JimmyHavok: More 30-second research, I see

Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:59:33 EST

You're good at that.

gerrymander: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:50:42 EST

Good point, zyx.

skeptic: treating gender dysphoria

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:58:27 EST

This is a somewhat complex topic and I haven't gone into all of the complexities because they are not necessary for the point that I was trying to make, which is that it would be wrong to deny a job to an otherwise qualified person, on the basis of being a

skeptic: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:50:05 EST

You're not paying attention. My decisions are not arbitrary. You may not agree with my reasoning, but that doesn't mean that I don't have reasons.

zyxwvutsr: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:45:13 EST

...people might well look back and view current gender reassignment surgical practices with the same horror we have for sawing off limbs to prevent gunshot wounds from becoming gangrenous

A better analogy, gerry, is the horro

zyxwvutsr: Re: Hoooold on, bubby.

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:42:22 EST

Yeah, and seven transgender hookers are a representative sample, too

I'm pretty sure that article doesn't say what you think it says. Judging from your other comment (#76) I'd say you don't know what a meta-study is either.

Dr John A Zoidberg: Question for Gerrymander

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 05:30:00 EST

So I have a question for you then. I noticed your interaction above with Havok, Bob, sceptic and others and that the position you took in justifying taking the job offer away was that the candidate did not disclose his intent to undergo gender reassignment

JimmyHavok: another weary second of research

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:28:59 EST

Factors Associated with Satisfaction or Regret Following Male-to-Female Sex Reassignment (abstract)

Participants reported overwhelmingly that they were happy with

JimmyHavok: Re: Hoooold on, bubby.

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:20:42 EST

Not expressing regret is not the same as expressing satisfaction.

Yeah, and seven transgender hookers are a representative sample, too.

This is a case where there are two possible states: regretting, and not regretting. It's not a false

zyxwvutsr: Re: Hoooold on, bubby.

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:58:00 EST

That means that 80% of the cases were satisfied with the results

Bad, bad, logic, Havok. Not expressing regret is not the same as expressing satisfaction. Also, that one stat does not address the idea that gender dyspho

JimmyHavok: Hoooold on, bubby.

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:04:52 EST

zyxwvutsr: Re: Hold on.

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:55:29 EST

...we might consider the dysphoria itself to be a form of insanity, but as I have previously pointed out (when you compared gender dysphoria to cocaine addiction) it is a very TREATABLE form of insanity, and after the gender re-assignment su

Steve Urkel: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:37:21 EST
You've arbitrarily decided that some groups must accept offensive expressions and some groups must be tolerated while other groups can't engage in offensive expression and other groups can't be tolerated.

skeptic: Re: Hold on, again

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:06:47 EST
My initial reply to your comment is incomplete. I should also note that while it may be true that the problem, as you say, lies at the Congressional level rather than at the level of the administration of the Library of Congress, that does not in any

MayorBob: Get help, Lou.

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:36:24 EST
Those monkeys flying out your butt could be a sign of some sort of chemical imbalance in the brain.

Lou: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:34:26 EST
You might have a point there...however, by that time we'll be able to switch off and on our gender orientation for special weekends...
and we'll have jet cars...
and monkeys will fly out my butt.

skeptic: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:45:24 EST
I have never advocated a totalitarian system of morality and indeed, I favor a less intrusive government than the one we now have, at least in some respects (my system of reproductive licensing would, of course, be more intrusive); for example, I am strong

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:35:23 EST
Ah yes, now you are ready to accuse this person of insanity, because of gender dysphoria. Well, we might consider the dysphoria itself to be a form of insanity, but as I have previously pointed out (when you compared gender dysphoria to cocaine addic

skeptic: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:31:22 EST
I am sure that there is an underlying neurological cause to gender dysphoria. In essence, the brain is programmed for a different gender than the the body actually has, in terms of genitalia. I greatly doubt that this is a mere chemical imbalan

JimmyHavok: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:36:56 EST
mine's less intrusive
...for rich, straight, white men.

gerrymander: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:25:48 EST
I'm coming at it the other way, Lou. I'm presuming there's an underlying neurological cause to gender dysphoria -- a chemical imbalance or something -- which will eventually be discovered and become treatable. If so, people might well look back and view cu

Steve Urkel: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:12:52 EST
"My concept of morality is very fair and unbiased"
The word you were looking for is "totalitarian".
"it is not based upon any desire to secure a selfish advantage or to promote some arbitrary religious, ideological, or other belief system"
Sure it

Lou: Slice and dice

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:19:04 EST
view the decision to have your wang removed and filleted in order to feel comfortable wearing a dress.
Ummm, I think they want to be be comfortable being the sex they were born to be both externally AND internally. It certainly goes beyond

