PDA

View Full Version : Daycare workers claim they were fired over dispute with trans child (video)



Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 12:51 PM
[quote]The former manager of a Houston daycare claims she was fired after she refused to recognize a transgender child because of her religious beliefs.

Madeline Kirksey, who was once the manager of a Children

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 01:02 PM
Well, it's all jacked up and not letting me post the article, but... this was a "six year old transgender."

I don't get this. A little kid who has likely never seen the genitals of someone of the opposite sex claims to be that sex, and parents immediately jump and buy the clothes, take them to get the haircut... the whole nine yards, no questions asked.

What the fuck?

Mata Leao
11-13-2015, 01:10 PM
A 6 year old doesn't even understand what gender identity is. This is a case of overzealous parents trying to make noise and push an agenda. The world we live in today.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 01:52 PM
Here's the thing... none of us can tell people how to raise their children, but at the same times... they can't tell others to recognize their child's new identity.

I will, however, say that if the daycare center had an established policy on that; then the workers should have obeyed it. However, if I had to put money on it, I'd say that there was no policy or precedent in that daycare center (or the whole chain, if there's more than one).

When I was kid, I watched a few boys get slapped by their mothers for expressing a desire to do things associated with girls (like wear a dress, or things like that). I remember back to being potty trained, how I was corrected for sitting down to piss... an, around the same time, I had a toy snatched from me because I was pretending that it was a purse (imitating my mother). That's about the extent, but other kids had it far worse.

I don't think that this girl really believes herself to be a boy.

I also don't believe that a child will grow up to be gay if the parents allow them to dress and identify with the opposite sex as a child... BUT... it IS possible for an effeminate man to be straight, or a woman who's totally butch to be straight. And, of course, they grow up to be miserable because no one of the opposite sex wants them.

Remember Elliot Rodgers and Christopher Harper-Mercer. Effeminate men whose constant rejection from women cost lives.

MikeKerriii
11-13-2015, 04:00 PM
The former manager of a Houston daycare claims she was fired after she refused to recognize a transgender child because of her religious beliefs.

Madeline Kirksey, who was once the manager of a Children

I did a bit or research, the parents seem to be more than a little bit off, but the teacher's firing was appropriate. Especially since nothing in her religion would stop her from doing as asked, nothing in the bible supports her actions at all., But I am getting a little tired of people using their faith to refuse to do their jobs.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 04:10 PM
I did a bit or research, the parents seem to be more than a little bit off, but the teacher's firing was appropriate. Especially since nothing in her religion would stop her from doing as asked, nothing in the bible supports her actions at all., But I am getting a little tired of people using their faith to refuse to do their jobs.

I'm not even worried about the faith part.

I would agree with the firing IF the employer had written policy on this, or if she was previously told by someone higher up to respect the parents' wishes. She'd have at least had time to suck it up for a few weeks while looking for some place else to work. However... I don't see where there was anything - be it a written policy or a verbal warning - that she violated.

I think that she has a case, depending on the what the laws are in Texas. Just like in the military where you need to keep a record of counseling for most Article 15's to go through; it works the same way in many states. You have to keep letters of reprimand on file, or you could face an unlawful termination case.

MikeKerriii
11-13-2015, 05:18 PM
I'm not even worried about the faith part.

I would agree with the firing IF the employer had written policy on this, or if she was previously told by someone higher up to respect the parents' wishes. She'd have at least had time to suck it up for a few weeks while looking for some place else to work. However... I don't see where there was anything - be it a written policy or a verbal warning - that she violated.

I think that she has a case, depending on the what the laws are in Texas. Just like in the military where you need to keep a record of counseling for most Article 15's to go through; it works the same way in many states. You have to keep letters of reprimand on file, or you could face an unlawful termination case.

Texas is a "at will" employment State. You can be fired any reason at all, or no stated reason, ith the exception of certain constitutionally protected causes. GI's have far more protection from mistreatment that folks in may states including Texas. "I felt like firing her becasue I was in a bad mood" is a legally acceptable reason in Texas.

Unless she has hard evidence that the firing was done on a religious basis she is toast. Even then, since the bible does not say she can''t call the kid the name the desired she seems to have no case.

sandsjames
11-13-2015, 05:58 PM
Texas is a "at will" employment State. You can be fired any reason at all, or no stated reason, ith the exception of certain constitutionally protected causes. GI's have far more protection from mistreatment that folks in may states including Texas. "I felt like firing her becasue I was in a bad mood" is a legally acceptable reason in Texas.

