So, if you live somewhere like Iowa and your boss has a sexual desire towards you that might not even have back towards them, you can lose your job for it–and it’s not illegal.

Melissa Nelson, who worked as a dental assistant for James Knight for more than 10 long years, was fired by Knight for being “irresistible.” While Knight claimed her attire was inappropriate and used that as one of the reasons why this dismissal was necessary, as a dental assistant, Nelson says she only wore scrubs, and allegedly rocked a long sleeve shirt underneath that. And seriously, we know how non-cute those ensembles are, even with the nicest prints and designs. However, bulges in the defendant’s pants were somehow supposed to be a signal that she needed to put on some baggier scrubs.

In a phone interview with CNN done by Don Lemon, Nelson made it clear that she was not having any type of affair with Knight, and in fact, she thought she had a great relationship with his entire family (as in, her family knew their family) after 10 long years of work. But somewhere in those 10 years, the wife became uneasy about their working relationship and their alleged relationship outside of work. While both claim they didn’t stray on their spouses (Nelson is “happily married” as she told Lemon), they did text each other occasionally outside of work, even though it wasn’t anything explicit. But when the wife found out they were texting one another, she wasn’t having it. Sometime later, the couple must have agreed that Nelson was someone Knight was very much attracted to, so he made the decision in 2010 to fire her to save himself the trouble of failing to be faithful to his wife. According to CNN, this is how the ax came down on her:

“In the presence of a pastor, Knight told Nelson that she had become a “detriment” to his family and for the sakes of both their families, they should no longer work together. Knight gave Nelson one month’s severance.”

But the problem with the whole firing is, how can you punish someone else because YOU’RE sexually attracted to them? Uh, that’s on you to get together! And Nelson was thinking the same thing, so she tried to file a lawsuit over her dismissal, claiming it was gender discrimination, and the case wound up in the hands of Iowa’s Supreme Court. However, as did the district court, the Supreme Court sided with Knight, not saying that he was right, but that he definitely didn’t fire her because of her gender, so it wasn’t unlawful. As Supreme Court Justice Edward M. Mansfield wrote:

“The issue before us is not whether a jury could find that Dr. Knight treated Nelson badly. We are asked to decide only if a genuine fact issue exists as to whether Dr. Knight engaged in unlawful gender discrimination when he fired Nelson at the request of his wife. For the reasons previously discussed, we believe this conduct did not amount to unlawful discrimination, and therefore we affirm the judgment of the district court.”

Since it went to the highest court in Iowa, Nelson’s attorney isn’t sure yet if they’re going to be able to appeal. As for Knight, he has already employed a new dental assistant. Ironically, he said that he didn’t fire Nelson because she was a woman, in fact, Knight only hires women, and has since replaced her with another female dental assistant, even though he claims that Nelson was the best one he ever had. Hmmm, it seems that if it took all this to bring piece of mind to this man’s marriage, and he still turned around and hired another female dental assistant, Knight’s wife is never probably going to be comfortable with her husband’s co-workers. We hope Nelson gets some type of justice for her unfair (well, in our opinion at least) termination, and this dude needs to take responsibility for himself and not blame other people for the fact that he was a sleazeball.

Source: The Huffington Post

As more details of the Sandy Hook School shooting are revealed and the news of this horrific tragedy begins to settle in the minds of many Americans as they try to make sense of it, many questions and issues have risen to the surface. Gun control and mental illness have been major topics of conversation stemming from the tragedy and now, race and ethnicity has also become a factor. In an article featured on Salon.com entitled “Time To Profile White Men?”, author David Sirota somewhat rekindled the age-old conversation regarding the imbalance of criminal profiling between White men and men of other races.

“ Any honest observer should be able to admit that if the gunmen in these mass shootings mostly had, say, Muslim names or were mostly, say, African-American men, the country right now wouldn’t be confused about the causes of the violence, and wouldn’t be asking broad questions. There would probably be few queries or calls for reflection, and mostly definitive declarations blaming the bloodshed squarely on Islamic fundamentalism or black nationalism, respectively. Additionally, we would almost certainly hear demands that the government intensify the extantprofiling systems already aimed at those groups.”

Of course, Sirota was painted as a villain by several news outlets for “injecting” race into discussions of the tragedy. Sirota recently appeared as a panelist on Don Lemon’s CNN show to discuss the controversy as well as his stance on the subject.