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:04:39 EST
My opinion is that if it is wrong to discriminate against transgendered people, then it is wrong everywhere, and in every forum.
My point there is that regardless of what the LoC might choose to do as regards hiring, national security policy over

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:41:38 EST
We humans dare to do all sorts of things that are not an established part of our past history. We did not routinely change gender in the past, but now we do. Many people have successfully treated their gender dysphoria by means of gender re-ass

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:51:37 EST
If gender isn't a relevant job qualification, then changing gender is also irrelevant.
Nonsense. Humans are not a species which routinely or biologically changes sex. Even the rate of sexual dysphoria as a percentage of the population is extremel

skeptic: forced sterilization

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:44:23 EST
I am not actually planning to have Jimmy Havok sterilized (despite the lengthy arguments that I have had with him in the past) but you are definitely on my list.

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:41:44 EST
If gender isn't a relevant job qualification, then changing gender is also irrelevant. And even if it is true that a change of gender will, as you say, invoke a security clearance alert at high enough levels of government, I still don't see why it sh

skeptic: the phony pose of neutrality

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:36:10 EST
It is a funny thing about moral beliefs; everybody thinks that theirs are correct and should therefore be imposed on everyone. Even people who think that it is up to every individual to arrive at his or her own concept of morality are expressing a mo

JimmyHavok: Re: Gender

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:09:05 EST
If you're referring to skeptic's idea about limiting population, I suspect you'd have some trouble making the cut. Inbreeding can have that effect.

Lou: Re: Gender

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:07:15 EST
Better sterilized than lynched. But, just to be clear...what in the name of all that's holy are you talking about? All people named Jimmy should be lynched?

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:02:27 EST
Read his other comments, Jimmy, he thinks people like you should be sterilized.

JimmyHavok: Re: Gender

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:42:17 EST
Yeah, whose big idea is it to impose that phony-baloney morality that prohibits lynching?

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:16:20 EST
"so with the matter of personal adornment, it may be your personal choice but there are still some limits."
Earlier you said "It is not the business of society to make those kind of personal decisions for people."
Obviously when personal expression i

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:48:12 EST
It sounds to me that under the approach you outline, we'd still be excluding black people, homosexuals and other untrustworthy people from public service on the grounds that they couldn't credibly perform their jobs.
Not to put too fine a point o

wetkarma: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:22:44 EST

We can hope that wouldn't be the case and that people would be tolerant of his choice, but life is rarely fair.
It sounds to me that under the approach you outline, we'd still be excluding black people, homosexuals and other untrustworthy pe

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:14:46 EST
The weird thing about your comment is that you claim that failing to discuss one's sexual dysphoria is equivalent to discussing one's sexual fetish, when clearly, these are opposite kinds of situations.
They're not, from the perspective of an emp

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:54:16 EST
Are you then saying his disclosure/sex change significantly affects his/her ability to do the job such that some other candidate would then be more qualified?
Affect his ability, maybe; some other candidate would become more qualified, possibly.

MayorBob: The Bad Thing About Swastika Tattoos.

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:56:09 EST
First they start out all innocent as some sort of political statement and a matter of somebody's right to express themselves. Then, the next thing you know they're murdering everyone in

skeptic: Re: Gender

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:45:50 EST
While I do support freedom of religion, I also believe that there are limits to what one can reasonably do in the name of religion. The Thuggee cult used to practice ritual murder as a means of worshiping Kali, the Hindu goddess of death, but that cu

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:26:26 EST
The weird thing about your comment is that you claim that failing to discuss one's sexual dysphoria is equivalent to discussing one's sexual fetish, when clearly, these are opposite kinds of situations. Discussions pertaining to sex can make people u

wetkarma: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 04:48:02 EST

If he doesn't intend to continue that suppression, that needs to be part of the equation potential employers can consider. Keeping it hidden until after receiving an offer was a poor ethical choice -- what kind of asshole says, "Now that you're leg

JimmyHavok: Re: Hold on.

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:25:59 EST
Interesting. You seem to think that be3ing a woman is obnoxious.
A better analogy would be if you hired someone, and then at lunch he revealed to you that he was African-American, although he had been wearing very effective makeup that made him lo

Lou: Where will it end

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:11:29 EST
In many places the majority forces people to hire and do business with homosexuals, even if the business owner finds homosexuality
Fuckin' fags wantin' to sit at our lunch counters!? This is unprecedented.

JimmyHavok: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:56:27 EST
employers are also people, and are also worthy of being treated with respect.
What do you mean "also?" You don't seem to think that employees deserve any sort of respect.

JimmyHavok: Re: What's more important here?

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:53:51 EST
a willingness to deceive
You really think the interviewers asked him if he was going to have gender reassignment surgery, and he denied it?

ivyafire: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:52:55 EST
FWIW, I hope she/he wins.
My husband is acquainted with a transgendered woman who was hired by a company he used to work for after her surgery. She has one of those ambiguous first names and the company hired her based on her resume alone.

