LogFAQs > #961347738

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Outrage after a Woman REFUSED a FEMALE at Chevrolet to FIX her CAR!!!
adjl 12/31/21 1:03:15 AM #47:	Revelation34 posted... adjl posted... As far as I can tell, nothing about Duckbear's post suggests that it was the lady who didn't think women should work on cars that was employed by the dealership. I could be wrong, since I skimmed it pretty quickly and I'm so used to filling in the gaps in ducky's at-times-questionable wording that I don't even notice myself doing it, but that's why I'm inviting you to point out which part suggests that. mrduckbear posted... who then FIRED the CUSTOMER Yes. That is a phrase that's sometimes used when talking about long-term customers. It's more common in professional contexts (like a lawyer or accountant firing a client, or a doctor firing a patient), so it's a little weird that Ducky's using it here, but it's not wrong. Phrased another way, the owner has banned her from the shop. Kyuubi4269 posted... adjl posted... As far as I can tell, nothing about Duckbear's post suggests that it was the lady who didn't think women should work on cars that was employed by the dealership. "I didn't ask for a female, i would like to talk to a male. My opinion is woman don't belong in the service department, they belong behind the scenes doing the paperwork" mrduckbear posted... But when the woman [customer] hears another woman [mechanic] speak she says [quote] I know Duckbear's wording can be a little weird sometimes, but this one's really not ambiguous at all. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:961347738] in Outrage af... [t:79831546]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>adjl posted... As far as I can tell, nothing about Duckbear's post suggests that it was the lady who didn't think women should work on cars that was employed by the dealership. I could be wrong, since I skimmed it pretty quickly and I'm so used to filling in the gaps in ducky's at-times-questionable wording that I don't even notice myself doing it, but that's why I'm inviting you to point out which part suggests that. mrduckbear posted... who then FIRED the CUSTOMER</quote> Yes. That is a phrase that's sometimes used when talking about long-term customers. It's more common in professional contexts (like a lawyer or accountant firing a client, or a doctor firing a patient), so it's a little weird that Ducky's using it here, but it's not wrong. Phrased another way, the owner has banned her from the shop. Kyuubi4269 posted... </cite> <quote>adjl posted... As far as I can tell, nothing about Duckbear's post suggests that it was the lady who didn't think women should work on cars that was employed by the dealership. "I didn't ask for a female, i would like to talk to a male. My opinion is woman don't belong in the service department, they belong behind the scenes doing the paperwork"</quote>mrduckbear posted... </cite> <quote>But when the woman [customer] hears another woman [mechanic] speak she says <quote></quote> I know Duckbear's wording can be a little weird sometimes, but this one's really not ambiguous at all. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1