Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Jimmy Fallon Sued for Gender Discrimination Against Men
8 views
Skip to first unread message
He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole
Jan 25, 2012, 12:26:46 AM1/25/12
to
From TMZ:
Jimmy Fallon likes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
staffer who's suing Jimmy and NBC Universal for discrimination.
In the lawsuit, filed in Manhattan, Paul Tarascio -- claims he was
dropped from his position as first stage manager at "Late Night with
Jimmy Fallon" ... and replaced by a "totally incompetent woman" back
in early 2010.
In the documents, obtained by TMZ ... Tarascio accuses Fallon of
"gender bias" -- and says he wasn't the only victim. He claims other
male staffers, such as audio technicians and a Prop-Master were also
replaced by women at Jimmy's request.
Tarascio also alleges his replacement was "a less qualified woman" who
constantly asked him how to do the job, and screwed up her stage
manager duties.
In the docs, Tarascio says Jimmy's director, David Diomedi, told him,
"Jimmy just prefers to take direction from a woman." He also claims
that -- under pressure from producers -- Diomedi "knowingly fabricated
alleged performance issues" about Tarascio.
Tarascio is suing for punitive damages and lost wages.
Calls to Jimmy's rep and NBC Universal were not immediately returned.
Jimmy Fallon likes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
staffer who's suing Jimmy and NBC Universal for discrimination.
In the lawsuit, filed in Manhattan, Paul Tarascio -- claims he was
dropped from his position as first stage manager at "Late Night with
Jimmy Fallon" ... and replaced by a "totally incompetent woman" back
in early 2010.
In the documents, obtained by TMZ ... Tarascio accuses Fallon of
"gender bias" -- and says he wasn't the only victim. He claims other
male staffers, such as audio technicians and a Prop-Master were also
replaced by women at Jimmy's request.
Tarascio also alleges his replacement was "a less qualified woman" who
constantly asked him how to do the job, and screwed up her stage
manager duties.
In the docs, Tarascio says Jimmy's director, David Diomedi, told him,
"Jimmy just prefers to take direction from a woman." He also claims
that -- under pressure from producers -- Diomedi "knowingly fabricated
alleged performance issues" about Tarascio.
Tarascio is suing for punitive damages and lost wages.
Calls to Jimmy's rep and NBC Universal were not immediately returned.
Captain Infinity
Jan 25, 2012, 4:58:06 AM1/25/12
to
Once Upon A Time,
**
Captain Infinity
He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole wrote:
>From TMZ:
>
>Jimmy Fallon likes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
>himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
>staffer who's suing Jimmy and NBC Universal for discrimination.
You forgot to say "Yay Jimmy!"
>From TMZ:
>
>Jimmy Fallon likes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
>himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
>staffer who's suing Jimmy and NBC Universal for discrimination.
**
Captain Infinity
Martin Phipps
Jan 25, 2012, 10:15:39 AM1/25/12
to
On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The
This is bullshit. California is an at will employment state.
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/20345/careers_and_job_hunting/california_at_will_employment_statute.html
That means an employer can fire you for any reason. If Jimmy Fallon
didn't like him then it is a valid reason for him to get fired. But
guess what? Jimmy Fallon can pick a name out of a hat and fire
somebody and there's not a thing he can do about it.
Discrimination based on gender is a tricky issue. Does the
application form for a job at Hooters actually say the applicant must
be a woman? No? But I doubt if any guy would get hired there. And
if the place is called "Hooters" then small breasted women need not
apply either.
Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
Period.
I know what you are thinking. "What if Jimmy didn't like black
people? Could he fire somebody for being black?"
You know, I think he probably could and I think he should be allowed
to. For that matter, he should be able to hire an all black stage
crew if he wanted to.
I think discrimination only comes into play if it is a big
corporation. If the CEO circulates a memo saying "Fire all the black
people" and an ex employee goes to his lawyer with a copy of that memo
then the company is screwed. But Jimmy Fallon himself, as an
individual doing his job, should have whatever people around him he
needs to do his job.
Martin
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/20345/careers_and_job_hunting/california_at_will_employment_statute.html
That means an employer can fire you for any reason. If Jimmy Fallon
didn't like him then it is a valid reason for him to get fired. But
guess what? Jimmy Fallon can pick a name out of a hat and fire
somebody and there's not a thing he can do about it.
Discrimination based on gender is a tricky issue. Does the
application form for a job at Hooters actually say the applicant must
be a woman? No? But I doubt if any guy would get hired there. And
if the place is called "Hooters" then small breasted women need not
apply either.
Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
Period.
