In what can only be seen as a lesson in discrimination, Spring Arbor, a private Christian university has fired a male teacher for showing up as a woman.
What I find amusing is the school’s policy:
“We expect our faculty to model Christian character as an example for our students.”
So what is a model Christian character? Is it discriminating against a veteran professor that has taught thousands of students over the course of 16 years? Or maybe it’s taking action against someone and not engaging him or her in conversation to try and understand his or her differences.
I know people reading this will say that this is a private institution and they can do whatever they please. In the past I would have agreed, but the bigotry and hatred that this breeds is out of control and damaging to society.
Christians should see this as an opportunity to question their beliefs and priorities. Seriously, this focus on sexual discrimination is tired and it pains me to keep reporting it. But I will keep reporting it till some Christian can justify these unJesus-like Christian beliefs.
Thanks go out to Headline Junky for the scoop. If you haven’t seen their site, go check it out!
Related posts:
- Catholic University Girls Gone Wild
- Muslim-Only Bathrooms In La Trobe University
- America Not A Christian Nation
- Christian Hypocrites Attack Ford
- Katherine Harris, Christian Freak Or MILF?
February 5th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
While it is a stupid idea it is clear why they are doing it, a Christian university cannot have Professors that believe in such wild ideas as science!
February 6th, 2007 at 10:06 am
Um, from what I read in the article he signed a contract that expressly forbids him coming to campus as a woman.
I think that he is an idiot for signing a contract that made his lifestyle choice clash with his employer’s policy.
Gasmonso: I think that this is a clear cut case of employee idiocy.
D-H: This has nothing to do with science or secularism. it is a contract breach plain and simple.
February 6th, 2007 at 10:17 am
I can’t believe I am about to say this (I have been hanging out here for a little while now and some may remember that I am absolutely an atheist) but… I agree with the school.
It is a private CHRISTIAN university. I am pretty sure the bible takes a dim view on changing your gender since god made you the way you are and god does NOT make mistakes right? By changing your gender you are saying god made you a man when you should have been a woman, thus making a mistake.
As stated, they are a private university. They are free to teach what they want (assuming they have to meet certain math, etc guidelines as well) and can run their organization however they want. Since this transgender thing runs contrary to their primary belief it only makes sense to get rid of him. I am sorry folks, I said him because I do not believe in this changing of gender personally. I am not against it by any means, its your body, mutilate it as you will, but if you are born a man you will genetically remain a man forever. He will always be a he, no matter how she he may look.
February 6th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Michael: They are a private university. There are no requirements as to what they teach. Only if they care about accreditation are there any requirements as to curriculum.
February 6th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Jew_boy_420: You basically just repeated what I said. I don’t understand, were you trying to “educate me” by repeating what I said?
February 6th, 2007 at 10:55 am
Not so fast guys. In the article it claims that Nemecek had violated an “updated” contract that included a ban on appearing as a woman on campus or in the town of Spring Arbor, a city of 2,200 located 95 miles west of Detroit.
That to me seems like they added it in just to go after him personally. It was not part of their original policy. They just updated it because the school didn’t approve of his actions. I think this leaves the debate open.
gasmonso
February 6th, 2007 at 10:59 am
Hello Michael,
I was originally going to post a similar comment to yours (#3), but than I had reservations. What if this private institution instead refused employment to someone who is black based on some twisted interpretation of Christianity? Is it permissible to discriminate then? If not, what is qualitatively different between having a minority skin color and a minority gender identification?
Now I’m not sure what to think about this case. To what extent should private institutions be permitted to self-determine employment criteria?
February 6th, 2007 at 11:06 am
But being black is not a choice. Having gender reassignment surgery is. And the contract is an updated one as G pointed out, but I would think he still would have had to sign it. As it is it sounds like they gave him adequate time to find other employment by letting him teach classes online for a year.
I’m interested in what is “un-Jesus like” about what the school did.
February 6th, 2007 at 11:26 am
That’s a fair point, Scott, but gender identity is not always a choice. If they school forbade it’s employees to undergo gender reassignment surgery, that would be one thing. My guess is that the surgery is not what the school was objecting to. I could be wrong on this, but I think they object to the idea that someone with a male body would believe that they are mentally a female. If that is the case, then the school made an employment decision based on something that the employee did not choose: being born with the wrong body.
