If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chron)   Fresh on the heels of acquitting the guy who beat a puppy to death with a baseball bat, Iowa's Supreme Court Rules it is okay to fire an employee because she's so hot you are worried you might try to have an affair with her   (chron.com) divider line 173
    More: Asinine, Iowa, supreme court ruling, sex discriminations  
•       •       •

9542 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Jul 2013 at 11:31 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



173 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-12 11:33:41 AM
It's Iowa, so that's like five women. Prove me wrong Farkers. Prove me wrong with photographic evidence.

/No boss Friday.
 
2013-07-12 11:35:03 AM

Harry Freakstorm: It's Iowa, so that's like five women. Prove me wrong Farkers. Prove me wrong with photographic evidence.

/No boss Friday.


www.wtsp.com
 
2013-07-12 11:35:09 AM
Well if there's a disability to have, being so hot that people want to have affairs with you is the one to get.
 
2013-07-12 11:36:42 AM
img.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-12 11:37:17 AM
APPLICANT: Well, I type about 90 words a minute. I'm completely well-versed in all IBM and Macintosh programs.

GEORGE: (looking over her resume) Well Miss Coggins you're ah, obviously qualified for the job. You've all the necessary skills and experience. But you're extremely attractive. you're gorgeous. I'm looking at you, I can't even remember my name. So ah, I'm afraid this is not going to work out (he crumples her resume into a ball) Thanks for coming in.
 
2013-07-12 11:37:19 AM
 
2013-07-12 11:37:45 AM
That ruling should attract enough closeted gays business owners to Iowa that Westboro Baptist Church may relocate there.
 
2013-07-12 11:37:47 AM
Shiat, looks like i'll be out of a job soon then if this goes national...

/no i won't
//fugly chode
 
2013-07-12 11:38:10 AM
I'm worried I might use a Judge on that bat.

NSA? Hello? Anybody home?
 
2013-07-12 11:38:13 AM
Well that's awfully nice of him to state, for the record in court, that he has absolutely no control over his sex drive whatsoever.
 
2013-07-12 11:38:42 AM

Mock26:


It's Iowa. Being under four hundred pounds and not slathered in HFCS and corn husks is like being Helen of Troy out there.
 
2013-07-12 11:38:50 AM
It may be shiatty, but I don't think attractiveness is a protected class. You can be fired/not hired for being an uggo too.
 
2013-07-12 11:38:58 AM
Thank goodness for right to work legislation.  I think it may have saved that dentist's marriage.
 
2013-07-12 11:39:11 AM

Harry Freakstorm: It's Iowa, so that's like five women. Prove me wrong Farkers. Prove me wrong with photographic evidence.

/No boss Friday.


Found her..

o.aolcdn.com
 
2013-07-12 11:39:12 AM
...Iowahot?
 
2013-07-12 11:39:18 AM
It is the natural inclination for dentists to want to
*puts on sunglasses*
fill cavities.

YEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAH!
 
2013-07-12 11:39:30 AM
How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?
 
2013-07-12 11:40:59 AM
This story again?  Jeez, how many times is this chick getting fired?
 
2013-07-12 11:41:01 AM

hardinparamedic: How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?


It's not that she's female, it's that he's attracted to her.  If he were bi, he could fire a male OR female employee.  It's not discrimination on the basis of her sex, it's discrimination on the basis of his lust, regardless of what sex he's lusting for.
 
2013-07-12 11:41:37 AM
As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control. Whats next Iowa, letting rapist go because the woman was dressed too sexy?
 
2013-07-12 11:41:40 AM
Stupid decision..
 
2013-07-12 11:42:27 AM
Yeah, let's file an appeal and let FARK be the judge of this issue...
 
2013-07-12 11:42:48 AM
Well done Iowa, well done.

BTW, so who the heck would ever go see that dentist again? Even if you don't care about shiatty behavior, that guy must be off his rocker to do that.
 
2013-07-12 11:43:06 AM

Drew P Balls: Thank goodness for right to work legislation.  I think it may have saved that dentist's marriage.


And what a marriage it is too!

"Honey, I wanted to have an affair with an attractive woman."
"WHAT???"
"But it's OK! I fired her!"
"Oh, well, OK then. Because I know for a fact that the only way you would ever meet another attractive woman is if she worked for you."

They must be fundies. This sounds like a "remove the temptation" thing that would sound completely reasonable and logical to people like that.
 
