Over

the last decade, our laws and our social norms have changed such that homosexuality is accepted more and more by society. Connecticut was one of the first states to allow same-sex marriage. Under Connecticuts anti-discrimination laws, sexual orientation is a protected class. That means that a person cannot suffer discrimination at his workplace because of his sexual orientation. But even though society in general has become more accepting of homosexuality, not everyone has converted. So we still see discrimination, bullying, and violent behavior towards homosexual and transgender individuals. While we have come a long way, we have not come all the way in terms of acceptance. Still, many homosexual and transgender people feel safer in the workplace and in society as they embrace their sexuality and their personhood. However they can still face scrutiny, ostracism, discrimination, and retaliation by some who are opposed to homosexuality or somehow threatened by it. A recent case from Groton illustrates what some people still face. A homosexual man had been hired by the Groton Board of Education to teach at the towns high school. While he worked there, the court found that he was subjected to numerous offensive remarks, comments and drawings by a fellow teacher, supervisor, and school resource officer. The derisive comments and drawings were made in front of other teachers and students. The plaintiffs supervisor complained to a fellow faculty member that the plaintiff was too flaming and too flamboyant, echoing sentiments more likely to have been felt and voiced by Archie Bunker from an episode of All in the Family a generation ago. A fellow teacher said that he was so overdramatic and used a slur to describe his behavior to a fellow teacher. In order to disguise their disdain for the plaintiff based upon his sexual orientation, the supervisor and fellow teachers claimed that the plaintiff was not a team player, and that his sarcasm and attempts at humor were not understandable by fellow faculty members. The supervisor said that this lack of understanding stemmed from their divergent social views and pervasive stereotypes on gender and sexuality. Ultimately the discord became too great and the plaintiff was fired by the school board. The plaintiff sued the school board claiming that he was discriminated against based not only on his sexual orientation, which was clearly an issue for his fellow faculty members, but also on his gender due to the stereotypes which the school projected onto him. Essentially his argument was this. The school expected males to act in a typically masculine way. When he failed to meet that stereotype, acting in a flaming or flamboyant, or overly-dramatic way he became the subject of discriminatory treatment. But can stereotyping by a supervisor or an employer be the basis for a sex discrimination claim? According to the trial court, the answer was yes. Acknowledging federal protections against sex and gender discrimination, the court said that Congress intended to strike at the entire spectrum of disparate

treatment of men and women resulting from sex stereotypes. As a result, sex stereotyping by an employer based on a persons gender non-conforming behavior is impermissible discrimination. The bottom line is that employers have to do for their employees what The Beatles sang about fifty years ago. Let [them] be, let [them] be. Eric Brown is an attorney from Waterbury. He can be reached at 203-676- 9110 or on the web at www.TheLaborLawyer.com.