RE: Being outted?

RE: Being outted? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

sting516 -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 2:05:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stunning quote: ORIGINAL: sting516 Unfortunately, here in the US many states are considered 'at will' states with regard to employment. What that means is one can be fired for just about any reason, so long as it doesn't affect a 'protected class' simply for their being a protected class... If you owned your own business you'd thank God for at will employment so you could actually fire lazy people without being sued. And your recitation of the law is somewhat innacurate, though its much better than most here. The protection is stepped in levels and state action must be involved. Unless you want government to regulate free enterprise. We call this fascism and fought a rather large war to stop it. Stunning, i did not debate the merit or non-merit of at will employment, merely how it would affect one who was outed. And as far as government needing to regulate free enterprise, have you heard of Enron or WorldCom? This, however, is not the place for that debate. sting

Stunning -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 3:08:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sting516 And as far as government needing to regulate free enterprise, have you heard of Enron or WorldCom? Of course; who hasn't? What is your point? If you're a fascist, just say so, but I can't read your mind.

Lordskitten -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 3:27:50 PM)
Ok, some posts in this thread have made it seem as if i didnt care about being outed or didnt understand how bad it would be. I do to both things, while i'm not peticularly worried about myself i am very worried about my boyfriend.. I do not want him to loose his 18 year job over this. Thats why i started asking in the first place to see if there are legal actions that can be taken to protect his job (which is very slim in his job, since getting a blow job is considered grounds for a court martial) should something happen. I want to become active in local groups and meet friends in the area, but not if it is going to somehow put his job at danger if "someone finds out". My needs/wants/desires come second to the security of his life. All in all i want to thank everyone again for very informitive answers.

Sensualips -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 3:33:44 PM)
I actually did lose my job over a published essay that had sexual tones. It was a humor columns and not BDSM related at all. However, I live in a small Kansas town and worked with small children. People that work with children are apparently unable to have any sexual desires and certainly can not make any reference to a sex toy like a vibrator. Of course, they didn't SAY that was why I was being dismissed. It was just that after the book was published and brought to the attention of my director, a series of imaginary issues arose that resulted in me being asked to resign after eight years of outstanding perfomance evaluations. Depending on your community and your industry, it certainly CAN be a career issue. After a rough few months, I recovered nicely though. ;)

sting516 -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 3:57:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stunning quote: ORIGINAL: sting516 And as far as government needing to regulate free enterprise, have you heard of Enron or WorldCom? Of course; who hasn't? What is your point? If you're a fascist, just say so, but I can't read your mind. Well, if by fascist you mean, have i got concern about corporate greed, then yes, i'm a fascist. But then we both know, there are other options out there. You just choose not to throw them out there because it doesn't make your point. sting

Padriag -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 6:01:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stunning quote: ORIGINAL: Padriag One of those protected classes in religion, which is a federal statute. What in the world are you talking about? Religion is a statute? The euqal protetion classes have to do with common law jurisprudence, anyway. No, but the federal law (ie statute) that protects someone from being fired for their religious choice is. Unfortunately that law, while protecting someone who chooses to be Buddhist, Muslim, Mormon, Christian, Jewish, Satanists, Wiccan, etc... does not protect athiests. quote: quote: However, lack of religion is not protected and you can be (and I have been) fired for being an athiest... Just like you can be fired for being a southerner in California, or for having a beard, or for not bathing, or for saying "groovy" a lot, or for not liking sports, or for having long hair, or for having short hair, or for having red hair, or for having blue hair... ad nauseum. Which doesn't make any of that right. The point is, firing someone for their sexual preferences, religious choices (or choice not to be religious), how they wear their hair, etc. is wrong. If a person is going to be fired, the sole reason ought to be directly related to their work performance, period. None the less, it happens across the US, more frequently in work at will states simply because its easier to do in those states, but in all the other states as well. quote: quote: ...as an athiest I'm part of one of the smallest minorities in America. Please tell me your statistics. Did you just make that up and throw it out for people to believe? US Census statistics 2003. According to which atheists make up 0.4% of the US poputlation, agnostics beat us out with 0.5%, Muslims with 0.5%, Chinese speaking with 0.6%, Jehohvah's Witness with 0.6%, Mormons at 1.93%, Buddhists with 0.87%, registered Native Americans at 0.9%, gay men at 0.7%, vegetarians at 4.2%... shall I continue or would you like to appologize now? I don't know who pissed in your Cheerios or why you feel this is something to do with bashing the South, or why you choose to take that particular tone with me. I live in the south, just south of you in fact, and I like it here. Just because I live here and like it here does not mean I agree with everything that goes on here (or elsewhere in the country or the planet for that matter), nor does it mean when I speak up about the fact that certain things are wrong means I'm bashing the South, those damn Yankees, mid-westerners, Texans, or anyone else. Well, okay, maybe those's damn Yankees... you know how they are... (and that was a joke for anyone lacking a sense of humor, I pick on the Brits too, but I like my British friends)

