Being fired for not conforming to masculine stereotypes

[moonshadow]

Saw this roll through the wire today and it struck a chord with me, considering this was almost my situation eight years ago.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/eeoc- ... r-AA1z7hqz

What's interesting here is that the article clearly states that when the employee is on the job, he "conforms to male stereotypes" as he is expected, however he was called into a meeting one day on a day off and he arrived wearing capris, pink nail polish, and box braids.

He was fired via text a few hours later.

The EEOC took up his case, however has now petitioned the judge to dismiss it citing Trump's recent EO regarding "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism"

Note, the word is "Ideology", not "identity". A very subtle, but BIG difference.

Most of us here may not consider ourselves trans, or even nonbinary, and I realize we don't view our skirts as feminine, or "women's" garments, however, unfortunately, the rest of the world does, and that's what matters at this juncture.

The employee worked for Harmony Hospitality as a night auditor and “styled himself in conformity with male gender stereotypes” at work, according to the EEOC's original lawsuit. But when he was called in for a meeting outside of working hours, he wore “capri-cut joggers, pink-painted nails, and box braids.”

Granted, I figure the likelihood of any one of us finding ourselves in such a situation is small. Most members here are well into retirement and don't have to worry about going without. There is also likely more to the story than is being reported, but that's just speculation on my part. Nevertheless, I'm watching my back.

*sighs*

I hate what has become of everything.

[timemeddler]

Alabama from what I've heard is really uptight about male stereotypes. To quote an old game, "back in alabama we'd never let a man who wear earings plan a military operation."

I had to look up what box braids even were, just looks like black hipster hair I've seen often enough on guys.

[kingfish]

About 25 some-odd years ago, I remember reading about a truck driver who got spotted by his company cross-dressing during his off-time (around where he lives), getting fired for it, suing for wrongful termination, and losing.

We've come quite a way from those days. Unfortunately, I think that the whole gender spectrum thing has been used to politicize the subject. It has been used to promote tribal attitudes among those who don't identify with the stereotypes attached to our reproductive configuration. Then those "tribes" were encouraged to demand what in centuries past would have been seen as tyrannical behavior.

I'm talking about alternate pronouns and the enforcement of their use. That practice, highlighted loudest by Jordan Peterson's reaction to that compelled speech, has heralded the backlash that we are now seeing. The really annoying part is that the current administration is pandering to their side by enabling what amounts to vengeful retribution. He's making rulings that bolster what the enbys call the "cisgendereds" at the enby's (and our) expense. This irritates me to no end because it continues to promote the division between the two tribes.

We also end up in the target zone of this retribution simply because look like we're part of the enby tribe. If only those Republi-can't(s) would realize that they could win over many of those enby types by encouraging and protecting sex based stereotype non-conformity.

And I think that most of the right-leaning people would go along with it. I've gone skrited in the wilds of West Texas, specifically Amarillo and the suburb where my father grew up. I will say, without equivocation that, when I disavowed my affiliation with the enby crowd (and their tyrannical ways) and declared my affiliation with the concepts of liberty and individualism, I received at most mild disapproval regarding what I was wearing. In short, they really identified with following the beat of your own drum.

It's only been a handful of generations since the people who fled to the region did so because they hated being told how to live. That hasn't been fully forgotten.

[Coder]

Here's the original press release from "way back" in 2024:

https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues ... rimination

EEOC Sues Two Employers for Sex Discrimination

Federal Agency Charges That the Companies Discriminated Against Employees Because of Their Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity
MOBILE, Ala. and CHICAGO – Harmony Hospitality LLC, which operates a Home2 Suites by Hilton hotel in Dothan, Alabama, and LAS Hardwoods, a hardwood flooring company in the Chicago area, violated federal civil rights law when they each discriminated against an employee because of his sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or failure to adhere to gender stereotypes, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in two separate lawsuits filed today.

According to the Alabama lawsuit, Harmony fired a night auditor after management observed him styled and dressed in a manner they perceived to be feminine and that differed from management’s preferred appearance for male employees. The agency claims that the company’s management learned about the employee’s sexual orientation and gender identity when his supervisor opposed asking the employee to change his appearance to align with management’s gender stereotypes. In its complaint, the agency alleges that Harmony’s management terminated the night auditor mere hours after the supervisor informed them that the employee is gay and identifies as “more feminine.”

