Art Exhibit Highlights Struggles for Women in the Construction Industry

Here is an article about a riveting art exhibit titled "On Equal Terms." The Exhibit has been featured at Brandeis University, Michigan State University Museum, and Clemente Soto Vélez Cultural Center in Manhattan, but it closes this week. It shows its audience a dark side of the construction industry: the side that continues to harass and discriminate against women in the industry. As the article points out, the construction industry is pretty much the ONLY industry that has NOT seen gains for women in recent decades. Still today, only 2.6% of construction workers are women, and that is the SAME as it was 30 years ago. This art exhibit is interesting in part because it seems to offer its viewers a glimpse of a day in the life of a female construction worker. As you move through it, it seems you would get the chance to experience what it would actually be like on the job--a chance to walk a mile, or even just a step or two, in a female construction worker's work boots. I wish I'd had the chance to see it.

Dangerous Sexism - Colorlines

Topless Activist Secures Settlement in Fight for the Right to Bare her Boobies

As a follow-up to one of my earlier posts, one Woman in New York City, who was repeatedly arrested and detained for not wearing a shirt, finally sued the city for her multiple wrongful arrests and detentions because, as she pointed out, toplessness is not a crime. Not in New York City anyway. And that is true. But police officers there apparently still arrest and detain women for it, despite being repeatedly reminded of the laws, at which point the charges are presumably dismissed as nonexistent. Well, this lady finally settled her lawsuit against the city for $40,000 because, as she acknowledged, she would not play well to a judge or jury . . . not without a shirt (assuming she would also show up shirtless to court).

Topless Activist Wins $40,000 Settlement From City for Boob Freedom - nymag.com

Earlier information about the legality of toplessness in New York:

Cops Reminded Repeatedly That Exposed Boobs Are Not a Crime - nymag.com

2013 Gender Gap Report Ranks America as 23rd Best Place for Women (Out of 136 Countries)

Well, the 2013 Gender Gap Report is out, and the United States ranks #23 out of 136 countries as far as the status of women is concerned. And the U.S. has NOT made relative progress; it has actually fallen one place in the rankings since last year. Perhaps we (as in the U.S.) have not actually fallen backwards but rather have stagnated as the status of women in other countries has improved slightly. Either way, we have a long way to go. But naturally, this is only a relative measure with other countries; the relative rankings don't measure the absolute progress being made in each country. Hopefully, there have been improvements across the board. But broadly speaking, as you can see from the rankings table on pages 9-10 of the report, Scandinavia seems to be the best place to be a woman right now, and the Middle East seems to be the worst.

Gender Gap Report 2013 - World Economic Forum

 

Gender Equality: Is there an App for That?

Here's another wonderful editorial about gender equality by Natascha McElhone. (This is actually an edited version of a speech she gave at Wired 2013 in London.) She shares a lot of anecdotes of her experiences with sexism which will probably ring true for (or sound familiar to) many of us. She discusses the phenomenon of "casual sexism," which is oft times subtle and is far more pervasive, I would imagine, than any of us realize. One facet of that phenomenon is the casual objectification of women, which, according to McElhone, is sexist primarily because it happens so much more frequently than the converse (the casual objectification of men), and because of the powerless positions in which women are portrayed in sexual images.

And McElhone asks a number of great questions about a variety of issues. Among those most important in my mind are:

"Why should men not garner respect for staying at home for those formative years?"

Undoubtedly an issue worthy of much discussion is the right of men to play a more active role in raising their children and maintaining their households if they so choose. The importance of this issue should be abundantly clear because, as anyone who has thought long and hard about gender equality should realize, women will never and can never play a truly equal role in the workplace until men play a truly equal role at home. Or, in the paraphrased words of Sheryl Sandberg, women can't "lean in" at the board table until men "lean in" at the kitchen table.

