Some stories are so absurd they sound like satire—until you realize they’re real.
A transgender student expelled over a swimsuit post.
A transgender hotel worker fired on their second day for existing.
A transgender teen banned from prom for wearing a dress.
In a world where legal protections supposedly exist, these stories lay bare how discrimination isn’t just alive—it’s thriving in schools, workplaces, and public spaces. And if you think these are just isolated incidents, think again.
This isn’t about “dress codes” or “workplace norms.” It’s about systemic exclusion—and these three cases prove just how brazen institutions can be when enforcing it.
Case #1: Expelled for a Swimsuit—A School Decides Social Media Is a Problem (But Only for Some)
A transgender student at South Point School in Guwahati, Assam, was expelled after posting a bathing suit photo on Instagram—because apparently, that’s a moral offense worthy of academic punishment.
The class XI student, a minor, had posted a personal photo of herself in a swimsuit, taken during a family pool outing, on her private Instagram account. That was enough for the school’s principal, K. Chanda, to summon her parents and demand that she be withdrawn from the institution.
According to the student’s mother, Indrani Chakraborty, the principal contacted her daughter directly on June 10, calling the post “shameful and disgusting” and telling her she was suspended until further notice. He then sent the family a WhatsApp message confirming her suspension.
When the family met with school officials on June 11, several teachers voiced support for the student and opposed her expulsion. However, Principal Chanda had his own conditions:
- The student could stay at the school, but only if she:
- Deleted her social media accounts
- Stopped engaging with her community and counseling
- Followed specific rules set by the school counselor
Her family refused. Instead, they requested a transfer certificate, stating that the school’s actions had violated their daughter’s privacy and engaged in character defamation.
Principal Chanda defended the school’s decision, claiming the student had moved away from “school norms” by getting piercings, tattoos, and posting semi-nude photos. He stated that the family had been asked to remove the photos and modify the student’s appearance, but they refused, citing their daughter’s right to self-expression.
As a result, the school issued a transfer certificate upon the parents’ request.
The incident has sparked outrage, with Rituparna, associate vice-chairperson of the State Transgender Welfare Board, issuing a letter demanding an explanation from the school. She stressed the need for educational institutions to uphold legal standards and ensure accountability in such cases.
Chakraborty has since spoken out, stating that her daughter had already been bullied before this incident and that the school had failed to take proper action against it.
Principal Chanda, however, denied any major issues, attributing past incidents to “verbal bullying” and insisting that the school had taken appropriate action through sensitization sessions.
Chakraborty has condemned the school’s actions, emphasizing that the psychological impact of such discrimination on transgender students is profound and lasting.
Case #2: Fired After One Day—A Transgender Employee’s Shortest Job Ever
For a transgender employee at a Holiday Inn Express in Jamestown, New York, their first day of work was also their last—because their supervisor apparently “needed more time” to adjust to having a transgender coworker.
According to a Sept. 25 lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against Boxwood Hotels, LLC, and related entities, the employee was subjected to a hostile work environment from day one.
The housekeeping manager immediately began “repeatedly and intentionally misgendering and dehumanizing” the worker.
The employee reported the harassment to both the front office and general managers, who assured them they would speak to the supervisor.
The next day, however, the response was clear:
- The supervisor denied the allegations
- The employee was told their supervisor “needed more time to get used to” working with them
- The general manager refused to hold a meeting to discuss the issue
- Instead, the general manager said, “this job may not be a good fit for you,” and fired them.
The EEOC’s lawsuit argues that the termination violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex-based discrimination, including gender identity.
This isn’t an isolated case. The EEOC has been actively suing companies for workplace harassment against transgender employees:
- A construction contractor was forced into a settlement in July after supervisors and coworkers verbally and physically harassed a transgender employee.
- An Illinois hog farm is currently in litigation after a co-owner repeatedly deadnamed and made derogatory comments about a transgender worker.
This year, the EEOC updated its official guidance on workplace harassment, explicitly stating that misgendering and similar actions are examples of illegal discrimination.
Kimberly Cruz, regional attorney for the EEOC’s New York District Office, reinforced the agency’s stance:
“Enduring harassment based on one’s transgender status is not and should not be a condition of employment.”
Yet, in workplaces like Holiday Inn Express, that remains a reality for many trans workers.
Case #3: No Dress, No Prom—A School Calls the Police Over Clothing
At Section High School in Jackson County, Alabama, a transgender student arrived at her senior prom in a dress—and was denied entry.
Not only was she barred from attending, but when a parent questioned the decision, the school called the police.
According to local ABC station WAAY 31, the school’s principal, Blake Wigley, allegedly told the student the day before the event that she would not be allowed to enter if she wore a dress.
The student, who attended prom with a group of friends, was stopped at the entrance and told she would have to change into pants if she wanted to attend.
A local parent, Lesa Drake, confronted the principal, but he refused to provide a clear reason for the decision.
“I kept asking why. Why can’t she come? Because she’s wearing a dress?” Drake recalled.
The school then called the police.
When Drake checked the school’s official handbook, she found no policy barring students from wearing clothing that matched their gender identity.
Alabama has been at the center of multiple anti-trans laws in recent years, including:
- A 2022 law that requires schools to inform parents if a student expresses a gender identity different from their assigned sex at birth.
- A law banning trans students from using bathrooms that align with their gender.
The Southern Poverty Law Center and ACLU have repeatedly stated that such actions violate the First Amendment and Title IX.
Drake’s response was simple:
“Who gives a crap about what they wear?”
Final Thought: A Pattern of Exclusion
Three cases. Three different places. Same underlying message: transgender people are still treated as if they don’t belong.
This isn’t about “policies” or “dress codes.” It’s about systemic exclusion—and whether institutions are willing to change.
Because if a bathing suit, a work uniform, and a prom dress are enough to justify expulsions, firings, and police calls, then the issue isn’t clothing.
It’s discrimination.
