Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   "Well, you're eminently qualified, your references are beyond reproach, and we really think you'd make a great addition to our staff. Now if you'd just go to the examination room and disrobe, the gynecologist will be in to see you shortly"   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 46
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

6251 clicks; posted to Business » on 10 Aug 2014 at 6:04 PM (42 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-10 01:15:10 PM  
Coming to a Southern state near you...
 
2014-08-10 04:54:31 PM  
I wonder if male candidates have to get a prostate exam?
 
2014-08-10 06:45:20 PM  
In the '80s, I worked for a large-ish company that required medical exams for employees in an on-site first aid office. Not long after I started, some of us younger types were talking about the exams and my secretary mentioned that she thought it a bit much that she had had to disrobe and wear a gown for an exam by the (male) doctor. Some of the other women confirmed this, and we all had a WTF moment, as the men's "exam" had been the a brief Q&A and basic checkup, fully clothed. The women went to the bosses and protested and the practise was stopped. I don't know who the visiting MD was, but he was gone, and IIRC a staff nurse handled all the medical issues after that.
Not sure if this is a CSB, but that stuff does go on.
 
2014-08-10 07:11:15 PM  

Mentat: I wonder if male candidates have to get a prostate exam?



The article says yes, if they're over 40.
 
2014-08-10 07:20:00 PM  

vicioushobbit: Coming to a Southern state near you...


Came here to ask how many thought that's what it would be until they saw the link.
 
2014-08-10 07:28:13 PM  
Coming soon to ALL of the us. makes as much sense as piss testing. yes im looking at quest "diagonists"america. land of the the fee home of the slave.......
 
2014-08-10 08:01:15 PM  
I see no reason why this perfectly rational sounding story reported in the Daily Mail should be questioned at all and the correct response is to wildly extrapolate based on no additional evidence whatsoever.
 
2014-08-10 08:11:42 PM  

Mentat: I wonder if male candidates have to get a prostate exam?


I was wondering this myself, how do you say moon river in Portuguese
 
2014-08-10 08:55:27 PM  
Good, Mr. Happy hasn't had a good exam.
 
2014-08-10 09:06:54 PM  
This is why unions are important.
 
2014-08-10 09:10:39 PM  

Skink Wrangler: In the '80s, I worked for a large-ish company that required medical exams for employees in an on-site first aid office. Not long after I started, some of us younger types were talking about the exams and my secretary mentioned that she thought it a bit much that she had had to disrobe and wear a gown for an exam by the (male) doctor. Some of the other women confirmed this, and we all had a WTF moment, as the men's "exam" had been the a brief Q&A and basic checkup, fully clothed. The women went to the bosses and protested and the practise was stopped. I don't know who the visiting MD was, but he was gone, and IIRC a staff nurse handled all the medical issues after that.
Not sure if this is a CSB, but that stuff does go on.


I thought corporations had the religious right to do that now.
 
2014-08-10 09:20:27 PM  

FormlessOne: This is why unions are important.


Unions are important because the DM is full of shiat? That's a new one.
 
2014-08-10 09:33:55 PM  
Why does this feel about as legit as a guy standing by the side of the road with a cardboard "FREE MAMMOGRAMS HERE" sign?
 
2014-08-10 10:06:33 PM  
So aside from the absurdity of requiring such a test, the lack of ethical justification, and the lack of scientific integrity, are they also saying married women can't get the job? Is this nuns only?
 
2014-08-10 10:08:46 PM  

picturescrazy: So aside from the absurdity of requiring such a test, the lack of ethical justification, and the lack of scientific integrity, are they also saying married women can't get the job? Is this nuns only?


Personally, I just think they're trying to not let pregnant women slip into a job without anyone noticing.
 
2014-08-10 10:17:29 PM  
Context? Sounds like the "virginity" declaration is only an option that excuses a woman from STD tests, as part of a comprehensive health check. Still weird.
 
2014-08-10 10:34:07 PM  

mt.madman: Coming soon to ALL of the us. makes as much sense as piss testing. yes im looking at quest "diagonists"america. land of the the fee home of the slave.......


*raises hand*

Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test?  *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!
 
2014-08-10 10:38:38 PM  

E5bie: *raises hand*

Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test? *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!


With the ACA and the market places and everything, couldn't you just buy an independent policy and tell your company to EABOD about their health insurance tests?
 
2014-08-10 10:54:57 PM  

gadian: E5bie: *raises hand*

Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test? *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!

With the ACA and the market places and everything, couldn't you just buy an independent policy and tell your company to EABOD about their health insurance tests?