And, in the Illinois lawsuit, the EEOC alleges that LAS Hardwoods created a hostile work environment for a sales associate because of his sexual orientation. The agency alleges that the employee was harassed, including being subject to the frequent use of gay slurs, because of his perceived feminine style of dress, speech and mannerisms. The agency claims that the company ignored the employee’s complaints and did nothing to stop the harassment by various managers and employees.

“During this Pride month, we want workers to know that they should be able to work in any job without fear of being harassed or fired because of who they are or who they love,” said EEOC General Counsel Karla Gilbride. “Federal civil rights law, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County, makes it illegal to discriminate against an employee for their sexual orientation or gender identity, and the EEOC will vigorously enforce those protections.”

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination because of sex, including discrimination because of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender stereotypes. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama (EEOC v. Harmony Hospitality LLC, case no. 1:24-cv-00357) and U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (EEOC v. LAS Hardwoods, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-04899) after first attempting to reach pre-litigation settlements through its administrative conciliation process.

EEOC Birmingham District Director Bradley Anderson said, “It is illegal for an employer to fire an employee because of their sex. Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination bars discrimination based on an employee’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or departure from gender stereotypes.”

Marsha Rucker, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Birmingham District, said, “Federal law guarantees all employees equal employment opportunity regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. As the federal agency charged with enforcing Title VII, the EEOC will always work to protect Americans from unlawful sex-based discrimination.”

Amrith Kaur Aakre, district director of the Chicago District Office, added, “The EEOC is committed to making our country’s workplaces safe for all employees, regardless of their sexual orientation.”

“Just like other forms of harassment, workplace harassment because of an individual’s sexual orientation violates federal law,” said Gregory Gochanour, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Chicago District Office. “Our agency will hold employers accountable if they allow this type of inexcusable conduct to occur.”

For more information on sex-based discrimination, please visit https://www.eeoc.gov/sex-based-discrimination.

The EEOC’s Birmingham District Office is responsible for processing charges of discrimination, administrative enforcement and the conduct of agency litigation in Alabama, Mississippi (except 17 northern counties) and the Florida Panhandle, with an Area Office in Jackson and a Local Office in Mobile.

The EEOC’s Chicago District Office is responsible for processing charges of discrimination, administrative enforcement and the conduct of agency litigation in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and North and South Dakota, with Area Offices in Milwaukee and Minneapolis.
The EEOC prevents and remedies unlawful employment discrimination and advances equal opportunity for all. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

[Coder]

And a news article from the time:

https://www.al.com/news/2024/06/federal ... apris.html

This doesn't add a lot more context - and we don't know if there were any other issues that the employer had with this employee - but the EEOC dropping this case is concerning.

[Grok]

Granted, I figure the likelihood of any one of us finding ourselves in such a situation is small. Most members here are well into retirement and don't have to worry about going without. T

*sighs*

I will likely retire in 2 or three years.

I am careful, appearing to conform on the job. And I have never mentioned my interest in MIS to my employer or coworkers.

[Barleymower]

Granted, I figure the likelihood of any one of us finding ourselves in such a situation is small. Most members here are well into retirement and don't have to worry about going without. T

*sighs*

I will likely retire in 2 or three years.

I am careful, appearing to conform on the job. And I have never mentioned my interest in MIS to my employer or coworkers.

Same here Grok. I never have and i never will. I listen, take note and keep my head down. In my industry if your face doesnt fit, the work runs out. Its a shame and i dont feel good about it, I've got seven years to retirement and kids in school.

I'm thinking i should get out of design maangemnt because mostly i nag people about their deliverables, if they dont do it and its within my gift i do it myself. I might get into primavera p6.

[moonshadow]

I think that the biggest reason why I wasn't terminated back in 2016 at the grocery chain I worked at was because at the time, corporate America was trending towards favoring the whole "DEI" thing. Plainly stated, they were likely worried about bad P.R. and a costly lawsuit.

Today, for whatever reason, the winds have shifted. It seems American society is less tolerant of gender non-conforming males and we're seeing this manifested in stories like the one posted on this thread. You'll note there's no outrage, no press releases from the A.C.L.U... no interviews with left wing media. He was fired and basically forgotten about. We don't even know the person's name. American society seems by and large okay with this person's fate.

