Transgender Employment Discrimination

[foundit66]

MATT WALSH (HOST): So you're confused about that and we have to ask what else are you confused about? Because if you can be confused about something as basic as that, about who you are, what you are, about what a woman is, and so on -- if you can be confused about that, then you could plausibly be confused about anything, which makes you unfit for this job, and it makes you unfit for, frankly, most employment. Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it. Oh, yeah, there are some jobs like that. But any job where the reality actually matters, seriously, you're seriously called into question.​

Matt Walsh says people who are "confused" about "what a woman is" are "unfit for, frankly, most employment"

www.mediamatters.org

Once again, transphobes pushing for discrimination against transgenders.

 

[TheParser]

There have always been, I believe, transgenders (especially in Europe).

But generally they have kept a low profile.

They did not shout it from the rooftops.

And they certainly did not demand to participate on cisgender sports teams.

There is a British travel writer named Jan Morris. Originally, she was James Morris. I understand that the British people cheerfully accept her.

I think that Americans would also more cheerfully accept them if some of the activists refrained from insisting that young children should be taught about this subject.

Life is difficult for transgenders, especially those who do not look like the gender they have decided to choose.

Their colleagues should refrain from insulting them. And there should be penalties for those who do.

 

[VySky]

MATT WALSH (HOST): So you're confused about that and we have to ask what else are you confused about? Because if you can be confused about something as basic as that, about who you are, what you are, about what a woman is, and so on -- if you can be confused about that, then you could plausibly be confused about anything, which makes you unfit for this job, and it makes you unfit for, frankly, most employment. Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it. Oh, yeah, there are some jobs like that. But any job where the reality actually matters, seriously, you're seriously called into question.​

Matt Walsh says people who are "confused" about "what a woman is" are "unfit for, frankly, most employment"

www.mediamatters.org

Once again, transphobes pushing for discrimination against transgenders.

Character is part of the overall performance of personnel.

 

[Fabiusbile]

I love watching this LGBT bestiary of yours from the outside... it was doubly funny to look at how all the narratives of feminism just crumbled to dust (what's there, the 4th wave), just recently they were so loudly hysterical... and today's fury of the most radical representatives of the "sisters" is simply spraying poison... and then the hateful men beat them up by sitting on hype trance topics, ruining their sports and the most sacred thing - occupying the position of eternal victims.
It's so funny. Today, American society, as an element of a dying empire, shows by the most vivid example how not to do and where the curve of social development can lead.
Yes... funny... and a little sad. However, the story does not have a "subjunctive mood" (I am not sure that there is such an expression in English)... and what has to die and give way to something new, then that's how it should be.

 

[tshade]

MATT WALSH (HOST): So you're confused about that and we have to ask what else are you confused about? Because if you can be confused about something as basic as that, about who you are, what you are, about what a woman is, and so on -- if you can be confused about that, then you could plausibly be confused about anything, which makes you unfit for this job, and it makes you unfit for, frankly, most employment. Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it. Oh, yeah, there are some jobs like that. But any job where the reality actually matters, seriously, you're seriously called into question.​

Matt Walsh says people who are "confused" about "what a woman is" are "unfit for, frankly, most employment"

www.mediamatters.org

Once again, transphobes pushing for discrimination against transgenders.

there has always been, and always will be ignorant people. Always those fighting against liberty.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

There have always been, I believe, transgenders (especially in Europe).

But generally they have kept a low profile.

They did not shout it from the rooftops.

And they certainly did not demand to participate on cisgender sports teams.

There is a British travel writer named Jan Morris. Originally, she was James Morris. I understand that the British people cheerfully accept her.

I think that Americans would also more cheerfully accept them if some of the activists refrained from insisting that young children should be taught about this subject.

Life is difficult for transgenders, especially those who do not look like the gender they have decided to choose.

Their colleagues should refrain from insulting them. And there should be penalties for those who do.

The problem with the current trans fad is this - we are supposed to accept EVERYONE wearing a dress as a woman. PERIOD.
No argument. If you say otherwise, you are MAGA... right wing extremist.
The left totally, and completely ignore the existence of CDs. Cross dressers. Who have also existed for a very-very long time.
They are not transgender. And their desire to dress like a woman is based on a sexual fetish. Most are heterosexual or bisexual. They are sexually attracted to women. And we are supposed to ignore that, and allow them to go into women's restrooms, dressing rooms.
We don't accept that. Because it is insane. And horribly unfair to actual women.
There is absolutely no way to tell the difference between an actual transgender, which is very rare, and cross dressers or effeminate gay men dressing like women.
That is one point.
The other point, that is more important than above - in hiring a trans person, again because you can't tell between a person who is a genuine trans, and a woke hive mind nut who is going to be a major pain in the ass. So they avoid hiring them to avoid the problems a demanding nut brings to the table.