2013-07-12 11:43:13 AM

stuffy: As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control. Whats next Iowa, letting rapist go because the woman was dressed too sexy?


Logically the court is saying anyone can fire anyone they're attracted to.
 
2013-07-12 11:43:35 AM

stuffy: As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control. Whats next Iowa, letting rapist go because the woman was dressed too sexy?


Isn't that what the MRA movement has been telling us for years?
 
2013-07-12 11:43:47 AM

hardinparamedic: How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?


So if the boss was gay, and he fired an attractive man, what would it be then?
 
2013-07-12 11:44:21 AM

exick: You can be fired/not hired for being an uggo too


It's true. Target hires reasonably attractive employees while K-Mart seems to hire the ugliest, saddest people they can find. While I salute their charity efforts, it's not really bringing customers in to the store.
 
2013-07-12 11:44:24 AM

WhippingBoy: hardinparamedic: How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?

So if the boss was gay, and he fired an attractive man, what would it be then?


butthurt
 
2013-07-12 11:44:45 AM
She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.
 
2013-07-12 11:45:04 AM
The ruling upholds a judge's decision to dismiss a discrimination lawsuit filed against Fort Dodge dentist James Knight, who fired assistant Melissa Nelson, even while acknowledging she had been a stellar employee for 10 years. Knight and his wife believed that his attraction to Nelson - two decades younger than the dentist - had become a threat to their marriage. Nelson, now 33, was replaced by another woman; Knight had an all-female staff.

I'll bet that all-female staff got a little younger and cheaper to pay.

On the upside, Ms Nelson can now put on her resume "I was fired for being too pretty."

Interviewer: You worked there for 10 years?
Nelson: Yes. I was a stellar employee. I revamped the scheduling...
Interviewer: And he fired you after ten years for being too pretty?
Nelson: Yes. I also color coded the inventory to speed...
Interviewer: So, you were younger and you got prettier. What? Nu-boobs? Were you a young fatty?
Nelson: No! I just got so pretty that I was a threat to his marriage. Now, please. I would like to discuss my qualifications. I have a degree...
Interviewer: Well, here is our problem: Are you just going to continue to get prettier? If we hired you and you and in a few years, you achieve Anniston grade beauty, then we might have to fire you also. You can see our concern. So, do you anticipate getting prettier?
 
2013-07-12 11:45:39 AM
Based on the court's logic I would expect that the fired worker could sue for sexual harassment.  He didn't act on his impulses in either case but obviously he thought about it.  Mentally he violated her like a screen door in a hurricane.  That should be good enough.
 
2013-07-12 11:46:01 AM

stuffy: As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control.


Your point?
 
2013-07-12 11:46:04 AM
m5.paperblog.com

Uh, hmmm, well 2 out of 5 ain't bad.
 
2013-07-12 11:46:47 AM
His paitents must all be as ugly as a box of smashed @$$holes...
 
2013-07-12 11:46:57 AM

hardinparamedic: How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?


Because he didn't fire her based on her gender - the counter-evidence is that all of his employees are female.
 
2013-07-12 11:47:09 AM
His wife made him do it. the courts can not legally tell you to argue with your wife,
 
2013-07-12 11:47:25 AM

thisisyourbrainonFark: [m5.paperblog.com image 850x637]

Uh, hmmm, well 2 out of 5 ain't bad.


WTF? Do they put "breast growth suppressant" in the water or something?
 
2013-07-12 11:47:31 AM
 
2013-07-12 11:47:32 AM

hardinparamedic: How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?


Well, from the ruling, it's based on attraction, not gender. He could just as easily have fired a man whom he felt unduly attracted to.

This is the same supreme court that legalized gay marriage in the state, so they have a track record of not taking gender into account.

I guess the reality that there are more heterosexual males in positions of power and therefore more women that can legally be fired for hotness doesn't matter.

So now I guess the gameplan is: hit on the hotties, but not in an overtly obvious way (so they can't sue for sexual harrassment). If they don't respond positively, fire the biatches. If they complain, cite the Iowa supreme court. Say that they threatened your marriage/peace of mind/whatever. Then the other hotties will see what the score is and learn to play ball or hit the road. Life is good.
 
2013-07-12 11:47:52 AM

tortilla burger: She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.


In a right to work state you can be fired for any reason that doesn't discriminate against a protected class?