I know what you are thinking. "What if Jimmy didn't like black
people? Could he fire somebody for being black?"
You know, I think he probably could and I think he should be allowed
to. For that matter, he should be able to hire an all black stage
crew if he wanted to.
I think discrimination only comes into play if it is a big
corporation. If the CEO circulates a memo saying "Fire all the black
people" and an ex employee goes to his lawyer with a copy of that memo
then the company is screwed. But Jimmy Fallon himself, as an
individual doing his job, should have whatever people around him he
needs to do his job.
Martin
Remysun
Jan 25, 2012, 11:11:00 AM1/25/12
to
On Jan 25, 10:15 am, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The
> Rapacious Mr. Hole" <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Tarascio is suing for punitive damages and lost wages.
>
> This is bullshit. California is an at will employment state.
Well dude, he's in NYC.
> On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The
> Rapacious Mr. Hole" <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Tarascio is suing for punitive damages and lost wages.
>
> This is bullshit. California is an at will employment state.
He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole
Jan 25, 2012, 12:05:17 PM1/25/12
to
Jim G.
Jan 25, 2012, 1:53:58 PM1/25/12
to
Martin Phipps sent the following on Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800
(PST):
I'm leaving everything in place, in all its glory.
To put it charitably, your understanding of discrimination legislation
is ... tenuous.
--
Jim G. | Waukesha, WI
NoCLoDS Founding Member (No Cop, Lawyer or Doctor Shows)
(PST):
To put it charitably, your understanding of discrimination legislation
is ... tenuous.
--
Jim G. | Waukesha, WI
NoCLoDS Founding Member (No Cop, Lawyer or Doctor Shows)
Mason Barge
Jan 25, 2012, 2:20:13 PM1/25/12
to
lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona fide
occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense verdict,
so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very much
an open question.
As for a flat chest, a federal judge recently refused to dismiss a lawsuit
for "weight discrimination" by a waitress.
>Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
>based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
>pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
>Period.
>
addre...@invalid.invalid
Jan 25, 2012, 2:44:45 PM1/25/12
to
above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
wrong.
Jim G.
Jan 25, 2012, 4:56:29 PM1/25/12
to
<addre...@invalid.invalid> sent the following on Wed, 25 Jan 2012
13:44:45 -0600:
breathtakingly stupid from start to finish that I figured that pretty
much anyone and everyone would be able to find at least a few of the
choice nuggets in the whole mess. A thing of beauty, really. If by
"beauty" you mean "something so indicative of cluelessness that you
didn't think that anyone had it in them to spell it out so wonderfully."
13:44:45 -0600:
> Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > To put it charitably, your understanding of discrimination legislation
> > is ... tenuous.
>
> And if you specifically point out any of the multiple fallacies in his post
> above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
> wrong.
Heh. Which is one of the reasons why I didn't bother. Plus it was so
> >
> > To put it charitably, your understanding of discrimination legislation
> > is ... tenuous.
>
> And if you specifically point out any of the multiple fallacies in his post
> above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
> wrong.
breathtakingly stupid from start to finish that I figured that pretty
much anyone and everyone would be able to find at least a few of the
choice nuggets in the whole mess. A thing of beauty, really. If by
"beauty" you mean "something so indicative of cluelessness that you
didn't think that anyone had it in them to spell it out so wonderfully."
Captain Infinity
Jan 25, 2012, 8:10:14 PM1/25/12
to
Once Upon A Time,
He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole wrote:
>On Jan 25, 4:58 am, Captain Infinity <Infin...@captaininfinity.us>
>wrote:
>> Once Upon A Time,
>> He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole wrote:
>>
>> >From TMZ:
>>
>> >Jimmy Fallon likes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
>> >himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
>> >staffer who's suing Jimmy and NBC Universal for discrimination.
>>
>> You forgot to say "Yay Jimmy!"
>
>Wrong Jimmy!!!! :~(
That's a darned poor excuse for skipping a chance at a good "Yay Jimmy".
He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole wrote:
>On Jan 25, 4:58 am, Captain Infinity <Infin...@captaininfinity.us>
>wrote:
>> Once Upon A Time,
>> He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole wrote:
>>
>> >From TMZ:
>>
>> >Jimmy Fallon likes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
>> >himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
>> >staffer who's suing Jimmy and NBC Universal for discrimination.
>>
>> You forgot to say "Yay Jimmy!"
>
>Wrong Jimmy!!!! :~(
**
Captain Infinity
Mason Barge
Jan 26, 2012, 11:24:37 AM1/26/12
to
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:20:13 -0500, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:
[...]
"Enter".
wrote:
[...]
>>Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
>>based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
>>pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
>>Period.
