Should Grey's Anatomy Actor Be Fired For Using The F Word?

[MrsSpringsteen]

Not that F word, the one that really matters. Not only did he use it when he had a fight with Patrick Dempsey on the set, referring to his gay coworker (who was then publicly outed as a result), but he actually said it again in the press room at the Golden Globes, when denying that he ever called him that (which is an outright lie in my opinion given the first hand accounts of the incident). So why hasn't ABC fired him? If he made a racist or anti -Semitic comment, wouldn't he have been fired immediately? I think so.

I am a fan of this show and this angers and saddens me, and I think he should be fired. Not only has he created a hostile work environment but he has hurt a coworker so much-and offended the audience of the show. I for one am offended. When I watch the show now I think of him using that word-every time I see him. And of how TR must be hurting over the whole thing.



By SANDY COHEN, AP Entertainment Writer 32 minutes ago

The heated controversy at ABC's top show, "Grey's Anatomy," boiled over Thursday as the network rebuked co-star Isaiah Washington for an anti-gay comment and Washington issued a lengthy apology.

"We are greatly dismayed that Mr. Washington chose to use such inappropriate language at the Golden Globes, language that he himself deemed `unfortunate' in his previous public apology," the network said in a statement.

"His actions are unacceptable and are being addressed," the statement conclude.

During a backstage interview Monday at the Globes gala, Washington denied involvement in a heated on-set incident in October during which an anti-gay remark was reportedly uttered.

"No, I did not call (co-star) T.R. (Knight) a faggot," Washington told reporters. "Never happened, never happened."

In his apology Thursday, Washington acknowledged "repeating the word Monday night."

"I apologize to T.R., my colleagues, the fans of the show and especially the lesbian and gay community for using a word that is unacceptable in any context or circumstance. I marred what should have been a perfect night for everyone who works on `Grey's Anatomy.' I can neither defend nor explain my behavior. I can also no longer deny to myself that there are issues I obviously need to examine within my own soul, and I've asked for help."

ABC said in its statement it has "a longstanding policy to maintain respectful workplaces" for its employees, adding that the network had "dealt with the original situation in October, and thought the issue resolved."

Thursday's events followed a critical statement Wednesday from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. Neil Giuliano, GLAAD president, said he had contacted Washington's representatives in hopes of meeting the actor to discuss "the destructive impact of these kinds of anti-gay slurs."

"Washington's repeated use of it on-set and in the media is simply inexcusable," Giuliano said in the statement.

Washington said on Thursday that he welcomes the chance to meet with gay and lesbian community leaders "to apologize in person and to talk about what I can do to heal the wounds I've opened."

"I know a mere apology will not end this, and I intend to let my future actions prove my sincerity," Washington said.

Knight, who said soon after the October fracas that he is gay, appeared in Tuesday's taping of "The Ellen DeGeneres Show" to discuss the original incident and Washington's recent comments.

"He referred to me as a faggot," Knight said of the October incident. "Everyone heard it."

 

[dazzlingamy]

Maybe he thought it was ok to use the word. I mean its JUST a word, i don't think someone should be fired over using a word. Sticks and stones really. If he was physical, then something should be done, but c'mon its just a word. Its the connotations that someone puts on the word that makes it harmful, not the word itself.

I have gay friends, who call each other fags, i call them fags, its not a big deal. Its only a big deal if people make it a big deal, and obviously people are because its a hot topic and media wants to sell more newspapers and tv ex want to have more people tune into their shows.

While i agree that it is derogatory to call someone a faggot, i don't believe it is enough to warrent being fired.

 

[BVS]

I don't think he should be fired for using the word. If he gets fired it will be for causing an uncomfortable work environment. They already said he shouldn't be speaking in public...

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

What about the n word, would that warrant being fired? I can't believe that, in most corporate environments, it wouldn't.

The workplace isn't treated the same as when you are around your friends, and it shouldn't be. Friends calling each other fags, and you calling them fags and obviously they don't have a problem with that, just isn't at all comparable to what happened here.

At this point I think firing has become a possibility due to his reigniting of the whole thing at the Golden Globes. At what point does it become such a PR nightmare for ABC that they don't just fire him, even though they didn't after the first incident? It has become a PR thing and not just a moral mess for them. And tv is driven by things like PR.