Unless she has hard evidence that the firing was done on a religious basis she is toast. Even then, since the bible does not say she can''t call the kid the name the desired she seems to have no case.

Crazy that the employer of a private business could choose who does or doesn't work for him and what his requirements are for employments. That almost sounds like freedom.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 06:16 PM
Crazy that the employer of a private business could choose who does or doesn't work for him and what his requirements are for employments. That almost sounds like freedom.

Freedom of the anarchic kind.

sandsjames
11-13-2015, 06:22 PM
Freedom of the anarchic kind.

Several business/organizations do this already. The military, for one, has requirements for employment. Many businesses won't hire smokers. As long as it's not a "protected" group, the employer should be able to decide who he wants working for him.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 06:43 PM
Okay, say you're an employee at a hoagie shop. You were trained on how to slice each piece of meat, but they neglected to tell you how thick the salami is to be sliced. Well, pepperoni is similar to salama, so you assume that you should slice the salami to the same thickness as the pepperoni. Turns out that the salami should have been sliced one notch thinner than the pepperoni.

Mind you, you made a decision based on inadequate training. You're okay with this, over a meaningless word (i.e., "freedom")?

sandsjames
11-13-2015, 06:55 PM
Okay, say you're an employee at a hoagie shop. You were trained on how to slice each piece of meat, but they neglected to tell you how thick the salami is to be sliced. Well, pepperoni is similar to salama, so you assume that you should slice the salami to the same thickness as the pepperoni. Turns out that the salami should have been sliced on notch thinner than the pepperoni.

Mind you, you made a decision based on inadequate training. You're okay with this, over a meaningless word (i.e., "freedom")?

Absolutely, but I'm also ok with, and fully support, workers organizing/unionizing to protect against that happening. It's a private business and it's up to the owner/employer, but he also has to deal with the consequences of treating employees like that.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 06:57 PM
Absolutely, but I'm also ok with, and fully support, workers organizing/unionizing to protect against that happening. It's a private business and it's up to the owner/employer, but he also has to deal with the consequences of treating employees like that.

And there will be no consequences. Like WJ5, it appears your ideal country is Somalia. All the freedom anyone could ever ask for over there.

sandsjames
11-13-2015, 07:03 PM
And there will be no consequences. Like WJ5, it appears your ideal country is Somalia. All the freedom anyone could ever ask for over there.

Not at all. If he treats his employees like that then nobody is going to work for him. His business will fail and he won't be an issue anymore. Employees have a lot of power. So do boycotts and picketing. We have more power than we like to think. We're so used to being controlled by employers and protected by laws that we forget we are the biggest factor when it comes to our bosses treating us right.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 07:18 PM
Not at all. If he treats his employees like that then nobody is going to work for him.

Except the people don't really have options, and there are more than plenty. The hoagie shop would basically be a rotating door full of easily replaceable employees.


His business will fail and he won't be an issue anymore. Employees have a lot of power.

Employees who are easily replaceable have ZERO power.


So do boycotts and picketing.

When you go to restaurant, are you aware of how the employees are being treated if such treatment isn't happening in front of you? When you go into a hoagie shop, do you go in knowing that someone was fired yesterday for slicing the salami too thick?


We have more power than we like to think. We're so used to being ontrolled by employers and protected by laws that we forget we are the biggest factor when it comes to our bosses treating us right.

Idealism at its finest.

sandsjames
11-13-2015, 07:21 PM
Idealism at its finest.Yep. And we'll never have the ideal, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying.

I am a true believer that if a Hooter's waitress gets fat then the boss should be able to get rid of her.

Rusty Jones
11-13-2015, 07:23 PM
Yep. And we'll never have the ideal, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying.

I am a true believer that if a Hooter's waitress gets fat then the boss should be able to get rid of her.

I agree, as long as those conditions were communicated to the employee when she was hired.

garhkal
11-14-2015, 03:36 AM
Well, it's all jacked up and not letting me post the article, but... this was a "six year old transgender."

I don't get this. A little kid who has likely never seen the genitals of someone of the opposite sex claims to be that sex, and parents immediately jump and buy the clothes, take them to get the haircut... the whole nine yards, no questions asked.

What the fuck?

I feel the same.... First off according to several reports ON this situation, she was NOT fired for her religious beliefs, but cause she was NOT willing to call IT a boy, when half the time the kid was wanting to be a girl, while the other half of the time a boy. It continually flipped and flopped over what it wanted to be regarded as..