Aileen68 -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 7:08:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stunning quote: ORIGINAL: Aileen68 ...We live in America (the majority of us on this site)... one of the most uptight countries when it comes to missionary, lights off kind of sex... You're kidding, right? Ever been to the middle east? There is a big world out there. Actually Stunning I lived in Saudi Arabia for six years. So yes I do know what it's like in the big wide world. If you think that you have to fly half way around the world to find repression and prejudice (speaking sexually at this point) then maybe you should open your eyes. It's in every small town and large city right here in the good old USA.

OscarHargraves -> RE: Being outted? (10/15/2005 9:05:23 PM)
The quickest way to lose your job and everything else where I come from was to lose your security clearance. No clearance - No job! No access to the base. No way to find a decent job anywhere else because the 'removal' of your security clearance was on your employment records as the 'reason for termination'. Do I have to tell you how those government types that do security clearance background checks feel about people in 'this lifestyle', let alone someone who might be able to be blackmailed about their sexual activities?

Lordandmaster -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 3:52:23 AM)
Excellent reply, Padriag. I'm amused that "Chinese speaking" is considered a religion in that list. Or are those just minorities of various categories? quote: ORIGINAL: Padriag US Census statistics 2003. According to which atheists make up 0.4% of the US poputlation, agnostics beat us out with 0.5%, Muslims with 0.5%, Chinese speaking with 0.6%, Jehohvah's Witness with 0.6%, Mormons at 1.93%, Buddhists with 0.87%, registered Native Americans at 0.9%, gay men at 0.7%, vegetarians at 4.2%... shall I continue or would you like to appologize now?

LadiesBladewing -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 6:21:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JohnWarren After all the Salvation Army went to court for the right to fire people who weren't Christians... and won. How is a person's religious belief make them unable to hand out MREs and water to flood victims? Actually, in the case of the Salvation Army, I think that it was appropriate that they won. The Salvation Army is now and has always been a Christian organization. In addition, there are secular organizations that serve the same or similar purpose to the SA. It is not inappropriate that a private company with a designated profile as a particular religious faith should be allowed to consider that when hiring and firing, especially since the work done by the SA does not just comprise disaster relief, but includes a requirement to "minister to individuals having difficulty in their lives about the healing power and practical existence of God's love in -their- world". (Quote from an SA recruiter attending a seminary job fair where I was a presenting speaker on non-traditional religious communities in the United States). It is wholly appropriate that spiritual organizations and religious organizations be allowed to retain their mission by selecting individuals who promote the spirit of their organization and work in the world. Otherwise, why bother to have the organization in place at all. HOWEVER, there is a huge difference between a religious organization having religious restrictions on hiring and a secular organization having religious restrictions. The purpose of such restrictions for a religious organization is to further the mission of the organization. In a secular organization, there -is- no religious mission, and therefore, religious restrictions are, reasonably, considered to be discrimination. "Freedom of religion" implies the capacity to fully practice one's religion and fully embrace one's religious beliefs, including the right to hire individuals who share religious beliefs, where those beliefs are essential to the job at hand. It is unrealistic to expect to have it both ways. One of the most irritating and frustrating arguments that I've seen this past few years has revolved around issues related to the Boy Scouts. in 1999, the Boy Scouts were declared to be 'Not a religious organization' when they were ruled against in Dale vs. BSA (over Dale's being fired as a scoutmaster when he came out as being gay). The same year, the ACLU took up the OTHER side of the coin for an atheist mother, trying to get the BMA ruled as a "religious organziation" to force the BMA our of her son's school in Oregon. The second case was lost, in part because of the earlier win that declared the BSA as not being allowed to discriminate against gays by virtue of the fact that they were not a religious organization. So many people had a field day and flipped a holy hairy cow over the ruling, without ever stopping to think that if the ruling had been overturned and the BSA had been declared a religious organization, the New Jersey ruling would have had to have been overturned as well, with profound impact on the GLBT community, including newly "out" young people. Justice for all. Lady Zephyr

