Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Business

All-Male Iowa Supreme Court Rules Bosses Can Fire Employees for Being ‘Irresistibly Attractive’

Dec. 21, 2012 7:50pm Jason Howerton

IOWA CITY, Iowa (AP) — A dentist acted legally when he fired an assistant that he found attractive simply because he and his wife viewed the woman as a threat to their marriage, the all-male Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday.

The court ruled 7-0 that bosses can fire employees they see as an “irresistible attraction,” even if the employees have not engaged in flirtatious behavior or otherwise done anything wrong. Such firings may be unfair, but they are not unlawful discrimination under the Iowa Civil Rights Act because they are motivated by feelings and emotions, not gender, Justice Edward Mansfield wrote.

An attorney for Fort Dodge dentist James Knight said the decision, the first of its kind in Iowa, is a victory for family values because Knight fired Melissa Nelson in the interest of saving his marriage, not because she was a woman.

But Nelson’s attorney said Iowa’s all-male high court, one of only a handful in the nation, failed to recognize the discrimination that women see routinely in the workplace.

“These judges sent a message to Iowa women that they don’t think men can be held responsible for their sexual desires and that Iowa women are the ones who have to monitor and control their bosses’ sexual desires,” said attorney Paige Fiedler. “If they get out of hand, then the women can be legally fired for it.”

Nelson, 32, worked for Knight for 10 years, and he considered her a stellar worker. But in the final months of her employment, he complained that her tight clothing was distracting, once telling her that if his pants were bulging that was a sign her clothes were too revealing, according to the opinion.

He also once allegedly remarked about her infrequent sex life by saying, “that’s like having a Lamborghini in the garage and never driving it.”

Knight and Nelson — both married with children — started exchanging text messages, mostly about personal matters, such as their families. Knight’s wife, who also worked in the dental office, found out about the messages and demanded Nelson be fired. The Knights consulted with their pastor, who agreed that terminating Nelson was appropriate.

Knight fired Nelson and gave her one month’s severance. He later told Nelson’s husband that he worried he was getting too personally attached and feared he would eventually try to start an affair with her.

Nelson was stunned because she viewed the 53-year-old Knight as a father figure and had never been interested in starting a relationship, Fiedler said.

Nelson filed a lawsuit alleging gender discrimination, arguing she would not have been terminated if she was male. She did not allege sexual harassment because Knight’s conduct may not have risen to that level and didn’t particularly offend her, Fiedler said.

Knight argued Nelson was fired not because of her gender, but because her continued employment threatened his marriage. A district judge agreed, dismissing the case before trial, and the high court upheld that ruling.

Mansfield noted that Knight had an all-female workforce and Nelson was replaced by a woman.

He said the decision was in line with state and federal court rulings that found workers can be fired for relationships that cause jealousy and tension within a business owner’s family. One such case from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a business owner’s firing of a valued employee who was seen by his wife as a threat to their marriage. In that case, the fired employee had engaged in flirtatious conduct.

Mansfield said allowing Nelson’s lawsuit would stretch the definition of discrimination to allow anyone fired over a relationship to file a claim arguing they would not have been fired but for their gender.

Knight’s attorney, Stuart Cochrane, said the court got it right. The decision clarified that bosses can make decisions showing favoritism to a family member without committing discrimination; in this case, by allowing Knight to honor his wife’s wishes to fire Nelson, he said.

Knight is a very religious and moral individual, and he sincerely believed that firing Nelson would be best for all parties, he said.

“While there was really no fault on the part of Mrs. Nelson, it was just as clear the decision to terminate her was not related to the fact that she was a woman,” he said. “The motives behind Dr. Knight terminating Mrs. Nelson were quite clear: He did so to preserve his marriage.

“I don’t view this as a decision that was either pro-women or opposed to women rights at all. In my view, this was a decision that followed the appropriate case law.”

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (151)

dealer@678
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:56pm
The better looking the babe the bigger the tip. Thats my motto

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- December22
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 6:29am
  What is this feeling that people have that they are entitled to a job and can’t be fired. Anyone should be allowed to fire anyone for any reason. /
  
  Report this comment
- G-WHIZ
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 9:06am
  Ya donna wanna git raped and/or groped…donna dress lika seductive cheep hoar!
  
  Report this comment
- poorrichard09
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 9:09am
  I don’t know-if this was appealed to a higher court they might call it discrimination based on sex.
  BTW, would this apply to the male employee of a gay employer? Just askin’.
  
