Wells Report on Dolphins locker room: Incognito, others in 'pattern of harrassment'

[Deus Irae]

This is proof of your desire to turn this argument into something its not for political reasons.

Its not about PC.

It's about the Dolphins locker room and the actions of some players not being conducive to good team building. Overwhelming evidence suggests this was the case.

It's not proof of that at all. You made a claim. I noted reasons why your claim didn't hold water. In fact, the reality is that the report makes clear that Martin did not tell his teammates that the problem was their so-called harassment.

 

[BradyFTW!]

In any corporate environment that I'm familiar with, those kind of actions would result in mandatory counseling and possibly suspension, with repeated incidents resulting in permanent dismissal.

Conversely, I don't think we can reasonably expect an NFL locker room to have the same standards of conduct as a corporate work environment. Locker rooms have always been un-PC and always will be, and I don't see any reason to have an inherent problem with that.

That doesn't mean that there isn't a line, and the line was very clearly crossed in this case.

 

[DaBruinz]

Again, for what seems like the millionth time, Martin told Incognito that he'd HAD the thoughts, and that they'd been there because of his worry about his play. He didn't say that the was feeling suicidal at that moment because of feeling harassed.

Deus - Clearly you are naive about depression and suicide. Either that or you're a sociopath, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Depression and suicidal thoughts aren't something that you can turn off like a light switch and they go away. Depression is a disease that can be treated, but never cured. And the suicidal thoughts can come and go depending on how depressed you are. And macho guys like football players don't like to acknowledge their vulnerabilities for fear of being thought weak.

If you're a "FRIEND" as Incognito claimed, you don't sit there and LEAD the incessant harassment of the guy who confided in you that he had been thinking about committing suicide previously, regardless of what the reason was. Why? Because that reason can quickly become you and lead that person to actually commit the act.

You sit him down. You talk. You listen. You support. You lay off the things that you KNOW have upset him because he's told you to stop. You change your manners towards him so that your teammates cool it on the things that obviously upset him (talking about his sister).

You sit there and claim others are naive, but it is clear to anyone that you are the naive one when it comes to depression and suicide.

 

[Deus Irae]

So you invoked the first amendment for literally no reason at all, except to build a (poor) straw man argument.

My argument wasn't a straw man at all. Someone posted a claim about when the so-called harassment should have stopped. I made a perfectly legitimate comparison of speech/offense and, in the same reply, I noted that the players didn't know that their so-called harassment was the problem because Martin hadn't told them.

Now, if you've got something substantive to critique about my pointing out the difference in how those two items (speech/freedom from offense) are viewed, feel free to share. If not, this particular horse has been beaten to death, and the claims of "no point at all" (before your edit) and straw man are simply incorrect.

 

[Ring 6]

I've never treated a coworker remotely as badly as they treated their assistant trainer, so no.

I didnt say coworker. I said things you have done. Where it occurs is not that relevant.

I've said some pretty heinous things in my time, too. I've joked about the most un-PC things imaginable with my friends. But I can honestly say that I've never systematically harassed and bullied a coworker who had already confided that he was contemplating suicide, while maintaining a bet over whether or not I could 'break' him. That's just sadistic.

So if you said those things to the wrong person, you would be Incognito.
Remember the report clearly says that there was no evidence Incognito was trying to get him to quit, or cause him mental distress (paraphrased for lack of memory) and that Incognito felt they were friends.
What if those friends you made those comments to were like Martin where they knew they should say something but just wanted to make you happy so they accepted what was hurtful to them and pretended it didn't bother them.

I am not saying Incognito did not do stupid things.
I am saying those things are common place in that atmosphere, and to suggest he did them out of a loathing for Martin is assuming things that arent there.

 

[DaBruinz]

First, I never claimed it did. Second, so what? My point was in the context of responding to someone else who made a comment that should be seen as objectively wrong. Legally speaking, you don't judge the acceptability of a comment based upon the hurt/nohurt of the person on the receiving end.

