Federal lawsuit against religious schools, including byu - Update

[smac97]

We previously discussed this story:

Quote

As a new federal lawsuit accuses 25 religious colleges of discriminating against LGBTQ students, more plaintiffs have signed on to speak against one of those schools than any other: Brigham Young University.

“I joined this lawsuit because I didn’t want anyone else to feel how I felt there in Provo,” said Ashtin Markowski, a recent BYU graduate who is lesbian. “I was on edge, anxious all the time and afraid every day that I was going to be kicked out for being myself.”

Markowski is one of three former students from BYU’s campuses in Utah and Idaho who are part of the case, which targets practices such as disciplining and sometimes expelling those who are openly queer.

It looks like Ashtin filed a separate lawsuit against BYU in federal court in Utah.  Yesterday the federal court granted summary judgment in favor of BYU:

https://reason.com/volokh/2022/02/11/mormon-missionary-training-insufficiently-feminine-haircuts-and-the-first-amendment/

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.utd.123259/gov.uscourts.utd.123259.17.0.pdf

From the court's decision:

Quote

On November 6, 2017, BYU hired Plaintiff Ashtin Markowski (“Markowski”) as a trainer at the MTC’s Online Teaching Center. Markowski trained full-time missionaries in how to respond to online inquiries about the Church and how to use their social media to have discussions with people interested in learning more about the Church. Markowski also piloted new online engagement projects. 

All MTC employees, including Markowski, must comply with the Church’s Missionary Dress and Grooming Standards. On April 3, 2020, Markowski cut her hair short. Six weeks later, Markowski’s supervisors informed her that they considered her haircut to be extreme and distracting. Her supervisors informed her that her haircut was “not feminine enough” and “was too masculine.” ECF No. 7 ¶ 10. They also complained that her eyebrows were “too firm.” Id.  Markowski indicated that she did not want her haircut to jeopardize her ability to work at the MTC and agreed to grow her hair out. The next day, Markowski’s supervisors fired her. 

Markowski filed a complaint with the EEOC and the EEOC issued Markowski a Right to Sue Letter. Markowski brings two claims in this court. First, Markowski accuses BYU of sex discrimination in violation of Title VII. Second, Markowski also claims that BYU retaliated against her for complaining to supervisors that BYU applied a double standard in deeming her hairstyle “extreme” while allowing male employees to wear bleached hair. 

BYU's legal argument is interesting.  It argued Markowski fell within the "Ministerial Exception" to Title VII.  Title VII bars discrimination on the basis of sex, which discrimination can include "failing to fulfill traditional sex stereotypes."  However, an exception to Title VII applies to preclude its enforcement against religious institutions' employment decisions regarding "ministers."  This exception is based on constitutional grounds. 

The federal court found that Markowski's employment at the MTC fell within this exception based on the nature of the work she did, her own statements, etc.  The court found that "she played a vital role in advancing the religious mission of BYU—her claim fails under the ministerial exception" because her duties were "explicitly religious in nature and reflected a role in
conveying the Church’s message and carrying out its mission."

I think this is Ashtin:

I am saddened to see her estranged from the Church, but I think the above is fairly dissembling.  She knew all about the Honor Code prior to attending BYU.  That she chose to violate the Honor Code and was therefore "worr{ied}" about being caught is rather problematic.

Anyway, I think the federal court got the law right.

Thanks,

-Smac

[JAHS]

She explained things in her own words here (see link).  She said that cutting her hair made her feel more at peace with herself. How does shorter hair do that for a gay woman?

https://fb.watch/b6KjRB8yhY/

Edited February 12, 2022 by JAHS

[Calm]

25 minutes ago, JAHS said:

She said that cutting her hair made her feel more at peace with herself. How does shorter hair do that for a gay woman?

Shorter hair gives me more peace, so nice not to have to fuss and I don’t wake up feeling like my head is soaking wet and it does at times feel weird that it is shorter than some men’s typical haircuts when I get aggressive (cut it myself, it grows fast enough I just take a razor to it if I am really in a hurry).  It is quite liberating to cut several inches off, but I don’t associate it with gender.  I have associated it with not letting others dictate to me how I should look when younger…shocked a few people when I went from hip long to not needing to even run a comb through it.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Calm

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

She explained things in her own words here (see link).  She said that cutting her hair made her feel more at peace with herself. How does shorter hair do that for a gay woman?

https://fb.watch/b6KjRB8yhY/

When I hear that used it can often mean that the outside matches the way that they see themselves on the inside.

