• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Go Figure! Get a Sex Change Operation and Get FIRED!

Saxjazzman

Saxjazzman

Active Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Messages
2,505
Location
New York
This is an interesting story. This guy does a great job for 14 years and is the epitome of integrity. Now he wants a sex change operation and he is probably going to get fired. All of sudden he has no integrity. Sex Changing Politician I wonder if he smokes cigars???
 
Seems like because of his CHOICE to have the sex change, it will cause too much disruption and interfere w/ 'it's' ability to do the job effectively. I would feel different if it wasn't something elective, but 'it' made the decision, and 'it' has to live w/ the consequences.
 
It's not right, but it did happen. I hope he/she makes a bundle off of the ignorance of these people.
 
I think there's more to this story than what we're reading, seems like the Commissioner could have said "it will be too big of a distraction to do his job properly" instead of what this person said.
 
Gator said:
Seems like because of his CHOICE to have the sex change, it will cause too much disruption and interfere w/ 'it's' ability to do the job effectively. I would feel different if it wasn't something elective, but 'it' made the decision, and 'it' has to live w/ the consequences.
Click to expand...

Right that's easy to say, but the story leaves out a lot. He could be an intersexed individual - the article makes no mention of wife or family. An intersexed individual is born with transient genitalia and, as I'm sure you can imagine, has a shitload of stress in their life over that. Getting a sex change is seen as a way to normalcy, a way to legitimacy and a way to end the stress and possibly even start up a relationship. So, it might not be his choice in the sense you're refering to it as.

Further, even if he's a completely normal, functioning male, he may still feel the need for a sex change, seeing as he doesn't identify himself as male (he calls himself transexual). I don't see how in any way, short of medical leave, that a sex change operation would be able to effect his ability to work as a City Manager. If it's an elected position and if the electorate feels too uneasy about the guy after the operation, or they feel his work has been affected, then they can give him the boot - it's not the City Council's decision to make before the fact. They haven't even given this guy a chance to prove he can continue to be effective - they are firing him due to their own ignorance and hate.

The quote from councilman Black is especially revealing, that somehow, this guy getting a sex change operation robs him of integrity, trust and respect. The City Manager has probably identified as a transexual his entire adult life, yet, apparently, Black trusted him then. When he's out in the open, all of a sudden he's persona non grata.

These are not consequences "it", as you put it, should fairly have to live with. In no way can anyone fairly say that the operation will surely make the City Manager less effective or capable. It's punishing a person for a personal decision in their largely personal life - how would you feel if you worked for one of those companies that started firing employees because they smoke?
 
Gator said:
Seems like because of his CHOICE to have the sex change, it will cause too much disruption and interfere w/ 'it's' ability to do the job effectively. I would feel different if it wasn't something elective, but 'it' made the decision, and 'it' has to live w/ the consequences.
Click to expand...



I will not pretend to think that a person is an "it". Indeed with a new persona a new life is in order. One can not expect people to just accept what changes we choose to make in our lives. Is it fair? Depends, but one thing is true there is very little in life that is fair. With this change of sex came many psycological and physiological changes... And as such I find it hard to belive that this was a sneek attack. What would be the chances of him/ her winning a lawsuit?

Kinda goes hand in hand with the recent stories of sexuality in the military....
 
A person's personal life is their own business, plain and simple, but when you sign a contract, it's binding:

Stanton can appeal the decision, though his contract says he can be fired without cause at any time.
Click to expand...

I can sympathize with what he's going through, even disagree with the way he's being treated, but if he didn't agree with the terms of the contract, he shouldn't have signed it. You can't ignore the terms of a legal contract just because you don't like it anymore.

Regards - B.B.S.
 
Cheekie said:
Gator said:
Seems like because of his CHOICE to have the sex change, it will cause too much disruption and interfere w/ 'it's' ability to do the job effectively. I would feel different if it wasn't something elective, but 'it' made the decision, and 'it' has to live w/ the consequences.
Click to expand...



I will not pretend to think that a person is an "it". Indeed with a new persona a new life is in order. One can not expect people to just accept what changes we choose to make in our lives. Is it fair? Depends, but one thing is true there is very little in life that is fair. With this change of sex came many psycological and physiological changes... And as such I find it hard to belive that this was a sneek attack. What would be the chances of him/ her winning a lawsuit?