WOW. Just WOW.. Clearly you are naive about bullying because that is EXACTLY what you do, LEGALLY SPEAKING... Clearly Deus has jumped the shark.

 

[DaBruinz]

Go back and read. You should have done that before jumping in.



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/1098868-ot-wells-report-dolphins-locker-room-page3.html#post3755789

Too bad you couldn't have followed your own advice. Then you could actually participate in the conversation with a modicum of information without pulling out bits and pieces and trying to strew they together to make a cogent argument.

 

[Ring 6]

Deus - Clearly you are naive about depression and suicide. Either that or you're a sociopath, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Depression and suicidal thoughts aren't something that you can turn off like a light switch and they go away. Depression is a disease that can be treated, but never cured. And the suicidal thoughts can come and go depending on how depressed you are. And macho guys like football players don't like to acknowledge their vulnerabilities for fear of being thought weak.

If you're a "FRIEND" as Incognito claimed, you don't sit there and LEAD the incessant harassment of the guy who confided in you that he had been thinking about committing suicide previously, regardless of what the reason was. Why? Because that reason can quickly become you and lead that person to actually commit the act.

You sit him down. You talk. You listen. You support. You lay off the things that you KNOW have upset him because he's told you to stop. You change your manners towards him so that your teammates cool it on the things that obviously upset him (talking about his sister).

You sit there and claim others are naive, but it is clear to anyone that you are the naive one when it comes to depression and suicide.

Martin never told Incognito to stop.
Your argument says that if you tell me you once contemplated suicide because you were doing poorly at your job, then I should stop treating you like I treat other people, and handle yo with kid gloves, because I must assume that the way I treat you is a problem when you have never said it is.
Can we not joke with a person with depression?

 

[Huckleberry1]

I don't know about anyone else but I like the Dolphins lockerroom just the way it is, they should bring both of them back to provide consistency and leadership for the young guys.

 

[upstater1]

In any corporate environment that I'm familiar with, those kind of actions would result in mandatory counseling and possibly suspension, with repeated incidents resulting in permanent dismissal.

I was just talking to a friend of mine who was called into HQ in NYC from Boston after a conference call with 4 other regional managers. 3 of the others were also called to attend but no one knew what it was about. It turned out to be inappropriate banter. One regional manager wasn't there. What got the 4 of them summoned was much much much less than fordcircle reported. And this was for a national retail chain!

 

[upstater1]

We used to joke that every employee in America could be fired if you observed them at just the right time.
Same here. I challenge anyone to consider the 5 worst or most offcolor things they have ever done, and tell me that if a report was written about them they wouldn't sound like Incognito or if they said or did them to the wrong person they wouldn't have had major consequences.

Doesn't a lot depend on whether the person speaking is prone to beating people up and sexually assaulting women? It gives his words a totally different context.

 

[DaBruinz]

My argument wasn't a straw man at all. Someone posted a claim about when the so-called harassment should have stopped. I made a perfectly legitimate comparison of speech/offense and, in the same reply, I noted that the players didn't know that their so-called harassment was the problem because Martin hadn't told them.

No. What you posted amounts to a bunch of BS because there are such things as bullying laws that DO limit what you can say to another person.

Furthermore, it was CLEAR to the players that their talking about Martin's sister in such a derogatory fashion upset it. He told them numerous times to stop. They CHOSE not to. The fact that it was why he was contemplating suicide doesn't matter. He let them know they'd crossed a line with him

Now, if you've got something substantive to critique about my pointing out the difference in how those two items (speech/freedom from offense) are viewed, feel free to share. If not, this particular horse has been beaten to death, and the claims of "no point at all" (before your edit) and straw man are simply incorrect.

People who bring substantive arguments against you end up on your ignore list because you can't be bothered to actually acknowledge them..

 

[Deus Irae]

Doesn't a lot depend on whether the person speaking is prone to beating people up and sexually assaulting women? It gives his words a totally different context.