>>
>
>That may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
I want to apologize for that remark. I regretted it as soon as I hit
>>based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
>>pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
>>Period.
>>
>
>That may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
"Enter".
addre...@invalid.invalid
Jan 26, 2012, 2:20:00 PM1/26/12
to
level of stupidity trotsky generates every day.
Martin Phipps
Jan 27, 2012, 12:11:53 PM1/27/12
to
On Jan 27, 3:20 am, <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:20:13 -0500, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com>
being stupid.
Is it illegal to discriminate against someone who is missing both
legs? Or how about against somebody who is three feet tall. "Of
course!" you say. "You can't discriminate against any group!" So
what if the job is stacking shelves in a supermarket?
The fact is Jimmy, as an individual doing a job, has the right to hire
whatever people he needs to do that job. He can't be forced to work
with people he doesn't want to work with. It's that simple.
And yet some of you still don't get it, do you?
Martin
> Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:20:13 -0500, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
> >> <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >>> Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
> >>> based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
> >>> pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
> >>> Period.
>
> >> That may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
>
> > I want to apologize for that remark. I regretted it as soon as I hit
> > "Enter".
>
> As well you should. As stupid as that was, it pales in comparison to the
> level of stupidity trotsky generates every day.
It makes me want to cry when I see people this stupid accusing me of
>
> >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
> >> <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >>> Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
> >>> based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
> >>> pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
> >>> Period.
>
> >> That may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
>
> > I want to apologize for that remark. I regretted it as soon as I hit
> > "Enter".
>
> As well you should. As stupid as that was, it pales in comparison to the
> level of stupidity trotsky generates every day.
being stupid.
Is it illegal to discriminate against someone who is missing both
legs? Or how about against somebody who is three feet tall. "Of
course!" you say. "You can't discriminate against any group!" So
what if the job is stacking shelves in a supermarket?
The fact is Jimmy, as an individual doing a job, has the right to hire
whatever people he needs to do that job. He can't be forced to work
with people he doesn't want to work with. It's that simple.
And yet some of you still don't get it, do you?
Martin
Martin Phipps
Jan 27, 2012, 12:05:51 PM1/27/12
to
On Jan 26, 3:44 am, <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
quotes in another thread?
It never ceases to amaze me how far trolls will go to try to deceive
people. :P
Martin
> Jim G. <jimgy...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > Martin Phipps sent the following on Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800
> > (PST):
> >> On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The
> >> Rapacious Mr. Hole" <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> From TMZ:
>
> >>>JimmyFallonlikes being bossed around by women, and tried to surround
> > Martin Phipps sent the following on Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800
> > (PST):
> >> On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The
> >> Rapacious Mr. Hole" <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> From TMZ:
>
> >>> himself with an all-female stage crew -- that's the claim of a fired
> >>> staffer who's suingJimmyand NBC Universal for discrimination.
>
> >>> In the lawsuit, filed in Manhattan, Paul Tarascio -- claims he was
> >>> dropped from his position as first stage manager at "Late Night with
> >>>JimmyFallon" ... and replaced by a "totally incompetent woman" back
> >>> In the lawsuit, filed in Manhattan, Paul Tarascio -- claims he was
> >>> dropped from his position as first stage manager at "Late Night with
> >>> in early 2010.
>
> >>> In the documents, obtained by TMZ ... Tarascio accusesFallonof
> >>> "gender bias" -- and says he wasn't the only victim. He claims other
> >>> male staffers, such as audio technicians and a Prop-Master were also
> >>> replaced by women atJimmy'srequest.
>
> >>> Tarascio also alleges his replacement was "a less qualified woman" who
> >>> constantly asked him how to do the job, and screwed up her stage
> >>> manager duties.
>
> >>> In the docs, Tarascio saysJimmy'sdirector, David Diomedi, told him,
> >>> "Jimmyjust prefers to take direction from a woman." He also claims
>
> >>> In the documents, obtained by TMZ ... Tarascio accusesFallonof
> >>> "gender bias" -- and says he wasn't the only victim. He claims other
> >>> male staffers, such as audio technicians and a Prop-Master were also
> >>> replaced by women atJimmy'srequest.
>
> >>> Tarascio also alleges his replacement was "a less qualified woman" who
> >>> constantly asked him how to do the job, and screwed up her stage
> >>> manager duties.
>
> >>> In the docs, Tarascio saysJimmy'sdirector, David Diomedi, told him,
> >>> that -- under pressure from producers -- Diomedi "knowingly fabricated
> >>> alleged performance issues" about Tarascio.
>
> >>> Tarascio is suing for punitive damages and lost wages.