 

[BVS]

What about the n word, would that warrant being fired? I can't believe that, in most corporate environments, it wouldn't.

Language itself isn't a firable offense, it's usually how the language is used.

Some can make a completely asinine racist joke amongst employees and not be fired, but if the word was used at another employee or said in front of clients then it can be a firable excuse. This is my experience in the workforce, obviously different companies work under different guidelines.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Language itself isn't a firable offense, it's usually how the language is used.

I understand that, but no matter how angry someone is at any given moment-how can calling a coworker a faggot ever be deemed acceptable? It was definitely not an asinine joke. If I recall correctly, he said something to the effect that "I'm not your little faggot like TR" to Dempsey, I'd have to look it up. Then of course he said it again in his denial, and the reporter's question wasnt even directed at him.

Like I said in my edit, if ABC fires him it will likely be for PR reasons, not other reasons. They just have to legally cover themselves

The look on TR's face when Washington said that backstage at the Globes, I just can't forget that. He looked heartbroken.

And I'm sorry for typing the word out here, honestly I cringe at even typing it. It feels wrong to even do that, that's just my personal view.

This is what happened, accdg to People Magazine

A set source says that when Knight, 33, was late to film a scene, a debate ensued between Dempsey and Washington, with Dempsey insisting on waiting for Knight before starting the scene. The argument quickly intensified, and the source says that yes, the alleged slur was used, but Knight was not present at the time. (he said "I'm not your little f like TR).

"Isaiah was running his mouth off," says the source. "Isaiah verbally attacked Patrick – he tore into him. Patrick's voice escalated and he did tell Isaiah to 'f– off, (but) that was as heated as Patrick got."



TR wasn't present at the time, but what does that matter? He was present Monday, and I'm sure it must have been so uncomfortable for him. It must be so hostile and uncomfortable for the whole cast too.

 

[Liesje]

Language itself isn't a firable offense, it's usually how the language is used.

I disagree. In several college courses, we looked at case studies like these, more in a business setting (I was a business communications major). In every case, the employee was fired. One case in particular was a true story, someone who was the top sales rep for whatever sector of AT&T my prof used to work for said something derogatory about another co-worker and was fired immediately. Maybe this isn't common, but we were taught that this is definitely a firable offense because it is a liability to the company. It turns away customers and co-workers and no matter how dumb it might sound, you will lose business (or in this case fans/viewers) for allowing this type of behavior.

Personally, I have no use for any type of derogatory language, even in jest, and no use for people that think it's OK. How hard is it to speak appropriately and avoid words you KNOW will offend people? Not that hard. I don't think a slip up is much of an excuse, sorry.

 

[Justin24]

I think he should be fired and put on the same pedistal as Mel and Richards.

Why is it he is not judged and blasted for what he said but when Richards used the N word and Mel usining anti-semetic words they were judged immeaditly?

 

[BVS]

I understand that, but no matter how angry someone is at any given moment-how can calling a coworker a faggot ever be deemed acceptable?

Like I said in my edit, if ABC fires him it will likely be for PR reasons, not other reasons. They just have to legally cover themselves

I agree, it isn't aceptable. But it isn't acceptable to me on a moral level. Speaking legally, free speech should win, unless like I said it creates a hostile environment. You're correct, if he gets fired it will be for PR reasons more likely.

 

[BVS]

I disagree.

One case in particular was a true story, someone who was the top sales rep for whatever sector of AT&T my prof used to work for said something derogatory about another co-worker and was fired immediately. Maybe this isn't common, but we were taught that this is definitely a firable offense because it is a liability to the company. It turns away customers and co-workers and no matter how dumb it might sound, you will lose business (or in this case fans/viewers) for allowing this type of behavior.

But isn't this a case of "how it's used"? Given the example above, let's say a co-worker called someone a bitch. He didn't get fired for using the word 'bitch', he got fired for using it towards a co-worker. If he had stumped his towed and yelled "son of a bitch", would he have gotten fired?

 

[BVS]

I think he should be fired and put on the same pedistal as Mel and Richards.

