Playing the Aging Religious Black Female Card....

[Joe Guy]

Attorneys: Katy-area teacher fired for refusing to address girl, 6, as transgender boy
By Emily Foxhall
Published 12:11 pm, Tuesday, November 10, 2015

A federal discrimination complaint has been filed on behalf of a Katy-area educator who says she was wrongly terminated for refusing to address a 6-year-old girl as a transgender boy, the teacher's attorneys said Tuesday.

Madeline Kirksey, of Houston, who worked at the Children's Lighthouse Learning Center location on Clay Road, was fired Nov. 3 after she would not agree to treat the child as a male and call the child by a new male name, according to a copy of the filing with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Attorney Andy Taylor pointed to Kirksey's protected class as a black female over 40 who holds religious convictions. "All of those rights were not vindicated but destroyed," Taylor said.

Taylor represented the plaintiffs who challenged the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, which was originally passed by the city council but was repealed by Houston voters last week. Taylor is joined in Kirksey's case by attorney Briscoe Cain. Kirksey's pastor also attended and spoke at a morning news conference at a Galleria-area hotel.

Reached by phone Tuesday, Jamie Izaks, a spokesman for the Children's Lighthouse Learning Centers, said Kirksey was not fired because of the matter relating to the transgender student. He said he could not comment on matters related to employment.

The learning center franchises, first established in Fort Worth, exist in multiple states, and the company promotes itself online as "the leading values-based educational child care system in the U.S." Izaks said the schools are accepting of all religions and have a reputation for nurturing and raising great students.

Taylor stressed that the child had been attending school since the start of classes as a "little girl."

Using fake names, Taylor said that the child left school Friday as "Sally" and returned on Monday going by "Johnny."

"They had a real issue on their hands," Taylor said of the school staff.

Taylor maintained the child's gender identity wasn't set in stone. He said the child continued to use the girls' bathroom. The 6-year-old also played football with the boys and, when hit hard, cried and said, "I'm really not a little boy."

Taylor likened the imposition of such a decision over gender on a child to "child abuse." At such a young age, he said, kids haven't even decided what ice cream or cereal they prefer.

The attorney praised Kirksey for standing up to protect the child from ridicule, as well as keeping the other children at the school in mind who would have been "mightily" confused.

The EEOC enforces federal discrimination laws on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information.

source

Who is guilty of discrimination, the school administration or the black religious older woman (BLOW)?

Does the BLOW classification trump the child's right to be called a boy when he is a girl?

I'm getting tired of this. I don't care. In this case, the BLOW is wrong and it has nothing to do with how she addressed the girl who is a boy but might end up wanting to be a girl eventually anyway (GWIABBMEUWTBAGEA). And the GWIABBMEUWTBAGEA might as well learn early that if you're gonna change sexes, people are gonna wonder what the hell is going on in your head so they might not know how to address you the way you want to be addressed!!!!

Of course, my opinion on this case is that the BLOW was fired for other reasons and decided to use her BLOW status as means to get even with the administration that fired her for being an inept bumbling crybaby teacher with an attitude.

The child gender issue is completely irrelevant to what actually happened.

I base my opinion on the fact that I've seen the world become more & more ridiculously PC and the legal system is being burdened with the problem of sorting out all of this crap. Anybody that gets fired for any reason nowadays can file a discrimination suit and win!!!

It's the end of the world as I once knew it.

I hate people!!!!

[BoSoxGal]

Things are certainly much more complicated in a world that tries to acknowledge and respect every person's interests instead of only imposing the majority will.

[Lord Jim]

Wow, this is the kind of case that must cause PC brains to explode...

ETA:

The 6-year-old also played football with the boys and, when hit hard, cried and said, "I'm really not a little boy."

Taylor likened the imposition of such a decision over gender on a child to "child abuse."

I'm an inclined to agree...

I think a long hard look should be taken at the parents, and how they decided to make such a radical decision in the case of a six year old.

[Econoline]

In the pursuit of true love's joys
Boys will be girls and girls will be boys
But sometimes it's hard to know what to do
When you don't know who you're talking to

-- Steve Goodman, "Men Who Love Women Who Love Men"

[MajGenl.Meade]

Girls will be boys, and boys will be girls.
It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world,
Except for Lola. Lo lo lo lo Lola.

Well I left home just a week before,
And I've never ever kissed a woman before,
But Lola smiled and took me by the hand,
And said, "Little boy, gonna make you a man."

Well I'm not the world's most masculine man,
But I know what I am and I'm glad I'm a man,
And so is Lola.
Lo lo lo lo Lola. Lo lo lo lo Lola.