Kinda goes hand in hand with the recent stories of sexuality in the military....
Click to expand...

My big issue with it is that they are firing him before the operation - before they can see if he is incompetent after the operation or not. That's not a fair shake. If after the operation, he is unable to function as he previously did as City Manager, fine, fire away, but beforehand seems like bullshit.

As for the lawsuit, since this is a gender, not a sexuality, based issue, Stanton would at least recieve what's called "intermediate scrutiny" for review of his case. The City Council would have to show that his firing was furthered an important government interest related to his firing. More recently though, gender law has been receiving a standard much closer to "strict scrutiny" which is the same level of review given to cases dealing with race or national origin. That would require that the City Council show that they have "exceedingly persuasive justification" (according to US v. Virginia). Honestly, I don't see "exceedingly persuasive justification" with firing before the fact, had they waited, there would definitely be a valid claim to that, but they didn't so I think a lawsuit might hold some water in this case.

BBS, as for the contract allowing him to be fired for any reason, that's understood to mean any legal reason. The city council can't just up and fire him for literally any reason, they have to have a legal reason. For example, they couldn't just fire him if they decided tomorrow they hate white people (and they said that as their reason). Since the Council went out of their way to state that they were firing him for a gender issue, they're in some trouble. They could have fired him and claimed no reason, but they didn't. Even though you have a contract that says "any reason", you still can't be fired for discriminatory purposes.
 
ThankYouForNotSmoking said:
Gator said:
Seems like because of his CHOICE to have the sex change, it will cause too much disruption and interfere w/ 'it's' ability to do the job effectively. I would feel different if it wasn't something elective, but 'it' made the decision, and 'it' has to live w/ the consequences.
Click to expand...

Right that's easy to say, but the story leaves out a lot. He could be an intersexed individual - the article makes no mention of wife or family. An intersexed individual is born with transient genitalia and, as I'm sure you can imagine, has a shitload of stress in their life over that. Getting a sex change is seen as a way to normalcy, a way to legitimacy and a way to end the stress and possibly even start up a relationship. So, it might not be his choice in the sense you're refering to it as.

Further, even if he's a completely normal, functioning male, he may still feel the need for a sex change, seeing as he doesn't identify himself as male (he calls himself transexual). I don't see how in any way, short of medical leave, that a sex change operation would be able to effect his ability to work as a City Manager. If it's an elected position and if the electorate feels too uneasy about the guy after the operation, or they feel his work has been affected, then they can give him the boot - it's not the City Council's decision to make before the fact. They haven't even given this guy a chance to prove he can continue to be effective - they are firing him due to their own ignorance and hate.

The quote from councilman Black is especially revealing, that somehow, this guy getting a sex change operation robs him of integrity, trust and respect. The City Manager has probably identified as a transexual his entire adult life, yet, apparently, Black trusted him then. When he's out in the open, all of a sudden he's persona non grata.

These are not consequences "it", as you put it, should fairly have to live with. In no way can anyone fairly say that the operation will surely make the City Manager less effective or capable. It's punishing a person for a personal decision in their largely personal life - how would you feel if you worked for one of those companies that started firing employees because they smoke?
Click to expand...

there's alot of assumptions here, and hey, we don't agree, that's ok. If i was to be fired because i smoked, then i would have to make a decision to either not smoke, or go get a new job. I guess i'm a hard ass on people being accountable for their actions / choices, and i still think there's more to this story than we're reading.

Is this a politics, if so i'll shut up now (most say that's usually a good thing).
 
BlindedByScience said:
A person's personal life is their own business, plain and simple, but when you sign a contract, it's binding:

Stanton can appeal the decision, though his contract says he can be fired without cause at any time.
Click to expand...

I can sympathize with what he's going through, even disagree with the way he's being treated, but if he didn't agree with the terms of the contract, he shouldn't have signed it. You can't ignore the terms of a legal contract just because you don't like it anymore.