  Report this comment
- georgette
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 9:30am
  wait a minute…
  he went through the rigors and demands of his training, graduated, and opened a practice only to demonstrate that he has no discipline and can’t be trusted?
  
  ……………….ew.
  
  Report this comment
- Proverbs17-12NLT
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 10:34am
  This is why man invented KY jelly.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:16am
  WHAT ABOUT UGLY?
  
  Does this mean horribly ugly people can be fired too?
  
  Report this comment
- TermLimitsForCongress
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 2:24pm
  Amen – nobody has a ‘right’ to work for anyone that doesn’t want them as an employee.
  
  Report this comment
- SovereignSoul
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 10:50pm
  I hope he doesn’t have any irresistibly ‘attractive patients’
  
  Report this comment
Walkabout
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:52pm
It was the right decision. A male probably could not wear a tank top to an office setting. But a female can. & show legs, cleavage with a V neck, etc.

Of course a female boss could fire a male that was to damn attractive.

The moral of the story is dress down a little bit. Dress “grey”. Solid, stolid plain grey, dark blue are in. After all you in the information age, you are suppose to be hired for what you know not you know or who you blow. Well Monica was an exception.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:13pm
  Hahaha, you sound like the Muslims who were on trial and asked the court to force the defense attorney to wear pant suits because seeing her legs made them turned on and they wouldn’t be able to fully help in their defense in that state.
  
  Religion-Tearing away the rights of women for centuries.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:26pm
  ModerationIsBest
  Your only reply was an ad hominem attack. Answer the question below & we will see how wise you are or are not.
  ***
  A male probably could not wear a tank top to an office setting. But a female can. & show legs, cleavage with a V neck, etc. Is that fair?
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 12:22am
  @WALKABOUT
  
  Who cares whether or not it’s fair?
  
  Did the guy set a dress code and she continually disobeyed it?
  
  Maybe I missed it but I didn’t see that as part of the article.
  
  All I saw was that a guy couldn’t control his hormones because of a woman, and instead of being a man and working through it, instead decided to fire the woman.
  
  Report this comment
- survivorseed
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 5:29am
  Hey there Walkabout, you’re going to need a new name for that law and I believe Sharia is already taken
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 10:54am
  survivorseed
  Hey there Walkabout, you’re going to need a new name for that law and I believe Sharia is already taken
  ***
  No not really. The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled the firing just. There is already a name. Firing for just cause or firing for cause.
  
  Also since I have taken an even handed approach saying that men should not wear revealing or tight clothing I am on firm ground. Also since the same restriction apply to men & women, there is not Sharia about this. Try harder weak seed that will not germinate.
  
  Report this comment
- Angel_light
  Posted on December 23, 2012 at 3:28pm
  I agree with ModerationIsBest.
  
  This is so ridiculous! Just b/c a man can’t control himself does not mean a woman should get punished for what she was BORN WITH! This is so F*cked up and pathetic.
  
  Report this comment
- From Virginia
  Posted on December 23, 2012 at 8:49pm
  You libs are pathetic and I’m GLAD of this decision. It was legal precisely BECAUSE it was based on emotion and feelings.
  
  Instead of having law that is passionless and based on facts you ******** are reaping the law YOU sowed.
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:57am
  What exactly was his other choice? Just get over it? Feel uncomfortable everyday in his own business? Maybe just shut down, fire everyone, and reopen elsewhere? Should who he associates with be completely dictated by a State agency? Maybe all employees can be handed out by a State Employment Agency, and only be allowed to be terminated once the proper appeals process and bureaucratic mechanisms adhered to? The business owner’s mistake was he gave reason for firing her, rather than just telling her, “There is a personality conflict, and it is not working out.”
  
  Report this comment
hugo65hsv
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:50pm
I agree with the judges.. and call B.S. on the woman and girly men complaining about it…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ChiefGeorge
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:28pm
Its totally right and here’s why.

If lets say his thoughts of an affair were realized, his marriage would have been over and his wife would have sued for half his assets and no doubt would have gotten the home in the settlement.

Of course if she were male this would not have been an issue! She’s missing the point. She was just too dang hot to have around and that takes incredible moral character to admit and then dismiss her for his own safety.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Exrepublisheep
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:41pm
  So women should be forced to wear burkas at work?
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:10pm
  Exrepublisheep’
  The did mention tight clothing. I object to women wearing V necks. Draw line form one collar bone to the other. You shouldn’t see any skin below that in the work place, when it come to the chest.
  
