No, what she told the interviewer does not indicate why she would not shake his hand. That is information the interviewer did not have when he told her to leave, and which we gained at a later date.
"Stay on target... stay on target..."She does not shake hands with men because of her religion. She does not shake hands with women because she wants to treat everyone equally.
She won't shake his hand because he is a man, she wouldn't shake a womans hand either because she wants to treat people equally.
Those are her motivations.
"It's a hit!"In truth, Farah wouldn't shake his hand because she doesn't shake the hands of anyone, man or woman. She doesn't shake the hands of anyone because she believes her religion proscribes physical contact between individuals of the opposite sex that are not married to each other, and she doesn't want to act in a manner that would appear to be discriminatory.
The AND there is precisely the point. She has different motivations for why she won't shake a mans hand why she wont shake a womans hand. One is based in sexism.
"Negative. It didn't go in. It just impacted the surface"
As I have gone over multiple times, her reason for not shaking mens hands is rooted in prudishness, not sexism.
No, that isn't in dispute. The case has already been settled. Do try to keep up.However, whether or not she referenced or alluded to her egalitarian greeting mannerisms is irrelevant, because it doesn't change the fact that she was discriminated against.
That fact is precisely what we're disputing.
Throwing someone out of an interview because of assumption you have made of them, and with no attempts to discover whether or not your assumptions are actually true, is absolutely being an asshole.Even if she told me that she greeted men and women differently, and I thought that would be a violation of the anti-discrimination policies, I would simply inform her that (if hired) the company might require her to use a single form of greeting for all clients. Problem solved, disaster averted, pack it up motherfuckers I just saved the goddamn world! And I wasn't an asshole about it!
It's not being an asshole to conclude someone is not worth your time on the basis of them signalling sexist attitudes. He simply declined to have as high a standard of evidence as you or I would require before writing someone off.
The court says you're wrong.Your victim blaming is completely ridiculous.
She isn't a victim. She communicated an idea. He received and understood that communication. He decided from that evidence to dismiss her.
No, you fucking haven't. I know because I searched your posts.And where's your outrage about Mike Pence's more overtly prudish beliefs and behaviour?
He shouldn't do what he's doing and i've said as much before. Where's the thread on it? I can show you my outrage