Many men are wonderful fathers, and homemakers, but they are never truly given the chance because of the stigma, stereotype, or casual sexism wrapped up in the still prevailing idea that these tasks are women's tasks--and continue to be women's tasks--even as women are expected to contribute equally to the workforce. If you find this insulting to men, then that only proves the point that domestic (and traditionally feminine) roles are demeaned and stigmatized in our society. Maybe a woman makes a free choice to stay home, or a man makes a free choice to bring home the bacon, but until the stigmas are eliminated for both sexes, no one can really make a choice that is completely free. And, in my view, this is the area in which WOMEN are the most guilty of contributing to the problem of gender inequality, by refusing to let their male partners play a more active role at home. You have to step back if you want them to step up. I only know this because I have been quite guilty of this myself!

Here was another of my favorite excerpts from McElhone's piece: "If I were a journalist, I would ask every man I interviewed if he was worried about his hair loss, his weight, how he managed his work/home balance, what his neuroses were – and skip over the content of what he actually did."

Ha. I would pay to see that. This is of course hilarious because this is usually what happens when the media interviews many women; they ask them about their appearance and not about their accomplishments--even women as accomplished as Hillary Clinton, which is presumably what brought them onto the show in the first place.

Natascha McElhone: It's Time to Find an App for Gender Equality

City of Los Angeles Contemplates Sexual Harassment Training for its Employees

Two City Council Members in Los Angeles, CA are asking the City to providing mandatory sexual harassment training to all of its employees, after two recent lawsuits. (Until now the City has provided such training only for managers.) Um, this really seems like a basic thing to me; I'm surprised the City hadn't been doing this already. But okay, good for them if they go along with the proposal and finally get with the program. I guess most private businesses STILL don't require such training, and are not required to in most cases, but I think a lot of governmental employers do. Exactly how effective such training is in actually preventing sexual harassment, I really can't say. Maybe it would depend in part on how good the training program is. But hey, at least it's something.

Sexual Harassment Lawsuits Against LA Prompt Calls For Prevention Training - Huffington Post

Companies with More Women Leaders Enjoy Higher Profits

Here's a great opinion piece by Nicholas D. Kristof in which he advocates for more women in positions of power. As his first example, he points out that the majority of tweeters on Twitter are female, yet the board of directors at Twitter is comprised of seven men and ZERO women. That's a company that is likely pretty out of touch with its own consumers. And this is an all too common occurrence. Kristof argues that equal representations of the sexes in leadership positions isn't just good for women; it's good for everyone, AND, more important to some, it's good for business. He cites some powerful facts and figures showing how companies with higher numbers of women in leadership positions have higher profits. And before you start debunking the correlation as not necessarily causative, whether the chicken came before the egg here isn't really the point. The bottom line is that these companies have something to show the rest of the corporate world--a world where still, in the 21st Century, women hold only 18% of board positions. Thanks to Mr. Kristof for this great editorial.

Twitter, Women, and Power - The New York Times

Meet Samantha Marquez, Girl Genius and Up-and-Coming Scientist

Here's a story about am amazing 17-year-old girl named Samantha Marquez who already has seven scientific patents under her belt. One is for Celloidosome, something that can organize cells into a new or different structures. Most of this science talk is beyond me, but I thought it was a great example of girls who are succeeding in STEM fields.

INNOVATOR: Samantha Marquez, Pioneering Teen Scientist - NBC

Powerful Poetry Slam: To the Man on the Bus

Following up on the last post, I wanted to share this incredibly moving poetry performance by a young man who was standing up for a woman on the bus. Apparently this piece was a part of the 2013 National Poetry Slam in Boston. There's not much to say about it, other than that it is beautiful. Please watch the video at this link:

7 Cowardly Words From A Totally Sexist Stranger Sparked This Courageous Response - Upworthy

More and More Rape Survivors are Choosing to Go Public

Here's an interesting new approach being taken by increasing numbers of young people these days who survive a sexual assault. Being a survivor has long been considered a major taboo or stigma due to the shame, humiliation, and embarrassment that survivors may feel in coming forward. And then of course, there are the real, actual punishments inflicted upon survivors when they do come forward: everything from re-victimization by law enforcement, the court system, educational institutions, blame from friends and family who struggle to make sense of what happened (and in some countries being stoned to death or burned alive!), direct retaliation by the perpetrators, friends or family of the perpetrators, or the public, and, most of all, blame from yourself as the survivor.