>
> >> This is bullshit. California is an at will employment state.
>
> >>http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/20345/careers_and_job_hun...
> >>> alleged performance issues" about Tarascio.
>
> >>> Tarascio is suing for punitive damages and lost wages.
>
> >> This is bullshit. California is an at will employment state.
>
>
> >> That means an employer can fire you for any reason. IfJimmyFallon
> >> didn't like him then it is a valid reason for him to get fired. But
> >> guess what? JimmyFalloncan pick a name out of a hat and fire
> >> That means an employer can fire you for any reason. IfJimmyFallon
> >> didn't like him then it is a valid reason for him to get fired. But
> >> somebody and there's not a thing he can do about it.
>
> >> Discrimination based on gender is a tricky issue. Does the
> >> application form for a job at Hooters actually say the applicant must
> >> be a woman? No? But I doubt if any guy would get hired there. And
> >> if the place is called "Hooters" then small breasted women need not
> >> apply either.
>
> >> Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
> >> based on something that is not part of the job. IfJimmyFallonwants
> >> pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
> >> Period.
>
> >> I know what you are thinking. "What ifJimmydidn't like black
>
> >> Discrimination based on gender is a tricky issue. Does the
> >> application form for a job at Hooters actually say the applicant must
> >> be a woman? No? But I doubt if any guy would get hired there. And
> >> if the place is called "Hooters" then small breasted women need not
> >> apply either.
>
> >> Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
> >> based on something that is not part of the job. IfJimmyFallonwants
> >> pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
> >> Period.
>
> >> people? Could he fire somebody for being black?"
>
> >> You know, I think he probably could and I think he should be allowed
> >> to. For that matter, he should be able to hire an all black stage
> >> crew if he wanted to.
>
> >> I think discrimination only comes into play if it is a big
> >> corporation. If the CEO circulates a memo saying "Fire all the black
> >> people" and an ex employee goes to his lawyer with a copy of that memo
> >> then the company is screwed. ButJimmyFallonhimself, as an
>
> >> You know, I think he probably could and I think he should be allowed
> >> to. For that matter, he should be able to hire an all black stage
> >> crew if he wanted to.
>
> >> I think discrimination only comes into play if it is a big
> >> corporation. If the CEO circulates a memo saying "Fire all the black
> >> people" and an ex employee goes to his lawyer with a copy of that memo
> >> individual doing his job, should have whatever people around him he
> >> needs to do his job.
>
> > I'm leaving everything in place, in all its glory.
>
> > To put it charitably, your understanding of discrimination legislation
> > is ... tenuous.
>
> And if you specifically point out any of the multiple fallacies in his post
> above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
> wrong.
Really? Like the way people were deliberately making changes to my
> >> needs to do his job.
>
> > I'm leaving everything in place, in all its glory.
>
> > To put it charitably, your understanding of discrimination legislation
> > is ... tenuous.
>
> And if you specifically point out any of the multiple fallacies in his post
> above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
> wrong.
quotes in another thread?
It never ceases to amaze me how far trolls will go to try to deceive
people. :P
Martin
David Johnston
Jan 27, 2012, 12:24:59 PM1/27/12
to
that matter) is not the same thing as an employer just preferring not to
see midgets or men in the workplace.
Martin Phipps
Jan 27, 2012, 12:30:50 PM1/27/12
to
>
> >That means an employer can fire you for any reason. If Jimmy Fallon
> >didn't like him then it is a valid reason for him to get fired. But
> >guess what? Jimmy Fallon can pick a name out of a hat and fire
> >somebody and there's not a thing he can do about it.
>
> >Discrimination based on gender is a tricky issue. Does the
> >application form for a job at Hooters actually say the applicant must
> >be a woman? No? But I doubt if any guy would get hired there. And
> >if the place is called "Hooters" then small breasted women need not
> >apply either.
>
> Hooters has paid out a lot of money to settle gender discrimination
> lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
> They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona fide
> occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense verdict,
> so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very much
> an open question.
In all fairness, $3 million dollars is not that much. The company
> >That means an employer can fire you for any reason. If Jimmy Fallon
> >didn't like him then it is a valid reason for him to get fired. But
> >guess what? Jimmy Fallon can pick a name out of a hat and fire
> >somebody and there's not a thing he can do about it.
>
> >Discrimination based on gender is a tricky issue. Does the
> >application form for a job at Hooters actually say the applicant must
> >be a woman? No? But I doubt if any guy would get hired there. And
> >if the place is called "Hooters" then small breasted women need not
> >apply either.