2nd, i agree with you. HOW THE HECK can a kid as young as 6 even KNOW what the differences are, to where they are able to cognitively make a choice of which they want to be?

Thirdly, IF it was wanting one sex, and one sex only to be called as, i can potentially see the day care telling workers "ok from now on, its a boy", but when it switches all the time, how can anyone with a brain, tell workers (and other kids there) "Ok we are calling it, a she today.. tommorrow it's a he"..

Lastly, two of the articles mentioned that the parents are a homosexual couple. If they really wanted to adopt a boy, why didn't they just do that, rather than adopt a girl, and pander IT to what to change their sex to boy???

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 04:28 PM
Crazy that the employer of a private business could choose who does or doesn't work for him and what his requirements are for employments. That almost sounds like freedom.

I have no problem with at will employment.

MikeKerriii
11-15-2015, 04:33 PM
I feel the same.... First off according to several reports ON this situation, she was NOT fired for her religious beliefs, but cause she was NOT willing to call IT a boy, when half the time the kid was wanting to be a girl, while the other half of the time a boy. It continually flipped and flopped over what it wanted to be regarded as..

2nd, i agree with you. HOW THE HECK can a kid as young as 6 even KNOW what the differences are, to where they are able to cognitively make a choice of which they want to be?

Thirdly, IF it was wanting one sex, and one sex only to be called as, i can potentially see the day care telling workers "ok from now on, its a boy", but when it switches all the time, how can anyone with a brain, tell workers (and other kids there) "Ok we are calling it, a she today.. tommorrow it's a he"..

Lastly, two of the articles mentioned that the parents are a homosexual couple. If they really wanted to adopt a boy, why didn't they just do that, rather than adopt a girl, and pander IT to what to change their sex to boy???

You have some evidence that the parent manipulated the kid? What the hell does the sexuality of the parents have to do with this situation?

Six year colds don't know that boys and girls are different? You must hang out around a bunch of really stupid kids, personally I don't think that I have ever met a that kid stupid who was not institutionalized. The kid was experimenting with the boy-girl thing, there was no need for the teachers drama queen antics.

The teacher broke her own employers rules and lost her job, rules that are legally valid. She doesn't have a case, nor even the biblical justification she is trying to claim.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 07:20 PM
You have some evidence that the parent manipulated the kid? What the hell does the sexuality of the parents have to do with this situation?

Six year colds don't know that boys and girls are different? You must hang out around a bunch of really stupid kids, personally I don't think that I have ever met a that kid stupid who was not institutionalized. The kid was experimenting with the boy-girl thing, there was no need for the teachers drama queen antics.

The teacher broke her own employers rules and lost her job, rules that are legally valid. She doesn't have a case, nor even the biblical justification she is trying to claim.

So you're saying that they had rules laid out, that the workers were completely aware of and wilfully violated?

I would agree with the firings in that case, but I saw nothing in the article or video that stated this.

garhkal
11-15-2015, 08:13 PM
You have some evidence that the parent manipulated the kid? What the hell does the sexuality of the parents have to do with this situation?

No i don't. BUT since someone that young can't imo understand the differences (BIOLOGICALLY) between a boy and a girl to the extend they feel they ARE the opposite sex, something must be pushing the kid to think that way.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 09:16 PM
I have no problem with at will employment.

It's no secret that SJ is all for that dog-eat-dog "fuck you, I'm looking out for #1" type of economy and employment laws, as he appears to be a firm believer in the invisible hand.

But you? Aren't you liberal? LOL

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 09:41 PM
It's no secret that SJ is all for that dog-eat-dog "fuck you, I'm looking out for #1" type of economy and employment laws, as he appears to be a firm believer in the invisible hand.

But you? Aren't you liberal? LOL

I like how you spin my view to make it sound like I don't give a shit about employees when, in fact, it's just the opposite. I'm a huge supporter of unions, I'm a member of the union. What I'm not a supporter of is government intervention in business.

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 09:49 PM
I like how you spin my view to make it sound like I don't give a shit about employees when, in fact, it's just the opposite. I'm a huge supporter of unions, I'm a member of the union. What I'm not a supporter of is government intervention in business.

I like how you tried denying what I said. only to confirm it.

sandsjames
11-15-2015, 09:54 PM
I like how you tried denying what I said. only to confirm it.Gotcha.....

