"Transgender People Do Not Deserve Hiring Protections" Case

[jesse135]

Warning: If you have a sensitive mind right now, do not read:

http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/news/2018/sep/06/gov-bryant-transgender-people-do-not-deserve-hirin/

Now, Mississippi is a very traditional place. They just don't like anything that is different, do not like change for the most part and like their nice little communities, which is sweet. However, what happens when a sweet little community has an outsider? They ban them, and don't let them work, keep them in the shadows, and never talk about them or anything. It's the worst.

I see why they are the way they are, but this poor person who was fired for being them self. This is the state where I am from, and I see why they don't like outsiders, they don't know their backstory, and whatever. OK. But this person is one of their own! This state is where I grew up, and one of the reasons I live just one state over, which, socially doesn't make much difference, but where my money goes makes a world of difference I know. I am livid.

Is anyone here from a state or area like this? I imagine most places like people to not change, in any way possible, but living is transformation, really. Otherwise you're just standing still. Or lying in a bed, drinking and smoking and that's it, right? (Well...not smoking if you're actively transitioning)

Sorry for the ramble! I wanted to know if anyone here is in an area like that. It's hard to make friends. I've had a lot on my mind recently, and now this pops up. I just started going back to school where I am less than accepted (again) and am very alone because I am physically to an outsider a middle-aged woman with short hair but to me in my mind I am a middle-aged man with a convex chest.

[GordonG]

Thanks for the post.

I see from this web page: https://www.vox.com/2018/7/12/17561692/senate-kavanaugh-confirmation-tracker that the two senators from my state are opposed to his confirmatin. Others should check for their states and write letters where appropriate.

[jesse135]

Will writing letters work, or what about calling? Which do these parties pay attention to more?

[KatieP]

Will writing letters work, or what about calling? Which do these parties pay attention to more?

Not to be too negative...

Based on the article linked in GordonG's post, unless one of those 3 Republican "Undecideds" is your representative, you are likely wasting your time.


If one of those 3 is yours, calling and emailing, and USPS letter if you are fast, are probably best since you cover all the bases. I say call and email first since those happen nearly instantaneously, and these votes for/against will be happening very quickly...

K

[Janes Groove]

JACKSON — Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant joined 15 other Republican leaders across the country in signing a brief that asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not protect transgender people and that employers have the right to fire them for their gender identity.

Ah. Good old Southern Hospitality.

[GingerVicki]

Title VII bars employers from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

Does this guy think that transgendered people are robots or something. I guess we don't count as people to some. Certainly this is discrimination based on sex. I suppose that their are many people who still see the world as black and white. Male or Female. The sad thing is that it's never been that way.

[KatieP]

Certainly this is discrimination based on sex. I suppose that their are many people who still see the world as black and white. Male or Female.

I expect I am preaching to the choir here, and...

I think for many, whether the word, "sex" in Title VII includes gender identity is an interpretation, and being such, it could go either way. I think most of us agree that "sex" may include the XX vs XY thing, even knowing there are lots of variants. If the interpretation is based on genetics only, it really is 99.99% binary. If, somehow, the interpretation said, "All we care about, to define "male" is the presence of a Y chromosome any place in the set, and all others are "female" " by law, I would be called "male." And that interpretation would then be law, which we would have to follow.

However, this is exactly the point of the SCOTUS, to interpret the words so that we all have a common legal understanding. At this point, SCOTUS seems to be leaning towards "sex" including "gender identity" but we all know that SCOTUS interpretations can change. Hence the worry over Kavanaugh affecting Roe v Wade.

It is simple, black and white for us, but we are but a small percentage of the people who decide these things...


Kate

[GingerVicki]

It is simple, black and white for us, but we are but a small percentage of the people who decide these things...

Kate

http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gender-lines-science-transgender-identity/

Transgender women tend to have brain structures that resemble cisgender women, rather than cisgender men. Two sexually dimorphic (differing between men and women) areas of the brain are often compared between men and women. The bed nucleus of the stria terminalus (BSTc) and sexually dimorphic nucleus of transgender women are more similar to those of cisgender woman than to those of cisgender men, suggesting that the general brain structure of these women is in keeping with their gender identity.

@KatieP  Oh it is black and white!