On top of all that, there are the more subtle, more cerebral, considerations surrounding the overwhelming fear about the details of your story becoming public information. The details of the event are of course very personal and very humiliating. Why would you want everyone to know those things about you? Why would you want everyone who ever sees you or meets you for the rest of your life to associate you with such atrocities? With such vulnerability? To see those images of you in their minds? They have no right to see that; no none does. Why would you want to identify yourself in that way to other people? To be inextricably intertwined with that story, so that it forever becomes a part of your identity in others' minds? Why tell people those things, and in so doing, perhaps make yourself that much more vulnerable than you already are, which is pretty damned vulnerable?

Maybe part of the fear comes from a fear a re-attack. If people know you are damaged in this way, then what if they use that information to take advantage of you again? After all, some people are evil, and those people do and will take advantage. That, if nothing else, is what you have learned from your awful, dreadful experience. Right?

Indeed, there is so much to consider in deciding whether to tell anyone at all (let alone everyone), if so, who, when, and how much to tell, and what will happen to you, your identity, your life, and to the lives of others, as a result of coming forward.

But as the thinking here (in this article below) goes, it is only in silence that the perpetrators continue to win. Again and again and again. They are guaranteed through your silence that they will continue to live their lives without any real consequences or repercussions, and they will (in most cases) be guaranteed the opportunity to reoffend over and over again, continuing to ruin the lives of the vulnerable and everyone around them. Maybe, just maybe, by finally putting aside the shame and the secrecy, in the name of privacy, we as a society can truly understand the depth and the gravity of what you have been through, how it has affected you, how it has affected everyone else in your life, and what we as a society can and should DO about it. Only then can we all truly understand the importance of accountability and community support. Maybe your story will not be enough to send your rapist(s) to prison for life, or to prevent him (or her, or them) from hurting someone else, but with your story, at least there's a chance. Without it, there's nothing but privacy.

Easier said than done.

On the other hand, the whole idea of rape shield laws and a victim's right of privacy was to help survivors maintain their dignity and avoid public scrutiny and condemnation. I could certainly see that point of view, too. After all you've been through, why should you be punished or humiliated by putting yourself out there like that?  On the other hand, are you, at some point, doing a disservice to the public by not sharing this information? Yes, these are difficult decisions indeed.

There is no right or wrong answer. It always depends on your individual situation and what you know and feel in your heart is the right thing to do. But this article was moving and powerful and inspiring and raised some very good points to consider. I think this courageous young lady, Daisy Coleman, like the hundreds of other survivors who have chosen to go public, has some good things to say. Part of the new dynamic with today's young adults is that social media has the ability to quickly and powerfully transform social consciousness in ways that were not available to the young adults of yesterday. For better or for worse, privacy is being eroded, sometimes by choice, sometimes not, but one upside is that people seem to care more about these issues than they did before. And that (hopefully) is a good thing for women today.

Why Rape Victims Are Giving Up Their Right to Privacy - nymag.com

On the flip side, there is also the dreadful possibility that photos or videos of the actual assault will be released to the public:

The Big Problem With How We Report on Sexual Assault Online - Time

This is NOT, I repeat, this is NOT, the same as thing as the survivor making a conscious, informed decision about whether to tell her (or his) story. Only YOU as the survivor should have the power to decide if, when, who, and how much to tell. But this related issue also touches on privacy and victims' rights when it comes to sexual assault, so I thought it was worth including. And it does raise a larger question common to both issues: Does putting sexual assault more into the public limelight, and the public media, increase awareness of the problem and support for survivors, or does it merely increase insensitivity to violence, as well as public condemnation and threats of violence toward the survivor? I suppose it all depends on how the information is conveyed.