 

[VanceMack]

Its not that complicated. If a man that knows he is a man but also acknowledges that for whatever reason he feels effeminate and that he more closely relates in life as a woman were to apply for a job, that man would probably be fine, However...if you are a man that has been lied to and told that by golly if you FEEL like a woman then you ARE a woman and should be poutraged if anyone 'misgenders' you...then **** no...why would you hire someone like that?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Its not that complicated. If a man that knows he is a man but also acknowledges that for whatever reason he feels effeminate and that he more closely relates in life as a woman were to apply for a job, that man would probably be fine, However...if you are a man that has been lied to and told that by golly if you FEEL like a woman then you ARE a woman and should be poutraged if anyone 'misgenders' you...then **** no...why would you hire someone like that?

"Cry Bullies" - what a great term! I had not heard that one before.
This is exactly what I referred to in my 2nd point. Imagine if you are an employer and you hired one of these hivemind narcissist. Imagine the nightmare that is going to ensue. The high probability of unrealistic demands and stress you inflicted upon your other employees.

 

[VanceMack]

I mean...sorry...I as an employer wouldnt put any of these people on the payroll. Bad for business and frankly...a morale and business killer.

 

[VanceMack]

"Cry Bullies" - what a great term! I had not heard that one before.
This is exactly what I referred to in my 2nd point. Imagine if you are an employer and you hired one of these hivemind narcissist. Imagine the nightmare that is going to ensue. The high probability of unrealistic demands and stress you inflicted upon your other employees.

The left has long used words ( acceptance and tolerance) that they have none of. When you have to attempt to force acceptance...its unlikely to be achieved. Other countries are literally promoting legislation that makes it criminal to not embrace and affirm delusion and mental illness.

 

[BirdinHand]

I think that Americans would also more cheerfully accept them if some of the activists refrained from insisting that young children should be taught about this subject.

What else should we refrain from teaching children about?

Should we not tell them that some people have disabilities? Should we not tell them that some people die? Should we not tell them that some of them will be discriminated against and bullied simply based on who they are?

 

[OrphanSlug]

If I were a business owner, it would be a difficult sell to convince me to put someone in front of my clients, who as employees of the business turn around demand a level of recognition and respect from coworkers and clients that is not given in return.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The left has long used words ( acceptance and tolerance) that they have none of. When you have to attempt to force acceptance...its unlikely to be achieved. Other countries are literally promoting legislation that makes it criminal to not embrace and affirm delusion and mental illness.

Hate to tell you but we already have ordinances in cities in America right now that make it a finable offense to do just that.

 

[VanceMack]

Hate to tell you but we already have ordinances in cities in America right now that make it a finable offense to do just that.

I know. California has made it illegal for state employees to deliberately misgender people. I suspect that like so many of the idiotic laws they pass it too will be overturned eventually. Then again...with the number of communists this administration has put on the federal benches....that might be the real battle of our day.

 

[noonereal]

MATT WALSH (HOST): So you're confused about that and we have to ask what else are you confused about? Because if you can be confused about something as basic as that, about who you are, what you are, about what a woman is, and so on -- if you can be confused about that, then you could plausibly be confused about anything, which makes you unfit for this job, and it makes you unfit for, frankly, most employment. Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it. Oh, yeah, there are some jobs like that. But any job where the reality actually matters, seriously, you're seriously called into question.​

Matt Walsh says people who are "confused" about "what a woman is" are "unfit for, frankly, most employment"

www.mediamatters.org

Once again, transphobes pushing for discrimination against transgenders.

Seems we hire people of faith and think nothing of it. Considering how ridiculous the invisible man in the sky is, should we not hire those in any religion?
Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Seems we hire people of faith and think nothing of it. Considering how ridiculous the invisible man in the sky is, should we not hire those in any religion?
Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it.