"I don't like the way you answer the phone. Fired."
"I don't like the way you lean back in your chair after lunch. Fired"
"You have a nasally voice that makes the managers want to throw you off the roof. Fired"
 
2013-07-12 11:48:32 AM

jayhawk88: Drew P Balls: Thank goodness for right to work legislation.  I think it may have saved that dentist's marriage.

And what a marriage it is too!

"Honey, I wanted to have an affair with an attractive woman."
"WHAT???"
"But it's OK! I fired her!"
"Oh, well, OK then. Because I know for a fact that the only way you would ever meet another attractive woman is if she worked for you."

They must be fundies. This sounds like a "remove the temptation" thing that would sound completely reasonable and logical to people like that.


If I remember the earlier story correctly, Boss Hog kept sending explicit texts to the employee and his wife found out and - after meeting with his pastor - decided to fire her because they couldn't legally dress her in a burka.
 
2013-07-12 11:48:44 AM
Have you seen the women that are native to Iowa.... two legs and a pulse is too hot.
 
2013-07-12 11:48:45 AM
So here's a question: can someone tell me about the acquittal of the puppy-killer?
 
2013-07-12 11:49:05 AM

redmid17: tortilla burger: She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.

In a right to work state you can be fired for any reason that doesn't discriminate against a protected class?

"I don't like the way you answer the phone. Fired."
"I don't like the way you lean back in your chair after lunch. Fired"
"You have a nasally voice that makes the managers want to throw you off the roof. Fired"


Just plant a baggie of pot in their locker... problem solved!
 
2013-07-12 11:49:13 AM

thisisyourbrainonFark: [m5.paperblog.com image 850x637]

Uh, hmmm, well 2 out of 5 ain't bad.


We're talkin' the two on the left, correct?
 
2013-07-12 11:49:28 AM

vudukungfu: WhippingBoy: hardinparamedic: How, in the hell, is this not gender discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Can someone who has a GED in Law Explain this to me?

So if the boss was gay, and he fired an attractive man, what would it be then?

butthurt


Whether or not the attractive man was fired there'd be butthurt. Amirite?
 
2013-07-12 11:49:35 AM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: jayhawk88: Drew P Balls: Thank goodness for right to work legislation.  I think it may have saved that dentist's marriage.

And what a marriage it is too!

"Honey, I wanted to have an affair with an attractive woman."
"WHAT???"
"But it's OK! I fired her!"
"Oh, well, OK then. Because I know for a fact that the only way you would ever meet another attractive woman is if she worked for you."

They must be fundies. This sounds like a "remove the temptation" thing that would sound completely reasonable and logical to people like that.

If I remember the earlier story correctly, Boss Hog kept sending explicit texts to the employee and his wife found out and - after meeting with his pastor - decided to fire her because they couldn't legally dress her in a burka.


Sexual harassment lawsuit in 3..2..1..
 
2013-07-12 11:50:11 AM

thisisyourbrainonFark: [m5.paperblog.com image 850x637]

Uh, hmmm, well 2 out of 5 ain't bad.


Yes, yes, no, no, yes.

/ who am I kidding?
// yes, yes, yes, yes, yes
 
2013-07-12 11:50:13 AM

Harry Freakstorm: The ruling upholds a judge's decision to dismiss a discrimination lawsuit filed against Fort Dodge dentist James Knight, who fired assistant Melissa Nelson, even while acknowledging she had been a stellar employee for 10 years. Knight and his wife believed that his attraction to Nelson - two decades younger than the dentist - had become a threat to their marriage. Nelson, now 33, was replaced by another woman; Knight had an all-female staff.

I'll bet that all-female staff got a little younger and cheaper to pay.

On the upside, Ms Nelson can now put on her resume "I was fired for being too pretty."

Interviewer: You worked there for 10 years?
Nelson: Yes. I was a stellar employee. I revamped the scheduling...
Interviewer: And he fired you after ten years for being too pretty?
Nelson: Yes. I also color coded the inventory to speed...
Interviewer: So, you were younger and you got prettier. What? Nu-boobs? Were you a young fatty?
Nelson: No! I just got so pretty that I was a threat to his marriage. Now, please. I would like to discuss my qualifications. I have a degree...
Interviewer: Well, here is our problem: Are you just going to continue to get prettier? If we hired you and you and in a few years, you achieve Anniston grade beauty, then we might have to fire you also. You can see our concern. So, do you anticipate getting prettier?


Sounds like a case for Diana Moon Glampers.

/Knows this isn't obscure.
 
Displayed 50 of 173 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report