  Actually I have seen a woman fired before for her tight clothes. He midriff would show from time to time as well.
  
  If women can where tight clothes, then can men wear tight clothes, cod pieces & tank tops.
  
  Just think how you would feel if your boss was gay, he promoted a guy over you who wore tight clothes. How mad would you be, if you had a better work ethic & work product? You know that is going to happen. there are dumb gay bosses just like there are dumb straight bosses.
  How would you feel if a straight boss favored a female employee even if her work was subpar compared to yours but she pretty? You know that is going ti happen & has happened. Clothes in the work place matter.
  If a person dresses conservatively & a coworker or boss can’t keep it together that is different.
  
  Also this was a small business, dentist office, & not a corporation of over 50 people.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:24pm
  Correction:
  If women can wear* tight clothes
  
  Report this comment
- Exrepublisheep
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 2:12am
  WALKABOUT, If she was aware of any dress code, if she was counseled about it before, there might be a case. This is simply a man putting his sins onto someone else, making his sins the responsibility of the female.
  
  Report this comment
- ArmedAndReallyPissed
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:38am
  EXREPUBLISHEEP : So women should be forced to wear burkas at work?…………CHIEFGEORGE says yes, unless of course they are from Israel, then they should be shot.
  
  Report this comment
Snidely
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:12pm
This just doesn’t pass the smell test. The story was probably selectively reported to sensationalize it. Although, I do think that an employer should be able to fire someone for any reason; good or bad.

The real issue here is why is the dateline Iowa City? Iowa city is 200 miles from Ft Dodge, where the incident took place, and 100 miles from Des Moines, where the Supreme Court is located.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:14pm
  Good question. Where does the AP have their bureaus? Many news organization are part of the AP or have a relationship with it. Maybe an APO reporter in Iowa city thought this was story & the AP reported in Des Moines did not? No clue.
  
  “The Associated Press is an American news agency. The AP is a cooperative owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television stations in the United States, which both contribute stories to the AP and use material written by its staff journalists. Many newspapers and broadcasters outside the United States are AP subscribers, paying a fee to use AP material without being contributing members of the cooperative.” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_press
  
  Again, I cannot answer your question & I wish I knew.
  
  Report this comment
DZ-015
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:08pm
Isn’t this the same state supreme court that decided that gay marriage had to be permitted in Iowa, no matter what the people wanted?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:17pm
  Yes, they approved gay marriage on April 3, 2009.
  
  The gays lost that day. Getting gay marriage is the climax of their culture. Denouement will be … well embarrassing. Many sheepish people will be staring intently at the ground.
  
  Report this comment
texastaximan
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:00pm
Judges got it right. In an alledgedly ‘free’ nation, you may hire or fire whomever you choose, for what ever reason you want. Simple as that. This once great nation is in her death throws now because of this constant need to be a victim and sue the crap out of the perceived victimizer. If this Dentist is such a sorry character, then ultimately his business will go bust. On the other hand, if he continues to do well and prosper, then perhaps he knows what he is doing. Once again, it’s his to decide, not the court or government of any kind.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- roscoe569
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:09pm
  Hey!you work for me! .?..You know what? I don’t. Like your ties, Yer Fired…clean out your desk
  
  Report this comment
Patriot Z
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:54pm
uggghhhh please dont put me in the position of having to defend the victocrat mentality

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
UnreconstructedLibertarian
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:52pm
These Iowa Judges have many things in common with Sharia, evidently.

Maybe next they’ll judge that “irresistably attractive” women wear burkhas to cover their “irresistability”.

I can’t believe you folks haven’t picked up on this angle yet – because that’s where its coming from.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Noah_fing-whey
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 6:20am
  Hmm…interesting thought. I was thinking more along the lines of radical feminism. These days it is impossible to trust the obvious so I’m glad you pointed that out. It’s like Christianne Ammanpour hosting a show last night on finding Noah’s Ark. I couldn’t make sense of that. Didnt see it the so don’t know how well the show was put together but Ammanpour as host seemed to make as much sense as having Jerry Sandusky hosting a special on child care. Maybe she was great but on the surface she seemed like a odd choice.
  
