Sheldon Cooper: I came to file a complaint. Somebody has made me feel uncomfortable in the workplace by using language of an inappropriate and sexual nature.
Ms. Davis: And who was that?
Sheldon Cooper: You, you dirty birdie. I thought about the things you said to me yesterday, and I realized I’m deeply offended. Now, be a dear and get me one of those complaint forms.
The Big Bang Theory: The Egg Salad Equivalency 2013
At Salon.com a rather late realization has set in:
Dang — looks like those women-only “Wonder Woman” screenings were illegal
Turns out that when men whined about being banned from the screenings, they had a legal point
Salon was shocked SHOCKED to find out that under the laws of liberal Austin Texas, discrimination is discrimination is discrimination.
Over at some colleges they are making similar discovers at a cost greater than a complementary Wonder Woman DVD
A University of Texas student claims in a lawsuit that UT President Gregory L. Fenves misapplied the school’s sexual assault policy and suspended him for five semesters even though his accuser agreed to have sex after a sorority formal in spring 2016.
And the costs aren’t limited to colleges either:
“Rolling Stone has settled a lawsuit with the University of Virginia fraternity whose members were falsely accused of raping a female student in a Nov. 2014 article, The Daily Caller has learned. A source involved at the national level with the fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi, tells TheDC that Rolling Stone will pay $1.65 million to settle the defamation suit.”
What’s really funny about this is these results were completely predictable because of laws our friends on the left spent decades getting in place:
According to Dan Eaton, an attorney and ethics professor at San Diego University, the engineer certainly has grounds for a case on two fronts. “First, federal labor law bars even non-union employers like Google from punishing an employee for communicating with fellow employees about improving working conditions,” Eaton writes.
And second, because the memo was a statement of political views, Eaton says Google may have violated California law which “prohibits employers from threatening to fire employees to get them to adopt or refrain from adopting a particular political course of action.”
An international corporation with armies of both lawyers, Google knew all this. They decided to take their chances with state and federal law anyway rather than stick up for one of their employees and risk public backlash. That’s an incredibly telling decision from a company that has mastered everything from artificial intelligence to self-driving cars.
The piece ends with the idea that google is more afraid of liberal anger than expensive lawsuits, but once those expensive lawsuits start coming, followed by the discrimination lawsuits from conservatives who are denied positions, and other lawsuits concerning “hostile work environments” which our friends on the left have so graciously provided us with, the worm will start turning quickly, particularly for publicly held companies who have to explain to their shareholders why keeping the perpetually outraged left is more important than their bottom line.
As for those who think Google’s size making them safe from this kind of thing. I’m old enough to remember when AOL was the net and the net was AOL. Google should take note.
After all if front groups that are essentially fax machines with a post office boxes and a few people tweeting can scare a company, how much so group consisting of actual people in quantity who both vote and shop?
Perhaps Google should ask Mizzou?