[KatieP]

Yep. I hear you. I get it. I am on your side. And, there are LOTS of sides that are at least as rational as us.

And, SCOTUS determines the interpretation of the law, not science.

As well, the scientific studies are very far from conclusive.

As one example, in one of the studies, the abstract says,

"Results revealed that regional gray matter variation in MTF transsexuals is more similar to the pattern found in men than in women. However, MTF transsexuals show a significantly larger volume of regional gray matter in the right putamen compared to men. " ... This evidence, "supports the assumption that brain anatomy plays a role in gender identity." So, the actual results go both ways in support and not. The actual result of that study is to say MAYBE brain anatomy affects gender identity.

With all respect, there are perfectly rational people who have at least as much data to support their position as we have to support ours.

My opinion is, if actual science determined anything, there would probably be far fewer debates in the world but in most of science, there is little that is absolute and definitive...

K

[Michelle_P]

As one example, in one of the studies, the abstract sahttps://thesafezoneproject.com/about/ys,

"Results revealed that regional gray matter variation in MTF transsexuals is more similar to the pattern found in men than in women. However, MTF transsexuals show a significantly larger volume of regional gray matter in the right putamen compared to men. " ... This evidence, "supports the assumption that brain anatomy plays a role in gender identity." So, the actual results go both ways in support and not. The actual result of that study is to say MAYBE brain anatomy affects gender identity.

No, the actual result of that study is that evidence related to regional gray matter variations supports the assumption that brain anatomy plays a role in gender identity.

There are a large number of such studies at this point in time, with several pinpoint locations in the brain showing very strong correlation with expressed gender identity and not with sex assigned at birth.  There are also a number of studies of regions of the brain that show a somewhat weaker correlation.

In looking at 10 regions of the brain that show correlation with gender identity, it turns out that only about 6% of the population have all 10 regions showing a correlation with the sex assigned at birth.  Most folks have some blend of attributes for these larger, easily image attributes.

I hypothesize that, much like the Kinsey studies found with sexual orientation, that much of the population has a slightly blended set of attributes between a male and female gender identity, likely following the familiar double Gaussian distribution with peaks near the Male and Female poles of gender identity.

There is quite a bit of lighter reading out there on the topic, beyond the dry and difficult scientific papers.  Here are some good links to get you started:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091302211000252

About neurological sexual dimorphism:

http://m.pnas.org/content/112/50/15468.short

Links to neurological studies of trans women and men:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7477289/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395610001585?via%3Dihub

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0083947

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10843193/

About origins of condition:

These are still fairly new studies.

In the study below, a strong correlation was found, indicating a significant association between transsexualism in trans women and the a gene site allelemorph with transsexuals having longer repeat lengths than non-transsexual male control subjects. This affects the formation of androgen receptors in embryonic neurological tissues.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18962445/

Here is a very similar study dealing with trans men:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24274329/?i=2&from=%2F18962445%2Frelated

Conclusion:

This is more than enough evidence to make the following statements:

- neurologically, trans men are men and trans women are women.
.
- this is an observable, inborn trait. Trans people are as they are born.

Trans women are women born women and trans men are born men. They just require medical (hormonal) intervention to have that better expressed in the rest of their bodies that's not neurological tissues.

Furthermore, we have known for a long time now that the "binary model" of gender and sex is incorrect. Stanford did a good job at putting it in writing a few years back.

http://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2015/02/24/sex-biology-redefined-genes-dont-indicate-binary-sexes/

[Devlyn]

Meh.

My gender changes, I can almost assure you the structure of my brain doesn't. Let's see pubmed and scientificamerican explain that.

[Michelle_P]

Meh.

My gender changes, I can almost assure you the structure of my brain doesn't. Let's see pubmed and scientificamerican explain that.

It's only been a short time since the medical and scientific community admitted that there might be a biological component to gender identity that was worth studying.  It might be decades before the old fossils controlling research grants decide the enby and genderfluid community is worth a look.

I'm a guinea pig in one of the brain functional mapping studies, and they are getting an almost free ride on patient data from one of the biggest HMOs out there with a good trans care program, yet they still have to fight tooth and nail for what little funding they need.

