Britain’s Court of Appeal overturned a lower court's ruling already having decided that a certain guy, Stephen English, was not entitled to file a homophobic harassment charge against his former employer because he is in fact married, ipso facto totally straight. Now though he's good to go on legally pleading his beef, so to speak.The English guy filed his original complaint alleging homo harassment that began when his co-workers discovered he had been educated at a boarding school and also that he lived in Brighton, apparently like Frisco's sister city from across the pond. Who knew about the boarding school connection, but okay, apparently the both together screaming gayest of the gay.
Anyway, somehow I find this amusing, both that this married lady-loving guy cared as much to be so offended and then quitting his job even over some name-calling and taking the matter before court in the first place.
Also that when they obviously rebuffed his hoped for ruling, to go ahead and bother bringing it on again to the higher up court for appealing. When divas don't get their way, better watch out.
He claims to having been forced to quit his job at some awning manufacturing company because they refused to shut up his fellow employees from calling him a faggot and stuff, and how that final straw was when the company’s newsletter pointed out him having attended the Brighton’s Gay Pride parade while wearing those skin-tight Lycra cycling shorts.
Okay, well ... I suppose now he will be eligible for yet another day in court after all, arguing why he should be meted out some sort of monetary reward, this straight upstanding family man having been forced out from his lucrative career in the manufacture of awnings because of ostensibly rampant albeit petty insults.
Hell, I've been called faggot before, didn't occur to me how it could have warranted quitting a job I hated anyway, in hoping for whatever sort of payoff instead. And I too was married back in those days!
Guess I just never thought to show up in Lycra shorts to any manner of public fairy parade, or I might as well have opted for trying raking in similar legal plunder. Stupid me, never with a plan until it's too late, always only in hindsight.
So best of luck, and congrats on that appeal and a second chance now for proving why the clichéd tagging costed your job and warrants financial reparation for damages, Steve. I only regret that I was not so ingenious as you way back when.
Not that it would have mattered much, my ex-wife would have ultimately ended up with it just the same after all those monthly alimony payments, me having been caught in that rather compromising position with another guy.
Just a heads up there, dude, reminder for best keeping certain things on the down low if in fact you do manage to win this next time around and want to keep some coin, you know what I mean.
Certainly not assuming anything, mind you, but I'm saying just in case. Also probably a good idea to scrap the Lycra altogether, and maybe consider moving somewhere more butch than Brighton.
As I read, I was thinking the same kind of..."Lot of trouble to go through just because someone called you a name?" "Most times" but of course not all, and I am NOT an advocate of violence either...a man would just throw a few punches and would have gotten his name in the "newsletter" that way, wouldn't have had to quit a job he hated etc.
ReplyDeleteNow to the "real story." (?) Being in the newsletter for the reasons he was? I am not gay OR male, and I think I would do something "legal" about it. Who knows. This reminds me of that comic "Bizarro World," and indeed it is, huh?
Oh, in proofreading AFTER posting (don't ask me why I do it that way sometimes if I proofread at all...) I see I didn't add after saying he wouldn't have to quit because he would have been fired I am sure.
ReplyDelete