  Report this comment
lel2007
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:49pm
The subject is certainly a **** for jokes, but in reality it is an OUTRAGEOUS position for ANY COURT to take. These judges should be removed and dis-bared, and the hung by their neck until dead.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:21pm
  I think if a woman can wear tight clothes & a V neck showing cleavage to work, then guys can wear tank tops that show off their pecs biceps & triceps.
  If enough people act like fools, a percentage will, then we have made our bed as a society.
  
  Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:45pm
I guess Joe Jackson wasn’t on that court……

“You Gotta Look Sharp ! ”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwivI1TJCeQ

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
lel2007
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:44pm
So, who is it that determines “irresistible attraction,”. Insane. This judge should be tar, feather, then hung by his neck until dead.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- chips1
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:01pm
  If he was hung, he wouldn’t have made that decision.
  
  Report this comment
RealLiibertarian
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:42pm
Went to their pastor for business advice?? What freakin’ loons. This is what happens when the religious whackos among us give up their common sense and live by bronze age rules.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- chips1
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:10pm
  They went to their pastor for marriage advice. The government doesn’t know anything about marriage.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:14pm
  I agree. I love to see the Christians on here talk poorly about the Muslims and how they subjugate women.
  
  Then you come on here and you see lots of Christians supporting the decision.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:30pm
  ModerationIsBest
  “I agree. I love to see the Christians on here talk poorly about the Muslims and how they subjugate women.”
  ***
  There are some Muslim women who appreciate wearing the hijab. It gives them anonymity & protects them from stares. I bet there are Muslim women who wear western clothes, but there are times when they would want to wear a hijab.
  
  What I have a problem with is someone saying
  
  1. they have to wear a hijab.
  2. they can’t leave home without an male escort fro their family
  3. That they can’t drive.
  
  Take a poll on 1, 2 & 3 of Blaze Readers. The poll results won’t live up to your precious perceptions.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:37pm
  ModerationIsBest
  
  Just FTI since you are a ,low information voter (i.e. very knowledgeable about liberal positions). Females in my house hold wear bikinis & also drive. Now to make it simple for you I will draw the equivalent of a stick figure so I don’t lose you.
  
  If one of my daughters wears a bikini at a public pool, I expect guys to keep their hands to themselves or the police will be involved. If one of my daughters wore a bikini to work (most work places) I expect her to be fired & have no recourse. I also expect that if someone laid hands on her, the police would be involved.
  
  Now in a workplace there is a happy medium between a hijab & a bikini & it ain’t showing cleavage or tight clothing in most office settings.
  
  Report this comment
- RealLiibertarian
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 10:52pm
  Walkabout, you must live in one of the flyover states. Try pushing that idea of office clothing in NYC or Boston. What people wear to the job is what they feel comfortable in, and, being comfortable, will do better work. Men or women who can’t handle that need to join the 21st century.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:14pm
  RealLiibertarian
  I like the story of the woman with the engineering degree, who graduated form a university without an engineering program, but got invited to meetings just so guys could see her her cleavage.
  
  Yup progress.
  
  Report this comment
- RealLiibertarian
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:28pm
  Nice evasion, Walkabout. Freedom says people whould wear waht they fell comfortable in, and if feeling sexy equates to feeling comfortable, that should be the person’s choice. Grey? Are you serious? Stop trying to take the colour, style, and excitement out of life. Grey people working in a grey building at a grey job sounds like a vision of hell. Go for the flash, go for the excitement. Take life in big bites. Moderation is for monks.
  
  Report this comment
- RaydocX
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:42pm
  Freedom also says hire and fire at will…nif your firing hurts the company you will lose.
  Unless said employer made a pass was rebuffed and then punished,nit may be poor manners but that is choice.
  
  If your receptionist suddenly comes in with garish facial piercings that disgust clients and cost business, by the ‘smell test’ you could not fire.
  
  In fact, so long as once employed the employee is at least ‘trying’ it would seem you say no right to fire.
  
  And why is this a court case? You were fired.. Learn from it, find a new job, even if the goal was just that the old employer was too rigid and uncompromising…
  
  Report this comment
- RealLiibertarian
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:54pm
  Raydocx- I work with women who have purple **** and facial piercings, guys who have ponytails to the middle of their back, women who dress like they are clubbing on Jersey shore, bikers, hippies, and all manner of people. None of it matters. The only thing that matters is how they do their jobs. Are they reliable, do they put in their hours, do they finish their workload. If somebody came from the sexual harrassment commission, they’d probably have a heart attack from the comments and jokes that fly around. Nobody cares. People are just too damned uptight, judgemental and controlling.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 12:35am
  @WALKABOUT
  I’m sure that the guy didn’t mind her tight clothing, until his wife found out about it and got upset.
  