[JustAnAustralian]

How does title VII interact with title IX?

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

......................

BYU's legal argument is interesting.  It argued Markowski fell within the "Ministerial Exception" to Title VII.  Title VII bars discrimination on the basis of sex, which discrimination can include "failing to fulfill traditional sex stereotypes."  However, an exception to Title VII applies to preclude its enforcement against religious institutions' employment decisions regarding "ministers."  This exception is based on constitutional grounds. 

............................

.................  She knew all about the Honor Code prior to attending BYU.  That she chose to violate the Honor Code and was therefore "worr{ied}" about being caught is rather problematic..................

Seems to me less of an "Honor Code" issue, and more of a ministerial exception which was operative here.  Would it have mattered in the "Honor Code" if she had gotten a short haircut simply as a student not working for the MTC?

[Thinking]

Quote

On April 3, 2020, Markowski cut her hair short. Six weeks later, Markowski’s supervisors informed her that they considered her haircut to be extreme and distracting. Her supervisors informed her that her haircut was “not feminine enough” and “was too masculine.” ECF No. 7 ¶ 10. They also complained that her eyebrows were “too firm.”

Cheryl A. Esplin could have shown her how to have a short feminine haircut.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2010/05/news-of-the-church/cheryl-a-esplin?lang=eng

Eyebrows too firm?

No. Words.

[Calm]

9 hours ago, Thinking said:

Eyebrows too firm?

No. Words.

I want to know if her supervisors were male or female…and have an urge to get the tweezers out.(not for me, for the supervisors)

I think I am probably a bit shorter on top, but longer on the sides….but only because doing it myself I can’t get the angle right for both sides.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Calm

[smac97]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Seems to me less of an "Honor Code" issue, and more of a ministerial exception which was operative here. 

Yes, I should have re-named the thread.  I saw the jpeg of Ashtin (which pertains to the Honor Code) and added it as an afterthought to the story about the lawsuit.

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Would it have mattered in the "Honor Code" if she had gotten a short haircut simply as a student not working for the MTC?

I don't think so.

Thanks,

-Smac

[provoman]

On 2/11/2022 at 9:19 PM, Thinking said:

Cheryl A. Esplin could have shown her how to have a short feminine haircut.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2010/05/news-of-the-church/cheryl-a-esplin?lang=eng

Eyebrows too firm?

No. Words.

What is “feminine” - seems to me most things masculine or feminine are artificial constructs humanity has imposed on itself, also seems that imposition was for subjugation. 
 

Your point is was well made though.

We have teenage priesthood saying “all the pictures of Jesus show Hime with long hair”

And then Sister missionaries going to their mission President “Sisters x, y, z, who spoke in General Conference, or teach at the MTC have a short haircut”

[Tacenda]

I went to a performance last night that I've never been more moved. It was called, "Considering Matthew Shepard" put on by the Salt Lake Choral Artists. I've never seen a more powerful performance. And a reminder of how far we've come and how far we need to go to beat this stigma that causes so much harm, and many deaths. @bluebelldo you remember this back in 1998? It happened in Laramie, Wyoming.

This isn't what I watched last night, but the same program outline and different performers. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72QZJ-uJFKk

 

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I went to a performance last night that I've never been more moved. It was called, "Considering Matthew Shepard" put on by the Salt Lake Choral Artists. I've never seen a more powerful performance. And a reminder of how far we've come and how far we need to go to beat this stigma that causes so much harm, and many deaths. @bluebelldo you remember this back in 1998? It happened in Laramie, Wyoming.

This isn't what I watched last night, but the same program outline and different performers. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72QZJ-uJFKk

 

I do remember it.  I was in college myself at the time, and even though Laramie is pretty far from where I grew up and was living (about 6 hours or 380 miles), it was still a very big deal and a heartbreaking tragedy.