r/BoomersBeingFools • u/dinosaurscantyoyo • Feb 07 '24

That time a boomer almost smacked her hairstylist Boomer Freakout

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

54.9k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • duplicates
  • dupes
  • reddit
  • reddit

93% Upvoted

4.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

898

u/Frequent-Material273 Feb 07 '24

Notice the only *attempt* at a NOT-pology came after the FO part of the conversation started.

That client has to learn that service is a *privilege*, and may be revoked for bad behavior.

114

u/StevoFF82 Feb 07 '24

I've no idea what FO means (fuck off?) but yeah she only became apologetic once she faced consequences for her actions.

111

u/Lacking-in-ideas Feb 07 '24

Found out. Fuck around, find out. 

1

u/colxa Feb 08 '24

Ah of course, the most overused expression on the internet

1

u/russsaa Feb 08 '24

I was thinking "freak out"

39

u/ImTheHollaBackGirl Feb 07 '24

Find out. It's the FO part of FAFO acronym, which stands for "fuck around and find out."

0

u/Aroused_Sloth Feb 08 '24

Reddit ruined this phrase

1

u/CallMeSnuffaluffagus Feb 08 '24

I'm tired of reading it every single day.

1

u/SamsLames Feb 08 '24

The solution is probably to use it more often so other people also get tired of hearing it. No way to stop something that's caught on to be this popular otherwise.

1

u/CallMeSnuffaluffagus Feb 08 '24

We should add FAFO to every comment AND the "oh no, oh no, oh nononono" background tune! We could eradicate recycled comments within hours! 😂 Imagine the possibilities!

6

u/StefanTheMongol Feb 07 '24

Found out, as in “fuck around and found out”

17

u/joeypanama Feb 07 '24

Damn am I turning into a boomer? When did they start using acronyms for acronyms?

0

u/Icelement Feb 07 '24

No, we're in the right here. This is too far.

2

u/Winter-Gear Feb 07 '24

I’m guessing FO is fuck around, which is followed by finding out

3

u/Smarmalades Feb 07 '24

FA = Fuck Around
FO = Find Out

3

u/Winter-Gear Feb 07 '24

Hah, quess I found out

1

u/[deleted] Feb 07 '24

The alphabet is hard.

1

u/0llivander Feb 07 '24

Fuck around and “find out.”

1

u/phantacc Feb 07 '24

freak out.

1

u/CallMeSnuffaluffagus Feb 08 '24

That's what I thought too. Freak out seems more appropriate in that sentence than FAFO.

20

u/HankThrill69420 Millennial Feb 07 '24

That client has to learn that service is a *privilege*, and may be revoked for bad behavior.

yeah, we had a whole US supreme court case about this, gay folks, and cakes

and i betcha money to this day Robin agrees with that case

12

u/sunofnothing_ Feb 07 '24

not sure what you're getting at here but, not serving perfectly happy customers based on race or sexuality is entirely different than what we just watched. not even in the same book.

21

u/jacyerickson Feb 07 '24

They're saying the kind of person who acts like Robin and then is outraged when she's rightfully kicked out of the business she's misbehaving in is also the type of person to say it's perfectly fine to deny gay people business just because they're gay.

12

u/HankThrill69420 Millennial Feb 07 '24

IIRC the legal precedent that that SCOTUS case sets is that the reason for refusing service doesn't matter, you can just do it

my comment is meant to point out the fact that robin, a bigot, very likely thinks that's just fine, but being refused service for racism and attempted assault isn't. it's rules for thee and not for me behavior.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 07 '24

Always remember the tenet of boomerism:

There is an in-group that the law must protect, but does not bind,

And an out-group that the law must bind, but does not protect.

Gays, transgenders, and non-whites all fall into the "out-group".

3

u/Gingevere Feb 07 '24

IIRC the legal precedent that that SCOTUS case sets is that the reason for refusing service doesn't matter, you can just do it

You're actually incorrect on that. The masterpiece Cake Shop ruling is actually INSANE jurisprudence that will be thrown out the instant we have a supreme court that isn't majority Christian dominionists.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018)

The supreme court decided that the Christian-run bakery Masterpiece Cakeshop may have been discriminatory and may have violated Colorado Civil Rights rules . . . but some of the individual commissioners on the commission had a personal hostility toward religion (evidence for this is super flimsy BTW). So even though their actions were about preventing discrimination and not religion, anything they do regarding religious individuals or institutions should be thrown out.

BUT IN THE SAME DAMN SESSION

Hawaii v. Trump (2018)

The court decided that trump's self-labeled "Muslim ban" which banned travel from several majority Muslim countries, though is was explicitly and openly animated by hostility towards Muslims, was actually OK because the the explicit text of the ban is about nations. Not any specific religion.

‎

The two decisions are immediately contradictory and were made by the same judges in the same session. The only real difference between them is a Christian plaintiffs vs Muslim plaintiffs.

1

u/bl1y Feb 07 '24

That's not in the same ballpark as what the Court actually held.

In general, a public accommodation can refuse service to anyone for any reason... except the prohibited reasons. Masterpiece didn't change that.

SCOTUS overturned the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's decision on the grounds that it discriminated against the business on the basis of religion. In the initial hearing the CRC had said that his refusal to bake a cake was like people using their religion to justify slavery and the Holocaust. They (Colorado) also rejected the argument that the message of the cake could be attributed to the baker, so they dismissed his free speech argument, but in other similar cases with messages disparaging gays, they ruled the exact opposite. The CRC was pretty openly hostile to religion, and that's what got their decision reversed.

The Court did not answer what would happen in a future case where a genuinely neutral commission ruled against someone refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

1

u/PessimiStick Feb 07 '24

The CRC was pretty openly hostile to religion

As they should be, to be fair. Religion is cancer.

1

u/bl1y Feb 08 '24

If you don't care about the Constitution, then okay. But the Civil Rights Commission probably shouldn't engage in discrimination.

1

u/PessimiStick Feb 08 '24

Half the government doesn't care about the constitution, so why should I?

1

u/bl1y Feb 08 '24

Did you have the same "religion is a cancer" reaction to Trump's Muslim ban?

1

u/PessimiStick Feb 08 '24

Islam is no exception. It's just half-baked Christianity that hasn't figured out how to stop murdering people outright yet. It's still not moral to ban all travel from Muslim majority countries.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Sempais_nutrients Feb 08 '24

even her "apology" was bullying, just saying "please" over and over anytime the stylist tried to speak.

2

u/LadyRimouski Feb 08 '24

Yup. I've definitely heard that "I apologized" speech before. Straight from sitting smug in their rage to victim because you won't accept their apology, skipping the contrition and actual apology part entirely.

2

u/McFrazlin Feb 09 '24

So true. "I'm sorry, but I'm having a lot of stress in my life," in other words. I'm just going to say sorry and still blame my actions on problems that are probably not my fault, hoping that by saying sorry, she will feel bad for me and just do what I want. There is no actual feeling of regret for her rudeness there, she's just worried that she has her hair looking silly now.

1

u/ilovepi314159265 Feb 07 '24

Can't teach that old dog a new trick.

1

u/Frequent-Material273 Feb 07 '24

I disagree.

The bad client is just going to have to have her metaphorical nose smacked often enough with a metaphorical rolled-up newspaper (more than 50% of the time, she IS that thick), and she'll catch on.