Southwest Virginia Community Health System Settles Sexual Harassment Suit

Southwest Virginia Community Health System (SVCHS) in Saltville, VA has settled a sexual harassment suit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of a female receptionist at the Troutdale, VA clinic. The receptionist alleged that she was sexually harassed by a male patient at the clinic and that the company failed to take action to stop the harassment after she complained about it.

Southwest Virginia Community Health System to Pay $30,000 to Settle EEOC Sexual Harassment Suit - EEOC Press Release

U.S. Customs and Border Protection Settles Sex Discrimination Suit

A female border protection agent in upstate Maine, who worked at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Coburn Gore facility near the Canadian border, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Customs and Border Protection for sex discrimination after suffering years of bullying at work based on her gender. This woman's charming male supervisor allegedly made numerous comments to her about how a woman's place is in the kitchen where she'd better have dinner "hot and ready." She also made allegations of incidents of physical harassment in addition to the ongoing verbal harassment, and she claimed she was eventually terminated from her job on trumped up charges.

Well, lucky for her boss, she had a lawsuit "hot and ready" for him! And now Customs has settled the case for $285,000. Unfortunately, the nasty boss still works there, seemingly with no real consequences or repercussions (an all too common occurrence), and she is now working as a store clerk. Hopefully this money will help her get back on her feet and back into law enforcement where she wants to be.

Maine Border Protection Agent Wins Six-Figure Discrimination Settlement - mpbn.net

Former Highest-Ranking Female Executive at Booz Allen Hamilton Settles Sex Discrimination Suit

At one time, Molly Finn was the highest-ranking female executive at large defense contracting company Booz Allen Hamilton. This is a company where only about 20% of the partners are female. Ms. Finn, who began working at Booz in 1986, claims that the higher she got up in the ranks, the more discrimination she experienced, because of what she and others call a glass ceiling, which seeks to get rid of women before they advance any further. (We wouldn't want them taking over the company, aahhh!) Ms. Finn says that another executive at the company told her to "stop saying 'pro-woman, feminist things'" if she wanted to keep her job. Eventually, Booz fired her in 2010. She filed suit in 2011 and has now settled the suit. Naturally, Booz has admitted no wrongdoing, but a female spokeswoman for the company did point out that, "The higher you go in the firm . . . the risk is higher." The risk of what exactly? The risk of a discriminatory termination, maybe? Hm, cryptic words indeed from a company woman.

Another female executive of Booz, Margo Fitzpatrick, who began working at Booz in 1999, was also fired in 2010 and also filed suit in 2011 for the same reasons. Her suit is ongoing.

Booz Allen Hamilton Settles Lawsuit with Former High-Ranking Female Executive - The Washington Post

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses Dismissal and Revives Case Against Family Dollar Stores

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has given the pay discrimination class action against Family Dollar Stores, Inc. a second chance. Fifty-one female store managers of Family Dollar brought suit in federal court in Alabama against Family Dollar, claiming they were paid less than male store managers for doing the same work. Family Dollar then got the case transferred to a different court in North Carolina. Family Dollar then filed a motion for judgment against the Plaintiffs, arguing that the Plaintiffs could not meet the requirements for class action certification under the federal rules.

During this time, another major class action for gender discrimination was going on, the Dukes v. Wal-Mart case. Dukes v. Wal-Mart was a class action sex discrimination case brought on behalf of 1.5 MILLION female employees of Wal-Mart. At the time, that case had been reversed in favor of the Plaintiffs by the Ninth Circuit on the class action certification issue, but Wal-Mart took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court for . . . ahem  . . . further consideration . . . .

