context: But, as we have noted, Ms. Escobedo has not alleged that it was a vehicle to effect any discriminatory animus harbored by the nurses, let alone provide evidence of such intent or effect; to the contrary, Ms. Escobedo testified that she got along well with the nurses and they supported her in disputes with her supervisors. This evidence before us thus simply does not permit an inference of "overt" discrimination as required by our precedent' and we cannot say that the combination of the two incidents could reasonably be found to have created a hostile atmosphere.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.identifier: 185 F.3d 1098, 1098, 1102
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that the "obviously sex and gender-motivated conduct" by a supervisor -- including, inter alia, his stated belief "that women in general were incompetent, stupid and scatterbrained" -- "so poisoned the entire body of conduct toward Plaintiff that a jury reasonably could view all of the allegedly harassing conduct ... as the product of sex and gender hostility"
citation_a.sentence: See Bolden v. PRC Inc., 43 F.3d 545, 551 (10th Cir.1994) (holding that plaintiff failed to present a triable issue as to a hostile work environment where the “derisive environment in the workshop was universal” — he was not “singled out” for abuse — and he failed to show the derisive atmosphere “stemmed from racial animus”); cf. O’Shea, 185 F.3d at 1098, 1102 (holding that the “obviously sex and gender-motivated conduct” by a supervisor — including, inter alia, his stated belief “that women in general were incompetent, stupid and scatterbrained” — “so poisoned the entire body of conduct toward Plaintiff that a jury reasonably could view all of the allegedly harassing conduct ... as the product of sex and gender hostility”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 43 F.3d 545, 551
citation_b.parenthetical: holding that plaintiff failed to present a triable issue as to a hostile work environment where the "derisive environment in the workshop was universal" -- he was not "singled out" for abuse -- and he failed to show the derisive atmosphere "stemmed from racial animus"
citation_b.sentence: See Bolden v. PRC Inc., 43 F.3d 545, 551 (10th Cir.1994) (holding that plaintiff failed to present a triable issue as to a hostile work environment where the “derisive environment in the workshop was universal” — he was not “singled out” for abuse — and he failed to show the derisive atmosphere “stemmed from racial animus”); cf. O’Shea, 185 F.3d at 1098, 1102 (holding that the “obviously sex and gender-motivated conduct” by a supervisor — including, inter alia, his stated belief “that women in general were incompetent, stupid and scatterbrained” — “so poisoned the entire body of conduct toward Plaintiff that a jury reasonably could view all of the allegedly harassing conduct ... as the product of sex and gender hostility”).