OK, if I understand this correctly there are three sides to the transgender issue.
Transgender advocates want non-discrimination against anyone who identifies itself as a transgender.
Others favor non-discrimination in cases where the person has reached an objective stage in the process of transitioning. This involves doctor’s supervision and diagnosis/prognosis/treatment as part of the medical record.
Others say screw them and give them nothing.
People like Jason Lewis and other clueless knee jerk lefty puppets in the House and Senate spoke in favor the law that allows gender to be determined by each individual with nothing more than their say so. By their definition a person’s gender can change on the whim of the individual. (ready made defense for some public restroom pervs out there).
Question for Jason and other BMGers that agree with him:
What should determine a person’s gender for the purposes of the transgender anti-discrimination law?
Looking down everyone’s pants?
You favor letting the individual determine his/her gender by their say so only? Therefore self-determination can be changed daily, even hourly, for purposes of state imposed discrimination laws. C’mon Charley. You can’t be in favor of that. Can you?
<
p>If appearing in everyway like a man you can say you are a woman and enter the ladies room without the worry of being discriminated against and being denied access. My goodness.
<
p>Why are you against a transgender person being defined with some objective medical declarations? I mean a little effort on their part is not discrimination. Disabled have to prove they are disabled. That requires medical information.
<
p>
The bill adds “gender identity or expression” to a host of current laws banning discrimination. One of the laws includes public accomodations, including restrooms.
<
p>Full opinion here.
Can you define “expression” as it has been used in this debate by the law’s supporters?
<
p>A definition please.
<
p>I and many others do not want to discriminate against anyone, regardless of the law. However it is important that our public and private institutions can hire and fire for conduct at the work place which not consistent with widely held societal beliefs and norms which have a negative result both internally with other employees, and externally with ability to effectively perform mission and/or earn a profit.
<
p>If Mary is a woman that believes she is a man. has been taking steps to transition including psychiatric/psychological and medical care and has acted consistently over some time as aa person who is transgender then she should not be discriminated against as she goes through and/or completed this very personal and emotional life decision.
<
p>But if fucking Denis Rodman wants to play games while working as a cashier at Wal Mart or as a collector for the T, and believe me people will be playing games, then this is Bizarro Land
<
p>
<
p>13 states and god knows how many cities, counties and employers already have this. Where are all the people “playing games.” Who have been put at risk? I have yet to see a single solitary example by the fear brigade. Put up or shut up.
<
p>—
<
p>Also, what happens when hypothetical Mary just decides to transition to Martin? How long should Martin have to wait before he’s given protections? Keep in mind that people generally become less obviously transgender the longer they’ve transitioned, so if Martin has to wait a year or two before he’s legally protected, that means he’s probably already been fired, thrown out of his housing and possibly beaten up (or killed).
<
p>Furthermore, if Martin needs to go to the Doctors to become protected, what about those who can’t afford the doctor? Are they to be punished for lack of funds. Keep in mind that a very sizable percentage of transgender people live in poverty because of the persecution against them, many of whom are actually homeless.
<
p>And what if Mary just decides not to conform to her gender stereotypes, identifying as gender queer instead, and is discriminated against? Your “ideas” won’t create a bill that’s very helpful to the glbt community — but I think you already know that. You are not interested in protecting the vulnerable; we’re already living in Bizarro Land.
Chances are you’ve already shared a bathroom with a transgendered person.
This is about employment practices. Define expression so employers won’t be sued left to right
It’ll depend on the situation but certain thresholds will be held to be an “establishment” of a transgender identity. Likely a court would rule that someone who changed their mind every hour wouldn’t be protected.
<
p>When the ADA passed lots of disabilities were left undefined, the courts worked it out, some say too loosely, some say too strictly.
Likely a court would rule that someone who changed their mind every hour wouldn’t be protected.
<
p>good law doesn’t leave it up to courts.
<
p>You’re argument is ‘don’t worry about it, the courts won’t let it happen.”
<
p>This is your argeument in favor of making “expression” the deteroming factor?
a note from the doctor. Should transgender? I say yes.
<
p>can someone please tell me why not. That is all I have been asking.
<
p>2. Any crime the “pervs” you reference commit will still be a crime, regardless of how they gained entrance to the restroom, or whatever other gender ambivalence they exploited to commit whatever crime.
<
p>3. Really, Ernie, you should lay off Jason Lewis. It feels really unfair. People read this thing, and I’ll bet you’ve quadrupled his name recognition — but people like me, who know nothing else about him, are likely to think he’s a fool. Come on, there are 200 of them, it’s bullying to single out one freshman. Did he kill your dog?
<
p>How else will the others learn?
the influence of anything that goes on here.
<
p>Plainly, we have people in power who read the site. Many know Ernie’s work here; many wonder who he is (as do I).
<
p>But Ernie’s harping and crankery against Jason Lewis — or my harping and crankery against anyone else, for that matter — is just not going to swing an election. Doesn’t work that way.
<
p>I think Jason can rest easy.
Not my intention.
<
p>I certainly don’t want to muzzle Ernie or anybody for fear of that.
<
p>Though I do like the image of him as a cranky harpy. :-!
it specifically protects gender identity and expression — including people who are gender noncomforming. That means this bill applies to people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, gender queer and completely straight. Not everyone, even those who are straight, completely conform to their gender stereotypes.
what about the XX and XY electric field generators? does it mandate turning them off, so XX can cross the streams? Vice versa?
<
p>And if that should happen, will the Stay Puft Marshmellow Man appear and attack everyone in the bathroom? Or if the Gatekeepers cross the threshold of the Key Masters, will they turn into giant statues or hideous monsters? Vice Versa? These all could certainly explain the dangers of this bill.
<
p>I think we better make sure the XX and XY electric field generators stay online and plugged in at a bathroom near you, otherwise we could have a sensational, nonsensical issue on our hands.