I'm curious as well.  Isn't this one of the arguments for decoupling health care from corporations/employers?
I thought I read that there was some verbiage in the law that prevents this sort of thing, though.
Anyone know?
 
2014-08-10 11:25:16 PM  

E5bie: Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test?  *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!


Be more worried your company and insurer are wasting time and resources... you can get lipids, glucose, and a HgA1c from pretty much the same specimen.

/And urine's better for nicotine and cotinine
 
2014-08-10 11:35:41 PM  

FormlessOne: This is why onions are important.


i really can't cook without them.
 
2014-08-10 11:43:10 PM  

Farty McPooPants: gadian: E5bie: *raises hand*

Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test? *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!

With the ACA and the market places and everything, couldn't you just buy an independent policy and tell your company to EABOD about their health insurance tests?

I'm curious as well.  Isn't this one of the arguments for decoupling health care from corporations/employers?
I thought I read that there was some verbiage in the law that prevents this sort of thing, though.
Anyone know?


If the company offers a qualifying health insurance plan as defined by the ACA, it pretty much disqualifies the employees from any kind of subsidy on the state and federal marketplaces.

And you think some third-party insurer isn't going to want to know how healthy you are inside and out before they write you a policy?
 
2014-08-11 12:15:18 AM  

FormlessOne: This is why unions are important.


Why?  You have to pay dues for the ass rape with unions.  Non union shops do it for free
 
2014-08-11 12:24:50 AM  

E5bie: Context? Sounds like the "virginity" declaration is only an option that excuses a woman from STD tests, as part of a comprehensive health check. Still weird.


Especially since these are education jobs.  Any reason I can imagine for why people hiring teachers want to conduct STD tests is concerning.

/Of course, since it's the Daily Mail, the real answer is probably "this story is bullshiat"
 
2014-08-11 12:33:34 AM  

jdjoker: Farty McPooPants: gadian: E5bie: *raises hand*

Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test? *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!

With the ACA and the market places and everything, couldn't you just buy an independent policy and tell your company to EABOD about their health insurance tests?

I'm curious as well.  Isn't this one of the arguments for decoupling health care from corporations/employers?
I thought I read that there was some verbiage in the law that prevents this sort of thing, though.
Anyone know?

If the company offers a qualifying health insurance plan as defined by the ACA, it pretty much disqualifies the employees from any kind of subsidy on the state and federal marketplaces.

And you think some third-party insurer isn't going to want to know how healthy you are inside and out before they write you a policy?


Have you never had health insurance? You're asking a very odd question.
 
2014-08-11 12:37:24 AM  

llortcM_yllort: Any reason I can imagine for why people hiring teachers want to conduct STD tests is concerning.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2014-08-11 01:03:22 AM  
How long before the Right start on this tactic?
 
2014-08-11 01:06:20 AM  

Smeggy Smurf: FormlessOne: This is why unions are important.

Why?


The rules of employment are clearly written for a union member.  There are no surprises.

If something needs to be inserted into your ass, you're going to know exactly to what depth and for what duration.
 
2014-08-11 05:45:08 AM  

Skink Wrangler: In the '80s, I worked for a large-ish company that required medical exams for employees in an on-site first aid office. Not long after I started, some of us younger types were talking about the exams and my secretary mentioned that she thought it a bit much that she had had to disrobe and wear a gown for an exam by the (male) doctor. Some of the other women confirmed this, and we all had a WTF moment, as the men's "exam" had been the a brief Q&A and basic checkup, fully clothed. The women went to the bosses and protested and the practise was stopped. I don't know who the visiting MD was, but he was gone, and IIRC a staff nurse handled all the medical issues after that.
Not sure if this is a CSB, but that stuff does go on.


Thanks for getting me fired.
 
2014-08-11 06:16:56 AM  

E5bie: Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently.


That's not your employer, that's your insurer. If you want to make it illegal to discriminate on the basis of tobacco/nicotine usage, talk to your commission or insurance. Insurance is already highly regulated and the change the rules all the time about what can and cannot be used as a basis for setting premiums.

And while I can certainly understand why it feels like a penalty the price difference is almost certainly supported by actuarial research. Insurers don't care whether or not you smoke, they just want to be sure you pay enough for them to make money, and smokers cost them more. It's  possible there is some busybody trying to abolish smoking via their influence on insurance premiums, but it's a lot more likely it's just math that hates smoking.
 
2014-08-11 06:39:48 AM  
This sort of (probably bull in this case but a real issue worldwide in corporate environments) fascism is part of the allure of working as a cook. I may be a raging alcoholic narcotics user, but nobody's checking my hair stems.

/or even clock in time.
//just get the job done, which I do. No muss or fuss.
///Enjoy the office without me, I wouldn't last.
 
