about me.......

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23586
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: The homophobic thread :>

Unread post by O Really »

neoplacebo wrote:
O Really wrote:My first serious love was a nice Jersey girl named Dixie. :)
My 3rd grade girlfriend (Ellen) ended up going to Harvard Law School and now lives in Hawaii. We used to ride bicycles together. I wonder if she thinks about me.......
You might enjoy Moody Blues "Wildest Dreams"... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmmPFrkuPq0
Great song - saw them do it live at Biltmore a couple of years ago. Anybody with a "past" of any sort can relate...

Or maybe to "Our Last Summer" ...well, maybe not for the third-grader, but still... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6YqC3D0GMo

Post Reply