Red Mosquito

JuanHamm wrote:I get people not wanting to wear a mask - but I don't understand people not wanting others to wear a mask.

maybe it infringes upon their rights.

dad wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:I get people not wanting to wear a mask - but I don't understand people not wanting others to wear a mask.

maybe it infringes upon their rights.

It reminds folks that the minimum-wage-so-idgaf staff preparing your food might have COVID or another contagious disease, triggering a disgust emotion.

actually, I think it makes sense for food prep workers to wear masks out of safety precautions.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... onewalling

Bi_3 wrote:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... onewalling

But Daszack continues to get grant money to continue this silliness elsewhere, so what does it matter?

simple schoolboy wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... onewalling

But Daszack continues to get grant money to continue this silliness elsewhere, so what does it matter?

i thought covid was chemical warfare

spike wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... onewalling

But Daszack continues to get grant money to continue this silliness elsewhere, so what does it matter?

i thought covid was chemical warfare

No, that's the vaccine, silly.

blueviper wrote:actually, I think it makes sense for food prep workers to wear masks out of safety precautions.

A restaurant is actually a place where employees wearing masks IS logical. No one wants spit in their food. Of course that has nothing to do with preventing the spread of an airborne virus traveling on aerosols and it should never be mandatory.

JuanHamm wrote:I get people not wanting to wear a mask - but I don't understand people not wanting others to wear a mask.

I wouldn’t want someone who comes to my house to wear a mask so I understand why a place of business wouldn’t want their employees or customers wearing them.

Matters wrote:

blueviper wrote:actually, I think it makes sense for food prep workers to wear masks out of safety precautions.

A restaurant is actually a place where employees wearing masks IS logical. No one wants spit in their food. Of course that has nothing to do with preventing the spread of an airborne virus traveling on aerosols and it should never be mandatory.

JuanHamm wrote:I get people not wanting to wear a mask - but I don't understand people not wanting others to wear a mask.

I wouldn’t want someone who comes to my house to wear a mask so I understand why a place of business wouldn’t want their employees or customers wearing them.

It’s like someone wearing sunglasses inside. Or at night. I fucking hate that shit.

Bammer wrote:

Matters wrote:

blueviper wrote:actually, I think it makes sense for food prep workers to wear masks out of safety precautions.

A restaurant is actually a place where employees wearing masks IS logical. No one wants spit in their food. Of course that has nothing to do with preventing the spread of an airborne virus traveling on aerosols and it should never be mandatory.

JuanHamm wrote:I get people not wanting to wear a mask - but I don't understand people not wanting others to wear a mask.

I wouldn’t want someone who comes to my house to wear a mask so I understand why a place of business wouldn’t want their employees or customers wearing them.

It’s like someone wearing sunglasses inside. Or at night. I fucking hate that shit.

Since it’s likely that a very small percentage of people who wear sunglasses inside or at night actually do it for a good reason… Sneaky good analogy there.

Matters wrote:

blueviper wrote:actually, I think it makes sense for food prep workers to wear masks out of safety precautions.

A restaurant is actually a place where employees wearing masks IS logical. No one wants spit in their food. Of course that has nothing to do with preventing the spread of an airborne virus traveling on aerosols and it should never be mandatory.

JuanHamm wrote:I get people not wanting to wear a mask - but I don't understand people not wanting others to wear a mask.

I wouldn’t want someone who comes to my house to wear a mask so I understand why a place of business wouldn’t want their employees or customers wearing them.

Why not?

Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

B wrote:Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

The thing is that masks are associated with disease. Prior to COVID when you saw a person with a mask in public, the assumption was the have the flu or are immunocompromised. They were a signal to recognize that person needed to be approached with a little care and thoughtfulness. Where did we see masks most often? A hospital. Why would a restaurant what that association triggered in a customer’s mind? Someone who wants to spit in food isn’t gonna be stopped by a mask and for line cooks running around in hot conditions for hours, masks might pose a risk. It’s different than hairnets and gloves.

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

The thing is that masks are associated with disease. Prior to COVID when you saw a person with a mask in public, the assumption was the have the flu or are immunocompromised. They were a signal to recognize that person needed to be approached with a little care and thoughtfulness. Where did we see masks most often? A hospital. Why would a restaurant what that association triggered in a customer’s mind? Someone who wants to spit in food isn’t gonna be stopped by a mask and for line cooks running around in hot conditions for hours, masks might pose a risk. It’s different than hairnets and gloves.

Don't you think people would get used to it? Do people in Japan associate masks with disease?

