For kim wood only
Ali-G
paper_for_kim.docxTopics for the individual essay
Choose one of the three topics.
Formulate your answer, to the question presented in the topic you chose, in the form of a thesis. Advance your thesis in the introductory paragraph, explaining by what means you are going to demonstrate your case. In the following paragraphs, lay out the reasons to support of your answer. After displaying your argument, bring up an objection to one or more of the reasons you presented. That objection should also come in a form of a well-reasoned argument. That is to say, tell the reader (me) what is the main point of the objection and then present reasons for anyone to consider that objection seriously. Finally, rebuttal: reply to the objection, explaining why the reader should accept your reasoning despite the objection. Maximum number of words: 1200.
Any quote, paraphrase or summary of external source (including the textbook and instructor's notes) requires citation in text (name of the author, year of publication and, in case of a book or an article, page number), and a complete citation at the end of the essay. You can use APA, MLA, or Chicago style, so long as you use only one particular style. Reminder: using external sources without reference constitute plagiarism. Do not use Wikipedia as a source in your writing.
1. Oiler v. Winn-Dixie Peter Oiler was a truck driver for Winn-Dixie, having begun working for that company in 1979. Oiler approached management in November, 2000 regarding rumours that were swirling in the company that he was gay. Oiler's supervisor attached the company's sexual orientation non-discrimination policy to everyone's paycheck. During a review Oiler's supervisor asked him if the rumours about his sexual orientation had stopped. Oiler said they had. Oiler's supervisor then asked why the rumours as to his sexuality bothered him. Oiler responded "Because I'm not gay. I'm transgendered. "Oiler's supervisor discussed the matter with upper management. Shortly thereafter he asked Oiler to resign. Oiler refused. On January 5, 2001, nearly two months later, Winn-Dixie fired him. The reason given by Winn-Dixie was that Oiler had publicly adopted a female persona and publicly cross-dressed as a woman, and Winn-Dixie believed that if Oiler were recognized by Winn-Dixie customers as a cross-dresser, customers would disapprove of plaintiff's lifestyle and Winn-Dixie would lose business as a result.
Oiler sued Winn-Dixie alleging sex discrimination prohibited by Title VII. Oiler argued that terminating him for his off-duty acts of cross-dressing and impersonating a woman was a form of sexual stereotyping which is prohibited by Title VII. In other words, Winn-Dixie's stereotypical notion of a male was one that did not engage in cross-dressing or role-playing as a woman. Oiler also argued that he was a victim of disparate treatment because women who dressed as men were not terminated by Winn-Dixie. The Louisiana Court dismissed Oiler’s case, explaining that sexual discrimination cases include only gender discrimination, or discrimination based on sexual orientation. Since Oiler did not have any intention to change his gender and since Oiler is not gay, his case does not fall under any of the aforementioned categories.
Was the Winn-Dixie management morally justified in firing Oiler?
