musings on discrimination and the constitution

[JayBird]

What is clear to me at least is that our laws are conflicted when it comes to this issue and others.  As was already pointed out, we do have laws that protect some in society based upon their race/color and gender when it comes to protecting the rights of women.  In this case the issue is protecting those who are GLBT from some of the same prejudice that the laws based on color were created for.  I think what is so frustrating and really what underlies the injustice with a situation like this is the understanding that we as a society have failed to reach the point where we accept people for who they are.  The fact that some people are unable to do that is what led to laws that attempted to correct societies moral compass and as such the civil rights of others. We are not there yet and have much growing to do.

While I get why this couple took the issue of being turned down by a photographer because of their sexual orientation to court on one hand, that being "the principal of the thing and rights", on the other I wonder if the better course of action is for folks to make a statement by "not patronizing" businesses that do not adhere to our personal code of ethics.  I think changing how society responds via public outcry and support or non support of businesses may be the way to achieve real change at a level that matters.  Personally, I would never want to do business with any one who did not respect me.   

It is a confusing subject to most of us.  GLBT?  There are so many uncertanties.  Very few of us care about whether a person is "gay" or not.  The concerns revolve around what society will be "forced" to accept.  California's Governor recently proved that by his decree that no child (that's 18 & under) could be denied the use of any restroom, dressing room, or sports team because of their sexual identification.  (I probably misstated that somehow).  Most of society sees that as the disaster that it is.  Most don't care if a guy wants to dress like a woman.  But most don't wan to be forced to hire him or let him represent their business.  Or let him use the ladies room if he desires to do so.

This subject requires much, much more thought.

What is so confusing Not Now?  I don't mean this with snark.  I would really like to know why this issue is so difficult for some to wrap their heads around.

I too am curious as to the answer, as a matter of fact that might explain where the stumbling block comes from that we as a united nation keep hitting when it comes to trying to end discrimination.

[NotNow]

Diane,

I was speaking about what the ramifications of "GLBT" in a legal sense.  It is my belief that this is what derailed the local initiative as well.  As I previously stated, few have any problem with gay members of society, as most gay people are largely indistinguishable.  People fear "unintended" consequences.  Or maybe they are intended.  Mixed sex use restrooms and such.  The whole "Mr. Doe" the schoolteacher scenario I discussed with Dare! and such.   The scary part is that StephenDare! defends such things as a crossdressing elementary school teacher and mixed restroom/dressing rooms in primary schools.  I would never allow my child to be exposed to such things and I believe the majority would agree with me.  In the same light, business's are sensitive to the image they project, and what they would be forced to do under some proposals.  These unknown consequences are what I am speaking of.

[Cheshire Cat]

Okay NN, you are talking ramifications in a legal sense.  If that is the concern than I think we have to recognize that this country has already headed well down the path of legislating how people are treated with regard to race and gender (usually to protect women's rights) so that door called "ramifications" has been open wide for quite some time in my view.  As a result we have laws on the books that can be interpreted to mean a variety of things depending upon the agenda of those using them to challenge their "unfair" treatment.  I can't see this country undoing those laws anytime soon and as such cannot see how we can have laws that defend some and not others. You and Stephen were both able to site cases of law to support your position and that can likely be said about a number of issues facing our society and our system of law.  Truthfully like our nation itself our laws are often seriously conflicted and in many cases lead to unintentional results that were never even imagined when the laws were written.  If that is the uncertainty behind "ramifications" that is something that will be very difficult to address in the drafting of the laws to begin with considering that those drafting them have their own agenda's and views about the problem they are addressing.

I think I am also hearing some fear in this statement.  Let me clarify what I mean.  The fear I am referring to seems to be that there will be an epidemic of Gay or cross gender folks using restrooms that don't seem to match up with the "equipment" they were physically given. That just won't happen.  The truth is that those who identify as male or female actually do not intimidate others when using the restroom of their choice.  I have been in restrooms several times where gay or transgender folks have used the same restroom.  It happens and no one has ever been asked to drop their pant's before entering, at least that I know of. The only problem for me would be if they wanted to share my stall which I would find very uncomfortable for anyone of any sex to do.  lmao  I also know that both men and women will take their younger children into the restroom they must use, like I did my son's without a problem and for safety sake.

I also detect another assumption that I often hear repeated and that is one that wrongly supposes that those who are Gay are the same folks who would sexually insult or abuse a person or child in a restroom or elsewhere.  You know NN that the majority of pedophiles are men or women who are generally considered straight.

