Unlike sexual orientation, being a sexual assaulter is not a protected class.

Oi this is the shit republicans use for that cake argument: “A jew shouldn’t be forced to design posters for neo-nazi groups” but at the end of the day you’re saying “Jew:neo-nazi” as “Christian:two gay people in love”.

There is something especially gross about the fact that this is Trump and that a group of women are being essentially forced to do something they don’t want to do for his benefit, isn’t there? I mean, I understand the whole “this is your job, and you have an obligation” and whatnot, but the the idea of the…

If Hillary had won she wouldn’t haven’t needed to do this. People would have been lining around the block to play for her inauguration. Who wouldn’t want to perform for the the inauguration for the first woman president of the United States? You would have made the history books.

This. Thank you. It’s not business as usual and a bunch of us need to pull our fingers out of our ears and asses and realize that.

This is something more. To pretend it’s business as usual is wrong of you.

Most employers will make reasonable accommodations for employees that feel deeply uncomfortable with a situation their employment puts them in. I was being cornered by a creep at the library I worked at. When I finally got up the guts to tell my boss the response wasn’t “well deal with it or quit.”

For the expert level fuckwits who keep commenting on this, saying stupid shit like “they can quit” and “contracts!” You are missing the point. These women have publicly stated they do not want to perform under these circumstances and are publicly being told they must. This is, as I said, not a good look.

Trump is not in a class in need of legal protection from discrimination, such as gay people or women. He is simply a horrible man who stole the election by hook or by crook.

Not when he says he has the right to inspect naked women changing in dressing rooms.

But he’s not just ‘someone they hate’. He’s a tyrant who will be celebrating the start of his term as President of this country. That makes a difference. Forcing citizens to perform at an explicitly partisan, political event in honor of a man who is dangerous for humanity crosses a line. Yes, we can hide behind labor…

If what Sobchak says is correct (that they can’t be sued), then I agree that it isn’t a great injustice, and they should do their job or quit. But RC does have an obligation (moral, if not legal) to take steps to protect them from a client who brags about sexually assaulting women, since RC is the one putting them in…

Thanks for this. I just emailed the following, so anyone can feel free to borrow/paraphrase:

Agreed, I would just think that their contract would have some type of out clause whereby the women would not have to perform for an admitted serial sexual assaulter.

So the owners aren’t thinking beyond Jan 20th? Because this sounds like a terrible business decision. On top of the appalling treatment of women on behalf of a man who has shown he has no respect or care for women, who aren’t his daughter Ivanka.

Forced labor is not a good look for a supposedly “free country.”

And the Rockettes’ red glares....

“Forcing dozens of women to go and perform for this man is without a question going to be problematic.”

Already forcing women to do something with their bodies against their will, and he’s not even president yet.