Meanwhile, in the Family Dollar case, the trial court in North Carolina originally denied Family Dollar's motion for judgment against the Plaintiffs. HOWEVER, it appears that Family Dollar succeeded in getting the case transferred to yet another different judge who would . . . ahem . . . maybe see the case differently. And indeed the new judge did. That is because, while the case was being stalled and moved around to different courts and different judges (it appears here that Family Dollar's attorneys may have been stalling for time and awaiting the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Wal-Mart case), the Supreme Court reversed that Ninth Circuit's decision in Wal-Mart and threw out the Plaintiff's class action claims.

The Court in Wal-Mart held that the Plaintiffs could not meet the commonality requirement for class action certification where they were all from different districts and the decisions that were allegedly discriminatory were made by different district managers. In other words, as relevant to Family Dollar, if one manager decides to pay you less because you're a woman, and a different manager decides to pay somebody else less because she is a woman, your claim does not have enough in common with the other woman's claim, even though you are working for the same company and have the same claims, because there are different decision makers involved, so you cannot bring the claims together in the same law suit (or at least not as a class action).

Well, the trial court in the Family Dollar case cited the new Wal-Mart decision when it threw out the Plaintiffs' claims by granting Family Dollar's motion for judgment and denying the Plaintiffs' motion to amend their Complaint, thereby axing their entire case. This was despite the fact that the Wal-Mart decision essentially added new and additional requirements to what must be included in the Plaintiffs' original complaint, but the Plaintiffs were not allowed to correct their original Complaint to account for those new requirements. The OTHER Catch-22 of course, was the fact that the Plaintiffs in Family Dollar were alleging that it was the centralized corporate policies of Family Dollar that led to the pay discrimination (the same policies in every district), yet they were never given the chance to pursue that theory or those allegations. The ultimate Catch-22 with these cases (and with all the new and additional pleadings requirements being erected by the courts in recent years, the overall point of which, imho, is just to make it more difficult for individuals to sue big corporations), is that one cannot prove one's theories in the absence of discovery during litigation (the process by which the parties obtain information from the other side to prove their respective theories of the case), yet they are never given the chance to engage in any discovery which they would need to prove their case, because their claims are axed at the outset, based on the fact that they have not put enough established information (a.k.a PROOF that they don't yet have) IN THEIR COMPLAINTS! Argh.

So, on the basis of Wal-Mart, the trial court in Family Dollar finally axed the Plaintiffs' claims.

BUT THEN, in came the Fourth Circuit, which REVERSED the trial court's denial of the Plaintiffs' request to amend their Complaint. As the Fourth Circuit observed, even if lower level managers are making different subjective and discriminatory decisions, they are not the ones setting the policies for the entire corporation, so if the policies themselves are discriminatory, then that equates to commonality for class action purposes. And, as the Court also noted, the Plaintiffs were alleging that higher level managers were also making discriminatory decisions that affected multiple districts and plaintiffs. Again, commonality. The court used these and other facts to distinguish the Wal-Mart case from the Family Dollar case. Simply put, the Plaintiffs should at least get the CHANCE to make the allegations they need to make to satisfy the Wal-Mart class action requirements (which, imho, are now essentially new and additional requirements which are NOT set forth in the federal class action rule), because giving them that chance is "necessary to ensure meaningful review."

The Court also shot down Family Dollar's arguments that allowing the Plaintiffs to amend their complaint would be prejudicial to Family Dollar. The Court pointed out that Family Dollar cannot turn around and claim prejudice now when Family Dollar was the one prolonging the litigation all along. Bam. Eat it and like it, Fortune 500 friends!

So now the Plaintiffs can amend their complaint and revive the class action lawsuit. Thank you, Fourth Circuit! Here is a link the the Fourth Circuit's opinion:

Luanna Scott et al v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc. - Bloomberg Law

And for point-and-counterpoint purposes, here is a pro-corporate rant about how horrible this decision was:

Supreme Disregard in Scott v. Family Dollar - The Wall Street Journal

Now, we can probably expect Family Dollar to try to take it up with the Supreme Court. . . .