Rusty Jones
11-15-2015, 11:13 PM
Gotcha.....

I'm not trying to be a dick. You've always been fair to me on MTF, so here's the issue:


I like how you spin my view to make it sound like I don't give a shit about employees when, in fact, it's just the opposite. I'm a huge supporter of unions, I'm a member of the union.

I was with you right up to this point.


What I'm not a supporter of is government intervention in business.

Who do you think benefits more from non-intervention of government? Big business, or you?

sandsjames
11-16-2015, 12:07 AM
Who do you think benefits more from non-intervention of government? Big business, or you?Not me, that's for sure. What benefits me more personally is government intervention. It's almost impossible for me to get fired. My boss really has no power over me. The only thing I could do that would really get me in any trouble would be to have a relationship with a student. Government intervention keeps the 65 year old civilian working with me from being told he needs to retire, even though he can't keep up with the technology, ultimately hurting the students he teaches. Everyone knows it...the students know it...the bosses know it...but because of government intervention, he'll be there 'til he dies.

Rusty Jones
11-16-2015, 01:03 AM
Not me, that's for sure. What benefits me more personally is government intervention. It's almost impossible for me to get fired. My boss really has no power over me. The only thing I could do that would really get me in any trouble would be to have a relationship with a student. Government intervention keeps the 65 year old civilian working with me from being told he needs to retire, even though he can't keep up with the technology, ultimately hurting the students he teaches. Everyone knows it...the students know it...the bosses know it...but because of government intervention, he'll be there 'til he dies.

That's because he works directly FOR the government, which has its rules like any other organization.

MikeKerriii
11-16-2015, 04:16 AM
So you're saying that they had rules laid out, that the workers were completely aware of and wilfully violated?

I would agree with the firings in that case, but I saw nothing in the article or video that stated this.
She was directed how to handle the situation by her bosses, The refused to do what she was instructed to do, that is clear in almost every news article. Refusing a legal and legitimate order from your employer is ground for termination almost anywhere. She violated direct orders/instructions from her superiors, then she got canned.

MikeKerriii
11-16-2015, 04:23 AM
No i don't. BUT since someone that young can't imo understand the differences (BIOLOGICALLY) between a boy and a girl to the extend they feel they ARE the opposite sex, something must be pushing the kid to think that way.

You think that a kid cares about biology? They only care about what they feel like. The kids is not claiming that he is in the wrong body or anything else just that he (wants to be/is) a girl. and want to be often translates to is in the mind of a child, harmlessly so except when a fool tries to fix a "problem' that will normally fix itself.

Why in the hell would gay parents try to push the kid into being transgender, most parents don't fight to make their kids lives harder. Gay parents are no different than anyone else in wanting to protect their kids.

MikeKerriii
11-16-2015, 04:28 AM
It's no secret that SJ is all for that dog-eat-dog "fuck you, I'm looking out for #1" type of economy and employment laws, as he appears to be a firm believer in the invisible hand.

But you? Aren't you liberal? LOL

I am a liberal, but I think that a job is a contract between an employer and an employee. Why should only one side of the contract have the ability to terminate the contract at will?

I am a liberal, but a liberal that believes that individual liberty is important. I like Unions but they just become a representative for one side of the contract and balance out the power disparities.

garhkal
11-17-2015, 03:39 AM
You think that a kid cares about biology? They only care about what they feel like. The kids is not claiming that he is in the wrong body or anything else just that he (wants to be/is) a girl. and want to be often translates to is in the mind of a child, harmlessly so except when a fool tries to fix a "problem' that will normally fix itself.

Why in the hell would gay parents try to push the kid into being transgender, most parents don't fight to make their kids lives harder. Gay parents are no different than anyone else in wanting to protect their kids.

Perhaps cause the parents wanted a boy, but got a girl, so are pushing the kid into becoming a boy??

MikeKerriii
11-18-2015, 04:53 AM
Perhaps cause the parents wanted a boy, but got a girl, so are pushing the kid into becoming a boy??

Is there any reason to believe that is true. any facts to support it, or are you just blowing smoke?

Why not just say that you have nothing to support your attack on the parents?

Rusty Jones
11-18-2015, 12:36 PM
Is there any reason to believe that is true. any facts to support it, or are you just blowing smoke?

Why not just say that you have nothing to support your attack on the parents?

His post began with "perhaps" and ended with three question marks. In other words, he wasn't trying to make a factual statement.

