<-- HitTail.com code -->

Blogger News Network

BNN provides English-language US and world news, analysis and opinion from all over the Internet. We strive for high standards, ethical behavior, and the presentation of multiple responsible points of view.

Visiting our advertisers directly supports this site. Thanks!

Get More Traffic For Your Blog!

Blog Explosion brings hundreds of interested visitors to your blog - without costing you a cent.

BNN News Archive Page

Friday, April 21, 2006

Imagine Your Byline Here - Click Here To Write For BNN

Update: Amaani Lyle

Three Strikes, She's Out?

Amaani Lyle lost in court again. Maybe -- just maybe -- she'll shut the hell up now. I first wrote about Amaani almost two years ago. Here's her story:

Six years ago, Amaani was fired from her job transcribing for the television series "Friends."

When she was hired as a writer's assistant, she was warned that sexually explicit discussions were part of developing the plotlines and scripts for the show, that frank and potentially offensive discussions were standard in the writer's room, and that she would be privy to raunchy chatter. She claimed she had no problem with this sort of material.

She was fired after four months on the job, because she could not transcribe meetings fast enough or accurately 'capture the flavor' of the meetings. Because of her inability, Warner Bros. producers credited her with the fact that several potential plotlines fell through the cracks.

She first filed suit against Warner Bros. Television Productions and writer-producers Adam Chase, Gregory Malins and Andrew Reich, in October of 2000, claiming she was discriminated against on the basis of race and gender because she was exposed to lewd and bigoted jokes during the writing process. Not that the jokes were directed at her -- they weren't -- but she was "forced" to be in the room when they were told. Lyle said she was also offended by repeated references to the actors' sex lives and to the writers' own sexual exploits as they penned banter for "Friends." She was tired of repeated profanity, talk about women's breasts and simulated masturbation.

The writers maintained that the overt talk was all part of working on a show that was, after all, about the sex lives of amorous adults. Warner Brothers reminded that she'd been duly warned before she ever took the job. And, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled against Amaani, calling the suit "frivolous" and awarding the defendants $400,000 in attorneys' fees. (Score one for the good guys.)

In 2004, the state appellate court reinstated the case on the basis that the original judge's explanation for dismissing the lawsuit -- that the language was simply part of the creative process -- insufficiently addressed the sexual harassment claim. That sent it to the state supreme court, which then reviewed only the sexual harassment claims and found them lacking merit.

In a unanimous ruling, the court's seven justices dismissed Amaani Lyle's claims, saying the raunchy and profanity-laced backstage discussions were all part of the creative process, particularly for a show revolving around the sex lives of twentysomething New Yorkers.

"The record discloses that most of the sexually coarse and vulgar language at issue did not involve and was not aimed at plaintiff or other women in the workplace," Justice Marvin Baxter wrote in the ruling. He further noted that the Friends set was, and expectantly so, "a creative workplace focused on generating scripts for an adult-oriented comic show featuring sexual themes."

The bawdy banter, the justices claimed, was a necessary byproduct of their job.

The case "has very little to do with sexual harassment and very much to do with core First Amendment rights," Justice Ming W. Chin said. "Lawsuits like this one, directed at restricting the creative process in a workplace whose very business is speech related, present a clear and present danger to fundamental free speech rights."

Game, set, match. This is all so simple -- if you get hired to type plot discussions for a semi-dirty show, and then get peeved because you're exposed to semi-dirty discussion, you really have no one but yourself to blame for the position you've found yourself in.

It's like going to model for Victoria's Secret and then getting mad because they ask you to model lingerie. Or being asked to pose for Playboy and then being shocked when they expect you to take your clothes off. If you're offended by this sort of thing, don't do it and you won't be offended! See how nicely that works out?

Wonder how long before she appeals it? If she refiles this case, they oughta be allowed to sue her for harassment. [Google It!, AP Wire/Mercury News, E-Online]

Kate blogs at The Original Musings.

Blogger News Network is advertiser-supported, and your visits to our advertisers help BNN to meet its expenses. Help keep us afloat!

posted by Kate at 1:11 AM