We started with introductions along with the question "Which live musical concert that you've seen in your life stands out in your mind?" (If someone had never seen a live musical concert, the question was: "Who is your favorite musical group or solo artist?") Responses included an Arcade Fire concert, the 2013 Electric Daisy Carnival in Las Vegas, & a King Crimson concert in Philadelphia in 1982. (There's one really old guy in the group.)
Next a discussion was held on the topic: "Should it be against the law for an employer to not hire someone because the person stutters?" (It was understood that there may already be laws against this, based on stuttering being classified as a handicap by the government. The topic was more designed to explore the idea of: do stutterers want or need special protection). The general opinion seemed to be that private employers can hire or not hire someone for any reason, including stuttering. If an employer thinks that a person's stuttering would prevent him from doing the job, it's a valid reason for not hiring him. One member said that it depended on the job. The same member said he would be hurt for not being hired because of his stuttering. The others agreed on this. Another comment was that it should be illegal to fire someone because of stuttering after being hired. We also talked about how it could be uncomfortable for a stutterer who was hired because it was illegal to not hire him, if his co-workers knew this. His co-workers could reasonably assume he was hired because he stuttered & not in spite of his stuttering, especially if he didn't perform as well as co-workers. This led to the idea that stutterers usually have to work harder to convince people of their abilities on or off the job.
It was hoped that the topic would lead to the concept of handicaps & is stuttering a handicap (& not necessarily the government definition of handicap). One member brought up the interesting point that he can say that stuttering is a handicap, but people who don't stutter cannot or should not. Also, the topic might have led to the question of are stutterers owed anything from others because of their stuttering - i.e. should we expect or deserve special consideration because of our stuttering. One other segue would be: How do stutterers want to be seen by people who don't stutter? All of these could topics for another night.
We concluded with Table Topics where everyone participated. Topics included: "The Most Unforgettable Person You've Known", "Your Ideal Career/Goals", "A Project You've Spent Time On" & "Heavy Equipment" - you guessed it, one member has operated heavy equipment & wants to do it more in the future.
The next meeting is Thursday, June 12 led by Matt & Mihaela.
Those who missed the last meeting (& your numbers are legion) can redeem themselves by coming to the next meeting.
Remember the mantra: 2nd & 4th Thursdays - 5:45PM - Kaiser.
It was hoped that the topic would lead to the concept of handicaps & is stuttering a handicap (& not necessarily the government definition of handicap). One member brought up the interesting point that he can say that stuttering is a handicap, but people who don't stutter cannot or should not. Also, the topic might have led to the question of are stutterers owed anything from others because of their stuttering - i.e. should we expect or deserve special consideration because of our stuttering. One other segue would be: How do stutterers want to be seen by people who don't stutter? All of these could topics for another night.
We concluded with Table Topics where everyone participated. Topics included: "The Most Unforgettable Person You've Known", "Your Ideal Career/Goals", "A Project You've Spent Time On" & "Heavy Equipment" - you guessed it, one member has operated heavy equipment & wants to do it more in the future.
The next meeting is Thursday, June 12 led by Matt & Mihaela.
Those who missed the last meeting (& your numbers are legion) can redeem themselves by coming to the next meeting.
Remember the mantra: 2nd & 4th Thursdays - 5:45PM - Kaiser.