  Did the guy give her time to change her attire? Doesn’t seem like it going off of the article.
  
  You also said “in most office settings” Well who is to decide what is classified as “most office settings?” Again, one would assume it would be up to the owner of the business right?
  
  You keep giving your opinion on what is “appropriate” office attire. Let me ask you, who cares what you think about this issue? This isn’t your office, and it isn’t your company. Again, I’m sure he didn’t mind her attire until he found out his wife was unhappy.
  
  You tell me I’m “uninformed” which is a laughable statement coming from ignorant religious people who worship books that were written 2000 years ago. You people sure are funny though.
  
  Your daughters wear bikinis while swimming? They aren’t doing a great job of following the Bible. Last time I checked the Bible didn’t provide a waiver for dressing modestly….unless you’re swimming.
  
  It’s the old argument of, “THE WHOLE BIBLE IS TRUE….except this part….and that part….and that other part….basically everything I agree with is true, and everything I disagree with is wrong.”
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:05am
  RealLiibertarian
  
  Nice evasion, Walkabout. Freedom says people would wear what they fell comfortable in, and if feeling sexy equates to feeling comfortable, that should be the person’s choice
  ***
  Dressing at work like you would dress going to a disco, bar, beach or other venue? Your comment speaks for itself. Good luck with that. 5 million years of primate evolution says otherwise.
  
  I expect women to dress to the nine when going out on the town. I expect more freedom when going to the mall. As you have phrased it & have laid out your logical & (secular) moral argument. A woman could go topless at a convenience store because it made her feel sexy. and in your world she would expect to get service even if the sign said no shirt, no shoes, no service. I think that makes you special.
  HeII using your argument very literally, if a guy or woman wanted to go bottomless at work or to the store, they should be free to do so.
  
  I have a question for you. Are you an alive, thinking person or are you a program let loose on the internet by some twisted freak?
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:09am
  ModerationIsBest
  I’m sure that the guy didn’t mind her tight clothing, until his wife found out about it and got upset.
  
  Did the guy give her time to change her attire? Doesn’t seem like it going off of the article.
  ***
  This happened over more than one day. But whatever, you are selectively reading & interpreting.
  
  Really not worth the time sparring with you as 8th Circuit Court of Appeals will not overturn this, if you read their previous decisions. Have nice day :)
  
  Report this comment
- Hispaniconservative
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 5:13am
  And who the he!! Do you think you are to judge and insult somebody because you don’t like who they consult for their business decisions ? Shut up troll . It you were a true libertarian, it would not bother you with whom the consulted with or how they run their business as long their business practices did not hurt you. Mind your own business. Live and let live “real libertarian”
  
  Report this comment
The Giver
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:35pm
No job is guaranteed for life. Now everyone knows she was fired from her previous job for dressing inappropriately. You would think that in a dentist’s office, you would have uniforms.
I’ve seen plenty of women dressed in an unprofessional manner at their jobs. Makes me wonder about the employer for allowing it. There’s a place for everything.
But this dentist does sound like a problem if he actually said some of the comments mentioned in the story. Maybe he thought she was dressing like that for “dear old pop”. Maybe she was, and it backfired with the wife right there! Good luck to them all.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- IOWAGIR
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 6:55am
  the situation should not have gotten that far. The guy could have enforced a dress code or had them wear a lab coat. The wife was jealous so she made him fire her. So what’s that say to the other women that work there…you can keep working here because you not so hot. This is so wrong. So glad it’s a right to work state and yeah no job is guaranteed. We are moving towards Shariah and Sameness. Do we all take a pill to supress human feelings like in the book that is you Avitar? Great book by the way.
  