Regards - B.B.S.
Click to expand...

bingo
 
Gator said:
ThankYouForNotSmoking said:
Gator said:
Seems like because of his CHOICE to have the sex change, it will cause too much disruption and interfere w/ 'it's' ability to do the job effectively. I would feel different if it wasn't something elective, but 'it' made the decision, and 'it' has to live w/ the consequences.
Click to expand...

Right that's easy to say, but the story leaves out a lot. He could be an intersexed individual - the article makes no mention of wife or family. An intersexed individual is born with transient genitalia and, as I'm sure you can imagine, has a shitload of stress in their life over that. Getting a sex change is seen as a way to normalcy, a way to legitimacy and a way to end the stress and possibly even start up a relationship. So, it might not be his choice in the sense you're refering to it as.

Further, even if he's a completely normal, functioning male, he may still feel the need for a sex change, seeing as he doesn't identify himself as male (he calls himself transexual). I don't see how in any way, short of medical leave, that a sex change operation would be able to effect his ability to work as a City Manager. If it's an elected position and if the electorate feels too uneasy about the guy after the operation, or they feel his work has been affected, then they can give him the boot - it's not the City Council's decision to make before the fact. They haven't even given this guy a chance to prove he can continue to be effective - they are firing him due to their own ignorance and hate.

The quote from councilman Black is especially revealing, that somehow, this guy getting a sex change operation robs him of integrity, trust and respect. The City Manager has probably identified as a transexual his entire adult life, yet, apparently, Black trusted him then. When he's out in the open, all of a sudden he's persona non grata.

These are not consequences "it", as you put it, should fairly have to live with. In no way can anyone fairly say that the operation will surely make the City Manager less effective or capable. It's punishing a person for a personal decision in their largely personal life - how would you feel if you worked for one of those companies that started firing employees because they smoke?
Click to expand...

there's alot of assumptions here, and hey, we don't agree, that's ok. If i was to be fired because i smoked, then i would have to make a decision to either not smoke, or go get a new job. I guess i'm a hard ass on people being accountable for their actions / choices, and i still think there's more to this story than we're reading.

Is this a politics, if so i'll shut up now (most say that's usually a good thing).
Click to expand...

Ok, what if you worked for the government and they told you tomorrow that they're firing you because they want to hire some more women and you're not a woman, even though you do your job better than most of your peers? You might not care, but that doesn't make it less illegal.

Also, I'm running on the assumption that this is a legal issue, not a political one (hope I'm right, otherwise, I'll shut up too).
 
Having just moved a few towns south of Largo; I have been exposed to this circus on the news every morning. I understand the situation to be a little different than CNN has explained. I was under the impression he was placed on paid leave until this summer when his contract will run up. At that point the City of Largo will not retain his services as City Manager. To fire him during a contract would be to welcome a lawsuit.

I would disagree that because you've held a position for 14 years; you've automatically gained "... a solid reputation as a forceful and energetic leader", as CNN puts it; I haven't had that impression at all. Nor have I been under the impression he was a poor leader. None of the news outlets will talk about any aspect his job performance. Regardless of performance I would not hold it against the people of Largo for not wanting this man back at the end of his contract anymore than I would hold it against his wife for kicking him to the curb and going after all of his money. I'll save my sympathy for his teenage son.
 
I feel "to each his own" as long as it doesn't adversely affect the lives of the many. I also agree with the issue that the disruption this has and will continue to cause could be very detrimental to the internal operations of the city. If this were a business, and he was one of my employees with a contract as he signed, I would have fired his ass the day he made a public annoucement. It is a personal issue, keep it that way.

IMHO, it BS that the councelman says that the person no longer has integrity.

Ken
 
Fatken said:
I feel "to each his own" as long as it doesn't adversely affect the lives of the many. I also agree with the issue that the disruption this has and will continue to cause could be very detrimental to the internal operations of the city. If this were a business, and he was one of my employees with a contract as he signed, I would have fired his ass the day he made a public annoucement. It is a personal issue, keep it that way.

IMHO, it BS that the councelman says that the person no longer has integrity.

Ken
Click to expand...