“I think we should ask the question why is America 30 percent white guys, and 70 percent of the shootings in the last many decades have been at the hands of white guys … I do think it’s interesting to note that had 70 percent of mass shooters been let’s say Arab or African-American men, I think the conversation would be … much uglier.”

David also expressed that he felt this odd imbalance was a form of White privilege.

“And and I think that it’s good we’re having a nuanced conversation about all sorts of things — mental illness, gun control — but I hope that the next time something bad happens … that if it’s not a white guy, that we remember that we shouldn’t ascribe to entire groups … the bad actions of individuals. Because we’re not doing that right now, and I’m not saying that we should, but I think we should remember that the reason we’re not, is because it’s a form of white privilege.”

What do you think? Would discussions of the Sandy Hook school shooter be more harsh if he were Black? Is it too soon for this conversation to be taking place? Check out footage of David Sirota’s conversation with Don Lemon here.

Jazmine Denise is a news writer for madamenoire.com. Follow her on Twitter @jazminedenise

Is it me or are journalists like CNN’s Don Lemon getting real comfortable with using their public platforms to express their private sentiments ? It may not be so serious but I was surprised to hear that Lemon used his Twitter account to go in on a Hollywood celeb that he felt snubby by. It all went down with Jonah Hill (the fat guy who was in 40 Year Old Virgin and who is now a slimmed down semi-mega-star a la Money Ball) after Lemon ran into him in a hotel. Peep the exchange below.

To top it all off, Lemon said  that Hill “was a tool” in another tweet. I do get where Lemon is coming in terms of practicing kindness as a general principle but at first glance, I gotta say that Lemon took it too far. Maybe he’s not used to being snubbed by celebs but how much is this tied to Lemon’s ego? Not to let Hill off the hook but Lemon probably shouldn’t be using his CNN associated Twitter handle to go off on a B-List celebrity for not properly recognizing.

What do you think? Do you think it was good for Lemon to blast Hill for acting too Hollywood?

Source: Nlgja.com

Within a one-month time span two white CNN reporters have said the word n***er on air in the midst of reporting on stories involving hateful language used toward African Americans and amongst the apologies that have been issued, a lot of people are still weighing in on how appropriate or inappropriate the word is in news coverage.

Don Lemon, a CNN news anchor himself, recently spoke on the issue during the network’s racism free zone segment, which is supposed to symbolize the ability to express your opinion without judgement, and he said he doesn’t have an issue with journalists using the word. During the debate he said:

“I hate saying ‘the n-word,’ I think it takes the value out of what that word really means, especially when we’re reporting it.

I don’t care what color the reporter is, I think someone should say ‘that person called him a n***er,’ rather than ‘the n-word,’ because it sanitizes it.”

Of course, here comes the white correspondent with the argument that “you confuse white people because when you say it, we think why can’t we say it” and luckily Don Cleared that up quickly, saying by no means is he talking about the use of the word in a casual context, he’s only speaking on the aspect of reporting. I’d also like thank Goldie Taylor for pointing out the fact that no white person on this earth is confused about that word.

Don brings up an interesting point, though. It does hold more weight in a sense to have the word n***er pierce your ears but you still don’t feel the amount of hate that was behind it in its original use so I don’t think it’s really necessary to get the point across in reporting. Most networks seem to feel that way as well. Check out the full debate on the topic in the clip below.

Do you agree with Don or is saying “the n-word” sufficient to get the point across in news reporting?

Brande Victorian is a blogger and culture writer in New York City. Follower her on Twitter at @be_vic.

More on Madame Noire!

• 7 Ways He Wants You To Be Better Than His Last Girlfriend
• The Simmons Family (Including Ex-Wife Valerie Vaughn) Pose For Ebony’s Mother’s Day Issue
• “Ask A Black Man” Episode 2: The Dating Episode
• Sheree’s $750K Salary Demand Likely Got Her Cut
• Stripper Vanity Wonder Writes Book On Undercover Butt Shots Culture
• Columnist Fired For Article On What White Parents Should Tell Kids About Blacks
• Am I Raising a Spoiled Brat?
• Beyonce, Jay-Z & Blue Ivy Head to St. Barts

In honor of National Coming Out Day we’re going to honor some of favorite gay men. You may have noticed I used “love” in the title. Now, we don’t love these men like want to spend the rest of our lives with them and have their babies (They wouldn’t let us if we tried.) We mean love like enjoy. Like we enjoy chocolate-dipped strawberries. The following men are either delightful, entertaining, inspiring or downright hot messes that we just can’t get enough of.