  Report this comment
Mobuy
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:23pm
This is absolute crap. Men are responsible for their own thoughts and sexual desires, not the women they are fantasizing about! Men, take some responsibility! Become a grownup! If you are lusting, that’s YOUR problem, not HERS.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- mbean
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:33pm
  These judges think like the Taliban. This is disgusting.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:37pm
  No, no no…Thats the illusion, its woman who screw men up. I’ve been there, most of my friends have seen it. You ladies just mess guys up…..its a fact. I’ve seen very intelligent men turn to jello brained idiots when confronted with a hot woman. He77 Eve screwed us all in the G of E and Adam went along no questions asked. Just the facts mam.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:44pm
  Oh, I forgot the wink ;-)
  
  Report this comment
- The Giver
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:47pm
  If life was the way you see it, commercials would never have worked. Women and men know how to make themselves more attractive. The word ATTRACTIVE says a lot. This kind of stuff Is all over the Old Testament. Better than any soap opera… Human nature. We are supposed to stay away from situations that are harmful to our souls.
  Why do we try to teach our daughters to dress decently if there’s nothing wrong with showing everything?
  
  Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:14pm
So it’s a right to work State but not a right to look good State?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Shasta
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:30pm
  Maybe they should have just asked her to wear a burka. Islamist males seem to have the same self-control problem.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:27pm
  You can look good without dressing to the nines.
  
  Report this comment
- IOWAGIR
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 6:40am
  Amen to that monk! Some of us ladies like to look good and if some men can’t handle it then seek medical attention. I think they still do chemical castratiion.
  http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1778
  I thing this dentist and his wife should look into it. I suggest that walkabout do the same.
  The real problem is jealous women. The wife felt threatened and her faith in her man is low.
  I bet the majority of complaints to HR and the ombudsman are from women. I bet it’s as high as 98%.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:28am
  IowaGIRRR
  
  There is a “sour Grapes” circuit in the human mind that helps us make decisions & stick to them. I suggest that you read up on it. When we make a choice the circuit kicks in & finds reasons to really not like the the choice not taken.
  Granted most guys want to hit on everything. Granted they should keep that in check. But a guy has a harder time to keep it in check if a gal dolls up. That is not all his fault. If a guy comes into work thinking about all the time he realizes that it is wasting his time. If one female co worker dolls up & the rest don’t, he knows whom is wasting his time.
  So what can he do? He can go guerrilla. I did not say gorilla. He can subtly sabotage the woman by responding to work requests or emails just a tad late making it hard on the doll while being on time in responding to others. Someone holding back on you can make life difficult. A doll might want to consider that.
  
  Report this comment
- MONICNE
  Posted on December 23, 2012 at 11:50am
  Walkabout, you might be better off leaving this topic alone (but you can’t, can you?)
  
  Your skewed opinions and outrageous logic are so twisted they reveal you as a self centered faux victim with bitterness towards female superiors. You seem surrounded by bikinis and V necks who are getting all the good stuff that you are denied. Get over it.
  
  Sometimes our hiring and promotion boards actually turn down otherwise qualified persons because the individuals are harboring self inflicted wounds that they are compelled to incessantly “share” with co-workers and customers. Just get over this. Your mom was a good woman.
  
  Christmas at the Vietnam Memorial includes a Christmas Tree decorated with memories. It includes Afghanistan and Iraq veteran memories. Say a quick prayer for Vets, just 10 seconds. Please!
  
  Report this comment
- Hispaniconservative
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 5:33am
  I’m asking a dumb question . Why does everybody assume this woman is hot? The reason why shy was fired was for being irresistibly attractive ” to her boss” . It could be her mannerisms or her speech patterns. whatever it was let us not forget that like it or not this is HIS business he can fire and hire who he want, we might not like but it is what it is. If you are his patient and you don’t like what he has done ,THEN CHANGE DENTISTS. SIMPLE, RIGHT? Right? ;-)
  
  Report this comment
Marine25
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:07pm
Sounds like the good dentist needs a less petulant wife, not a less attractive assistant

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jman-6
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:06pm
Is Iowa a ‘Right to Work’ state? If not they should start the process tomorrow! In a ‘RTW’ state this wouldn’t even be an issue as you don’t have to have a reason to fire someone! Simple as that!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- YallComeBack
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:58pm
  THAT is exactly what I was thinking. This is a poor story from a reporting point of view in that it left out one of the key facts.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Pointy_End
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:03pm
  Iowa is “at will employment”. You are correct that this is not a problem EXCEPT if the termination is based on race, gender, …..etc. Ms Nelson was claiming she was fired because of gender, claiming her boss would not have been attracted to her if she was male, therefore it was discrimination.
  
  Report this comment
The_Pointy_End
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:05pm
Iowa has at will employment, an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, unless in a union.