The company I work for, so far, hasn't scrapped it's DEI program... yet, and they actually rank on the HRC top 100 businesses, and yet despite that even on this website, I'm reluctant to brag and even list openly who I work for (though most here already know), I just don't want the web spiders picking up on it. I don't need some casual observer seeing this thread, putting two and two together and causing me problems.

So like the rest of you, I keep this basically on the down-low regarding work, because despite the company ranking high on the HRC index and fostering an overall "inclusive" work environment at the corporate level, I can tell you that here in the trenches, bigotry and prejudice is ripe. It seems every time I turn around, some coworker is calling me having a good laugh and kicking rocks and some "crossdressing freak" they saw while out and about, followed up by a general "I can't wait to get out of this f*cking state" rant. [0]

Just last week, a coworker phones me up specifically to poke fun and talk trash about what he saw during this route that day, "oh my God Andrea, you'd never believe what me and _________ saw while working at ________, a GUY, that's right... A GUY, full beard, hairy legs, WEARING A MINISKIRT!!!!" And proceeded to have a pretty good laugh about how ridiculous they rated it.

That one tripped a circuit breaker with me, I unleashed my tongue somewhat and fired back a stern, "well what the hell's wrong with that...!? do ya act this way whenever you see a woman wearing a pair of pants??"

He piped down a little, with the wind out of his sails somewhat, "oh... well yeah I guess so... but he could... at least shave his legs...".

My followup, "sounds like it's his business".

I'm kinda tired of listening to this crap.

[0] These last several months I've been inviting "west coast haters" to leave. As a transplant myself I can vouch for how easy it really is. If they can't stand this "liberal hell-hole", Idaho is just across the border, and Boise is hiring, if that's not sufficient, they're always looking for help in the deep south.

No prevailing wage or carry over sick time down there though... so you gotta take the good with the bad... But yeah... I encourage them to be a part of the solution. Go to "Free Tennessee", the land of milk and honey. Sell out, take the million dollars they get for the home they paid a buck and a quarter for 10 years ago, and go east. The less people here, the more housing is available. Supply and demand... don't let the screen door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!

[moonshadow]

I am careful, appearing to conform on the job. And I have never mentioned my interest in MIS to my employer or coworkers.

I've not brought it up myself since coming to Seattle. Too many scars from the past.

We've come quite a way from those days. Unfortunately, I think that the whole gender spectrum thing has been used to politicize the subject. It has been used to promote tribal attitudes among those who don't identify with the stereotypes attached to our reproductive configuration. Then those "tribes" were encouraged to demand what in centuries past would have been seen as tyrannical behavior.

I'm talking about alternate pronouns and the enforcement of their use. That practice, highlighted loudest by Jordan Peterson's reaction to that compelled speech, has heralded the backlash that we are now seeing. The really annoying part is that the current administration is pandering to their side by enabling what amounts to vengeful retribution. He's making rulings that bolster what the enbys call the "cisgendereds" at the enby's (and our) expense. This irritates me to no end because it continues to promote the division between the two tribes.

Indeed, it's been a hell of a tug-a-war between the two sides, with so many people caught in the middle. I've learned to not cozy up to any tribe, regardless of what "side" their on. George Carlin nailed it with his commentary regarding people in large groups. Sometimes I think the two sides are in competition to see who can be more ridiculous, e.g. transgender women demanding tampons followed up by the other side calling Greenland "Red White and Blueland".... really? I think BOTH extremes have fallen off the deep end.

In the interest of COMPROMISE, I'll strike a deal... I'll call it "the Gulf of America" when they pronounce my name right. I've got news for both tribes, respect is a two way street. To gain respect, you have to give it. Until we figure this out then we're just going to keep sucker punching each other at every turn.

[crfriend]

Granted, I figure the likelihood of any one of us finding ourselves in such a situation is small. Most members here are well into retirement and don't have to worry about going without. There is also likely more to the story than is being reported, but that's just speculation on my part. Nevertheless, I'm watching my back.

*sighs*

I hate what has become of everything.