Ex-Mayor of San Diego Bob Filner Pleads Guilty to Criminal Charges in Sexual Harassment Scandal

Bob Filner has now pleaded guilty to criminal false imprisonment and battery charges in connection with his extensive and egregious (and now apparently admitted) sexual harassment of numerous City of San Diego employees. At least he is "manning up," as they say in sexist terms.

It is unfortunate for Democrats that this happened with the first Democratic mayor in San Diego in twenty years--and within nine months of him taking office. Unfortunately, when an office is this political, and there had been a lot of bipartisan animosity brewing in this office in recent years, this kind of thing, in some ways, gives all Democrats a bad rap. Some democrats have written this off as a shameless political smear campaign, but it's clear by this point that the charges are substantiated. Maybe another democrat will step up who is NOT so pervy!

Lessons from Ex-San Diego Mayor Filner's Sex Harassment Scandal - L.A. Times

Sushi Den in Denver, CO Faces Charges of Sexual Harassment and Discrimination

Four employees of Sushi Den in Denver, CO have filed Charges of Discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against the restaurant for sexual harassment and sex discrimination. (Note: The news refers to suing and complaints, but that is somewhat incorrect as this is just an administrative charge and NOT a lawsuit, YET.)  Some of the allegations are that male owners and managers told the women they were not as smart as males and lacked the common sense of men. There are also allegations of systemic failure to promote women to management and chef positions and incidents of physical touching and lewd remarks.

Sushi Den Named in EEOC Complaint for Sexual Harassment - The Denver Post

Sushi Den: Investigator Discredits Female Employees’ Discrimination Complaint - kdvr.com

Well, shoot, thankfully these women at least have the SMARTS and COMMON SENSE to pursue their claims! That's all I can say. Dang! I have only eaten at this restaurant once, many years ago, but it is supposedly one of the best sushi restaurants in Denver. I did read somewhere, though, that they had ongoing issues with food and safety inspections as well:

Denver’s Top Health Code Violators Revealed - kdvr.com.

It may be be better when you find yourself in the Mile High City to drink your sake somewhere else!

Son at Pennsylvania McDonald's Who Stood Up For Female Workers Being Sexually Harassed by his Father-Boss Gets Fired and Files Charge of Discrimination

Here's a fun one: A man has filed a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against McDonald's, claiming that his 72-year-old FATHER, who is ALSO his boss at a McDonald's in rural Pennsylvania, sexually and racially harasses his employees and also forces his employees to help him hire hookers. What? Well, the Charge alleges that the father fired the son after the son confronted the father about his harassment of other workers, in an effort to protect the other workers, thus giving rise to a retaliation claim for the son.

The son claims that the father is obsessed with strippers and hookers. The father claims this is a family matter. Hm. Well, if these allegations are true, then let's just hope for this son's sake that the apple DOES fall far from the tree! And of course, McDonald's washes its hands of the whole mess because this father-of-the-year is running an independent franchise. I'm lovin' it!

Local McDonald's Owner Subject of Son's Harassment, Prostitution-Related Complaints - The Patriot News

Female Bartender in L.A. Files Suit Alleging She Was Fired For Being Pregnant and for not Dressing Like a Hooker

The King's Head Pub II on Ventura Boulevard in Los Angeles, CA is facing a lawsuit by a former bartender who says she was fired after her boss found out she was pregnant and that the boss also said she dressed too conservatively and not enough like a "California hooker" because she wore pants instead of miniskirts. Yes, I think it has been quite a while since women won the right to wear pants to work and to procreate AND work, too!

