There were some amazing clips from Congressional testimony yesterday. Let’s listen to them.
A court case went before the Supreme Court this week. Let’s go through one of them.
And the LGBTQ+ group seems to just be making crap up right now. Let’s talk about it.
The Problem is These People Aren’t Dumbasses
Summer Lee, a Representative from Pennsylvania got smacked down by Reilly Gaines:
A Court Case
There is a case that was put in front of the Supreme Court called Muldrow versus the City of St. Louis.
Does transferring an employee to an equivalent but arguably less prestigious position based on their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Here is what the case is about:
Petitioner Sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow (“Muldrow”) had been a patrol detective in the Intelligence Division of the St. Louis Police Department (“Department”) since 2008 until her transfer in 2017. She worked on cases involving public corruption, human trafficking, gun crimes, and gangs. The position was a traditional eight-hour workday Monday through Friday. During her assignment to the Intelligence Division, Muldrow was deputized as a task force officer by the FBI’s Human Trafficking Unit. . This deputization provided Muldrow with privileges equivalent to those of an FBI agent, including entry to FBI field offices, use of an unmarked FBI vehicle, and the potential to earn $17,500 in overtime pay.
In 2017, the acting police commissioner appointed a male commander, Captain Deeba, to replace the female commander of the Intelligence Division. Captain Deeba swiftly reassigned 17 male officers and 5 female officers from different ranks and positions across the Department. Among them, Captain Deeba moved two male officers and two female officers, including Muldrow, completely out of the Intelligence Division. Muldrow was moved to the Fifth District on June 12, 2017. . In her new role, Muldrow was required to carry out administrative tasks and supervisory responsibilities. Due to the transfer, Muldrow lost her role as an FBI task force officer, had to work a rotating schedule that included weekends, and was no longer eligible for the $17,500 overtime pay, although her salary remained the same and other overtime opportunities were available to her.
Ten days after her transfer, Muldrow filed a discrimination charge with the Missouri Department of Labor’s Human Rights Commission, alleging that the Department and Captain Deeba discriminated against her. She was subsequently issued a right to sue letter to allow her to sue in state court on the alleged discriminatory act. Simultaneously, Muldrow requested two different transfers from the Fifth District. The captain of the Second District, Captain Coonce, informally requested for Muldrow to be her administrative aide. . Muldrow applied for that position and two other positions in the Department but did not receive any of these positions. However, Muldrow was reassigned to the Intelligence Division and regained her status as a task force officer on February 5, 2018.
Here’s what I think:
- She should lose this case. This is not a discrimination case. She worked for the department as a lead for seven years.
- As the city points out, there are exceptions to the discrimination rule. Transfers within law enforcement are actually common to avoid someone getting too comfortable and becoming corrupt.
- There is no discussion of her work record. We don’t know if she was transferred for cause. The fact that she didn’t get a job at another department does raise questions.
- So far, all the city is arguing is that the case does not apply to the law.
- The big problem I have here is that one should not be able to sue every time a job does something you don’t like. The reality is I could NEVER SUE for a company doing something to me (and they have).
Supreme Court case could spark rush of reverse-discrimination claims (msn.com)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/22-193
Are They Just Making This Up As They Go?
According to the National Post:
Canada’s top medical journal recognized ‘greysexuality,’ a relatively new sexual orientation that is a subset of asexuality in a new paper.
The Canadian Medical Association Journal article published on Dec. 4 defines greysexuality as “experiencing sexual attraction rarely or under specific circumstances.”
The definition appeared in an article on asexuality, “an umbrella term” referring to those who either only form sexual attraction when emotional bonding needs are met or those who are greysexual. The article cites the Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health in reference to greysexuality.
It goes on to outline the challenges of those who are asexual. This can include mental stress and the feeling of stigma from discrimination, the researchers state.
“Asexual people also have unique physical and sexual health needs, such as navigating arousal without attraction and learning to set boundaries in relationships,” they add.
Many asexual people have reported being treated as having a disorder in healthcare settings, which can lead to avoidance of medical care, the authors write.