But wait -- it gets worse. With the current social and economic strife in the USA (and I suspect this will spread, cancer-like, around the world) there are no support systems left that can be counted on for a prolonged retirement unless you were born with that billion-dollar trust fund. Thus, retirement is off the table for a large segment of the population, and that segment will remain vulnerable to the idiotic rules being promulgated by MAGA and the American Taleban.

The current problems can be solved, but they'll be solved by "Old School" methodology -- and likely not before the damage is terminal. So we're going to be under this yoke for quite some time. Get used to it.

[moonshadow]

But wait -- it gets worse. With the current social and economic strife in the USA (and I suspect this will spread, cancer-like, around the world) there are no support systems left that can be counted on for a prolonged retirement unless you were born with that billion-dollar trust fund. Thus, retirement is off the table for a large segment of the population, and that segment will remain vulnerable to the idiotic rules being promulgated by MAGA and the American Taleban.

I actually have somewhat of a strategy for my own retirement. It may not be workable, and is subject to changes as the world changes, but at this juncture, "any plan is better than no plan".

Basically, I'm going to cash out some 401k money when I hit 55 in 11 years, purchase a modest house in an affordable market for cash on the barrel, then I'm going to leave the account ALONE for another 12 years while continuing the pay in my normal payroll percentage, while taking the $2500 I'm NOT sending out every month in housing and investing it in other retirement options, bringing me to 67, which at that time I'll be considering actual retirement. I'll weigh my overall health at that time and see if I feel up to going until I'm 70 or not. But the plan is to hit my mid 60's with a mortgage free home, a modest stipend from social security, and 401k payout to fill out the gaps.

We won't be living high on the hog, I'm sure we'll clip coupons, but I'm only trying to retire with a basic roof over my head and a little food in the pantry. Maybe tend a little garden in the back yard, and take a trip a few times a year with my wife.

We can do this.

Of course, if I get fired for wearing a skirt on the weekends then all bets are off. Time will tell.

One thing I can say, is right now we're stashing money back, we're living VERY frugally, and not making any major purchases right now. If someone pulls the rug out from under me, or I step on some proverbial landmine and lose my job then I'm actually not sure what we'd do.

It may not even be me being fired for wearing a skirt. It could be something else. I have a tendency to put my foot in my mouth. I mean, someone could happen upon this thread, read my comment about transgender women demanding tampons and they may report me for that, then suddenly this DEI employer I work for basically fires me because I had the audacity to suggest that transgender women DON'T require tampons, or that "them/them/theirs" is a ridiculous pronoun for nonbinary individuals.

*shrugs*

Landmines... sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail.

[Grok]

At 68 years of age, I am willing to conform at work because at this point its not worth rocking the boat.

A friend a few years older than me-now retired-described her last 5 years on the job as a sort of coasting phase. Coasting till retirement.

After working for a few decades, you feel that you have paid your dues. That you have done your fair share in terms of the harder aspects of your occupation.

By the time that you reach your sixties, you may not seek or want challenges at work. You start to think of retirement as a prospect for a future that is no longer so far off.

Yes, I am in the coasting phase.

[Modoc]

At 68 years of age, I am willing to conform at work because at this point its not worth rocking the boat.
X

I tend to agree with you Grok, but in the case at issue it appears that the person in question was conforming to the degree that he thought necessary. I know very few of the particulars but it seems that dress is not the only issue, and once he was out as a gay man probably no agreement to conform would have been satisfactory. It doesn't sound like a chance was even offered. It appears he was aware of and complied with the appropriate appearance for on duty time, but maybe not for non customer interaction tume. Without knowing all the details it's just speculation on my part of course, but if he were made aware of the requirement for appropriate dress extended even to off duty meetings he probably would have complied to that as well

[GoSkirtGo]

no press releases from the A.C.L.U.

According to posts on the ACLU's Facebook page, they have taken up lawsuits against at least two anti-transgender Trump actions: A ban on medical facilities from providing gender-transition medical care to those under 19, and a rule that passports must show the bearer's birth-assigned sex (and bans non-binary gender markers).

[Myopic Bookworm]

According to posts on the ACLU's Facebook page, they have taken up lawsuits against at least two anti-transgender Trump actions.

“Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive branch’s legitimate power.” JD Vance, 9 Feb 2025.