February 6th, 2007 at 11:27 am
In principle alleviating the suffering of transgender people and allowing them whatever operation they want and a normal place in society is good.
However, I think this transgender thing is a disease, regardless of whether it’s mental, congenital or genetic. I understand people not being comfortable having them as teachers or role models. In this case I agree with the outcome, even if it’s for the wrong (religious) reasons.
February 6th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Sidfaiwu, while I read your response I was reminded of my own internal conflict over that same question. I had not come up with a resolution, but Scott’s followup comment really does go a long way to doing that. I hadn’t thought of that aspect.
Gasmonso, I see your point but I still disagree. Perhaps they had not forseen the possibility of one of their teachers going transgender. Places update their contracts to address unforseen circumstances all the time.
On the issue of discrimination. Discrimination is not all bad! We discriminate all the time. We discriminate when we decide we want pizza instead of hamburgers, and we discriminate when we decide we don’t want a convicted child molester babysitting our kids. Yes, of course those are exaggerated examples. I chose those for effect. I am just saying the word discrimination has gained a power way beyond what it should have, and we have given it the power.
The libertarian in me wants the discrimination laws gone and people to be civilized freaking human beings and make the choice on their own to not be racist asshats. The realist in me realizes that because people will remain racist asshats the discrimination laws have to stay. Because of this, people can use the word discrimination whenever they feel they can use it to get what they want, even if it means trampling all over someone else’s beliefs. So yes, it is discrimination, but in this case I feel it is justified.
This kind of discussion could go on forever, and is interesting. Maybe we should move this over to the forum?
February 6th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
The forum’s been defunct since the attack. Any chance of it’s return, gasmonso?
February 6th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Indeed the forum has been removed for now. That was one of the holes in security. It provided a nice big whole for the hackers to walk through :(
I am looking at other forum packages because I see value in them. However, this site is under attack every day. I can’t afford to install any software that leaves me vulnerable.
If any of you guys have suggestions for forums software, please let me know. But remember, as soon I launch it, the hackers will come. That I can guarantee :(
gasmonso
February 6th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
If you want a secure forum, I can recommend to you MyBB, it’s much more secure than phpBB. I don’t think you can integrate it into your CMS though.
February 6th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Oh boy Spring Arbor University! That’s one of local “higher education” schools near me. It’s ultra-fundie as you can tell from the article. They had this story on the front page of my local paper the other day.
Anyway I’ve know people who went there. The students can be expelled for smoking and drinking even if they are of legal age and off campus and for having sex (if they aren’t married). My wife works with a guy that him and his g/f got expelled because she ended up pregnant. Two of my former bosses graduated from there and were always talking about religion at work and doing favors for the school all the time. Though to their credit they were open minded about hiring gay people and what not. One of the bosses said he had to email his wife, best friend, and pastor whenever he would look at porn because he was a recovering porn addict. LOL!
Ryan
February 6th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
“Hi, I’m Mike and I am a porn addict. I have have been boobie free for 3 days. Okay, I mean 3 hours but who is counting? I got addicted to porn before I knew that the sweet baby Jesus would be offended by pictures of his daddy’s most beautiful creations doing the nasty from all different angles. My pastor is my sponsor as he is immune to the draw of the naked boobie. For some reason he has lots of photos of the cub scout pool party though…”
Sorry, couldn’t resist. The thought of emailing my wife, best friend, and pastor every time I looked at porn made me laugh. The ISP would shut me down as a suspected porn spammer. Of course I would also have to find a pastor which means believing in that whole Jesus thing. And I would have to have a wife and best friend that wouldn’t ask to include links and any videos I downloaded as attachments for their own enjoyment. God it is good to be unencumbered by belief in a deity. Having a porn addict wife is good too…
February 6th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
“If that is the case, then the school made an employment decision based on something that the employee did not choose: being born with the wrong body.”
Actually it sounds like they made the decision based on someone coming to work dressed as a woman. If the school is as fundie as |Tch0rT| says then this man knew that they wouldn’t be “understanding” or interested in “diversity” which leads me to think that as soon as he had a clue that he was in the “wrong body” (an idea I find a bit laughable) then he should have started looking for more liberal Christian institutions. I’ve no doubt that he’s find one or two that would practically beg him to come on so that they could show how liberal they were.
