First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply NYC fines employers $250,000 for getting someone's "gender" wrong
15742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 12/25/15 , edited 12/25/15




Not going to lie I laughed lol.

22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 12/25/15
Employer's are not allowed to be verbally abusive--part of providing a healthy and safe work environment. There are already plenty of laws to restrict such behaviors.

This law doesn't appear to be about stopping 'harassment'. We already have such. It's attempting to prevent discrimination. Very different.

Now I don't actually mind such laws, although it must be within good reason. This law, like many, isn't. Mind you, such laws hardly fix discrimination and prejudice on the level they are attempting to do so.

I honestly don't think it's the place of the government to enforce such triviality in speech.

The only part of this law I agree with is allowing the use of single-sex facilities.

Posted 12/25/15

PrinceJudar wrote:

Employer's are not allowed to be verbally abusive--part of providing a healthy and safe work environment. There are already plenty of laws to restrict such behaviors.

This law doesn't appear to be about stopping 'harassment'. We already have such. It's attempting to prevent discrimination. Very different.

Now I don't actually mind such laws, although it must be within good reason. This law, like many, isn't. Mind you, such laws hardly fix discrimination and prejudice on the level they are attempting to do so.

I honestly don't think it's the place of the government to enforce such triviality in speech.

The only part of this law I agree with is allowing the use of single-sex facilities.



So would referring to someone by the wrong pronoun intentionally and repeatedly be considered a type of harassment?
747 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 12/25/15
Sorry, but if it is a guy, I will refer to them as such same thing with a girl wanting to be called a man. I know I'll get some heat for this but no matter how much makeup, wigs, and dresses a man wears they will never be a woman, simple biology. I will apologize for not conforming to their delusions and simply refer to them by their given name or nickname to avoid further issues and inconveniences.
81324 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M
Offline
Posted 12/25/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

But that's exactly what you're doing if you knowingly and maliciously use the wrong pronoun. It basically is saying what you are is an abomination, and it must be stopped.


No it is not. But calling them by their preferred gender pronoun is supporting a delusion. I'm not going to tell a paranoid schizophrenic that the government is actually out to get them and that a secret agency has been asking around about them, and I'm not going to tell a man who thinks he's a woman that he's a woman. It is harmful to support delusions.
871 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / West Friendship,...
Offline
Posted 12/25/15
The fine is WAY too high. A hundred dollar fine, maybe.
16735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/25/15 , edited 12/25/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


XxDarkSasuxX wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I don't see how it is a bad analogy.


That's a bad analogy here. In that case you are referring to someone refusing to call someone what they are (called).
However, if you refuse to call someone by say their given name
Their given name is the name they were attributed at birth.

However, if you refuse to call someone by their actual gender


A better analogy would be to call someone by their real name when they clearly prefer their nickname.

. . . to call someone by their gender from birth when they clearly prefer their gender identity


You're clearly refusing to call someone by their preferred gender, based on physical attributes, despite protests not to. The real kicker is, is gender identity determine by birth sex or gender? I believe it is determined by the gender identity you choose.


I've got a question for you on the opposite side. Who even determines what a gender identity is? Sex is obvious: Penis/Vagina. Who determines what a gender identity is and who decides what is acceptable/unacceptable for the chosen gender? What is to prevent one person's gender from being different from another person's gender if they both choose female?




ishe5555 wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Gender policing and enforcing gender norms has shown to be consistently harmful, aren't they? Even more so in a domestic setting such as home.


You're assuming that because someone is particular gender that they should be force to follow gender norms. Just because someone is male doesn't mean they have to do typical male things, but if they don't then it doesn't mean they aren't male. One does not need to be male to be masculine or female to be feminine. I have no desire to box people into asinine gender boxes where they are "male but functioning as partial female that associates as male most of the time except when they associate as female", just because they like some things or like to do some things that are not thought by society to be normal for their gender. If they like those things, that is their prerogative.

Agreed. It's called personality traits you can't generically box everyone's personalities into a category like that it's insulting.
81337 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Inside Lorreen's...
Offline
Posted 12/25/15
So many people in this thread would misconstrue the gender of Hideyoshi...
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 12/25/15 , edited 12/25/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So would referring to someone by the wrong pronoun intentionally and repeatedly be considered a type of harassment?


When done in a casual fashion and simple refusal (possibly on the grounds of beliefs). No. Aggressively and maliciously, in a way one could prove that it provides a threatening environment. Yes.

People who are honestly malicious and hostile towards transgenders will not stop being a dick just because they can't refer to them with the wrong pronoun. There are other ways to harass someone, if that is the intention.



Posted 12/25/15 , edited 1/2/16

ishe5555 wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

But that's exactly what you're doing if you knowingly and maliciously use the wrong pronoun. It basically is saying what you are is an abomination, and it must be stopped.


No it is not. But calling them by their preferred gender pronoun is supporting a delusion. I'm not going to tell a paranoid schizophrenic that the government is actually out to get them and that a secret agency has been asking around about them, and I'm not going to tell a man who thinks he's a woman that he's a woman. It is harmful to support delusions.