Why is it he is not judged and blasted for what he said but when Richards used the N word and Mel usining anti-semetic words they were judged immeaditly?

I think you aren't seeing the same outrage for two reasons, one, the obvious society is still very homophopic so it's more acceptable. Secondly it wasn't said with as much rage behind it as Mel or Richards.

 

[Justin24]

It does not matter, he still used the word, which is unacceptable. Is it acceptable since most of society is still homophobic?

 

[BVS]

It does not matter, he still used the word, which is unacceptable. Is it acceptable since most of society is still homophobic?

I didn't say it was acceptable, I'm just telling you why you haven't heard more of an outcry like that of the Mel or Richards incident.

 

[redhotswami]

hate speech is unfortunately protected by the 1st amendment. while the f word can be used in jest or in hate speech, it is still protected.

i guess it is a matter of context though. i can almost promise you that if he worked at my office, he would for sure be fired, or at least stripped of his duties. perhaps not for using the f word, but i'm sure people here would dig up something on him as an excuse for firing him. at this university we are struggling to improve our campus climate and are committed to diversity (it is even in our mission statement). so we have very high standards of our faculty and staff. so like lies said, in terms of maintaining liability, if an employee did something that was not in line with our mission, something would definitely be done about it.

however, this is a very different context here than my work environment. i just wanted to offer up an example to what lies said before. anyway, it would be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[BVS]

hate speech is unfortunately protected by the 1st amendment.

I wouldn't say it's unfortunate. It's unfortunate people still use this language. I would love to stop this language today, but make it illegal won't stop people from feeling that way.

You can't make the language illegal, for if you make this language illegal then someone may turn around and make your language illegal.

 

[Liesje]

But isn't this a case of "how it's used"? Given the example above, let's say a co-worker called someone a bitch. He didn't get fired for using the word 'bitch', he got fired for using it towards a co-worker. If he had stumped his towed and yelled "son of a bitch", would he have gotten fired?

Definitely. IMO, it may even be less of a liability using words at a co-worker, because usually there is some reason why this is done or some conflict that may have been resolved. Just using the word in general shows that the person finds it acceptable, even when not directed at someone they know. To me, that's not acceptable professionally, in ANY circumstance.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

You have to wonder if this incident is being watched very carefully in terms of ratings. The show is, without question, at near peak success in terms of audience ratings. Remember Washington has already been exposed pubically for his on-set assault against Demsey. There is already friction on the set. You would have to consider the likelihood of bad press being good press for the show. The media believes that people like reading and hearing about this. In turn, the studio may believe this is a ticket to grab more of an already huge audience.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Storm in a teacup.

Sticks and stones, people...

If people didn´t make such a big fuss about these words than sooner or later they would lose all their power and they would stop being used out of their sheer futility.

Shrug it off and ignore the bastards.

 

[Irvine511]

i really couldn't care less.

and while "faggot" -- when used by a straight person -- makes me quite uncomfortable, it doesn't have the same historical weight as "******."

it just doesn't.

it might be every bit as hateful, but i would even say that the "n-word" makes me, as a white boy, more uncomfortable than the "f-word."

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

and while "faggot" -- when used by a straight person -- makes me quite uncomfortable, it doesn't have the same historical weight as "******."

it just doesn't.

it might be every bit as hateful, but i would even say that the "n-word" makes me, as a white boy, more uncomfortable than the "f-word."

That's interesting to me, thanks for your perspective. But as we all know, you aren't TR and you and he don't share the same makeup-and you aren't both in the same place as far as your sexuality and all the surrounding issues, perhaps. I don't know you or TR enough to say for sure, it's based upon assumptions I am making based upon what I do know about both of you. I don't mean to sound condescending- but just to make the point that people are different, sensitivities are different. I know he also said on Ellen that he has never been called that word before, at least that he has heard.

And I just think it just has no place whatsoever in the workplace, period-end of story. Actually TR did say on Ellen that he was around the corner and heard it on the set the first time.

If it is all just "sticks and stones", then why aren't all of these hateful and hurtful words allowed to be directed at others on Interference? Just to give one example. It's so easy to say "shrug it off" when you aren't the target of it, and you don't have to live with all the surrounding hate and discrimination on a daily basis.