February 6th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
I think you are probably right, Scott. It was the fact that he dressed as a women that gave the university fits.
I wouldn’t be so quick to laugh at someone believing they are in the “wrong body”. It is exactly how some trans gendered individuals describe their predicament. Some were born as hermaphrodites and their parents decided that they will raise their child as a girl (and had him/her undergo surgery to MAKE them female). I know that it’s not the norm for trans gendered people, but it does lend some credibility to feeling of being in the ‘wrong body’.
February 6th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Yea but that feeling that they are in the wrong body is a mental illness, this begs the question: Is it appropriate to hire mentally ill people to teach? Once you learn that a teacher is mentally ill is it appropriate to remove them? I feel that if the illness affects their ability to teach then, yes. A dude dressing up as a woman and trying to teach at a fundie university definitely seems to be contrary to their interests.
February 7th, 2007 at 11:32 am
Michael, I was just point out that there are NO real requirements on any higher learning institution.
Sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way it was not intentional.
Gasmonso> vBulletin is pretty nice, not sure about the hackproofiness of it though.
February 7th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Hello jew_boy_420,
While there are no absolute requirements on any higher learning institution, there are requirements if that institution wants to be accredited in the US. Accreditation is required if degrees conferred by the schools are to be taken seriously by employers and other institutions.
February 7th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
” Some were born as hermaphrodites and their parents decided that they will raise their child as a girl (and had him/her undergo surgery to MAKE them female).”
This is not a case of them being born in the wrong body, but rather a case of them being mutilated and that can have PROFOUND ill effects.
“that feeling that they are in the wrong body is a mental illness”
I wouldn’t go that far. Not too long ago it was said that being gay was a mental illness. Would you agree with that? Why or why not?
February 7th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Hello Scott,
You’ve had some fantastic and challenging post recently. Please, keep them coming!
The point with the hermaphrodite was more to indicate that the shape of one’s body doesn’t always match with one’s mental gender identity, albeit somewhat artificial in the example I gave. In fact, the very existence of people with both/neither sets of sexual organs demonstrate that human sexuality isn’t as binary as we’d like it to be. Is it really out of the realm of possibility for a small minority of humans to be born with a male body and a ‘female brain’ or visa versa?
Anyway, I was only casting doubt on the belief that transgenderism is always a choice. Supposing, just for a moment, that it is not a choice, would that minority be worthy of protection from discrimination? My gut is saying ‘no’, but I cannot think of a rational justification for why not (my gut has been wrong before). Since I don’t think it’s always a choice, that reason does not suffice. Any other thoughts?
February 7th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
So here’s a question for you, where does gender identitiy come from? I don’t think it’s innate necessarily. I’ve always erred more on the side of nurture, so you are largely what you’ve been raised to think you are. Of course there’s more to that than your parents. I’d say that if you run into a person that has gender ID issues serious enough to warrant what I’d view as mutilation, it’s not a case of them being in the wrong body, but rather them having had an unfortunate experience in their past. I don’t have any data to back that up though, just a “gut” thing.
I definitely agree that gender id isn’t binary. In my relationship with my wife I fill some of the “female” roles/tendencies and she fills some of the “male”. A shallow example of this is that I’m the sports widow.
And while transgenderism and homosexuality probably aren’t “choices”, ie they didn’t wake up one day and say I want to be “x” I don’t know that that should always exempt them from this sort of discrimination. Why would a homosexual or transgender person want to work where they weren’t wanted even if they could? And why should the gov’t force these organizations to employ them?
February 7th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
Oh and thanks, I’m only as good as my company and sometimes not even that good.
February 8th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Hello Scott,
I’m come down more often on the side of nature. Here is a website about recent nueroscience research that show that men and women physically different brains. This suggests that gender identity is derived from what kind of brain one has. They also point out that “…gender differences are already apparent from just a few months after birth, when social influence is still small,” so nurture isn’t the cause of these difference.
I think agree with you, though. I don’t know what this person was expecting. She was working for an institution she knew wouldn’t except who she is. This sort of reminds me of another story ran on RF awhile back about the Jehovah’s Witness who knew she’d be unable to fulfill all the duties required of her by the job when she signed up.
In my internal debate, I think the libertarian in me has won. The private institution should be permitted to make such choices. Similarly, we, and others, are free to criticize their decision as closed-minded and/or bigoted.