[Devlyn]

Yeah, well, those conclusions reinforce the "There are boys and there are girls" mindset. Frankly, we have enough people in the world saying it that we hardly need to be saying it for them.

[Michelle_P]

Yeah, well, those conclusions reinforce the "There are boys and there are girls" mindset. Frankly, we have enough people in the world saying it that we hardly need to be saying it for them.

Correct.  The researchers are still putting Band-Aids on a broken binary model.  The good news is that there is proof that gender identity is biological in origin, and at the same time is not tied to the genetalia.

This makes it harder to claim that gender identity that conflicts with the sex assigned at birth is a mental illness, or something that can be corrected with 'conversion therapy' or torture.   It gives us a fighting legal chance of being recognized as just another variation within the human race, rather than being classified as 'things' or immoral constructs.

I think that's worth fighting for. 

[Devlyn]

I don't know. Seems more likely to put us in a "Pass the scan or you can't have the treatment you want." situation. Sort of like the early McHugh and Blanchard passability requirements. Fight for that dessert all you want, I don't want a portion.

[GingerVicki]

The good new is that the younger population of people are more open and laws will eventually change. I'm my opinion it will change regardless of scientific data. The bad news is that it will be too late for many people.

[Michelle_P]

I don't know. Seems more likely to put us in a "Pass the scan or you can't have the treatment you want." situation. Sort of like the early McHugh and Blanchard passability requirements. Fight for that dessert all you want, I don't want a portion.

Given that the reliable pinpoint location markers like the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis require microdissection, a bit rough on the patient (dead, brain removed and prepared for dissection), and the regional indicators available through fMRI and similar methods that work on living people only point to rough correlations with significant overlap, I am not worried about a 'Pass the scan' scenario.

My concern is more with theologically inspired legislation vs scientifically informed lawmaking.  That is where our freedoms, our right to live our lives is at stake here. 

Now, I know that there are those even within our community that do not want laws or rules protecting transgender persons or anyone else from the prejudices of others, however I am not one of these.  I beleive that we are each individual human beings, and would prefer to be judged or hired on that basis.  Unfortunately we know that there are those in our society who dislike entire classes of the population and would like to be able to discriminate against these people.

My particular country has expressed in in its constitution and the body of law a principle that all persons are entitled to equal treatment under the law.  I find this appealing, myself.  Again, there are those who differ in their opinion and would like to deny equal treatment under the law to classes of the population that they dislike.

I suppose that's where we stand.  I can push for equal treatment and try to ensure that all have this.  Or, I can not push, and accept whatever unequal treatment is to be meted out by those of a different ideological bent than I until such time as I and those like me can find a more accepting land.

It's depressing to know that people I have never met none the less hate me to the point that they would like to be able to deny my access to employment and housing because of my gender identity.

[GingerVicki]

I've spoken to several people who believe that any variation from the typical male XY is female. This idea works great if someone is intersexed and MtF. Not so much for anyone else. I should point out that these were foreign guys.

[Michelle_P]

I've spoken to several people who believe that any variation from the typical male XY is female. This idea works great if someone is intersexed and MtF. Not so much for anyone else. I should point out that these were foreign guys.

It's mind boggling that folks insist on seeing an invariant gender binary model even in cases where it explicitly doesn't work, such as the various chromosomal intersex variations.   I cannot think of anything more frustrating than having a nonbinary or genderfluid identity in the face of this insistence on a broken binary model.

The whole "you can't exist; go away" thing is bad enough coming from the occasional bigot. Getting this from within our community, where we expect some acceptance, or from medical support folks is no good.

[Lucca]

As far as the "pass a scan" thing goes, I can't think of any other mental condition where a brain scan is a pre-requisite for diagnosis and treatment, even though most mental conditions or illnesses will probably show signs on a brain scan in one way or another. Unless an exception is carved out just for transgenderism, I think we're safe on that front.

Scientific evidence about independently observable physical signs of being transgender help us understand ourselves, helps others understand us, and help us prove that we're not just making stuff up when pushing for legal and societal protection. I'm very scientifically minded; if this evidence exists, it's our obligation to at least try to discover and use it. If I simply push for whatever sounds nice to me, I'm no different than the people picking out Bible verses and demanding discrimination against LGBT people and putting creationism in schools.