It's also interesting to me that Isaiah is black, I just wonder how he would react if a fellow GA actor used the n word to refer to him.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

Lets face it. Washington is an assaulting, potty-mouthed fool and America wants to watch it.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Lets face it. Washington is an assaulting, potty-mouthed fool and America wants to watch it.

I want to watch Grey's Anatomy because I really enjoy the show. I don't want to watch homophobes, racists, people who use that word and then go on to play scenes with that person-and all I can think about is him calling him that word. Nope I don't, even though I'm an American.

What about what is going on with the British Big Brother-do British people want to watch that?

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

If it is all just "sticks and stones", then why aren't all of these hateful and hurtful words allowed to be directed at others on Interference? Just to give one example. It's so easy to say "shrug it off" when you aren't the target of it, and you don't have to live with all the surrounding hate and discrimination on a daily basis.

It's also interesting to me that Isaiah is black, I just wonder how he would react if a fellow GA actor used the n word to refer to him.

Because people HAVE consistently given those words the power to hurt. I don´t think I could care less about words being said to me. I never have. Just be confident and secure in yourself and words will never hurt your pride.

I remember in high school, whenever we gave someone a nickname and they didn´t like it we would use it a lot more because we knew it would get under his or her skin. Whenever they didn´t care about it usually just lost all point in existing and nobody ever remembered it.

I think it´s time to leave those words in the past. Strip them from their power. Ignore them.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Because people HAVE consistently given those words the power to hurt. I don´t think I could care less about words being said to me. I never have. Just be confident and secure in yourself and words will never hurt your pride.

People may have given those words power but they also have intrinsic, historic, hateful power. To deny that is naive, sorry.

And you can't project your attitude towards it onto everyone else and just expect them to feel the same way. Life just doesn't work that way, relationships just don't work that way. Frankly I think it's a very self-centric and self centered way in which to operate and live. If we all went around living like that that there would be a helluva lot more problems than we have now.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

People may have given those words power but they also have intrinsic, historic, hateful power. To deny that is naive, sorry.

And you can't project your attitude towards it onto everyone else and just expect them to feel the same way. Life just doesn't work that way, relationships just don't work that way. Frankly I think it's a very self-centric and self centered way in which to operate and live. If we all went around living like that that there would be a helluva lot more problems than we have now.

Obviously I can´t expect it from people. But I can sure as hell suggest it.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Obviously I can´t expect it from people. But I can sure as hell suggest it.

You can suggest it all you want, but you have to live as if the suggestion has no weight or importance whatsoever-because you aren't them and they aren't you and we all have to exist in this world together. Like it or not, that's how it is.

This is something I read the other day about a real life "Philadelphia"-only difference is that he doesn't have AIDS. This is the kind of thing that gay people have to face in a "professional" workplace.


The link isn't working, so here's the whole story.

By MARCUS BARAM

Jan. 18, 2007 — - It's a scenario reminiscent of the Oscar-winning Tom Hanks movie "Philadelphia."

A gay lawyer at a prestigious white-shoe law firm claims that he experienced discrimination and homophobic comments from his co-workers.

Aaron Brett Charney, a 28-year-old associate at New York-based Sullivan & Cromwell, one of the biggest law firms in the country, sued the firm for sexual orientation discrimination, alleging a pattern of anti-gay behavior.

Charney claims that one of the firm's partners, Eric Krautheimer, threw a document at his feet and told him to "bend over and pick it up -- I'm sure you like that" and that partner Alexandra Korry falsely accused him of "carrying on an 'unnatural' homosexual relationship with another male S&C associate," according to court documents.

When Charney filed an internal complaint, partners at the firm suggested that he relocate to a foreign office and fabricated negative reviews accusing him of overbilling clients, Charney claims in the suit filed in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan. A few hours after filing the suit Tuesday, Charney says the firm told him not to come into the office while they conducted their own internal investigation, and his Blackberry was turned off.

The lawsuit is notable in that associates, who work around the clock for years to become partners, rarely sue their firms for fear of losing their jobs and committing career suicide.

But that didn't stop the young lawyer.

