Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Hello,
I thought I'd post this here. It's a link to site that is not only a petition for ENDA, but will also send a letter to your Senators and Congressmen.

http://www.rallycongress.com/enda/ (http://www.rallycongress.com/enda/)

Please go and show your support for the community!! We need all the voices we can get!!!
~Jasmine

The Government can not enforce the laws it has now. We do not need more laws we need better government and much better enforcement or just get rid of the laws they will not enforce.

Yeah, Lisagurl, let's work against legal reforms for trans equality. That works.  ::)

On a serious note, I signed the petition with a lengthy personal note, and fleshed that out into a personalized letter for Pelosi, Feinstein and Boxer. Done and done.

I also signed it.  Yes there are laws on the books that are not enforced, but they are still there and enforceable.  I agree with a better government, but until then we have laws, and ( shutter ) lawyers.

"but they are still there and enforceable."
==============
It is called selective enforcement which is worse than no law at all.

Quote from: lisagurl on April 27, 2010, 04:15:05 PM
It is called selective enforcement which is worse than no law at all.

I would disagree with this statement. Currently, there is no legal recourse for discrimination of TG people at the federal level. Not only would ENDA allow one to seek reconciliation through the courts, it would also send a message to the entire world that the US, at it's heart, does not condone discrimination.

Instead of the current message of 'well, it depends.'

But, I'm under no illusion that it's going to change much of anything.

Look, good law (and I think this is what Lisa was trying to get at) is organic.  It comes from the bottom up, not the top down.  Law works, and it only works - see: marijuana - when everybody believes in it and works to enforce it.  To get to that point, you need to work it out, rather than just impose it - see: marijuana.

So that (or at least in my understanding) working it out, on a basic level, with the citizens of that community coming to a common understanding is not only the best way, but pretty much the only way, to bring about real change.  So that, in fact, the places that will really benefit from EDNA are places where it's already the local law, then it became the state law.  Places like San Francisco - there the entire majesty of the law from top to bottom will read the same way, and there is a real power in that.  Being wrong under local, state and federal law means you have no other court to take refuge in.  You lose.

But, in places where there is no local or state law in place, it does not make it much better on a day to day basis because it's awful damn hard to just up and start a federal case.  Just because it's against federal law don't mean the power of the Federal Government is yours now to command.  That would be a total misunderstanding.  So it's not going to have a real power in changing places where EDNA is really needed in the short run.  Over the course of decades, sure.  And law is not only about the short run, but also about the long run too.

Quoteit would also send a message to the entire world that the US, at it's heart, does not condone discrimination.

To discriminate is very useful and important human activity. We discriminate on products we buy on food we eat the cloths we wear and on the culture we live. I would not want to live in a world without discrimination. I would not want to work with people that did not want to associate with me. I would not want to have to worship a with a universal religion. I prefer to have the right to discriminate between people and things I think that are important in life. The world would think us as weak and none cultured if we did not discriminate.

 ::) Lisagurl, you know what Jasmine meant. Don't be a prig.

Quote from: PanoramaIsland on April 29, 2010, 02:06:53 AM
::) Lisagurl, you know what Jasmine meant. Don't be a prig.

Discriminating people are no different. Would want to be forced to provide a service to a rapist or anyone who you disagree with?

Lisagurl, I can respect your opinion but I disagree with you.

I strongly believe that no person should be forced into economic hardship because of their expression or past. Firing someone for being TG is no better than firing a GG because she's a girl or firing someone based on the color of their skin. We are all entitled to employment and, once employed, should be judged on the merits of our accomplishments rather then personal prejudice.

As a nation, we've been dealing with the issue of civil liberties since our founding. We've come a long way, but still have a ways to go. Historically, laws and court orders have proven to be the most effective method for ensuring them.

Comparing TG's to rapists is just plain wrong.

Quote from: lisagurl on April 29, 2010, 09:06:37 AM
Discriminating people are no different. Would want to be forced to provide a service to a rapist or anyone who you disagree with?

You should, and I should. Laws that force people to provide goods and services to people they don't like are what prevent racists from putting up "whites only" - or "no transgender people" - signs in their businesses.

Laws can't prevent racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc., but they can to a certain extent prevent people from acting on those things by, for example, preventing someone from entering their bar or restaurant because they're trans.

This is different from expelling a trans person from a bar or restaurant because that trans person is shouting and yelling, or harassing other customers. That's perfectly fine; that's a sort of "discrimination," if you will, that's still valuable and needed.

Keeping society somewhat open to a criminal such as a rapist or bank robber is important, because we all need to try our best to help such people re-integrate into society and lead a life free of crime. It's important to be cautious around such people, of course, but spurning them entirely will tend to lead them towards committing more crime and becoming more involved in the career criminal lifestyle.

So at bottom, this is not an argument about whether "discrimination" is good or bad per se, but what kind of discrimination is good, and what kind is bad.