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

The thing is that masks are associated with disease. Prior to COVID when you saw a person with a mask in public, the assumption was the have the flu or are immunocompromised. They were a signal to recognize that person needed to be approached with a little care and thoughtfulness. Where did we see masks most often? A hospital. Why would a restaurant what that association triggered in a customer’s mind? Someone who wants to spit in food isn’t gonna be stopped by a mask and for line cooks running around in hot conditions for hours, masks might pose a risk. It’s different than hairnets and gloves.

I didn't make that post in 2019. I made it today. And I'm fine with workers who work sick so they don't lose their home due to a lack of sick leave and low pay wearing masks just in case.

B wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

The thing is that masks are associated with disease. Prior to COVID when you saw a person with a mask in public, the assumption was the have the flu or are immunocompromised. They were a signal to recognize that person needed to be approached with a little care and thoughtfulness. Where did we see masks most often? A hospital. Why would a restaurant what that association triggered in a customer’s mind? Someone who wants to spit in food isn’t gonna be stopped by a mask and for line cooks running around in hot conditions for hours, masks might pose a risk. It’s different than hairnets and gloves.

I didn't make that post in 2019. I made it today. And I'm fine with workers who work sick so they don't lose their home due to a lack of sick leave and low pay wearing masks just in case.

Let’s get off topic: At what point should an employer have to keep paying someone who isn’t at work? Or maybe another way to look at it, who should be responsible for paying someone when they’re not at work? Obvs a complicated issue. Your post gives the sense that a restaurant owner, for example, should be more responsible for paying employees who aren’t there. (Maybe I read that totally wrong)

Bammer wrote:

B wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

The thing is that masks are associated with disease. Prior to COVID when you saw a person with a mask in public, the assumption was the have the flu or are immunocompromised. They were a signal to recognize that person needed to be approached with a little care and thoughtfulness. Where did we see masks most often? A hospital. Why would a restaurant what that association triggered in a customer’s mind? Someone who wants to spit in food isn’t gonna be stopped by a mask and for line cooks running around in hot conditions for hours, masks might pose a risk. It’s different than hairnets and gloves.

I didn't make that post in 2019. I made it today. And I'm fine with workers who work sick so they don't lose their home due to a lack of sick leave and low pay wearing masks just in case.

Let’s get off topic: At what point should an employer have to keep paying someone who isn’t at work? Or maybe another way to look at it, who should be responsible for paying someone when they’re not at work? Obvs a complicated issue. Your post gives the sense that a restaurant owner, for example, should be more responsible for paying employees who aren’t there. (Maybe I read that totally wrong)

If customers perceive the restaurant or it's staff as "dirty" then it doesn't matter because the restaurant won't be there anymore. We all went through a lot with one-way grocery store aisles, laminating and carrying our vax card like they were our "papers" in East Germany, and "clean pens" everywhere... no one wants to live in that world anymore and businesses are smart to recognize and adapt to that.

Bi_3 wrote:

B wrote:Maybe food workers should have always been wearing masks.

The thing is that masks are associated with disease. Prior to COVID when you saw a person with a mask in public, the assumption was the have the flu or are immunocompromised. They were a signal to recognize that person needed to be approached with a little care and thoughtfulness. Where did we see masks most often? A hospital. Why would a restaurant what that association triggered in a customer’s mind? Someone who wants to spit in food isn’t gonna be stopped by a mask and for line cooks running around in hot conditions for hours, masks might pose a risk. It’s different than hairnets and gloves.

Bi would rather have a booger in his food than a hair.

Bi_3 wrote:If customers perceive the restaurant or its staff as "dirty" then it doesn't matter because the restaurant won't be there anymore.

There’s no way your life has been pampered enough for you to believe this sentence.

We all went through a lot with one-way grocery store aisles, laminating and carrying our vax card like they were our "papers" in East Germany, and "clean pens" everywhere

We all went through a lot with one-way grocery store aisles

Sooooooo anyway, disgust developed as a disease avoidance behaviour. Situations that trigger disgust are most often situations where there is a perception of disease. Rotting things, roaches, rats, etc. You sees these, the natural reaction for most is to feel disgust and lose their appetite, which in turn causes them to move away from that place. For example, a server shows up with a huge cold sore on their face, that impacts the customer's lasting perception of the cleanliness of the establishment regardless of whether or not it poses real risk to anyone. Thus if a food service business has determined that employees wearing masks is associated with triggering subconscious disease detection, i.o.w. disgust, then it makes sense for them to ban masks because they don't want customers to think there are sick workers there, regardless of whether or not there are. It may be completely illusory, but giving customers the idea they are safe there is actually pretty important for most businesses.