There hasn't been one drop of evidence pointing to Jane Meyer being specifically discriminated by the U based on gender and/or sexual orientation. The "pattern of discrimination" you speak of would be applicable if there was at least a tiny amount of evidence pointing to this discrimination specific to Jane Meyer; this evidence does not exist.
The jury might have decided that hiring a man and assigning him her duties and paying him more and going back and retroactively changing her work evaluations and then assigning her out of the department and finally firing her because they disagreed over compliance might just be discrimination. Looks like that is what the jury did.
If she were a man, there wouldn't be any thought of discrimination based on gender. Just because she is female, doesn't mean those decisions were made because of her gender, let alone sexual orientation.
Perhaps part of the key is he never did that to a man and he's done that (or similar) to other women???
In what other instances did he do that to other women?
How many lawsuits or settled complaints were there??
Probably because there are 3 million more social justice warriors than idiots.
We get to pick and choose states to leave out now? Awesome but this time what did it look like with Oklahoma and Alabama taken out? I'll wait.