[oldr_n_wsr]

only 6 years old and already!?!?!?!?!
The wheels are coming off.

[BoSoxGal]

This excellent Frontline piece called "Growing Up Trans" contains an excellent discussion of the brain science/psychology involved in early childhood expressions of gender identity - it's worth watching:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... -up-trans/

[Guinevere]

Attorneys: Katy-area teacher fired for refusing to address girl, 6, as transgender boy
By Emily Foxhall
Published 12:11 pm, Tuesday, November 10, 2015

A federal discrimination complaint has been filed on behalf of a Katy-area educator who says she was wrongly terminated for refusing to address a 6-year-old girl as a transgender boy, the teacher's attorneys said Tuesday.

Madeline Kirksey, of Houston, who worked at the Children's Lighthouse Learning Center location on Clay Road, was fired Nov. 3 after she would not agree to treat the child as a male and call the child by a new male name, according to a copy of the filing with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Attorney Andy Taylor pointed to Kirksey's protected class as a black female over 40 who holds religious convictions. "All of those rights were not vindicated but destroyed," Taylor said.

Taylor represented the plaintiffs who challenged the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, which was originally passed by the city council but was repealed by Houston voters last week. Taylor is joined in Kirksey's case by attorney Briscoe Cain. Kirksey's pastor also attended and spoke at a morning news conference at a Galleria-area hotel.

Reached by phone Tuesday, Jamie Izaks, a spokesman for the Children's Lighthouse Learning Centers, said Kirksey was not fired because of the matter relating to the transgender student. He said he could not comment on matters related to employment.

The learning center franchises, first established in Fort Worth, exist in multiple states, and the company promotes itself online as "the leading values-based educational child care system in the U.S." Izaks said the schools are accepting of all religions and have a reputation for nurturing and raising great students.

Taylor stressed that the child had been attending school since the start of classes as a "little girl."

Using fake names, Taylor said that the child left school Friday as "Sally" and returned on Monday going by "Johnny."

"They had a real issue on their hands," Taylor said of the school staff.

Taylor maintained the child's gender identity wasn't set in stone. He said the child continued to use the girls' bathroom. The 6-year-old also played football with the boys and, when hit hard, cried and said, "I'm really not a little boy."

Taylor likened the imposition of such a decision over gender on a child to "child abuse." At such a young age, he said, kids haven't even decided what ice cream or cereal they prefer.

The attorney praised Kirksey for standing up to protect the child from ridicule, as well as keeping the other children at the school in mind who would have been "mightily" confused.

The EEOC enforces federal discrimination laws on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information.

source

Who is guilty of discrimination, the school administration or the black religious older woman (BLOW)?

Does the BLOW classification trump the child's right to be called a boy when he is a girl?

I'm getting tired of this. I don't care. In this case, the BLOW is wrong and it has nothing to do with how she addressed the girl who is a boy but might end up wanting to be a girl eventually anyway (GWIABBMEUWTBAGEA). And the GWIABBMEUWTBAGEA might as well learn early that if you're gonna change sexes, people are gonna wonder what the hell is going on in your head so they might not know how to address you the way you want to be addressed!!!!

Of course, my opinion on this case is that the BLOW was fired for other reasons and decided to use her BLOW status as means to get even with the administration that fired her for being an inept bumbling crybaby teacher with an attitude.

The child gender issue is completely irrelevant to what actually happened.

I base my opinion on the fact that I've seen the world become more & more ridiculously PC and the legal system is being burdened with the problem of sorting out all of this crap. Anybody that gets fired for any reason nowadays can file a discrimination suit and win!!!

It's the end of the world as I once knew it.

I hate people!!!!

That's not how it works in theory or reality. First of all, discrimination claims are very difficult to prove. There is rarely direct evidence of discrimination, and it is not easy to show indirect evidence is related to an improper , I.e., discriminatory motive. Second, the cases are rarely successful. In Massachusetts, 98% of those claims are either dismissed or settled. Of the 2% remaining, the percentage that "win" at trial varies by county from 10-30%. It's a long, expensive, difficult slog. In 10 years in my firm I know of one discrimination case where the plaintiff was successful. Most of the time they settled or dismissed, and those that went to trial lost, but for the one I mentioned. We work for employers, so are defending the cases, any case, we can't pick and chose. If there is a settlement that pays the plaintiff, it's because there was actual liability (I.e., the employer screwed up - which happens more than you might think).

[Joe Guy]

......Second, the cases are rarely successful. In Massachusetts, 98% of those claims are either dismissed or settled......