2014-08-11 08:24:30 AM  
Never understood this.  Who the hell wants to fark a virgin?  They're awkward, hesitant, boring, and have no idea what they're doing.  Give me a woman with experience every time.
 
2014-08-11 08:31:47 AM  

vicioushobbit: Coming to a Southern state near you...


What does it say that when I clicked on the article I was eminently relieved that it wasn't some fly-over state pulling this shiat to embarrass the rest of us again.
 
2014-08-11 08:51:48 AM  

AngryDragon: Never understood this.  Who the hell wants to fark a virgin?  They're awkward, hesitant, boring, and have no idea what they're doing.  Give me a woman with experience every time.


"Wants to" as in "intentionally seeks them out"? Creepy, borderline lunatics who are more interested in exerting control and gaining a sensation of power in bed than in having a good time with a partner.

Also, Brazil's schools, apparently.
 
2014-08-11 09:03:39 AM  
Right now, somewhere in the united states of america, some bible-thumping sh*t for brains is reading this article from the DAILY FAIL, and dreaming.

Or beating off.

/this is why people really need to get out and vote
//especially women
 
2014-08-11 09:24:59 AM  

rewind2846: Right now, somewhere in the united states of america, some bible-thumping sh*t for brains is reading this article from the DAILY FAIL, and dreaming.

Or beating off.

/this is why people really need to get out and vote
//especially women


Or both?
 
2014-08-11 09:27:39 AM  

lackadaisicalfreakshow: Why does this feel about as legit as a guy standing by the side of the road with a cardboard "FREE MAMMOGRAMS HERE" sign?


www.demoties.com
 
2014-08-11 10:11:11 AM  

vicioushobbit: Coming to a Southern state near you...


Does incest count?
 
2014-08-11 10:22:30 AM  

monoski: vicioushobbit: Coming to a Southern state near you...

Does incest count?


That's Appalachia. Get your geography straight.
 
2014-08-11 10:44:43 AM  
Brazilian employers require women to have VIRGINITY tests before taking them on

To be honest, the only state I can see adopting this is Utah. Mmmmmmaybe Idaho.
 
2014-08-11 10:52:33 AM  

TomD9938: Smeggy Smurf: FormlessOne: This is why unions are important.

Why?

The rules of employment are clearly written for a union member.  There are no surprises.

If something needs to be inserted into your ass, you're going to know exactly to what depth and for what duration.


It must suck to need to have every little thing micromanaged in your union job
 
2014-08-11 11:01:27 AM  

Farty McPooPants: gadian: E5bie: *raises hand*

Here I am, still bruised from a mandatory annual round of on-site blood tests, for cholesterol, blood sugar, and nicotine metabolites. Why they need a whole vial of blood for each, I don't know. Surely it isn't cheaper than the quick test? *shrug* Getting caught with nicotine costs over $3000/year in health insurance premium penalties, currently. No telling what it'll be next year. And of course we can be called in for random drug tests anytime, urine and blood both, and/or immediately fired.
Thank you, dear corporate leaders.

But the health benefits are great!

With the ACA and the market places and everything, couldn't you just buy an independent policy and tell your company to EABOD about their health insurance tests?

I'm curious as well.  Isn't this one of the arguments for decoupling health care from corporations/employers?
I thought I read that there was some verbiage in the law that prevents this sort of thing, though.
Anyone know?


At my employer, it's not a "requirement" unless you want the *discount*, which is sizable.
 
2014-08-11 11:03:52 AM  
"Oh, wait, we aren't doing that anymore?"

Backs slowly out of the room.
 
2014-08-11 11:49:22 AM  

E5bie: Context? Sounds like the "virginity" declaration is only an option that excuses a woman from STD tests, as part of a comprehensive health check. Still weird.


As far as I can see there are two big reasons:

Centuries of society conditioning men to favour virgins. This was originally based heavily on the idea of ensuring that you are the father of all her children (this was a big focus in much of Ancient Greece and was why adultury was a criminal matter (it put the citizenship of the children intoquestion).

And the second is power. You are recieving something from her that nobody else can.
 
2014-08-11 02:27:44 PM  
Related: Brazilian student Catarina planed to sell her virginity

That's awfully drastic, usually I thought they just waxed.
 
2014-08-12 12:03:44 AM  

KWess: Mentat: I wonder if male candidates have to get a prostate exam?


The article says yes, if they're over 40.


IMHO, it would be one thing to require all candidates have all the recommended screening procedures, it's the virginity note exception that puts this into weird territory. It shows they still buy into the completely fallacious belief that you can medically prove virginity.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report