Well, the standard involved is "reasonable person". That's why I mentioned earlier that it's not about the butthurt specifically of the victim.

" In determining whether harassment is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile environment, the harasser's conduct should be evaluated from the objective standpoint of a "reasonable person."


So, the court/jury would theoretically look at whatever factors it felt appropriate (assuming they were considered valid factors to be looked at) and then decide from there.

 

[Ring 6]

OK. Clearly you do not understand what proof means. First off, I gave you evidence in BB's comments, and former players echoing it. But that's beside the point at this stage, I am not asking you to prove my argument wrong, I'm asking you to prove your argument is correct.

You are off the rails. You want me to prove that something didn't not happen?
Let me get this straight.
Nothing of this sort ever happened in a Patriot lockerroom because BB and players have made comments to the media that you find positive?

My point is that you do not know what happened in the Patriots locerroom.
You proved it with your comments.


As further proof without Jonathan Martin coming forward you wouldnt know it happened in Miami. So you have to be wrong because it was happening all along and you didn't know about, and i'm sure you could go find nice we love each other comments in the paper from Dolphin players and coaches.
End of story.

 

[Patsrock]

https://twitter.com/TJLang70/status/434412931296415745

TJ Lang ?@TJLang70 3m
Please don't stereotype NFL players for what's going on with Miami. That type of stuff is not common in other locker rooms.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I never claimed Incognito's first amendment rights were violated. I compared the level of protection we give speech to the level of protection we give to people's desire not to be offended.

The problem is that the proper comparison is not to the desire not to be offended, but rather to a right that is not mentioned in the Constitution, but has been declared to exist by federal law and the courts: namely, the right to a work environment free of harassment.

Federal law has decided that where those two rights conflict—in the mind of a reasonable person, not necessarily the person alleging the misconduct—free speech actually loses.

Now I still don't know enough to know for sure if such an environment existed, but, if it did, then Incognito et al. went too far.

 

[Ring 6]

Doesn't a lot depend on whether the person speaking is prone to beating people up and sexually assaulting women? It gives his words a totally different context.

Are you saying that Martin believed Incognito would beat him up or sexually assualt his sister? Wells did not say anything like that.

Martin explanation for not saying anything back was that he likes to please people and other people have witty responses but he doesn't. I did not see the part where he feared physical harm or thought the comments about his sister were real threats.

Of course as I said in my first post in this thread I read much of the report but not all, so if I missed something please direct me to it.

 

[upstater1]

If this were about anyone other than Incognito, I would sympathize more with Deus and Andy's argument, but how can you guys defend this? Incognito has a history.

He reminds me of the off kilter guys that were around at college. Yeah, they joked around. Yeah they were "like" the other guys, but there was always something about them that told you they might not be joking so much. Prone to violence, not aware of lines you should never cross, the person who was most likely to get in trouble with the law, and not someone you wanted to befriend. But for some reason they were always around, lingering, tolerated. No one told him to get lost. Or they were afraid to tell him.

 

[BradyManny]

You are off the rails. You want me to prove that something didn't not happen?

I asked your to prove one of the several comments you've made suggesting this is the norm in the NFL, including the Patriots locker room. This marks the 5th time I've asked you rather clearly to do that. I'm looking forward to seeing what BS way you can get around trying to address it in your next post.

 

[upstater1]

Are you saying that Martin believed Incognito would beat him up or sexually assualt his sister? Wells did not say anything like that.

Martin explanation for not saying anything back was that he likes to please people and other people have witty responses but he doesn't. I did not see the part where he feared physical harm or thought the comments about his sister were real threats.

Of course as I said in my first post in this thread I read much of the report but not all, so if I missed something please direct me to it.

I'm saying that they way Incognito related to teammates in the past was of bullying and threatening and yes, beating people up. And yes, when a guy jokes about your sister but also clearly has no issue grabbing women's breasts in public and assaulting them, it comes off differently than it would from someone joking.