MayorBob: Short Answer To A Rather Long Ridiculous Example.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:58:45 EST
No, it's really nothing like that at all.

I have to give you points for really digging down deep but you're just striving here.

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:53:20 EST
it is perfectly NORMAL for human beings to be either male or female.
Yes, but changing from one to the other isn't. More the point, bringing the change up immediately after, and only after, a job offer is laid on the table is not even slightly n

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:14:03 EST
"If a given individual wishes a sex change, or wishes to wear earrings, or tattoos, or whatever, that kind of decision is the business of the person who makes it."
Including swastika tattoos? How about someone who wishes to wear a shirt with a bib

gerrymander: Re: What's more important here?

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:28:33 EST
He's just doing something that would be bad for his supervisors if they are prejudiced; while non-prejudiced employers are unaffected.
I disagree. In your scenario, non-prejudiced employers are treated as if they are prejudiced at the outset, and

arromdee: Re: What's more important here?

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:35:56 EST
It's not prejudice against his supervisors. He's just doing something that would be bad for his supervisors if they are prejudiced; while non-prejudiced employers are unaffected.Think of it like insurance; if you get fire insurance,

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:26:51 EST
Since I already told you that I am from the planet Vulcan, I don't see why you expect me to come to work in full Klingon battle garb.
But seriously, folks, it is perfectly NORMAL for human beings to be either male or female. There is no particular

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:03:55 EST
I do not usually mention to prospective employers that I am a science fiction fan, either. Does this mean that I am keeping secrets from them?
It does if it means you plan to come to the office every day in full Klingon battle garb, and exp

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:55:40 EST
I don't think that respecting a prospective employer means that one therefore has to divulge information which has no relevance to the job for which one is applying. If I were in the situation of applying for a job at a time when I was also planning

gerrymander: Re: What's more important here?

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:45:31 EST
Because he wanted to be protected against dishonest employers who paid attention to things they weren't supposed to pay attention to?
So it's OK for him to go into a job with a prejudice against his supervisors, but not the other way around? And

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:33:30 EST
In effect, you are asking this applicant to say "by the way, just in case you happen to be prejudiced against transgendered people, you should know that I intend to have a sex change operation, so that you can discriminate against me unfairly".

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:27:03 EST
Now you say 'why didn't Schroer insist on being treated as a woman' in the interview. Well what can this really mean?
It means he didn't show up to the interview in a dress (despite having pictures); didn't disclose the plan to change his sex pri

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:32:43 EST
If we accept that gender dysphoria is equivalent in severity to cocaine addiction, there is still a fundamental difference between the two. In the case of gender dysphoria, there is a simple and effective treatment, which is to get a sex change opera

skeptic: Re: Gender

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:20:47 EST
I often see this kind of argument used to justify discrimination against a minority. We live in a democracy, in which the majority rules. The minority must therefore conform to the wishes of the majority. But minorities must also have rig

MayorBob: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:16:35 EST
Perhaps it's good to note that, before anyone goes through gender modification surgery, they do so at the end of a ton of counseling and courses of hormones designed to make the surgery the final touch in the process. One of the things most transgendered

Degee: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:28:35 EST
In the light of your reaction to this case, what is your stance on the following scenarios? :

A "man" gets hired and then a week later reveals that he WAS pre op wanting to become a man but has recognised it is a silly delusion and

arromdee: Re: What's more important here?

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:18:41 EST
It's not a willingness to deceive because it only "deceives" the employer about something they legally aren't supposed to pay attention to in the first place.
If being thought of as a woman is so important to Schroer, why did he interview as a man?<

Lou: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 06:59:43 EST
troll

wetkarma: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 04:37:51 EST

Here's my question: if this is so damn important to him, why didn't Schroer insist on being treated as a woman during the interview? Even if we agree that transsexuals should not be discriminated against, shouldn't employers have the right to withd

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:11:33 EST
Given that the sex of the individual is legally irrelevant to the hiring and employment process, no.
So why did Schroer inject it into the discussion? He could have conducted the entire interview process as a woman, or he could have not sai

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:07:37 EST
They're both mind-state affecting disorders, right? We know drug addiction is, and that's what Schroer is claiming as per the write-up above. So, what's the problem?

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:02:00 EST
Not prescribing birth control has an impact on one's ability to work at a pharmacy.
No, it has an impact on the pharmacy's customers; the employee's ability to prescribe the medication in unaltered.

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:09:32 EST
Likewise, there was almost certainly a point during the selection process where Schroer was asked it there was anything he would have liked to address about the job. "I want you to consider me a woman"
Given that the sex of the individual is l

rumata: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:56:01 EST

To use another example, employers are also forbidden to ask about religion; should a prospective employee with a pharmacy be allowed to bring a discrimination suit if a job offer is rescinded because the candidate says "my faith won't let me pr

Lou: Hold on.