LadiesBladewing -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 6:31:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Padriag Quite true. One of those protected classes in religion, which is a federal statute. However, lack of religion is not protected and you can be (and I have been) fired for being an athiest and it is legal for an employer to do so anywhere in the US. Aren't loopholes fun. The odds of that little loophole ever being closed are small because as an athiest I'm part of one of the smallest minorities in America. Actually, Padriag, atheism IS a protected 'religion', and if you can prove that you were fired from a secular organization for being an atheist, you could win a religious discrimination suit. The only hitch is that if you were fired from a religious organization for being an atheist (like Salvation Army), you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. If you have the documentation, and the statute of limitations hasn't expired in the state in which you were fired, you might -really- want to have a chat with a labor lawyer. (Bolded section below was highlighted by myself, NOT the SSA) ***** From the US Social Security Administration Memo 32288-77-832*** Discrimination based on religion is prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In defining religious discrimination, the United States Supreme Court held that religion is not limited to Orthodox or well recognized denominations; e.g., Catholic, Baptist or Judaism. All that is required is a sincere and meaningful belief equivalent to the belief in God held by the more well recognized religions.Atheists are also protected. Religious discrimination can occur in two ways. The first is by treating employees or applicants for employment differently because of their religion. The second occurs when an employment rule or policy violates a fundamental belief, principle or practice of one’s religion and management fails to provide an accommodation. Religious practices are not limited to worship, but may include attendance at meetings and retreats, or the wearing of certain attire. Management’s obligation to accommodate begins when the employee notifies them of the need for an accommodation. Once notified, management should consider alternatives and offer one which would not create an undue hardship for the Agency or disadvantage other employees. Undue hardships are determined on a case-by-case basis. ****************************************** Lady Zephyr

service2U -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 6:43:15 AM)
In this country, there is no special "right" to a job. Unless it is for one of the "protected" categories (race, religion, etc.) specifically enumerated in the US labor laws, you can be fired for any reason or no reason. That means if an employer simply doesn't like you, they can legally fire you even through your work is satisfactory.

ownedjulia -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 7:56:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JohnWarren quote: ORIGINAL: ownedjulia Yes you could lose your job. Certain employeers (I'm thinking Government here) WILL fire you if they think you could be open to blackmail or intimidation. It's like the old "we can't have gays in the government." Why can't you? Because they could be blackmailed. Why could they be blackmailed? Because if we learned they were gay we'd fire them. A classic example of circular logic I never said it was right but I know how dense they can be. Before I found the scene I worked for HM Government. A bigger bunch of perverts you couldn't find - even at a play party! [:D]

LadiesBladewing -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 7:56:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: service2U In this country, there is no special "right" to a job. Unless it is for one of the "protected" categories (race, religion, etc.) specifically enumerated in the US labor laws, you can be fired for any reason or no reason. That means if an employer simply doesn't like you, they can legally fire you even through your work is satisfactory. While there is no right to a job in the United States, there are certain states where it is more difficult to fire an individual "without cause" than there is in others. In particular, in many states in the Northeast, it is -very- difficult to fire an individual who is doing his or her job, unless there are broad-reaching layoffs in the organization. Even the smallest company must document a chain of events, and repetitive productivity issues. Even the one employer/one employee business must prove that every dismissal is based on legitimate business-operations-related activity, or that there is a financial need to eliminate a certain number of positions, either temporarily or permanently, and that the individual being "laid off" is included in that reduction-in-force. On the other hand, in states like Texas, which is a "right-to-work" state, the minimum of documentation is required to get rid of someone. In small companies, there is often NO backup documentation required. In larger organizations, organizational policy may set certain requirements for documentation in order to prove that work-related issues, rather than "protected class" related issues comprise the reason for dismissal. For large organizations, this helps to reduce the number of lawsuits brought against the organization for legitimate dismissals based on work-related items that are then brought to court with the terminated individual claiming "discrimination". Lady Zephyr

CitizenCane -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 12:11:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RainGod quote: Now i'm sure she didnt loose her job because its illegal to discriminate against sexual prefrence in the work place as long as it does not affect said work. uh-huh. Maybe you're confused on the way some vanilla cowards who would fire someone over their sex life works. It is against t he law to fire them over that, But they will hunt, search, and downright fabricate a legal reason to fire someone, and succeed. I don't suggest that anyone working with children go on the assumption that it's illegal to discriminate against sexual preferences. I think most of us, even, would agree that not everyone should be working with kids, and I doubt that a person identified with 'abberant sexual practices' would recieve a lot of legal protection in most places.

