The hardship begins when personal and professional relationships mix, but if a personal relationship is established it's reasonable to assume that both people should know how to deal with eachother and would have cleared this up between themselves. If HR was involved, it's because someone was out of line or just doesn't understand how adults manage boundaries, in which case he should be warned and, if the case merits, punished.

I love those beanbag-chair, not corp environments. Not everything that isn't corporate is 'unprofessional'. Wearing trainers to work was unprofessional, until it became established; now tech CEOs compete on who has the most expensive sneakers.

> If HR was involved, it's because someone was out of line or just doesn't understand how adults manage boundaries, in which case he should be warned and, if the case merits, punished.

I assume you mean the person who said it? It's also possible the person who reported it doesn't know how to manage relationships, or had some other motive in reporting this to HR - you can speculate either way.

Directness, professionalism and - yes! - impersonal conversation - is what I would generally prefer.

And as for competitive dressing. Bring back uniforms is all I can say to that.

Edit: grammar

Professionalism is what allows you to work together despite being very different people with different interests and personalities.

Fun workplaces tend to discriminate against those who are different on personal level regardless of their actual skills and contributions.

It's not, but when it takes up the majority of your waking life at ~60-80hrs/wk, it's not an unreasonable expectation, especially for the mental well-being of the workers. And so long as the trend continues towards longer work hours, there really doesn't seem to be much of a humane way to deal with that added stress otherwise, despite all the obvious drawbacks you mentioned.

The ideal of course, would be to shorten the workday. Unfortunately, inertia seems to be working very much against that possible solution.

Yes, my observation is the same - the people who spend 60-80hrs at work do take all their socialization into workplace. Meaning they waste time of people who want to work at work and then go home - either because of kids or because of aging relative or because of anything else including hobbies.

The above is one more reason to avoid fun cultural workplaces. They tend to want all of you, not just your work.

Other than that, I cannot think of a single place that is appropriate.

Anyway, I was thinking of the sorts of situations that actually turn up, on average, for most people. There are only so many princesses to go round, a tiara is highly unusual office garb, and I've never heard of anybody asking to be called "princess" in a professional capacity, at least not in white collar work such as Google. I stand by my rule of thumb. My difficulty thinking up situations was based on my experiences of being at work, which are of course unique, but not, I suspect, especially unusual.

(But if we're trying to think of unlikely possibilities, what about if Princess is your colleague's name? Though given your reply, I expect you're the sort of pedantic so-and-so who'd actually notice that I deliberately quoted it in lower case to sidestep this one.)

(but yes, clearly exceptional case)

But yes, we all have to be really careful what we say. Not for fear of being shamed -- for fear of offending someone! Calling someone a "princess" for liking salads could easily be taken as an offense, gender aside.

It's the same reason you don't just go around talking politics in the officf. Keep that kind of dialogue out of the workplace.

It is easier to criticize people if you did not picked up on them nor mocked nor humiliated them previously. Because a.) they will have more trust to what you say b.) they will not assume you are not just humiliating them again c.) they will not be predispose to see you as a jerk.

Or freely leave until you find a place that's cool.

You talk of vague "inclusivity", and hyperbolic "say anything I want"; but the post specifically referred to "Calling someone a 'princess' for liking salads" - when are we going to be inclusive of differing opinions and forms of expression? Seems a very specific interpretational framework is being mandated here.

Using rough language versus running off to HR when offended - I know who I'd prefer working with.

This is also why I originally said it depends on the context. You can say it to a work buddy who you hang out with after hours. You can't say it to someone from another team who you don't know very well. Use your head.

If you retreat when pushed, they'll just keep pushing. The issue here isn't whether you offend someone, it's who should be sided with when it goes to HR.

If she pushes back and humiliates you back, would you be cool with it?

But it's always possible to claim your offense is real. Pushing is using real authority to moderate a person's own language. Interpretation is subjective.

HR is neither a nuanced or objective judge of semantics - they aren't even in the same ballpark as a direct response.

I meant would you be ok if she really humiliated you. As you said, offense is semantic. Pushing back won't be comfortable to you. If she did that, would the teasing stop or would the group take your side and retaliated?

> If she did that, would the teasing stop or would the group take your side and retaliated?

false choice. I don't know what you mean retaliate, anymore than I know what you mean "really humiliated". Maybe I'm thick skinned, but what do you imagine a coworker could say?

I would find the princess salad comment hostile, unless there is context to mitigate that (we are good friends and in mutually teasing relationship).