>
> Hooters has paid out a lot of money to settle gender discrimination
> lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
> They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona fide
> occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense verdict,
> so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very much
> an open question.
pulls in roughly a billion dollars in annual revenue.
http://www.womensfoodserviceforum.com/export/sites/wff/events/Webinars/Kat_Cole_Bio_x_Photo.pdf
Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
men?
Martin
Adam H. Kerman
Jan 27, 2012, 12:46:05 PM1/27/12
to
Martin Phipps <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>men?
Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>men?
models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
for a photography session? Something in a business sense, that is...
Bad analogy.
Mason Barge
Jan 27, 2012, 2:30:49 PM1/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:11:53 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 27, 3:20 am, <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:20:13 -0500, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
>> >> <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > [...]
>> >>> Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
>> >>> based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
>> >>> pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
>> >>> Period.
>>
>> >> That may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
>>
>> > I want to apologize for that remark. I regretted it as soon as I hit
>> > "Enter".
>>
>> As well you should. As stupid as that was, it pales in comparison to the
>> level of stupidity trotsky generates every day.
>
>It makes me want to cry when I see people this stupid accusing me of
>being stupid.
It makes me very sad when I stoop to the level of calling people names.
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 27, 3:20 am, <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:20:13 -0500, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:15:39 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
>> >> <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > [...]
>> >>> Proving discrimination requires that you were discriminated against
>> >>> based on something that is not part of the job. If Jimmy Fallon wants
>> >>> pretty women around then being a pretty woman is part of the job.
>> >>> Period.
>>
>> >> That may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
>>
>> > I want to apologize for that remark. I regretted it as soon as I hit
>> > "Enter".
>>
>> As well you should. As stupid as that was, it pales in comparison to the
>> level of stupidity trotsky generates every day.
>
>It makes me want to cry when I see people this stupid accusing me of
>being stupid.
>Is it illegal to discriminate against someone who is missing both
>legs? Or how about against somebody who is three feet tall. "Of
>course!" you say. "You can't discriminate against any group!" So
>what if the job is stacking shelves in a supermarket?
laws called BFOQ, "Bona Fide Occupational Qualification".
So, like, when a t.v. show casts a part for someone to play Martin Luther
King, they can limit their consideration to African-Americans.
>The fact is Jimmy, as an individual doing a job, has the right to hire
>whatever people he needs to do that job. He can't be forced to work
>with people he doesn't want to work with. It's that simple.
>And yet some of you still don't get it, do you?
for over 20 years.
Mason Barge
Jan 27, 2012, 2:34:22 PM1/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:30:50 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 26, 3:20 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 26, 3:20 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hooters has paid out a lot of money to settle gender discrimination
>> lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
>> They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona fide
>> occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense verdict,
>> so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very much
>> an open question.
>
>In all fairness, $3 million dollars is not that much. The company
>pulls in roughly a billion dollars in annual revenue.
The company is in bankruptcy.
>> Hooters has paid out a lot of money to settle gender discrimination
>> lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
>> They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona fide
>> occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense verdict,
>> so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very much
>> an open question.
>
>In all fairness, $3 million dollars is not that much. The company
>pulls in roughly a billion dollars in annual revenue.
>
>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>men?
from gender AND age discrimination laws for its Playboy clubs.
Hooters might well qualify, it's just never been decided and they've
settled all the cases.
Mason Barge
Jan 27, 2012, 2:38:50 PM1/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:46:05 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>Martin Phipps <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>>men?
>
>Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
>models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
>be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
Oddly enough, the race discrimination laws apply to independent
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>Martin Phipps <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>>men?
>
>Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
>models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
>be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
contractors. In fact, they apply to all private contracts. This is for
race only, not gender, handicap, age etc.
Adam H. Kerman
Jan 27, 2012, 2:41:52 PM1/27/12
to
Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hooters might well qualify, it's just never been decided and they've
>settled all the cases.
I thought they lost that case.
>Hooters might well qualify, it's just never been decided and they've
>settled all the cases.
Jim G.
Jan 27, 2012, 2:46:00 PM1/27/12
to
Martin Phipps sent the following on Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:05:51 -0800
(PST):
okay to accuse others of doing something that only you do here. It has
been a douchebag each time you've done it and it remains a douchebag
move.
(PST):
> >
> > And if you specifically point out any of the multiple fallacies in his post
> > above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
> > wrong.
>
> Really? Like the way people were deliberately making changes to my
> quotes in another thread?
>
> It never ceases to amaze me how far trolls will go to try to deceive
> people. :P
A cute emoticon doesn't change what you did, Phipps. Nor does it make it
> > And if you specifically point out any of the multiple fallacies in his post
> > above, he'll just go back and change them, then claim you're the one who's
> > wrong.