I said "don't be a prig" because Jasmine was clearly using the shorthand definition of "discrimination" - referring to racism, sexism, homophobia etc.

QuoteFiring someone for being TG is no better than firing a GG because she's a girl or firing someone based on the color of their skin.

The fact is people are hired to make the business money. If you do not fit that mode you are fired. No employer is firing anyone who is making them money. I have been in many business and have seen many workers. Some are very strange. They do not work with the public. Making money with public exposer means you need to be neutral and fit a general description that everyone accepts. Why do you think many news hosts come from the Midwest because they have a no accent. A business can not afford to put people with certain attributes in situations that are not congruent with that job. One size does not fit all. Gender and sex should not interrupt the work place. Many live lifestyles that will not let them control themselves on the job. Those are reasons for firing. You will not find a securities salesman with a big star tattooed on their forehead.

---

Post Merge: April 29, 2010, 03:58:02 PM

---

QuoteYou should, and I should. Laws that force people to provide goods and services to people they don't like are what prevent racists from putting up "whites only" - or "no transgender people" - signs in their businesses.

No shoes, no shirt, No service. Business has a choice of who they want to do business with. As a consultant I will not work for people who are polluting the environment. Why would anyone want to give money to someone who hates them?

---

Post Merge: April 29, 2010, 05:09:10 PM

---

QuoteThat's perfectly fine; that's a sort of "discrimination," if you will, that's still valuable and needed.

That is the discrimination that is practiced. If a bar has a reputation for having certain clientèle and someone comes and disrupts the setting they are removed. If a person comes into a mostly male bar dressed like a prostitute and flirts, the owner has a right to remove them as his reputation could be tarnished. Life can not be determined by national laws. Each case is a special issue and deserves special attention.

I have transitioned in the so called bigoted south and never I repeat "NEVER" been discriminated against. The secret is to be normal and not flaunt your status.

Quote from: lisagurl on April 29, 2010, 04:53:50 PM
I have transitioned in the so called bigoted south and never I repeat "NEVER" been discriminated against. The secret is to be normal and not flaunt your status.

The secret is to be secret, in other words. It's impossible for queers or trans people to be "normal." "Normal" people are cisgender and straight (and white, and upper- or upper-middle-class, and Christian, etc.).

If you wouldn't consider it reasonable to ask a straight cisgender person to hide who and what they are - and I sure as hell wouldn't - why would you ask that of a transgender person?
The fact is that the reasons for passing are social and safety-related: if people find out you're trans they'll spurn you and cease to regard you as the gender that you are, and you may be in physical danger as a result.
In other words, if the South wasn't by and large bigoted, you wouldn't need to pass.

Also, what about people who simply can't pass? Are their needs less valid? What about androgynous/intergendered people, for whom expressing their gender has the unfortunate side effect of standing out?



Most disturbing to me is that you dodged the assertion of the difference between kicking someone out for making noise or being shirtless and kicking someone out for being black, or gay, or trans. You pretend that everyone has the choice to go to a different establishment at all times: a competition-based model of civil liberties.
However, this fails on two accounts: first, that getting kicked out and having to go somewhere else is itself an inconvenience and takes an emotional toll if it happens constantly; second, that people often do not have the choice to go to a competitor.
My neighborhood has only one large supermarket, and I do not drive; my shopping is therefore limited to what I am able to transport relatively short distances on foot and via public transit. I can purchase a variety of items at small local ethnic markets, but there are many items that only the Safeway carries. If they were to bar me entry because I am transgender, I would be effectively unable to cook with those items. On a greater level of severity, what if the electrical company were run by a very right-wing owner who decided that the company would turn away transgender customers? How would I fight that except by recourse to the courts?

You seem to be making the classic mistakes of naive free market economic logic that (a) businesses are always perfectly rational profit-seeking actors and (b) competition will always develop for every product and service, unless the government interferes. "Whites only" signs on yesteryear's businesses disprove the first idea - after all, black and brown customers' money fuels profits just as effectively as white customers' money - and the local electricity monopoly of Pacific Gas & Electric in our very minimally regulated energy market disproves the second.

Remember, businesses are run by people, not computers, and people can be quite irrational.

QuoteIt's impossible for queers or trans people to be "normal."

No they just want to impose their cultural on everyone else. I can go to any foreign country and be respectful of their culture and not have problems.  Life is cooperation not resistance with society.

QuoteIf you wouldn't consider it reasonable to ask a straight cisgender person to hide who and what they are - and I sure as hell wouldn't - why would you ask that of a transgender person?

These situations happen all the time outside your home culture. When in Rome do as the Romans. What happens in Las Vegas stays in Las Vegas.

QuoteAlso, what about people who simply can't pass? Are their needs less valid?

"
They need to think long and hard as to what life has instore for them. That is why many commute suicide as they are unprepared to live as a freak in the eyes of culture. It costs over 100K to get some people to pass. Some can not afford transition. Those who DIY  are in for a big surprise if they survive the unsupervised drugs.