By referring it to as a delusion you're basically saying that expressing your gender identity is wrong. It's more harmful than to support your own delusion of gender identity because it has less of a basis in reality and facts than expressed gender identity. By referring to it as a delusion, you're saying that you cannot have a preferred gender identity, because a thing only exist as an arbitrary dichotomy assigned at birth alongside gender rather than something that develops semi independently. Therapy is usually an option so that the person in question can find what gender identity they want to have and express.


Or something. Yada yada. Might've used dichotomy wrong. BRB.
648 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/25/15 , edited 12/25/15
Does this apply to someone who uses the pronouns "their, they"? because that would be annoying as fuck. I used to know someone in tumblr who wanted people to call them by those pronouns but she was a girl by looks so I always called her "she, her" because calling a single person "they, their" was very difficult for me. She got so mad (I still can't help but use 'she') and offended. I didn't speak to that person ever again because I thought "I don't have time for this shit".

Now the special snowflakes will use this law to their advantage. As ridiculous as this world is getting with many people who love to get offended by trivial bullshit and make up shit to feel cool, we will soon have like 10 types of genders and poor us if we screw up.

This reminds me when I cut all my hair in middle school and since I was flat as a board, classmates used to call me "he, him" a lot as a joke that even the ones who didn't know me thought I was a boy...I never felt mad about it but it makes me mad now that I could have won $250,000 back then with this law.
3349 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Ente Isla
Offline
Posted 12/25/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I think consistent and malicious harassment of any type is inappropriate for the work place and if they do not handle it then I believe the person has a right to legal action.


If an individual is hounding another over their gender identity and intentionally taking time out of their day to badger them over it, it's interfering with their job and I'd agree that it's an issue that needs addressing. But if it's just someone refusing to refer to the person they're talking to by their preferred pronoun, I don't think it's a significant enough issue to warrant legal action. Bob may not like it that Alice is referring to him by a pronoun that doesn't correspond with his gender identity, but that doesn't mean he should be able to take her to court over it and sue her for hundreds of thousands of dollars.


PrinceJudar wrote:

Employer's are not allowed to be verbally abusive--part of providing a healthy and safe work environment. There are already plenty of laws to restrict such behaviors.

This law doesn't appear to be about stopping 'harassment'. We already have such. It's attempting to prevent discrimination. Very different.

Now I don't actually mind such laws, although it must be within good reason. This law, like many, isn't. Mind you, such laws hardly fix discrimination and prejudice on the level they are attempting to do so.

I honestly don't think it's the place of the government to enforce such triviality in speech.

The only part of this law I agree with is allowing the use of single-sex facilities.



^ This.
Posted 12/25/15

PrinceJudar wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So would referring to someone by the wrong pronoun intentionally and repeatedly be considered a type of harassment?


When done in a casual fashion and simple refusal (possibly on the grounds of beliefs). No. Aggressively and maliciously, in a way one could prove that it provides a threatening environment. Yes.

People who are honestly malicious and hostile towards transgenders will not stop being a dick just because they can't refer to them with the wrong pronoun. There are other ways to harass someone, if that is the intention.





I believe that simple refusal does create a threatening environment. Intentional is by nature Intentionally malicious, isn't it?
16735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/25/15 , edited 1/2/16

descloud wrote:

The way you worded it sounds it just meant me :p


If your Uncle Sam demand your tax money from PV! You can throw PV's ass in jail if they don't comply.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So would referring to someone by the wrong pronoun intentionally and repeatedly be considered a type of harassment?


If they are dude trying to be a girl and they get referred to as a dude then no. The truth is not harassment it's reality. The sooner they accept reality the sooner they can accept themselves.
16735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/25/15 , edited 12/25/15

PrinceJudar wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So would referring to someone by the wrong pronoun intentionally and repeatedly be considered a type of harassment?


When done in a casual fashion and simple refusal (possibly on the grounds of beliefs). No. Aggressively and maliciously, in a way one could prove that it provides a threatening environment. Yes.

People who are honestly malicious and hostile towards transgenders will not stop being a dick just because they can't refer to them with the wrong pronoun. There are other ways to harass someone, if that is the intention.





Give some examples of how he/she is used aggressively or in a threatening way.



PeripheralVisionary wrote:


PrinceJudar wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So would referring to someone by the wrong pronoun intentionally and repeatedly be considered a type of harassment?


When done in a casual fashion and simple refusal (possibly on the grounds of beliefs). No. Aggressively and maliciously, in a way one could prove that it provides a threatening environment. Yes.

People who are honestly malicious and hostile towards transgenders will not stop being a dick just because they can't refer to them with the wrong pronoun. There are other ways to harass someone, if that is the intention.





I believe that simple refusal does create a threatening environment. Intentional is by nature Intentionally malicious, isn't it?


You know people getting hostile and aggressive because people call them the wrong "gender" is a threatening environment too.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.