Pregnant Studio City Bartender Fired Because She Wore Pants, Didn’t Look Like ‘California Hooker,’ Suit Alleges - Los Angeles Daily News

Female Deputy Sheriff Files Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Complaint in Madison County, Tennessee

A female deputy sheriff in Madison County, Tennessee has filed a complaint of sexual harassment against the Sheriff's Department, alleging that a male deputy sheriff sexually harassed her for years. This article does not really provide many specific facts, but the video does reveal that there was allegedly some physical violence which led to the police being called to the female deputy's home and led the courts to grant a temporary protection order against the alleged harasser in order to keep the female deputy safe. Yikes! One can only imagine.

Deputy Alleges Years of Sexual Harassment From Sheriff - wbbjtv.com

Bad Domestic Violence Joke Gets Bar Employee Fired

Hey dude, I have an idea for the chalkboard sign out front! You know how beer can be domestic? And violence can also be domestic, like when a dude beats on his wife? Well, maybe if we make a joke about domestic beer AND domestic violence, we will sell more domestic beer! Dude!

So this brilliant bar employee puts out a sign in front of the bar where he works that says: "I like my beer like I like my violence: Domestic."

Brilliant.

Um . . . no. Just no. Dude, seriously, so. Not. Funny. Luckily, the bar owner who employed this dimwit employee agreed, and FIRED his ass. But the owner even went a step further than that and decided to DONATE profits from the sale of each beer to domestic violence awareness and prevention. Good show, old chap.

Bar Employee Makes Domestic Violence Joke To Sell Beer, Gets Rightfully Fired - Huffington Post

12 Amazing Women from Nepal

Here is a really nice collection of photos and biographies of some very amazing and powerful women from Nepal. Among these women are the first female Nepali elephant rider, the first female Nepali mountain guide, and the first female Nepali pilot. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

Women Who Broke The Rules In Nepal - NPR

Female Students who were Sexually Assaulted Sue Emerson College for Civil Rights Violations

The day after an Emerson College student was raped by two assailants, one of them a fellow Emerson College student, the survivor reported the rape to the College. Their response? Don't make a big deal about it! What? Several months later, they get around to starting an investigation (as they are legally required to do under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act), and during that investigation (which of course exonerates the rapist), he rapes her again!! Okay, I'm no rocket scientist, but I DO know that this is precisely one MAJOR thing that Title IX was designed to PREVENT. THEN, the school tells the SURVIVOR (note: NOT the perp) to take a semester off!! Again, one MAJOR thing Title IX is designed to prevent is the denial of equal educational opportunities for women as a result of gender-motivated violence. Smooth move, Emerson.

Well now, thankfully, this brave survivor, along with other survivors from Emerson College, have filed a Title IX lawsuit against the school. I am glad to see more and more of these cases being filed in recent years. Maybe now there will actually be some accountability in this area.

Emerson College Told Sexual Assault Victim Not To Make Big Deal Of Attack: Complaint - Huffington Post

United States Sues Annapolis Internal Medicine in MD for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has sued Annapolis Internal Medicine in Annapolis, MD for pregnancy discrimination and retaliation. The lawsuit alleges that the company discriminated against a female receptionist because she was pregnant, and then fired her because she complained about it.

EEOC Sues Annapolis Internal Medicine for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation - EEOC Press Release

United States Sues Industrial Labor Management Group, Inc. (ILM) in Nashville, TN for Gender Discrimination

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has sued Industrial Labor Management Group, Inc. (ILM) in Nashville, TN for gender discrimination. The lawsuit alleges that ILM, a temporary staffing agency, refused to place qualified female applicants in positions because of their gender. It further alleges that ILM directly told a female applicant that certain jobs in warehouses were only for men.

EEOC SUES Employment Staffing Agency ILM for Sex-Based Hiring Discrimination - EEOC Press Release

United States Sues Red Lobster for Sexual Harassment

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has sued GMRI, Inc., doing business as Red Lobster in Baltimore for sexual harassment. The lawsuit alleges that a male manager at the restaurant sexually harassed numerous female subordinates with various repulsive acts, including pressing his groin against them, grabbing and groping them against their will. It further alleges that the women tried to complain, but the manager above him was a sexual harasser as well. Let's hope these lobster attacks will not happen to these women anymore.