>
> Really? Like the way people were deliberately making changes to my
> quotes in another thread?
>
> It never ceases to amaze me how far trolls will go to try to deceive
> people. :P
okay to accuse others of doing something that only you do here. It has
been a douchebag each time you've done it and it remains a douchebag
move.
Obveeus
Jan 27, 2012, 3:11:47 PM1/27/12
to
"Mason Barge" <mason...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7uu5i7p5qaqq2u36a...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:30:50 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
> <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 26, 3:20 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>>>
>>> Hooters has paid out a lot of money to settle gender discrimination
>>> lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
>>> They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona
>>> fide
>>> occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense
>>> verdict,
>>> so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very
>>> much
>>> an open question.
>>
>>In all fairness, $3 million dollars is not that much. The company
>>pulls in roughly a billion dollars in annual revenue.
>
> The company is in bankruptcy.
I don't think so. The hotel went bankrupt (and the airline years ago), but
> <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 26, 3:20 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>>>
>>> Hooters has paid out a lot of money to settle gender discrimination
>>> lawsuits, including something like $3 million dollars in a class action.
>>> They have a colorable claim that being an attractive woman is a "Bona
>>> fide
>>> occupational qualification" but they have never gotten a defense
>>> verdict,
>>> so whether their waitress hiring practices are legal, or not, is very
>>> much
>>> an open question.
>>
>>In all fairness, $3 million dollars is not that much. The company
>>pulls in roughly a billion dollars in annual revenue.
>
> The company is in bankruptcy.
I think the restaurant chain is not part of that.
Adam H. Kerman
Jan 27, 2012, 3:19:22 PM1/27/12
to
magazines showed naked non-white boobies, although as I recall Hugh was
willing to let his subscribers drool over images of any beautiful naked
woman without concern for race, creed, or color.
Were my civil rights to non-discriminatory nudity violated as a
consumer of pr0n during this period?
Jim G.
Jan 27, 2012, 4:27:54 PM1/27/12
to
Obveeus sent the following on Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:11:47 -0500:
pretty much owns the wings market these days. It seems that most guys
prefer sports and to not overpay for breaded chicken.
>
> I don't think so. The hotel went bankrupt (and the airline years ago), but
> I think the restaurant chain is not part of that.
I don't know about Hooters' financial situation, but Buffalo Wild Wings
> I don't think so. The hotel went bankrupt (and the airline years ago), but
> I think the restaurant chain is not part of that.
pretty much owns the wings market these days. It seems that most guys
prefer sports and to not overpay for breaded chicken.
Thanatos
Jan 27, 2012, 8:25:07 PM1/27/12
to
In article <jfunst$icf$2...@news.albasani.net>,
> Martin Phipps <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
> >because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
> >men?
>
> Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
> models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
> be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>
> What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
> for a photography session?
Playboy had their playmates working in those men's clubs for years.
>
> >Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
> >because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
> >men?
>
> Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
> models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
> be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>
> What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
> for a photography session?
Martin Phipps
Jan 28, 2012, 5:24:51 AM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 3:38 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:46:05 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>
> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:46:05 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>
> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> >Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
> >>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
> >>men?
>
> >Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
> >models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
> >be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>
> Oddly enough, the race discrimination laws apply to independent
> contractors. In fact, they apply to all private contracts. This is for
> race only, not gender, handicap, age etc.
But there are magazines in the U.S. called Asian Beauties, Orient
>
> >>Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
> >>because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
> >>men?
>
> >Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
> >models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
> >be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>
> Oddly enough, the race discrimination laws apply to independent
> contractors. In fact, they apply to all private contracts. This is for
> race only, not gender, handicap, age etc.
Tails, Oriental Women, Black Tail, etc. All you have to say is that
the magazine caters to certain preferences and you're home free.
I may have been mistaken about where Jimmy Fallon's show was taped but
I am quite certain New York is also an at will state which means that
if Jimmy Fallon doesn't like somebody then he can fire them without
explanation. Of course, it is different if there is a binding
contract but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
Martin
Martin Phipps
Jan 28, 2012, 5:22:33 AM1/28/12
to
have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
Martin
trotsky
Jan 28, 2012, 6:33:33 AM1/28/12
to
Martin Phipps
Jan 28, 2012, 6:54:04 AM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 7:33 pm, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 1/27/12 7:25 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article<jfunst$ic...@news.albasani.net>,
> On 1/27/12 7:25 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Martin Phipps<martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
> >>> because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
> >>> men?
>
> >> Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
> >> models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
> >> be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>
> >> What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
> >> for a photography session?