I almost always take that viewpoint, but there are circumstances where I won't and from just what CNN said (which they could be completely misrepresenting it - like they did with that NJ governor who came out of the closet and they tried to make it look like he was forced to resign because he said he was gay) this is one of those circumstances. There is a huge parallel to the race card here - what if you hired an Arab person, highly qualified, who, to your surprised, made the rest of your co-workers uncomfortable because he was Arab. Could you fire him with a clear conscious?

What if (god forbid) Hillary Clinton is elected President and people stop paying taxes because she's a woman (unlikely, I know), and they don't trust a woman to run the country? Should she be impeached?
 
ThankYouForNotSmoking said:
I almost always take that viewpoint, but there are circumstances where I won't and from just what CNN said (which they could be completely misrepresenting it - like they did with that NJ governor who came out of the closet and they tried to make it look like he was forced to resign because he said he was gay) this is one of those circumstances. There is a huge parallel to the race card here - what if you hired an Arab person, highly qualified, who, to your surprised, made the rest of your co-workers uncomfortable because he was Arab. Could you fire him with a clear conscious?

What if (god forbid) Hillary Clinton is elected President and people stop paying taxes because she's a woman (unlikely, I know), and they don't trust a woman to run the country? Should she be impeached?
Click to expand...

IMHO, there is no parallel at all. He was born a man, is a man, and will always be a man no matter how badly he decides to mutilate his body. However, we probably shouldn't follow that road. I will add that he had already started on hormone therapy and originally intended to "come out" in June. He has made the claim that someone was set to "out him" to the media and in response he called an immediate news conference. I don't know the timing of his contract renewal as it related to his planned announcement. It does look like there is a possibility he was going to announce this while his signature was still wet on a new contract with Largo. His wife is reportedly "devastated".
 
CasaSoho said:
ThankYouForNotSmoking said:
I almost always take that viewpoint, but there are circumstances where I won't and from just what CNN said (which they could be completely misrepresenting it - like they did with that NJ governor who came out of the closet and they tried to make it look like he was forced to resign because he said he was gay) this is one of those circumstances. There is a huge parallel to the race card here - what if you hired an Arab person, highly qualified, who, to your surprised, made the rest of your co-workers uncomfortable because he was Arab. Could you fire him with a clear conscious?

What if (god forbid) Hillary Clinton is elected President and people stop paying taxes because she's a woman (unlikely, I know), and they don't trust a woman to run the country? Should she be impeached?
Click to expand...

IMHO, there is no parallel at all. He was born a man, is a man, and will always be a man no matter how badly he decides to mutilate his body. However, we probably shouldn't follow that road. I will add that he had already started on hormone therapy and originally intended to "come out" in June. He has made the claim that someone was set to "out him" to the media and in response he called an immediate news conference. I don't know the timing of his contract renewal as it related to his planned announcement. It does look like there is a possibility he was going to announce this while his signature was still wet on a new contract with Largo. His wife is reportedly "devastated".
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. There is an academic and research consensus that transgendered people do not chose to be transgendered like I chose to eat roast beef over turkey at lunch. He may have been supressing it for a long time, but that never made him any less transgendered.

His decision to have a wife (and possibly kids, I don't know) is regrettable, however, it wouldn't be the first time someone took on a "beard" to appear more normal.
 
Gator said:
BlindedByScience said:
A person's personal life is their own business, plain and simple, but when you sign a contract, it's binding:

Stanton can appeal the decision, though his contract says he can be fired without cause at any time.
Click to expand...

I can sympathize with what he's going through, even disagree with the way he's being treated, but if he didn't agree with the terms of the contract, he shouldn't have signed it. You can't ignore the terms of a legal contract just because you don't like it anymore.

Regards - B.B.S.
Click to expand...

bingo
Click to expand...


Fair enough, but remember, if an at-will employee (can be fired at any time for any reason or NO reason) is fired, the employer must still not violate any state or government discrimination laws. Depending on the state AND MUNICIPALITY, there might be employement laws that protect based on sexual orientation and gender identity. There is a contract here, which usually speaks AGAINST being at-will, but the above language speaks to at-will status (you serve at the will of the employer).

I haven't looked into it deep enough to know if this is the case, nor what the exact claim is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top