"My career was pretty well sabotaged. They already ruined whatever prospects I had," says Charney. He says that sexual discrimination against gay lawyers is endemic at some firms, and he hopes "that those who were suffering in silence at other firms know that someone was standing up and fighting for their rights."

Sullivan & Cromwell, where Charney has worked since 2005, said in a statement that it had previously investigated the claims and that it "categorically denies Mr. Charney's allegations of discrimination and retaliation."

In general, the firm has a good reputation among gay lawyers. Among the 25 top law firms in New York surveyed in 2003, Sullivan & Cromwell had the highest percentage of gay, lesbian and transgender partners -- almost 7 percent, although it ranked much lower -- at 17th -- for associates, which constitutes 1.48 percent of the total.

"Sullivan Cromwell is far from prejudiced in any way," says John Scheich, the first vice president of the Lesbian and Gay Law Association of New York, adding that the firm often buys a table at his group's annual fundraising dinner dance. "I don't know Aaron Charney or the details of his case, but if I had to line up on one side or the other, I would have to line up with David H. Braff [an openly gay partner at the firm] and Sullivan Cromwell."

Despite Charney's lawsuit and several other similar discrimination cases, gay lawyer groups say that most law firms have become more gay-friendly since 1993, when "Philadelphia" moved moviegoers with its portrayal of an attorney fired because he was gay and HIV-positive.

D'arcy Kemnitz, the executive director of the National Lesbian and Gay Law Association, says that firms have become more receptive to hiring gay lawyers in recent years. In October 2005, NLGLA's annual conference attracted recruiters from 64 law firms and organizations. Last September, NLGLA almost doubled that number, attracting recruiters from 126 employers to its 2006 conference.

Until recently, in states with anti-sodomy laws such as Virginia, "firms said that they would not hire a gay lawyer," says Kemnitz. But in the wake of the Lawrence v. Texas decision in 2003, which struck down the state's anti-sodomy law, things changed. There are now 24 state and regional bar associations for lesbian, gay and transgender lawyers around the country, including in states such as Texas, Wyoming and Missouri.

Yet sexual orientation discrimination persists at many law firms. Eighty-four percent of gay, lesbian and transgender attorneys in Minnesota believe that "bias was a major/moderate problem" at their firms, and 21 percent reported being denied "employment, equal pay, benefits, promotion, etc., due to their sexual orientation," according to a 2006 survey by the Minnesota Lavender Bar Association.

"All the studies indicate a great deal of bias still in the profession," says Kemnitz. "We have to realize just how recent it's been that things have started to change. Now is the time for the legal profession to follow the example of business and improve our commitment to diversity."

 

[financeguy]

People may have given those words power but they also have intrinsic, historic, hateful power. To deny that is naive, sorry.

And you can't project your attitude towards it onto everyone else and just expect them to feel the same way. Life just doesn't work that way, relationships just don't work that way. Frankly I think it's a very self-centric and self centered way in which to operate and live. If we all went around living like that that there would be a helluva lot more problems than we have now.

I think it's self-centric to assume that the standards and values deemed appropriate by easily offended PC American liberalism apply to everyone else.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I think it's self-centric to assume that the standards and values deemed appropriate by easily offended PC American liberalism apply to everyone else.

Well I think it's offensive for you to suggest that I am PC and "liberal" and easily offended because I feel the way I do. I don't like homophobia or racism or sexism, or any of the hateful and hurtful words associated with all of that. Whatever you think about my feelings, well frankly I don't care I think people should be humane and decent to each oher as far as all that is concerned. It has nothing to do with "pc" or "liberal"-but it's oh so easy for you to classify it as that, isn't it?

Let's just all live in a world in which we call each other the n word, faggots, and any sexist terms you can think of-especially in the workplace when people are just trying to make a living.. What a wonderful world it would be.

 

[BVS]

Anyone who shrugs off words as being powerless or "just words" are foolishly mistaken. Words are some of the most powerful weapons we have. They've stopped wars, started wars, instilled fear, instilled love, they've made men powerful, and have torn others down.

Don't be naive to think words are powerless.

 

[BVS]

I think it's self-centric to assume that the standards and values deemed appropriate by easily offended PC American liberalism apply to everyone else.

So only PC American Liberals hate racism.