The more likely scenario is that parents are subjecting themselves to their children's whims, and going along with whatever they call themselves at the time instead of enforcing what they are. There are hundreds of pages, editorials, and blogs out there where parents flat out state this.

I don't think that most people in first world countries are even aware that there's a biological difference between boys and girls until they get a younger sibling of the opposite sex and see their first diaper change. What if that never happens? I actually don't even recall kids talking about opposite sex genitalia in school until the third grade so, were it not for having a younger sister, I'd have been clueless up until that point.

Of course, before that "epiphany," you're probably going to think that the difference between boys and girls is how one behaves and dresses... which then means that you're going to believe that it's possible to become the opposite sex by altering your behavior and appearance.

sandsjames
11-18-2015, 01:00 PM
His post began with "perhaps" and ended with three question marks. In other words, he wasn't trying to make a factual statement.

The more likely scenario is that parents are subjecting themselves to their children's whims, and going along with whatever they call themselves at the time instead of enforcing what they are. There are hundreds of pages, editorials, and blogs out there where parents flat out state this.

I don't think that most people in first world countries are even aware that there's a biological difference between boys and girls until they get a younger sibling of the opposite sex and see their first diaper change. What if that never happens? I actually don't even recall kids talking about opposite sex genitalia in school until the third grade so, were it not for having a younger sister, I'd have been clueless up until that point.

Of course, before that "epiphany," you're probably going to think that the difference between boys and girls is how one behaves and dresses... which then means that you're going to believe that it's possible to become the opposite sex by altering your behavior and appearance.

I wish I could find the link, but there was a woman (on CNN.com, I think) that did an opinion article about Bruce Jenner, talking about how she found it offensive that a guy "becomes" a women and thinks they are able to understand what it's like to be a woman. It talks about the things that women have to face throughout their lives that a transgender, even with their own struggles, can't comprehend. It was an interesting article from a point of view I haven't heard. But it basically says what you are saying, that changing behavior and appearance, and even biology/anatomy, does not make a man a woman. Pretty much comparing it to a white man/woman living and pretending to be black and understand the black experience.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-18-2015, 01:08 PM
I wish I could find the link, but there was a woman (on CNN.com, I think) that did an opinion article about Bruce Jenner, talking about how she found it offensive that a guy "becomes" a women and thinks they are able to understand what it's like to be a woman. It talks about the things that women have to face throughout their lives that a transgender, even with their own struggles, can't comprehend. It was an interesting article from a point of view I haven't heard. But it basically says what you are saying, that changing behavior and appearance, and even biology/anatomy, does not make a man a woman. Pretty much comparing it to a white man/woman living and pretending to be black and understand the black experience.

That reminded me of Rachel Dolezol. She popped up again on Bill Maher last week.


http://youtu.be/g31y9Nh1VGw

Rusty Jones
11-18-2015, 05:21 PM
I wish I could find the link, but there was a woman (on CNN.com, I think) that did an opinion article about Bruce Jenner, talking about how she found it offensive that a guy "becomes" a women and thinks they are able to understand what it's like to be a woman. It talks about the things that women have to face throughout their lives that a transgender, even with their own struggles, can't comprehend. It was an interesting article from a point of view I haven't heard. But it basically says what you are saying, that changing behavior and appearance, and even biology/anatomy, does not make a man a woman. Pretty much comparing it to a white man/woman living and pretending to be black and understand the black experience.

Well, for me, I'll respect their choices in how they identify as long as they do so as adults. It doesn't mean I'll agree with their chosen identity, but I'll refer to them as their chosen gender pronoun. Well, at least I will in their presence.

I don't believe in nurturing that from an early age. Do I believe that your child identifying with the opposite sex at the age of six really means that they're transgender or that they're homosexual, or that nurturing it will "make" them homosexual?

No, but... sometimes, I wish it did. Growing up to behave like the opposite sex while being straight at the same time... it's gotta be a hard life.

For example... I'm sure that we all know at least one butch looking/acting woman who isn't lesbian at all. She'll beat any man on the basketball court, and could probably beat most with her fists. But what man wants her? We have no problems being friends or drinking buddies with these women, but that's as far as most of us would go.

Could that be what the parents of this child are raising?

And it goes both ways, too. You raise your son to play with Barbies and all that... he might not be gay, but... he might grow up lacking the masculine qualities that women seek in a man. While I don't think Elliot Rodgers or Christoper Harper-Mercer grew up playing with Barbies, male sexual frustration can be a dangerous thing.