Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Androgyne sues catering business for $518,682

Page 3 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

11 Feb 2014, 10:03 pm

Society needs to introduce a third gender of pronouns.

Problem solved.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

11 Feb 2014, 11:48 pm

zer0netgain wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
I don't get upset over pronoun usage as the English language does not have particularly good options in regard to "gender-neutral" language.


From personal experience, other than "hey, you" and "hey, a$$h0le".... I'm drawing blanks. :lol:


Precisely. :wink:


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

13 Feb 2014, 10:50 am

Saw an episode of Dr. Who that made me think of this thread.

The Doctor borrows a horse. Owner says the horse's name is Samuel. The Doctor says he speaks horse and that the horse's name is Susan and it would appreciate the owner respecting it life choices.

:lol:



sihrf
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

14 Feb 2014, 1:57 am

hanyo wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
“little lady”


I'd find that one demeaning and offensive even if I was a 100% cisgendered female.


and i find being called a made up word "cisgender" offensive, yet the trans-community continue to do it..so why should anyone care what pronouns they want to be called?

and before saying it's not a made up word...

Quote:
Carl Buijs, a transsexual man from the Netherlands, claiming that Buijs coined the word in 1995.[9] In April 1996, Buijs said in a Usenet posting, "As for the origin, I just made it up. I just kept running into the problem of what to call non-trans people in various discussions, and one day it just hit me: non-trans equals cis. Therefore, cisgendered



sihrf
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

14 Feb 2014, 2:03 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
As I said, your "gender" is based on outward appearances. Short of lacking either or having both, it's pretty clear-cut what you were born into. At least when a transgendered person dresses as the opposite sex (if done right), they look it and it makes sense to refer to them as that gender. Should a man be able to say, "Refer to me as 'she'." when he doesn't look the least bit like a woman?


And if ones outside appearance is androgynous, and they prefer not to be referred to as a gender it makes sense. If a transgendered female(male body dressed as female) and prefers to be referred to as 'she' people who know obviously shouldn't call them 'he'. I think Gender neutral is just as valid as transgendered males and females.


Gender is based on what you born as, not what you wear. They have plenty of women who don't wear dresses and have short hair and don't act like the stereotype of a woman but still they know they are women, but if we go by the outward appearance argument..if I dress like a person from..lets say China..does that make me Chinese?

If a guy is wearing female cloths he is still a guy...sure you could call him a "she" but thats your choice why should others be forced to say something they know is not true



sihrf
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

14 Feb 2014, 2:12 am

thomas81 wrote:
Society needs to introduce a third gender of pronouns.

Problem solved.


"Society"

Quote:
there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families


any way what about the individuals who know there isn't a third gender and refuse to capitulate to a fringe minorities delusion..frivolous lawsuits?



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

14 Feb 2014, 2:14 am

sihrf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
As I said, your "gender" is based on outward appearances. Short of lacking either or having both, it's pretty clear-cut what you were born into. At least when a transgendered person dresses as the opposite sex (if done right), they look it and it makes sense to refer to them as that gender. Should a man be able to say, "Refer to me as 'she'." when he doesn't look the least bit like a woman?


And if ones outside appearance is androgynous, and they prefer not to be referred to as a gender it makes sense. If a transgendered female(male body dressed as female) and prefers to be referred to as 'she' people who know obviously shouldn't call them 'he'. I think Gender neutral is just as valid as transgendered males and females.


Gender is based on what you born as, not what you wear. They have plenty of women who don't wear dresses and have short hair and don't act like the stereotype of a woman but still they know they are women, but if we go by the outward appearance argument..if I dress like a person from..lets say China..does that make me Chinese?

If a guy is wearing female cloths he is still a guy...sure you could call him a "she" but thats your choice why should others be forced to say something they know is not true


Sihrf, your argument is moot, because the state of Oregon allows people to self-identify.

Quoted: "Under Oregon law, gender identity includes what a person believes his or her gender to be, including how the person chooses to express his or her gender. Gender identity protection also encompasses any behavior that differs from what may be traditionally associated with the person’s sex at birth. The law protects people who identify as transgender as well as people who do not fit into stereotypes of how a man or woman should look or act".

http://data.lambdalegal.org/pdf/fs_oreg ... ty-act.pdf

Thus, people can self-identify as "androgyne" and based on that identify, presumably, then they are protected from discrimination (courts will be deciding this).



sihrf
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

14 Feb 2014, 2:23 am

Quote:

Actually it is false that humans are either male or female and never neither or both....also its possible for one with a females body to have a male brain and one with a male body to have a female brain.....Gender is hardly a clear cut thing. Who decides what someones appropriate gender label is?....you?


it may not be clear cut to you, but it is to me and a vast majority of the people in the world. They have people who still belive the eath is flat..doesn't mean I have too because they do..same with gender..



sihrf
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

14 Feb 2014, 2:46 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
sihrf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
As I said, your "gender" is based on outward appearances. Short of lacking either or having both, it's pretty clear-cut what you were born into. At least when a transgendered person dresses as the opposite sex (if done right), they look it and it makes sense to refer to them as that gender. Should a man be able to say, "Refer to me as 'she'." when he doesn't look the least bit like a woman?


