If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Is BDSM a belief system? Should it be protected in the workplace?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
The Guardian
I agree with the judge in this case, no one can comment on or deny your lifestyle but wearing a collar as a nurse is a complicated issue because of the sexual aspect.
Would I say the same if I gay woman wanted to wear a 'lesbian' symbol around her neck? I don't know. I'm conflicted.
I agree with the judge in this case, no one can comment on or deny your lifestyle but wearing a collar as a nurse is a complicated issue because of the sexual aspect.
Would I say the same if I gay woman wanted to wear a 'lesbian' symbol around her neck? I don't know. I'm conflicted.
0
Comments
I'd be interested to find out if this nurse wears the collar all the time? Or do they put it on just for work?
I'm all for protecting rights at work, but the nurse removing the collar to go to work does in no way affect the nurses life at home.
The nurse will wear the collar all the time. It's a symbol of ownership, and absolutely is a belief system. The point is: would they ask someone of whatever religion to remove a symbol of their religion? If the answer is no then it is totally discriminatory.
Obviously in this instance there's a health and safety issue, so I'm not sure where I sit on it, but in general people who complain about collars and other symbols of D/s ownership can go to hell. It's not hurting anyone else and, for the most part, people are just judgemental fuckers.
Otherwise, she has every right to, as long as it doesn't bring H&S issues in her work, or distracts from her work. If she was a nursery nurse, it would be highly inappropriate, the same if she worked with vunerable adults. Its more about the context than what it denotes. I wouldn't wear my pentacle in those situations, I think it would be inappropriate to wear a cross in those situations too, because those groups can be easily led, even when you don't mean to. A conversation started by a child asking "whats that?, what does it mean?" can lead to them copying and not understand the full meaning of their actions.
Isn't BDSM an umbrella term for a bunch of sexual practices and mindsets? I think you'd have to drill into the specific practices before you got any sort of agreement and coherence, and even then I think you'd struggle to call any of it a belief system; I can't imagine there are any central tenets, doctrines, edicts, etc.
But I don't think anyone should worry about having it labelled as a belief system, that just smells of trying to establish the same special dispensation that religion asks for and often enjoys.
As much as anything else is protected: if it's been decided that wearing a necklace with a cross on it for cabin crew doesn't interfere with reasonable expectations of job performance, then Manchester United, Socialist Worker, and Wu-Tang Clan necklaces should all also be allowed.
I used to wear a pink ribbon on my jacket. When I spent a week in a nursery all the little girls started coming in with pink ribbons. That's relatively innocuous (I hope) but illustrates your point.
Under that idea, that means that paganism isn't a belief set... and I'm sure there are many other faiths that would apply to as well.
In a way, BDSM is a faith, its something people follow, but isn't a religion...
Perhaps I'm being a little too constrictive with my definitions. I guess consensus isn't necessary to be in possession of a belief system.
Isn't BDSM something you do? There might be a host of paraphernalia and a scene, but to say one would 'follow' it doesn't really seem to sit right.
Yes, but there are rules and whatnot, it comes with the territory, really. Maybe "follow" is the wrong word, but I would definitely say that the ideology (also probably the wrong word, my head won't work today) is like a belief system. Not the same as a religion, but I still think it is.
My head really won't work, I have a point somewhere sitting in there but I can't write it out in a coherent way.
I get that there's etiquette - broadly speaking - and that there are subgroups, flavours, paraphernalia, in and out groups, etc. But I think to call it an ideology or a belief system is to stretch the definitions of those words as to make them almost meaningless.
Using those loose definitions almost any collective could be referred to as ideological. I've met Games Workshop guys who you could easily say had an ideology and a belief system using those definitions. And they didn't, they were just really into it.
You want to enjoy your belief system (whether religion or not) then you are free to do so in your own time. Your priority at work should be the job in hand - for me that is especially true when talking about health professionals. The money that has gone into this case, just as we are having to cut services, really makes my blood boil.
Make sure you do next time I see you in the office.
Most people into BDSM dont let it affect their work
That's more or less where my thinking was. As I understand it, jewellery is generally not ok in hospitals because it's not sterile.
That's correct, these days it's no watches, ties and sleeves rolled up when you are clinical area (such as wards), but that isn't really the point here IMHO, it's just an good excuse to ban it.
The point, for me, is that she's there to work not express her individuality or her belief system. At least not one where there is an option *not* to wear the symbol - I do have sympathy with sikh community for example. Then to rub salt in the wound (no pun intended) she forced a legal challenge and bill will diverts resources from patient care.
So, first she puts her "beliefs" before her patients care, then she takes money away from them. Seriously, what a screwy set of priorities she must have.
And in that context, I believe it's right that the collar has to be removed (sterility issue aside). Most workplaces are inappropriate for sexual expression to such a degree.
Talk about getting your priorities wrong. The employment tribunal can make an award for costs against vexatious or frivolous claimants and I don't see why they shouldn't in this case.
That didn't occur to me, but it's a very good point.
And if people are taking off wedding rings, is there really a difference?
It's a job, you're being paid to do something. It just makes sense not too wear stuff like that >.<
You say that, but didn't I learn on THESE VERY BOARDS that sometimes you women have orgasms while breastfeeding?! Lord know what giving birth does to you crazy fuckers.
It makes us shit ourselves.
IF you want to wear what you like to work, then get a suitable job, one that lets you work from home.
have you never had the joy (or not), of listening to a woman complain about how bad their birth was? Seriously i would've thought the same thing, but no after listening to a friend point out everything, she shouldn't really of been noticiing.
There's nothing more sexual than a nurse's uniform, in my experience.
Can't the woman wear something else symbolic?
If this isn't a genuine health and safety issue, then what's the real problem?
I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread that she could easily wear a chastity belt which would have the same effect but wouldnt be that obvious.
I think a collar such as described is a health and safety issue, and not only that; I echo the sentiment that has been made in this thread about when did it happen that people become more expressive about showing off their desires than actually remaining professional and getting on with the job.
I think employers risk getting into a dodgy situation with this sort of thing. They can generally justify allowing things like head scarves and turbans are religious requirements, which dismissing things that are simply there to symbolize belief. It's on slightly dodgy territory imo, but it's quite difficult to argue that stopping a Christian wearing a pendant with a cross on it is preventing them from actually following the teachings they believe in.
But if an employer bans jewellery, I think they're on very dodgy ground if they then start to make exceptions for some people based on their judgement of what is a valid belief. It should be banned for everyone or allowed for everyone. I assume it's banned for a reason.
And it goes without saying that whether it's a religious requirement or simply a symbol of belief, there should be no exceptions whatsoever in situations where it affects your ability to do your job properly. We wouldn't allow a conservative Muslim to refuse the alcohol gel in a hospital, for example, or a vegetarian chef to refuse to prepare any of the meat items on the menu.