Strawman fail #8,332

 

[Irredentist]

The problem with the current trans fad is this - we are supposed to accept EVERYONE wearing a dress as a woman. PERIOD.
No argument. If you say otherwise, you are MAGA... right wing extremist.
The left totally, and completely ignore the existence of CDs. Cross dressers. Who have also existed for a very-very long time.
They are not transgender. And their desire to dress like a woman is based on a sexual fetish. Most are heterosexual or bisexual. They are sexually attracted to women. And we are supposed to ignore that, and allow them to go into women's restrooms, dressing rooms.
We don't accept that. Because it is insane. And horribly unfair to actual women.
There is absolutely no way to tell the difference between an actual transgender, which is very rare, and cross dressers or effeminate gay men dressing like women.
That is one point.
The other point, that is more important than above - in hiring a trans person, again because you can't tell between a person who is a genuine trans, and a woke hive mind nut who is going to be a major pain in the ass. So they avoid hiring them to avoid the problems a demanding nut brings to the table.

Employment discrimination on the basis of sex is illegal. So if a business were to refuse to hire a biological male on the basis that they wear women's clothing, that would be a violation of the law.

Also, I'm curious, do you think that lesbians should be banned from women's restrooms because they are attracted to women?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Employment discrimination on the basis of sex is illegal. So if a business were to refuse to hire a biological male on the basis that they wear women's clothing, that would be a violation of the law.

Also, I'm curious, do you think that lesbians should be banned from women's restrooms because they are attracted to women?

It would not be a violation of law, since it is not based on their sex. But what they are wearing, and that is not unlawful.

2nd question is a logical fallacy. Unless they develop a "sexual preference" scan - obviously impossible to know a persons sexual preference.
And I would say at least 98% of all women would not feel uncomfortable being in a public restroom with a lesbian like they feel uncomfortable with a man.

 

[noonereal]

, I'm curious, do you think that lesbians should be banned from women's restrooms because they are attracted to women?

Good point.
But honestly I have never understood why we need his and her bathrooms.
Seems ridiculous

 

[Irredentist]

It would not be a violation of law, since it is not based on their sex. But what they are wearing, and that is not unlawful.

Oh but it is based off their sex. Because if it was a woman wearing the exact same clothing, they would be hired.

2nd question is a logical fallacy. Unless they develop a "sexual preference" scan - obviously impossible to know a persons sexual preference.
And I would say at least 98% of all women would not feel uncomfortable being in a public restroom with a lesbian like they feel uncomfortable with a man.

Ok, then someone's sexual preferences shouldn't have anything to do with what bathroom they are allowed to use, correct?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Ok, then someone's sexual preferences shouldn't have anything to do with what bathroom they are allowed to use, correct?

No what their biological sex is that determination.
You brought sexual preference into this. Trying to absurdly equate a lesbian and a cross dresser.

 

[Irredentist]

No what their biological sex is that determination.
You brought sexual preference into this. Trying to absurdly equate a lesbian and a cross dresser.

Incorrect. You said

They are not transgender. And their desire to dress like a woman is based on a sexual fetish. Most are heterosexual or bisexual. They are sexually attracted to women. And we are supposed to ignore that, and allow them to go into women's restrooms, dressing rooms.

So it was actually you who brought sexual preference into this conversation. Because apparently that matters to you?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Incorrect. You said


So it was actually you who brought sexual preference into this conversation. Because apparently that matters to you?

No you simply misunderstand.
I took issue with the left DEMANDING that we accept a trans person and a CD as being equal.
They are not. And I 100% guarantee you every actual trans person agrees with me that they are NOT the same.

 

[Irredentist]

No you simply misunderstand.
I took issue with the left DEMANDING that we accept a trans person and a CD as being equal.
They are not. And I 100% guarantee you every actual trans person agrees with me that they are NOT the same.

Of course, crossdressers and transgender people are not the same. But that doesn't make it lawful to discriminate against a biological male just because they wear women's clothing. If you would hire a woman wearing the same clothing, then that constitutes illegal discrimination on the basis of sex.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Of course, crossdressers and transgender people are not the same. But that doesn't make it lawful to discriminate against a biological male just because they wear women's clothing. If you would hire a woman wearing the same clothing, then that constitutes illegal discrimination on the basis of sex.

Yes it does.
What a person's attire is, is lawfully separated by their sex.
An employer is 100% legally allowed to set a dress code that is based on biological dress.
100% legal to require "formal attire" that includes a suit/tie for a males, and dress skirt/dress for females.
If a male comes in, in a dress he can legally be sent home to change.
Sorry to break that to you.