Now to the cross dressing issue.  Firstly, if a person identifies as one sex, to dress according is almost something to expect.  I think the person has the right to dress as they feel fit.  When it comes to employment, their employers can set "dress codes".  If a guy happens to like a dress and it doesn't affect their job performance, let them wear the dadgum dress.  lol  I mean in the past we had toga's, still have kilts and it is not unheard of for a man to wear a skirt. It's all about current attitudes.  There was a time when women were frowned upon when wearing pant's and that is not very long ago.   Now this is going to shock you but I have no problem with a person who cross dresses teaching at a school.  My guess is that kids wouldn't either if it were the norm. I had a lesbian teacher in elementary school who dressed in men's clothes and carried a mans wallet. None of the kids cared.  What might happen is that a child might ask their parent or guardian why a person dressed a certain way and at that time receive an explanation that is age appropriate.  I don't see a rush on the part of Gay's to dress in a way that will "emphasize" the gender difference in the same way that many hide the fact that they are gay.  It's a matter of comfort level.  I don't see a great rush on the part of Gay men to wear dresses and some of them would not identify with that anyway. I also don't see a change in policy anytime soon regarding co ed locker rooms or restrooms in schools something I would not want to see for monthly reasons on the part of young girls and out of control hormones on the part of young men (or both sexes for that matter). Interestingly in many countries most who travel will tell you that there are many places where restrooms are not gender specific, including schools and this includes those with more than one stall. 

Just want to stress that my tone here is meant to be conversational and not confrontational.  You did say you don't have a problem with Gay people, but what you didn't say and I felt was implied was you and others don't have a problem with them if they follow the rules of dress and behavior that you are most comfortable with.  If I am wrong about this please let me know.  Again, I am just conversing and trying to understand. 

[NotNow]

Diane,

Thanks for the reply.  I think that you have misunderstood me on some points and that we just disagree on others. 

I agree that the legal landscape in this area is confused and muddled.  As I stated previously, it is my belief that that matches the current state of the majority of citizens.  We want equal liberty, but we also want to live and raise our children according to our belief/moral code/religious views as well.

Your previous experiences were under the current rules/laws.  If we change them, the unintended consequence may be new experiences for you...and the rest of us. 

I also took my son or daughter to the Men's room with me when they were small.  I am not commenting on this practice.

You are correct when you detect fear in my posts.  That fear is backed up by experience.  I did not address pedophilia but since you brought it up I will point out to you that pedophilia exists in both homosexual and heterosexual communities, and any loosening of moral code or confusion over sexual roles and norms will contribute to opportunity for these criminals.  The same criminals who are now asking for the same "protections" that the GLBT community is asking for (ever heard of B4U-Act?). 

Currently, employers can set dress codes.  With legal protection to "identify" as either sex, will that still be the case?  Like you, I could care less what people wear (within decency standards, remember those?), but if I had a business then I would want to retain that control.

We will just have to disagree about cross dressing primary teachers and the like.  Like it or not, a teacher can be a life changing role model for children and I demand the right to control that exposure to some extent.  Children sharing restrooms/dressing rooms is now the law in California.  I disagree with that as well.  They are simply asking for problims there.  We can't control the kids in schools now. 

I have traveled all over the world and I have never seen men and women "sharing" restrooms at the same time.  I have not been in the schools in those places but in many I am aware that boys and girls are separated ALL of the time.

I too want to stress that I am interested in discussion.  I am interested in equal liberties for all of us.  I am simply questioning how we go about it.

[Cheshire Cat]

I too appreciate your candor.  With regard to this remark:

You are correct when you detect fear in my posts.  That fear is backed up by experience.  I did not address pedophilia but since you brought it up I will point out to you that pedophilia manifests in both homosexual and heterosexual communities, and any loosening of moral code or confusion over sexual roles and norms will contribute to opportunity for these criminals.  The same criminals who are now asking for the same "protections" that the GLBT community is asking for (ever heard of B4U-Act?).

According to whose moral code should we conduct ourselves?  That of a political party, a church or some other unknown authority?  I know that pedophilia exists in both straight and non straight individuals, but the numbers I have seen in the past as well as cases reported clearly show the vast majority of such cases where kids are molested are by adults who are considered straight.  It happens in homes around this country on a daily basis.  To imagine that there would be an uptick in this behavior if a transgender man entered a woman's restroom seems to be something that will not happen but on the other side of the equation, I have heard of incidents where Gay men are attacked and harmed when using the Men's room.  So the worry can go both ways.  IMO  I just don't see Gay's as immoral and when we talk about a moral compass, we are implying something are we not?   

As to the criminals asking for the same protection, I would hope that the court would see this for what it is.  I know the bad guy's will use anything and everything to their own advantage, but I am not so sure that their attempted abuses of the system are reason enough to deny rights to others.  I do understand your position though.

Your previous experiences were under the current rules/laws.  If we change them, the unintended consequence may be new experiences for you...and the rest of us.

We pretty much run this risk with any type of legislation, I don't know how this issue is different. 

I do appreciate the discussion and think it is one long over due nationally and certainly in Jacksonville.

[Dog Walker]

Most parents will not allow their children to be subjected to mixed sex bathrooms and/or dressing rooms.  I would not.

Most businesses, as well as a majority of citizens, will find it unacceptable that mixed sex bathrooms be instituted.  While I am sympathetic to what you are trying to accomplish, the fact is that a man in a dress is still a man.

Lots of mixed sex public restrooms in other countries.  Row of sinks and mirrors on one side and a row of closed cubicles with toilets inside on the other; an attendant (usually female) keeping the place clean, handing out towels and taking tips.