And if ones outside appearance is androgynous, and they prefer not to be referred to as a gender it makes sense. If a transgendered female(male body dressed as female) and prefers to be referred to as 'she' people who know obviously shouldn't call them 'he'. I think Gender neutral is just as valid as transgendered males and females.


Gender is based on what you born as, not what you wear. They have plenty of women who don't wear dresses and have short hair and don't act like the stereotype of a woman but still they know they are women, but if we go by the outward appearance argument..if I dress like a person from..lets say China..does that make me Chinese?

If a guy is wearing female cloths he is still a guy...sure you could call him a "she" but thats your choice why should others be forced to say something they know is not true



Quoted: "Under Oregon law, gender identity includes what a person believes his or her gender to be, including how the person chooses to express his or her gender. Gender identity protection also encompasses any behavior that differs from what may be traditionally associated with the person’s sex at birth. The law protects people who identify as transgender as well as people who do not fit into stereotypes of how a man or woman should look or act".

[redacted because it blocks my from posting]

Thus, people can self-identify as "androgyne" and based on that identify, presumably, then they are protected from discrimination (courts will be deciding this).



My argument is not moot because they can't force me as an individual to call them what they want. Individuals and private organizations are allowed to discriminant..the Supreme Court already ruled that. Having said that even if the courts decide that business can't discriminate based on that I'm pretty sure they will find a way to not hire people like that so they can't be sued..with Facebook adding the 50 gender options..and Facebook users being naive..i'm pretty sure employers will use Facebook to pre-screen potential employees to make sure they steer clear of potential liabilities



sihrf
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

14 Feb 2014, 4:40 am

if gender can be self-identited then why not race or even species?

Image



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

14 Feb 2014, 10:51 am

sihrf wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
sihrf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
As I said, your "gender" is based on outward appearances. Short of lacking either or having both, it's pretty clear-cut what you were born into. At least when a transgendered person dresses as the opposite sex (if done right), they look it and it makes sense to refer to them as that gender. Should a man be able to say, "Refer to me as 'she'." when he doesn't look the least bit like a woman?


And if ones outside appearance is androgynous, and they prefer not to be referred to as a gender it makes sense. If a transgendered female(male body dressed as female) and prefers to be referred to as 'she' people who know obviously shouldn't call them 'he'. I think Gender neutral is just as valid as transgendered males and females.


Gender is based on what you born as, not what you wear. They have plenty of women who don't wear dresses and have short hair and don't act like the stereotype of a woman but still they know they are women, but if we go by the outward appearance argument..if I dress like a person from..lets say China..does that make me Chinese?

If a guy is wearing female cloths he is still a guy...sure you could call him a "she" but thats your choice why should others be forced to say something they know is not true



My argument is not moot because they can't force me as an individual to call them what they want.


1. Your original argument is moot, because you argued that gender is determined at birth, and I showed how the state of Oregon allows for redefinition of gender.

2. Yes, your point is taken. This is why I find this so fascinating.

a. The courts will have to decide if "misgendering" constitutes discrimination.
b. The courts will have to decide on whether the apparent rare identity of androgyne should be accommodated.
c. The courts will have to decide if binary gender terms are "misgendering" to an androgyne.

sihrf wrote:
[Individuals and private organizations are allowed to discriminant..


Not according to the EEOC.

The EEOC decided that "sex discrimination" in the Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act includes "LGBT discrimination".

Quoted: "The EEOC’s newly released Strategic Enforcement Plan for 2013-2016 lists “coverage of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals under Title VII” as one of its top six national en­­forcement priorities. Expect the EEOC to take significant enforcement actions soon and litigate issues more aggressively….".
http://hunterofjustice.com/2013/04/back ... e-vii.html

other relevant sources,
http://www.metroweekly.com/news/?ak=7288
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/r ... -eo-11246/
http://www.sgrlaw.com/resources/trust_t ... ttl17/824/

sihrf wrote:
the Supreme Court already ruled that.