Meaning, I would see that as one of those situations when I need to respond more aggressively next time otherwise I risk to be picked on regularly. Not sure if "humiliating" is the right word, but princess is not the image I want to maintain in front of colleges or anyone. Someone not to be picked on is much more practical image.

"I don't know what you mean retaliate, anymore than I know what you mean "really humiliated".

I am less likely to come with the answer right away, but I would attempt to figure out answer ready for next time you pick on me. Most likely, I would just tell "go fuck off" or something else rude with the tone of voice that is as deep and unfriendly as can be. Other then that, I am not sure, I don't know you nor the whole situation, so it is hard to come up with something.

Not a path for someone who considers it important to look like polite person all the time, but you gotta give up something. I think that this is where many women make mistake - they see aggressive response as something wrong and end up being constantly picked on.

"Maybe I'm thick skinned, but what do you imagine a coworker could say?"

That is part of the thing, right? You don't stick up with anything like that, you are mainstream and know that you are accepted by colleges. That gives you advantage in this bullshit.

But mostly, I prefer more formal workplaces that are above this elementary school stuff.

You make a lot of assumptions..

Yes, in fact anyone living in the west is privileged. Since we are talking in the context of software engineers, we're probably better off than most. Who are you talking about?

> get a paycheck, do their job, and not be discriminated

What "discrimination"? Being called a princess? or being shamed/fired for calling someone a princess?

It doesn't quite fit that someone "just" wants to collect their paycheck, yet rocks the boat on such a minor issue.

> inclusive and professional behavior

Are just words, without substance. Are tattoos unprofessional? or would discriminating against people with them not be inclusive?

great. I'm not sure I asked your opinion on the matter.

> no one got fired for calling someone a princess

I said "shamed/fired", and we're talking about HR, who are generally there to protect the company from disrepute, including firing people. The US is well know for liberal and at-will termination.

> Some people can collect their paychecks without having to be offended

That isn't the point - I'm calling into question your narrative: 'If you can choose jobs for their "coolness" factor', you are suggesting there are people who cannot choose their jobs for 'coolness', because there are more important things they are choosing for that reduce the number of jobs available to them; I am suggesting "being called a princess" is as superficial as "coolness".

> if they have a fucking swatiska

This is a tangent isn't it? The point is, those words aren't always consistent as attitudes on what is 'professional' change, and have changed, over time.

What constitutes 'unprofessional' is a matter of opinion, you are flipping this around to suggest that if something (might be) considered unprofessional,. I should not so it - but if everyone did this nothing would change. TLDR; calling something professional etc is an appeal to (supposed) popular opinion, not an argument.

It's can be a disrespectful joke. Besides, it's a gendered joke. If it was directed to a woman, it's very impolite, given the constant pressure on woman to keep thin in society and how that is a frequent bias towards woman. If it was a man, it sounds very transphobic/homophobic, as in "you're less because you act like a woman", besides man also deals with fat shaming. And a lot of people deal with eating disorders, so making fun of people eating choices at work is not a good idea.

Of course, if they were friends, I mean actual friends. It would be fine. If one person had felt offended, they would be able to say that to the other, instead of an anonymous mailing list. Or if they didn't felt offended, they could laugh together and each to it's own. But it's clearly not the case. So it's a good idea to avoid this sort of behavior to people that you don't know well, even you get along with them in a work environment.

If people feel they need a guideline to avoid this behavior and not feel like they need to be hard pushed to figure out what they did wrong, here it is: you can make this sort of joke to someone who is your friend (friend enough to regularly see each other outside of work, take care of each other kids, trust in each other in personal matters), if not, it's not work appropriate.

This could be making fun of a friend. How is this harassment?

The comment is made, we laugh, he has his salad, I eat my burger, we moved on to something else.

(UK)

Obviously casual sexism. Friend or not that's not professional to call a colleague that way at the workplace.

But if the "friend" feels the need to file a complaint rather than talk to the person about it then clearly the comment wasn't appropriate.

I can understand most of the listed complains, but both the "princess" reference and the one about the hairdressers sending supposedly racists code messages sound more like if some problems are also somehow with the people that complained.

No. It's okay to say this to someone you know well and who you know won't mind. But the default position is "don't say this", and so the people who have a strong negative response to it are not "particularly touchy", they're normal.

Most probably normality - like beauty - is in the eye of the beholder.

You have to see the irony in making this comment while whining about SJWs and comparing them to 'soviets'.