LadiesBladewing -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 12:37:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CitizenCane quote: ORIGINAL: RainGod quote: Now i'm sure she didnt loose her job because its illegal to discriminate against sexual prefrence in the work place as long as it does not affect said work. uh-huh. Maybe you're confused on the way some vanilla cowards who would fire someone over their sex life works. It is against t he law to fire them over that, But they will hunt, search, and downright fabricate a legal reason to fire someone, and succeed. I don't suggest that anyone working with children go on the assumption that it's illegal to discriminate against sexual preferences. I think most of us, even, would agree that not everyone should be working with kids, and I doubt that a person identified with 'abberant sexual practices' would recieve a lot of legal protection in most places. Actually, working with minors is considered an acceptable reason to have to go through a background check, and if something relating to BDSM comes up on that background check (some places repeat these every 6 months, even after an individual is employed), the individual -will- lose the job. Sexual orientation is protected in some places (not yet in all places), but voluntary sexual behavior is -never- protected, since it is considered to be voluntary, not -required-, and is considered to be controllable. One would likely have to decide whether one wanted to care for little children or be caned weekly (or any other voluntary BDSM practice). Any foray into the big wide world requires making choices. Not all of these choices are a good fit with other things in life, and so, one must choose. Our society has become very hung up on the idea that we should all get to do whatever we want, and that there shouldn't be any real "price" for making one decision over another. Sorry... I have to disagree with this way of thinking. I believe that you have to make the tough choices sometimes, and that respecting yourself means making the decision that is going to take you where you want to go--which may also mean letting go of something that was inimical to the choice. You turn the wheel and take your chances...and yield up what you bet when the dice are against you without bitching to the Croupier. Lady Zephyr

pinkpleasures -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 12:53:57 PM)
quote: I don't know who pissed in your Cheerios or why you feel this is something to do with bashing the South, or why you choose to take that particular tone with me. I live in the south, just south of you in fact, and I like it here. Just because I live here and like it here does not mean I agree with everything that goes on here (or elsewhere in the country or the planet for that matter), nor does it mean when I speak up about the fact that certain things are wrong means I'm bashing the South, those damn Yankees, mid-westerners, Texans, or anyone else. Padriag When i left the south and returned back up north, one of the advantages i expected was an end to the flagrant bigotry of the people i'd encounter. That is not the case in Cleveland; bigotry is rampant here. i think it's a human fraility and sin that will always need good people to oppose it. pinkpleasures

Evanesce -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 2:43:34 PM)
quote: Now down to my question, WHY would being outted as a Dominant/submissive Sadist/masocist in a relationship cause one to loose their job? Ask WalMart why they fired a truck driver for cross dressing on his own time. Different employers, locations, communities tolerate "differences" in vastly different ways. In some areas, it doesn't much matter what you do. In others, even on your own time, you're considered to be a representative of your employer, and what you do will definitely have an impact on the future of your employment with that company. It's unfair, it's wrong, but hey... this is the good old USA, where we're free to live as we please, as long as it means we're pleasing everyone else, right?

Evanesce -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 2:49:07 PM)
quote: I wasnt saying that loosing your home and assests wouldnt be a terrible thing...i'm saying WHY would you loose them? Yes people are close minded and as a group panic driven creatures. Yes they could harrass you to the point that you flee town. Yes you could give in and let everything happen exactly the way you say but why not stand up, and fight back? Hire a lawyer and sue the company that fired you for harassment and creating an unsafe workplace. Yea it might be hard to find a lawyer to represent you but not impossible i'm sure. How is it an unsafe workplace? How is it harassment? If you're referring to a hostile work environment, that's an extremely specific charge, and it doesn't mean what many people seem to think it means. I've worked in human resources and payroll for over 20 years, and you would be amazed at what employees think employers are not allowed to do. Unfair and illegal are two entirely different concepts. Just because something is unfair, does not mean an employer cannot do it.

tasha_tart -> RE: Being outted? (10/16/2005 10:23:41 PM)
After reading this thread, all I can say is thank goodness I'm in a unionized workplace. My employer/managers/supervisors have had absolutely no problem with my assorrtment of piercings and tattoos. I also know of at least one individual who transitiond M2F, and maintained her job. The company's rules ban all forms of harassment, not only sexual, and put the onus on the management supervisor to put a stop to it.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125