>
> > Playboy had their playmates working in those men's clubs for years.
>
> Cite?
He doesn't have to. They were called "Bunnies". Although, I think it
> >>> Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
> >>> because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
> >>> men?
>
> >> Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
> >> models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
> >> be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>
> >> What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
> >> for a photography session?
>
> > Playboy had their playmates working in those men's clubs for years.
>
> Cite?
was more the other way around: they would hire a girl to work in the
club and then ask her to pose in the magazine.
Nowadays if you are "Playmate of the Month" then there must be some
contract involved that they have to sign so that if there are any
public appearances or videos for them to make that they follow through
with their obligations. It's no big deal because they apply to be
Playmate of the Month knowing that they are going to be posing nude so
they shouldn't be the squemish type.
Martin
trotsky
Jan 28, 2012, 9:35:01 AM1/28/12
to
On 1/28/12 5:54 AM, Martin Phipps wrote:
> On Jan 28, 7:33 pm, trotsky<gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 1/27/12 7:25 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article<jfunst$ic...@news.albasani.net>,
>>> "Adam H. Kerman"<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Martin Phipps<martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>>>>> because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>>>>> men?
>>
>>>> Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
>>>> models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
>>>> be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>>
>>>> What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
>>>> for a photography session?
>>
>>> Playboy had their playmates working in those men's clubs for years.
>>
>> Cite?
>
> He doesn't have to. They were called "Bunnies". Although, I think it
> was more the other way around: they would hire a girl to work in the
> club and then ask her to pose in the magazine.
Yes, Playboy Bunnies and Playboy Playmates are two separate things.
> On Jan 28, 7:33 pm, trotsky<gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 1/27/12 7:25 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article<jfunst$ic...@news.albasani.net>,
>>> "Adam H. Kerman"<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Martin Phipps<martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Anyway, it's frivolous. Are there any men suing Playboy or Penthouse
>>>>> because the Playmates and Pets every month are always women and never
>>>>> men?
>>
>>>> Perhaps that's because models aren't employees, but contractors. The
>>>> models may even be contractors of photographers who themselves wouldn't
>>>> be employees of the magazine, but also contractors.
>>
>>>> What would a magazine publisher have a model do when she's not sitting
>>>> for a photography session?
>>
>>> Playboy had their playmates working in those men's clubs for years.
>>
>> Cite?
>
> He doesn't have to. They were called "Bunnies". Although, I think it
> was more the other way around: they would hire a girl to work in the
> club and then ask her to pose in the magazine.
There was some cross pollination between the two but not enough to
substitute one name for the other.
Remysun
Jan 28, 2012, 12:30:28 PM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 5:22 am, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So how does that apply to small businesses? Does a Chinese restaurant
> have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
> owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
A bar owner I knew once had to place an ad that he didn't really plan
> So how does that apply to small businesses? Does a Chinese restaurant
> have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
> owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
on filling, just to comply with hiring/firing/discrimination laws.
Your average proprietor can probably skate on hiring being dependent
on an as-needed basis. Should an opportunity present itself, he or she
would be subject to fair hiring among the applicants at the time, but
it's easier to keep it within the family, and there are exemptions for
family in farm labor, so between the probable exemption and the window
of opportunity, I'm confident that a proprietor is covered.
However, Jimmy Fallon was hired by NBC, which means large corporate
policies, and although he'd have final say, he'd have to abide by
their guidelines, which would comply with federal law, if not be even
more stringent.
Captain Infinity
Jan 28, 2012, 2:45:42 PM1/28/12
to
Once Upon A Time,
**
Captain Infinity
Remysun wrote:
>However, Jimmy Fallon was hired by NBC, which means large corporate
>policies, and although he'd have final say, he'd have to abide by
>their guidelines, which would comply with federal law, if not be even
>more stringent.
Including NBC's guideline of hiring the mentally incompetent, it seems.
>However, Jimmy Fallon was hired by NBC, which means large corporate
>policies, and although he'd have final say, he'd have to abide by
>their guidelines, which would comply with federal law, if not be even
>more stringent.
**
Captain Infinity
trotsky
Jan 28, 2012, 3:24:01 PM1/28/12
to
Thanatos
Jan 28, 2012, 5:25:58 PM1/28/12
to
In article
<1e6cf2a7-0310-418a...@t8g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
and there being some kind of big thing going on where all the Chinese
restaurants and laundries were being forced by the state to stop hiring
their relatives and friends and give jobs to anyone and everyone who
applied.
