This disgusts me.
The right to blog and the right to remain private or face consequences because of a blog or MySpace page is coming into sharper focus in Amarillo after Tejas Broadcasting officials fired a KBZD Energy 99.7 disc jockey Monday morning for sexual content on a MySpace page created for the station and on another for himself the company said was “inappropriate and inconsistent” with the company’s policies.
[...]
Vicki Wilmarth, an Amarillo attorney who specializes in employment law, said this was the first instance that an employer-employee conflict concerning a MySpace page had erupted so publicly in Amarillo.
For Wilmarth, the debate centers on two issues.
The first, she said, was Pascullo can’t claim that anything he posts on the Internet is private.
“(Employers) have a right to look on the Internet just like anyone else,” Wilmarth said.
The second issue is that homosexuality isn’t a protected class for discrimination.
“They are not breaking any law by discriminating against somebody on the basis of their homosexuality,” Wilmarth said. [Link]
First off - she’s right. Employers do have that right, and I’ve personally used it when doing hiring evaluations. I google people’s name, and see what comes up. More often than not, they have already given me their website address on a resume, but I always like to check to see what’s out there, especially if I’m looking for skills related to web design.
Second off - she’s right again. In most states it is still completely legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity. There are only NINE states that protect GLBT employees. That’s right, NINE. You can be a superior employee, and be fired just because you are gay, whether it has anything to do with your job or not. Comforting isn’t it? For those of you who live in the multitude of states that permit that…what are you doing there??

Third off - apparently saying you are gay is now “sexual content”. But I suppose for all those folks on myspace.com who have “straight” listed as sexual orientation, that has no sexual connotation at all, so we can just ignore them. But if it says anything else, bi, gay, questioning, unsure, well then we better just fire them because that’s naughty and perverted and condoning sex! (Can’t we take the sexual out of homo, and hetero, and bi?)
Fourth off - he wasn’t flashing about his naughty bits on myspace, and he wasn’t soliciting people for sex. Did they actually READ the profile? The news/media seems to be able to report the “concerning” text of the profile, and there’s nothing there that’s all that troublesome, but then I forget…we certainly wouldn’t want the good god fearing citizens of the planet to have impure thoughts, now would we?
I’ll let you in on a little secret…I’m having an impure thought about this stuff right now and it has nothing to do with the word “gay“.





