Republic Alert
Gateway Pundit

Transgender Woman Sues Yoga Center For $5 Million For Misgendering Her | The Gateway Pundit


A transgender woman in New York is suing a yoga studio for a whopping $5 Million because the studio misgendered her and wouldn’t let her use the women’s locker room.

The lawsuit, filed on Monday, refers to the plaintiff as ALI MILES a/k/a/ DYLAN MILES and states This is a civil action for monetary damages, and injunctive relief, brought by Plaintiff Dylan Miles to redress discrimination and harassment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. CHELSEA TRADITIONAL HOT YOGA LLC d/b/a HOT YOGA CHELSEA NYC, and its principals, owners, employees, MONIQUE FLORIO, NEIL COPPER deprived Plaintiff of his civil rights because he is gay, undergoing a gender transition, and because Miles does not conform to CHELSEA TRADITIONAL HOT YOGA LLC d/b/a HOT YOGA CHELSEA NYC, and its principals, owners, employees, MONIQUE FLORIO, NEIL COPPER genderbased preferences, expectations, or stereotypes about how a man/woman should dress and conduct himself/herself.”

The complaint goes on to specify:

9. Miles is an LGBTQIA+ individual, who was born with male genitalia but identifies
as woman.

10. Miles is a maletofemale transgender woman.

11. Miles wears women’s clothing and in all appearance expresses as a person of the
female gender.

12. Miles is in the process of transitioning into woman through various medical
treatments and hormone therapies.

13. On or about May 4, 2023, at 4:00 pm, Miles appeared at YOGA to participate in a
5 pm yoga class.

14. YOGA have did not have singleoccupancy restrooms.

15. YOGA did not have singleoccupancy locker rooms.

16. Miles sat down with the manager and owner and specifically told the manager about
Miles’ gender status, and informed that Miles most closely aligned with female gender identity
and that Miles intended to and wished to use a private nongender specific restroom and locker
room.

17. Defendant informed Miles that YOGA had no nongender specific bathrooms and
had no nongender specific locker room.

23. Miles was informed by YOGA which specifically confirmed that MILES could not
use the woman’s bathroom/locker room.

26. Miles attended the yoga class and when the class was completed Miles went into
the singlesex bathroom labelled Women.

27. Miles attended the yoga class and when the class was completed Miles went into
the singlesex locker room labelled Women.

28. Miles began using the public accommodation and facilities in the singlesex locker
room labelled Women.

29. Female patrons of YOGA complained and yelled at Miles about Miles’ presence
and use of the singlesex locker room and bathroom labelled Women, and they demanded Miles
leave and cease using the facilities.

30. Female patrons of YOGA complained to YOGA about Miles’ presence and use of
the singlesex locker room and bathroom labelled Women and they demanded Miles leave and
cease using the facilities.

33. YOGA refused to allow Miles to utilize the singlegender locker room and
bathroom, most closely aligned with Mile’s gender.

39. This incident caused a stir in YOGA and negative attention was drawn to Miles
from other YOGA patrons.

40. Feeling shame, humiliation, and frustration, Miles, against Miles wishes and intent
ceased using the singlegender locker room and bathroom, most closely aligned with Mile’s
gender.

41. Miles was escorted out of the singlegender locker room and bathroom labelled
Women, which was most closely aligned with Mile’s gender.

The complaint then goes on to cite numerous human rights statutes, including gender, orientation, and discrimination laws. One such citation includes Some people, including customers, other program participants, tenants, or employees, may object to sharing a facility or participating in a program with a transgender, nonbinary, or gender nonconforming person. Such objections are not a lawful reason to deny access to that transgender, nonbinary, or gender nonconforming person.

Even more concerning is the citation of the part of the law which apparently reads Aiding and abetting. It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person to aid, abet, incite, compel or coerce the doing of any of the acts forbidden under this chapter, or to attempt to do so.

So you better not misgender anyone or stand there watching while someone else misgenders someone, otherwise you could be on the hook for $5 Million.

Miles’s attorney, Peter Sverd, previously represented a disabled woman who attempted to sue 64 hotels for ADA violations, while also admitting that she never intended to actually stay at any of the hotels and she was just “testing” them for violations. It appears as though those cases were eventually dismissed.



Source link

Related posts

REPORT: San Diego’s ‘Safe Sleeping’ Site for the Homeless Remains Nearly Empty Since Opening | The Gateway Pundit | by Mike LaChance

Daily Reporter

Karine Jean-Pierre Wants Everyone to Know that Joe, Jill, Hunter and Entire Biden Family Were Away All Weekend when White House Cocaine Discovered; Strongly Infers West Wing Tourists to Blame | The Gateway Pundit | by Kristinn Taylor

Daily Reporter

GOP Senators Thune, Kennedy, Tillis and Paul Push Back Against Impeachment… Because Emails, Bank Statements, Whistleblowers, Audio Recordings, Photos, a Laptop Computer, $5 Million Bribes, Are Not Enough Proof of Wrongdoing | The Gateway Pundit

Daily Reporter

Leave a Comment