SCOTUS has ruled on Title VII cases per sex discrimination, but not "gender identity" discrimination per se.

sihrf wrote:
Having said that even if the courts decide that business can't discriminate based on that I'm pretty sure they will find a way to not hire people like that so they can't be sued..with Facebook adding the 50 gender options..and Facebook users being naive..i'm pretty sure employers will use Facebook to pre-screen potential employees to make sure they steer clear of potential liabilities


This is the same argument used against desegregating black people. "I am sure segregationists will still find a way to segregate them...".

sihrf wrote:
if gender can be self-identited then why not race or even species?


That is worthy of another thread. "Body Mods" is a big area.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

14 Feb 2014, 11:30 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
"Hir", "Per", "Thon" , "Jee" , "Ve" "Xe", "Ze" are proposed gender-neutral language.

So, the question is should other people have to learn this new language, and refer to Valeria Jones in this "non-offensive language". :?:

or perhaps refer to Valeria Jones by name always.


The words above are not currently words in the English language. Saying that co-workers are harrassing an employee if they don't use non-existent words is quite a stretch. But the courts will decide. Referring to Valeria Jones always by name seems a better option. However, if the co-orkers slip up and sometimes say "she" instead of Valeria I don't think that is actually harrassment. What Valeria is doing is requiring that people go against the standard grammatical constructions of English or else they are harrassing.

Personally I hope Valeria loses the case since I don't like the precedent it would set. It would mean that people could be acting unlawfully by using proper English in specific situations.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,029
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Feb 2014, 12:49 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
I don't get upset over pronoun usage as the English language does not have particularly good options in regard to "gender-neutral" language.


From personal experience, other than "hey, you" and "hey, a$$h0le".... I'm drawing blanks. :lol:


Precisely. :wink:


Do people usually address people as 'woman' or 'man'.....or do they typically use names? What would be wrong with calling this individual by their name? I just don't see a situation in which someone would address someone by their gender.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,029
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Feb 2014, 12:56 pm

sihrf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
As I said, your "gender" is based on outward appearances. Short of lacking either or having both, it's pretty clear-cut what you were born into. At least when a transgendered person dresses as the opposite sex (if done right), they look it and it makes sense to refer to them as that gender. Should a man be able to say, "Refer to me as 'she'." when he doesn't look the least bit like a woman?


And if ones outside appearance is androgynous, and they prefer not to be referred to as a gender it makes sense. If a transgendered female(male body dressed as female) and prefers to be referred to as 'she' people who know obviously shouldn't call them 'he'. I think Gender neutral is just as valid as transgendered males and females.


Gender is based on what you born as, not what you wear. They have plenty of women who don't wear dresses and have short hair and don't act like the stereotype of a woman but still they know they are women, but if we go by the outward appearance argument..if I dress like a person from..lets say China..does that make me Chinese?

If a guy is wearing female cloths he is still a guy...sure you could call him a "she" but thats your choice why should others be forced to say something they know is not true


You are missing the point....Gender is not exactly based on what you are born as. As I already said gender is not clear cut...and much of the time the brain gender doesn't match up with the physical gender. Transgender people should be referred to as their gender identity...not their physical body. Now I have heard there are plenty of males and females that dress the opposite gender as more of a hobby and don't consider themselves transgender.

I was not suggesting gender is based on what you wear, just pointing out typically transgender people dress as opposite than their physical gender.....If someone is gender neutral they'd probably dress in a way that is gender neutral.

I think the main point however is in this situation the co-workers knew this person identified as gender neutral and did not want to be called she or he...I don't see why it would be so hard to respect that. And from the sound of it such as things like co-workers calling them 'little lady' it sounds like a bit more than forgetting and more like intentional harassment.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,029
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Feb 2014, 12:58 pm

...


_________________
We won't go back.


Last edited by Sweetleaf on 14 Feb 2014, 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,029
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Feb 2014, 1:04 pm

sihrf wrote:
Quote:

Actually it is false that humans are either male or female and never neither or both....also its possible for one with a females body to have a male brain and one with a male body to have a female brain.....Gender is hardly a clear cut thing. Who decides what someones appropriate gender label is?....you?


it may not be clear cut to you, but it is to me and a vast majority of the people in the world. They have people who still belive the eath is flat..doesn't mean I have too because they do..same with gender..



No actually science says its not clear cut.....if it where explain hermaphrodites, but I guess since most of the world knows there are only two clear cut genders such people don't exist. :roll:

Your opinion doesn't disprove science....sorry.

here is a bit of reading: intersex link


_________________
We won't go back.