Note: If you’re a homo-phobe or have a personal vendetta against homosexuals this is not the post for you. Feel free to keep it moving. This right here is a no-hate space.

By J. Smith

The Root sat down with CNN anchor Don Lemon to talk about black homophobia and his molestation, but also about colorism in the media. He admits that the majority of newspersons of color on television are light-skinned, and though he doesn’t seem to be ok with it, you can almost hear him subliminally asking readers: “it sucks, but what can I do?”

“Well, I do have eyes, and I do see that a lot of the anchors of color on television are light-skinned — not all of them — but a number of them are,” he said. “When I look around the entire television landscape, I do see — I don’t know if it’s lighting, I don’t know if it’s makeup — there are many anchors of a lighter hue. I don’t know where that comes from. I think that is part of our society.”

I ask with the uttmost sincerity when I question the precarious situation that centuries worth of degradation has put light-skinned blacks in. It is a very delicate line to toe — benefiting from the issue but being so closely connected to it. However, the following question is delivered with the least bit of sincerity: Do you really not “know where that comes from” Mr. Lemon? Passive, non-confrontational responses to questions that could provide an opportunity to openly discuss the issue makes you just as wrong as the people perpetuating it. We can’t be afraid to honestly talk about problems that cripple our community or else we’ll never begin to address them. And if we don’t have to courage to address our own issues, others certainly won’t pay them any mind.

It should be all of our responsibility to confront and call out colorism when we have the opportunity to do so. Looking at you, Don Lemon.

(AOL Black Voices) — In the two-plus weeks since Don Lemon announced he is gay in tandem with the release of his new memoir, ’Transparent,’ the CNN anchor has received both kudos and criticism.  The praise is geared toward the courage it took to openly embrace his homosexuality as a public figure. The criticism lies mainly with the language Lemon used in his announcement. Lemon told the ‘New York Times’, where the news of his announcement first broke: “It’s quite different for an African-American male…It’s about the worst thing you can be in black culture. You’re taught you have to be a man; you have to be masculine. In the black community they think you can pray the gay away.” Lemon also mentioned black women specifically, expressing his concern “that black women will say the same things [about me being gay] as they do about how black men should be dating black women.”  We spoke to Lemon recently about those comments and his perspective on homosexuality in the black community, how life has changed since becoming an openly gay public figure and the women who still have a crush on him.
Jozen Cummings: How long did you know you were gay before you came out so publicly?
DL: I say in the book, I’ve always known I was gay. I think the exact quote in the book is, “Since I was knee high to a duck I’ve always known I was gay.” I had crushes on boys – it wasn’t in a sexual way, because kids aren’t that way, they don’t really know, they just know they have a crush on someone. I don’t remember the first person I came out to, but I didn’t come out to my mom until I was 30 years old.

Read More…

By Marcus Scott

In the age of Twitter, tabloid gossip can spread like wildfire within minutes. Yet it is unusual when the hot topic is CNN weekend prime-time news anchor Don Lemon, who revealed in an interview published yesterday by The New York Times that he is gay.

In late September, the Emmy-winner made a starling confession on national television. During a discussion about Georgia’s New Birth Missionary Baptist Church pastor Bishop Eddie Long, who was accused of sexually coercing four male teenage members of his congregation, Lemon announced that that he was a victim of sex abuse by a much older pedophile as a child.

During the interview, Lemon conversed about his early childhood after showing a video of a lawyer reiterating what one of the alleged victims said about the bishop’s sexual advances. “The things these men were talking about, especially African American men don’t want to talk about…I couldn’t tell my mom that until I was 30 years old,” said Lemon.

With an impressive portfolio that includes stints with WCAU in Philadelphia, WMAQ in Chicago and WNYW in New York City, as well as profiles on NBC Nightly News and Today, the Baton Rouge native is following in the footsteps of many of his other peers in journalism, media and television by releasing his first autobiographical memoir in June.

In the interview with The New York Times, Lemon, 45, shed light on his perspective on why the tell-all, dubbed “Transparent,” will gain notice: “People are going to say: ‘Oh, he was molested as a kid and now he is coming out.’ I get it.”

As horrifically shallow as this confession maybe perceived, it’s a sad fact. Once upon a time even uttering a confession of this gravity meant career suicide. However, with that bold statement, CNN’s baby-faced anchor joined the ranks of only a few news anchors that have come out, which include political commentator Rachel Maddow and MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts, both white personalities. Whether he likes it or not, Lemon has now established himself as the face of the quintessential African-American gay man of prime-time news.

(CNN)