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:10:07 EST
You're equating a drug addiction to a sex change?

gerrymander: Re: What's more important here?

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:05:18 EST
They decided to give him the job as a human being with all that experience and all those qualifications.
And that human being called all that experience and those qualifications on doubt by revealing something additional about himself: a willingn

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:45:10 EST
"Blind hiring" does not mean employers are forbidden to use their eyes. Likewise, there was almost certainly a point during the selection process where Schroer was asked it there was anything he would have liked to address about the job. "I want you to con

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:02:30 EST
If the employer is not legally allowed to inquire about sex, then how can the prospective employee have misrepresented an answer to a question they can't legally have been asked?

MayorBob: What's more important here?

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:16:38 EST
Was this the same person who came to the job full of all those wonderful job qualifications the Library of Congress was looking for? Yes. Did this person have an exemplary work record? Apparently, if you consider being a highly decorated combat veteran

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:02:11 EST
They're not legally allowed to ask about race, either, but that doesn't mean going to the interview in blackface is a wise choice. Again, it's not about sex, it's about misrepresentation -- which immediately opens the door to questions like, "what else has

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:50:04 EST
Unless it's specific to the job duties, I don't think employers are legally allowed to ask what sex you are, are they?

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:47:05 EST
If the individual's sex was irrelevant to the initial hiring process, then a change in sex is irrelevant.
Deliberately lying to an interviewer is always relevant, regardless of the nature of the lie.

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:42:15 EST
If the individual's sex was irrelevant to the initial hiring process, then a change in sex is irrelevant. I don't see any way around that.

gerrymander: gone lawsuit fishing

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:37:20 EST
The job offer was made and Schroer accepted. He also informed his new employer that he would begin work as Diane, because he was diagnosed as suffering "gender dysphoria" with associated gender identity disorder.
Here's my question: if this is so

port1080: Re: Gender

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:17:12 EST
And don't the wishes of the majority count? Most people prefer not to have to work in an environment full of freaks. Why should the desires of a tiny minority of freaks take precedence over the wishes of the majority?
This is sort a self-fulfilli

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:47:01 EST
"If that's what it takes for me to be psychologically fulfilled, who are you (or is my boss) to argue?"
What about my psychological fulfillment? If it's my company, I should be allowed to have employees I enjoy working around. If your psychological fulf

port1080: Gender

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:29:13 EST
Ignoring Schroer's exact case for the moment, I find it quite interesting that 12 states already offer some legal protection for transgendered folks. I find this interesting because we do allow for companies to hire somewhat based on appearance and h

You Can't Take Away A Job That You Offered Her When She Was A He (Trees And Things)

JimmyHavok: More 30-second research, I see

gerrymander: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

skeptic: treating gender dysphoria

skeptic: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

zyxwvutsr: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

zyxwvutsr: Re: Hoooold on, bubby.

Dr John A Zoidberg: Question for Gerrymander

JimmyHavok: another weary second of research

JimmyHavok: Re: Hoooold on, bubby.

zyxwvutsr: Re: Hoooold on, bubby.

JimmyHavok: Hoooold on, bubby.

zyxwvutsr: Re: Hold on.

Steve Urkel: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

skeptic: Re: Hold on, again

MayorBob: Get help, Lou.

Lou: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

skeptic: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

skeptic: Re: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

JimmyHavok: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

gerrymander: We Mutants, licken-chegs!

Steve Urkel: Re: the phony pose of neutrality

Lou: Slice and dice

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

skeptic: forced sterilization

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

skeptic: the phony pose of neutrality

JimmyHavok: Re: Gender

Lou: Re: Gender

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

JimmyHavok: Re: Gender

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

wetkarma: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

MayorBob: The Bad Thing About Swastika Tattoos.

skeptic: Re: Gender

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

wetkarma: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

JimmyHavok: Re: Hold on.

Lou: Where will it end

JimmyHavok: Re: Hold on.

JimmyHavok: Re: What's more important here?

ivyafire: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

MayorBob: Short Answer To A Rather Long Ridiculous Example.

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

Steve Urkel: Re: Gender

gerrymander: Re: What's more important here?

arromdee: Re: What's more important here?

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: What's more important here?

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

skeptic: Re: Hold on.

skeptic: Re: Gender

MayorBob: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Degee: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

arromdee: Re: What's more important here?

Lou: Re: Hold on.

wetkarma: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

gerrymander: Re: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

rumata: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

Lou: Hold on.

gerrymander: Re: What's more important here?

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

MayorBob: What's more important here?

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

gerrymander: Re: gone lawsuit fishing

thefadd: Re: gone lawsuit fishing