It depends on how you define "successful." For example, when an employer settles a case with an employee, it usually means the employee has gained something and the employer has given up something - doesn't it?

[Guinevere]

Read my last sentence.

[Joe Guy]

Sometimes I have a short attention span...

[wesw]

sounds like the only people who are at fault are the child s parents

[BoSoxGal]

I would recommend the Frontline piece to you as well, wes. Parents grapple with the choice, but it appears for some children it's absolutely the right one.

[rubato]

I looks to me that everyone, teachers, school administrators, parents, child is dealing with an issue for which they have no prior experience or training and is in the process of 'learning as they go'. Fault-finding and blame throwing is just dumb.


Give everyone the time and space to try to figure it out without putting a microscope on each decision.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

If there is a settlement that pays the plaintiff, it's because there was actual liability (I.e., the employer screwed up -

Or because they make the calculation that it would be cheaper to settle and avoid that lengthy and expensive legal process that you describe....

Which is likely more often the case...

[Guinevere]

If there is a settlement that pays the plaintiff, it's because there was actual liability (I.e., the employer screwed up -

Or because they make the calculation that it would be cheaper to settle and avoid that lengthy and expensive legal process that you describe....

Which is likely more often the case...

Nope.

In the last 10 years I've litigated about 10 employment law cases, all on behalf of the defendant employer.

1 case went to trial. I got a complete verdict for the defense, zero recovery for Plaintiffs. The demand was so outrageous (7 figures) we made no settlement offer until halfway through the case when the judge directed the parties to try and settle. They still asked for 7 figures. We crushed them in court.

4 cases I got outright dismissals, 3 at the state discrimination agency stage, 1 in court, and no appeals. Zero recovery for the plaintiffs.

4 cases settled. In 2 cases, there was pretty good evidence that the supervisor in case (1) sexually harassed his supervisee (they dated, something the employer should not have tolerated, and then he harassed her when she broke up with him); and in case (2) the supervisor actively disliked the "mouthy female" subordinate, put that in writing (emails) and there was indirect evidence he had discriminated against her. Employers can be liable for actions of their supervisory employees, and the cases settled because of the strong likelihood of some liability, playing the plaintiffs something. In both instances, the supervisor "retired" as part of the settlement.

2 other cases were terminations where the client screwed up. One, related to pregnancy/maternity leave, they fired her because she was pregnant and out a lot. A bad decision. Another, just bad documentation and poor planning. Both cases settled because of the strong likelihood of liability.

Last case, I lost after an administrative hearing, client decided not to appeal. It was one of those cases where the client also didn't document the process well, and had decent reasons for the personnel action it took, but for policy reasons wasn't interested in settling and ended up paying a lot more in a judgment *and* attorney's fees.

[Scooter]

I think a long hard look should be taken at the parents, and how they decided to make such a radical decision in the case of a six year old.

And said hard look would reveal that the parents followed the overwhelming consensus of medical opinion, which says that (a) gender dysphoria persisting into school age is unlikely to be transitory, and (b) even if it is, the least harm is likely to come from allowing the child to express the gender with which he/she identifies.

Does "radical" suggest that you see a potential for harm in allowing a child to live as the gender with which he/she identifies? If so, do you not see at least as much potential for harm in forcing a child to conform to one gender when he/she identifies with the opposite?

Gender identity and sexual orientation are distinct concepts, of course, but I spent my childhood and early adolescence pretending and wishing to be something other than what I was. I would have saved myself a lot of pain if I had told myself and everyone else the truth ten years earlier. The playground sociopaths were calling me a fag regardless, what downside would there have been?

Those who so obviously don't buy into the long accepted standard of care for gender dysphoria might ask themselves what they think happens to a child who is forced to lie about him/herself to everyone, all day, everyday. Let's pretend that every gender dysphoric child is going through a phase that will eventually pass, wouldn't it be far less traumatic to go through the phase as whatever gender he/she feels, and revert to the other gender when the phase passes? Is it better that the child should hate him/herself for as long as it takes everyone to see that it isn't a phase?

[Guinevere]

I'm sure you remember we went through a lot of this discussion earlier this year Scooter. I fear you are pissing into the wind for those who refuse to accept that gender dyphoria can and does impact young children.

[rubato]

On a related topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wHjJUdN16k

"The Saint of Dry Creek "

A very touching story about a perceptive and wise father of a gay son.


yrs,
rubato

[Scooter]

Guin, when have you known me not to tilt at windmills?

Sometimes people are unable to see the potential harm of the path they see as "natural" or "normal", and can see nothing but harm in that which is completely alien to them. If pointing that out will enlighten someone even a smidge...