<1e6cf2a7-0310-418a...@t8g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
Remysun <remys...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 28, 5:22 am, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > So how does that apply to small businesses? Does a Chinese restaurant
> > have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
> > owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
>
> A bar owner I knew once had to place an ad that he didn't really plan
> on filling, just to comply with hiring/firing/discrimination laws.
> Your average proprietor can probably skate on hiring being dependent
> on an as-needed basis. Should an opportunity present itself, he or she
> would be subject to fair hiring among the applicants at the time, but
> it's easier to keep it within the family, and there are exemptions for
> family in farm labor, so between the probable exemption and the window
> of opportunity, I'm confident that a proprietor is covered.
Seems like I remember visiting my grandparents as a kid in the Bay Area
> On Jan 28, 5:22 am, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > So how does that apply to small businesses? Does a Chinese restaurant
> > have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
> > owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
>
> A bar owner I knew once had to place an ad that he didn't really plan
> on filling, just to comply with hiring/firing/discrimination laws.
> Your average proprietor can probably skate on hiring being dependent
> on an as-needed basis. Should an opportunity present itself, he or she
> would be subject to fair hiring among the applicants at the time, but
> it's easier to keep it within the family, and there are exemptions for
> family in farm labor, so between the probable exemption and the window
> of opportunity, I'm confident that a proprietor is covered.
and there being some kind of big thing going on where all the Chinese
restaurants and laundries were being forced by the state to stop hiring
their relatives and friends and give jobs to anyone and everyone who
applied.
Martin Phipps
Jan 28, 2012, 7:00:03 PM1/28/12
to
On Jan 29, 1:30 am, Remysun <remysun2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> However, Jimmy Fallon was hired by NBC, which means large corporate
> policies, and although he'd have final say, he'd have to abide by
> their guidelines, which would comply with federal law, if not be even
> more stringent.
At the same time, however, if Jimmy can argue that he was acting
> However, Jimmy Fallon was hired by NBC, which means large corporate
> policies, and although he'd have final say, he'd have to abide by
> their guidelines, which would comply with federal law, if not be even
> more stringent.
within NBC's guidelines then the guy has no case against Jimmy Fallon
and he would have to try suing NBC. Good luck with that.
Martin
Mason Barge
Jan 28, 2012, 7:57:54 PM1/28/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:22:33 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 28, 3:30 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:11:53 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
[...]
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jan 28, 3:30 am, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:11:53 -0800 (PST), Martin Phipps
>So how does that apply to small businesses? Does a Chinese restaurant
>have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
>owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
No. You can get away with hiring your relatives.
>have to go through the motions of interviewing applicants or can the
>owner just hire his daughters and nieces?
Now, hiring only Chinese even if they're unrelated -- well, if someone
actually wanted to bring a case to get hired as a waiter in a Chinese
restaurant . . . . LOL
Mason Barge
Jan 28, 2012, 8:00:02 PM1/28/12
to
Captain Infinity
Jan 28, 2012, 8:31:55 PM1/28/12
to
Once Upon A Time,
I like the way you can insult folks who want to work *and* the entire
Chinese race at the same time and then laugh at your own witticism.
You're a very special person. There should be more like you.
**
Captain Infinity
Chinese race at the same time and then laugh at your own witticism.
You're a very special person. There should be more like you.
**
Captain Infinity
Martin Phipps
Jan 28, 2012, 10:27:40 PM1/28/12
to
On Jan 28, 5:31 pm, Captain Infinity <Infin...@captaininfinity.us>
wrote:
I think what he means is that the restaurants don't pay that much. It
would be like an adult trying to sue McDonalds for their only hiring
teenagers and college students. It's not worth it.
Martin
wrote:
would be like an adult trying to sue McDonalds for their only hiring
teenagers and college students. It's not worth it.
Martin
Captain Infinity
Jan 28, 2012, 11:23:05 PM1/28/12
to
Once Upon A Time,
tips. No one tips at McDonalds.
**
Captain Infinity
Martin Phipps wrote:
>I think what he means is that the restaurants don't pay that much. It
>would be like an adult trying to sue McDonalds for their only hiring
>teenagers and college students. It's not worth it.
Most restaurants don't pay much. Most of their help's income comes from
>I think what he means is that the restaurants don't pay that much. It
>would be like an adult trying to sue McDonalds for their only hiring
>teenagers and college students. It's not worth it.
tips. No one tips at McDonalds.
**
Captain Infinity
Stephen Newport
Jan 29, 2012, 3:35:28 AM1/29/12
to
He should be sued for impersonating a comedian.
http://community.webtv.net/NewportsRetro/SteveRhondasPetPics
http://community.webtv.net/NewportsRetro/SteveRhondasPetPics
0 new messages