All I have to say is it would be a bit hurting to the woman who was hired after Ms. Nelson. You are so ugly/old, the doctor will not be attracted to you, therefore his insecure wife won’t have any issue with you.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jman-6
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:11pm
  With Pastors dispensing counseling like this it’s no wonder souls are being lost! Hes’ got as much business being a Pastor as O’bolshevik does!!
  
  Report this comment
ThorLoser
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:04pm
My job is secure! LOL

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Stelex
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:20pm
  I just got fired……;-)
  
  Report this comment
Psychosis
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:04pm
but they are not unlawful discrimination under the Iowa Civil Rights Act because they are motivated by feelings and emotions,

………..and the problem is right there …..basing decisions on feelings and emotion ….i give you the liberal mind

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
TH30PH1LUS
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:04pm
“…she viewed the 53-year-old Knight as a father figure…”

“…once telling her that if his pants were bulging that was a sign her clothes were too revealing…”

…remarked about her infrequent sex life by saying, “that’s like having a Lamborghini in the garage and never driving it.”

So it would be NORMAL for a dad to say those things to his daughter? Gross. She’s deluded if she thinks that’s appropriate.

How about the Boss just issue a dress code for his office instead of oogling and fantasizing every day? The man basically said I can’t control myself so you’re fired. Really?

Everybody in this story seems a little weird.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- subic
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:42pm
  Guess the Dr. was afraid that if his pants were bulging she might try to coax him into a raise, lol.
  
  Report this comment
- DZ-015
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:03pm
  Is garaging the Lamborghini anything like hiding the salami?
  
  Report this comment
Wisdom7
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:03pm
What ever happened to self-discipline.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- OhioRifleman
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:09pm
  It died shortly after chivalry and alongside proper masculinity. Honor died a few months later.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:28pm
  I suspect you ask way to much of today’s society.
  
  The new 10 commandments………………..
  
  I will not be offended
  
  I will not have my child.
  
  I will not work
  
  I will not covet, I’ll just take it.
  
  I will not be responcible.
  
  I will not face reality
  
  I will not respect others
  
  I will not recognize a god
  
  I will not, not worship money
  
  I will not have sexual relations with a woman in a blue dress.
  
  Report this comment
- Wisdom7
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 11:07pm
  “It died shortly after chivalry and alongside proper masculinity. Honor died a few months later.”
  
  Sad. Ironically, one can point to radical feminism as the cause.
  
  Report this comment
FISH_BONE
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:56pm
This has been a problem for me my entire life. I keep getting fired because I’m just too damn good looking. Its just not fair.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Marine25
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:04pm
  outstanding opening comment.
  
  Report this comment
- copatriots
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 9:04pm
  LOL You’re just too sexy
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YUXIKrOFk
  
  Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 21, 2012 at 7:53pm
Looks like I’ll be losing my job.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The-Monk
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:02pm
  Hi Progressiveslayer,
  
  No wonder I can’t find a job.
  
  I’ve being pre-Attractive screened out. LOL
  
  Report this comment
- FISH_BONE
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:05pm
  No offense Prog, but you have nothing to worry about until you lose a little weight and get rid of that cheesy mustache.
  
  Report this comment
- TH30PH1LUS
  Posted on December 21, 2012 at 8:05pm
  Lol
  
  Report this comment
- MONICNE
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 10:52am
  The main reason Job Creators do not hire individuals is that they consider them lackluster, overweight, old, cranky and opinionated. We would rather hire young fresh thinkers with good programming skills and bright can-do attitudes, and pay them less to boot. If unemployed persons are really just takers with a convenient excuse, they will stay unemployed one way or another.
  
  Hammer is free, praise The Lord and our Hard Working Diplomats
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 11:10am
  MONICNE
  
  Having read your posts, I conclude that there is a 60 to 65% chance that you are not who you say you are.
  
  Therefore I treat you latest post with skepticism as to its’ wisdom. Good day :)
  
  Report this comment
- MONICNE
  Posted on December 22, 2012 at 1:20pm
  This is refreshing from a team of Australians pretending to be US taxpayers and voting US citizens. Hope you all have a great Christmas, I have lots of parties, driving and events to prepare for and attend. We are off now to what might be a surprise engagement dinner, when I get back late tonight I will return to see if you are brave enough to claim to be an individual American.
  
  Irony is pot calling kettle black!
  
  By the way as a Senior Manager, I wear what I like. They can’t do without moneymakers and effective leaders who make their goals regardless of the economy. I sometimes wear v necks, so what?
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.