EEOC Sues Red Lobster for Sexual Harassment - EEOC Press Release

 

United States Sues Kenan Transport Co. of Spartanburg, SC for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has sued Kenan Transport Co. of Spartanburg, SC for pregnancy discrimination and retaliation. The lawsuit alleges that the company forced a female billing clerk to take unpaid medical leave because she was pregnant, and then fired her after she complained about it.

Spartanburg Trucking Company Sued for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation - EEOC Press Release

Destination Tahoe Hotel Settles in Sexual Harassment Suit

A Tahoe Ski Resort company called Destination Tahoe Hotel is shelling out $30k for a sexual harassment suit brought against it by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The lawsuit alleged that a male manager sexually harassed a female subordinate (a food server) and that the company then demoted her after she complained about it.

Tahoe Ski Resort Settles EEOC Suit for Sexual Harassment and Retaliation - EEOC Press Release

Pregnant Women in New York City Now Entitled to Greater Legal Protections from Discrimination

New York City just passed the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In a nutshell, the Act requires employers to give reasonable accommodations to pregnant women on the job. Under most such laws, pregnancy by itself is not considered a disability that would entitle someone to any accommodations on the job but only becomes a disability if it is accompanied by an additional medical condition. This law is quite progressive then as far as these laws go. Only 7 states (AK, CA, CT, HI, IL, LA, and TX) have similar laws at the state level. And at the federal level, a similar law, the federal Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, was introduced in Congress in May of this year but has not passed.

New York City Passes Law To Protect Pregnant Workers From Discrimination - Think Progress

Mormon Women Protest for the Right to Become Priests

Mormon ladies are getting feisty! A Mormon activist group called Ordain Women organized a group of some 150 Mormon women and their supporters at an all-male convention of Mormon priests. The women were turned away. I wonder how long it will be before Mormons level the playing (or preaching) field. For that matter, I wonder how long it will be before these women realize that these religions are inherently sexist and they can simply start their own religion! But who am I to say they should not still fight for equality within their existing establishment? By all means, preach on, ladies.

Mormon Officials Turn Away 150 Female Members From All-male Conference - The Raw Story

Title IX Investigations All Over the Country Halted by Government Shutdown

There is at least one group of people that is actually benefitting from the federal government shutdown over the past week: college rapists!! The U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (OCR) is typically charged with compliance and enforcement of the sexual assault investigations happening (or, more commonly, not happening) on all higher education campuses across the country that receive federal funding. However, as a result of the shutdown, OCR is 94% shut down as well and will not able to do its job. This of course will lead to more deficiencies in the way rape complaints are handled at schools around the country. Such services are apparently not essential, according to the government. Bad news bears.

College Sexual Assault Investigations Grind To Halt Due To Shutdown - Huffington Post

Hold Onto Your Ovaries Before You Get Behind That Wheel! Holy Ovaries, These Women Want to Drive Cars!

This is hilarious. But I think the title of the article conveys that pretty well already. Note that this man is NOT a doctor of any kind and of course has absolutely no scientific evidence whatsoever for his claim that women in Saudi Arabia will damage their ovaries if they start driving cars. WHAT?! Uh . . . mm-kay. He is a cleric--as in, member of the church. I wonder whether, under this theory he has seemingly pulled out of his you-know-what, opening bank accounts, traveling, working, or getting an education without express permission from one's male guardian (all of which are also still outlawed for women in Saudi Arabia), will also cause damage to the ovaries?? And I wonder whether all of this ovarian damage is occurring to women engaging in these activities all over the world, or whether it is something specific to Saudi ovaries?? I wish we knew about this riveting (NOT) theory.

Saudi Cleric Warns Driving Could Damage Women's Ovaries - CNN