Life depends on society. If you want to be an out cast then live with the result of your choice.

---

Post Merge: April 29, 2010, 07:42:54 PM

---

QuoteHow would I fight that except by recourse to the courts?

Move. Your inconvenience is not anybodies problem but your own.

QuoteYou seem to be making the classic mistakes of naive free market economic logic

You are free to start your own business. No mistake about it business depends on customers who have the choice to shop with you or not. If I were you I would vote with my money at those places that accommodate your needs and not spend a penny at those you do not like.

QuoteRemember, businesses are run by people, not computers, and people can be quite irrational.

Welcome to the real world. I hear solar works well in CA.

If you even need solar.  I've lived in this place for over five years, never turned the heat on once.  Mediterranean climate and all.  That and being on the upper floor of a multi-floor building.  But the pool was nice and warm for my afternoon swim and the hot tub is very hot in the evening when I take my tub.  Financial problems on the state level aside, its still better to be here then in New Jersey.


If you know your history
Then you would know where you're coming from
Then you wouldn't have to ask me
Who the 'eck do I think I am
  -Bob Marley.

As a matter of fact businesses refusing to do business with you is a very old tradition.  The old South knew it well as Quakers, a very predominate business/merchant class in the antebellum era absolutely refused to do business with slave holders, or anyone who made their money in the slave trade.  That, to them, was a matter of honor.

Another fact is that all over SF there are guys standing outside of clubs like Ten15 deciding who gets in, and who does not.  Sure it's discrimination when the group of 4 cute hot chicks get in and the 2 dweeb guys don't.  Life in the big city and all.  I'm sure Lisa could not get a job being a cocktail waitress in a lot of those clubs, not because she is trans, but because she is too old, and doesn't wear those kind of clothes.

Heck, some forms of discrimination are still A-OK, like fat people.  Lots of people who would never think about posing a 'no blacks' or 'no gays' sign have no trouble telling other people to go be fat somewhere else.

What is forbidden is not discrimination.  It's class-based discrimination.  If I banned 'all gay', or 'all blacks' or 'all trans persons', that might be bad.  If I only ban you because I don't like the cut of your jib, or the color of your hair - then that's just standard 'we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone' something I think every business has a right to do.

Lisagurl, I think you're blowing hot air, and I think you know it. If you were really such a damned conformist, you would suffer in silence instead of transitioning, wouldn't you!

Anyone can see that it's eminently illogical to do whatever the culture dictates just because the culture dictates it. We must all struggle as individuals to figure out what makes sense to us, and what we find ethical and logical. You cannot honestly ask a scientist to abandon her pursuit of the scientific method and her promotion of the theory of evolution just because she lives in a deeply religious area. That's plain silly. If it makes her neighbors uncomfortable, well, that's what standards of civility and tolerance are for. A culture that values satisfying others' expectations over critical thinking is a culture of sheep, a culture without innovation or substance. It may be stable, but it goes nowhere, explores no new directions, fulfills no major goals aside from social sustainability and cohesiveness.

The only way for me to avoid resistance, to avoid rocking the boat, is for me to stay closeted and hidden at all times - and I'm not doing that. If you prefer such a life, that's you're prerogative. Don't expect me to do the same.

Lisagurl,
While I strongly disagree with your position, I have learned something from this thread....

I think we get so wrapped up in therapists and support groups and forums and the community that we sometimes forget there's a real world out there, full of real world implications and real world people that are going to discriminate against us, whether we like it or not. It's shocking when one of our own calls us freaks, insists we conform and compares us rapists. The reality is, these things happen to TG's all the time. Just look at the links that Zythyra posts everyday. 

The lesson? Be prepared for serious bigotry should you choose to openly transition, even within our own community.

As I believe every person should be entitled to legal recourse in cases of discrimination, I will continue encouraging people to back ENDA. I fully support it's cause and believe it's the best path forward.   

~Jasmine

QuoteYou cannot honestly ask a scientist to abandon her pursuit of the scientific method and her promotion of the theory of evolution just because she lives in a deeply religious area. That's plain silly.

Bush stopped stem cell research ,many were not happy. He used the government to do it. If you use the laws beware of the things you do not expect. If you set precedents you will find your enemy using the same tactics.

Quote from: lisagurl on April 30, 2010, 08:36:49 AM
Bush stopped stem cell research ,many were not happy. He used the government to do it. If you use the laws beware of the things you do not expect. If you set precedents you will find your enemy using the same tactics.

Which is not the point I was addressing. What I was talking with the scientist comment was the individual's right and duty to reason out their own path and follow that path, and the duty of everyone to respect and tolerate those differences instead of expecting everyone to conform. That has nothing to do with your opposition to government intervention.

Speaking of which, "government power can be used badly" is simply not an argument. Private sector power can be, and is, used badly all the time. You've said as much in previous posts, when talking about corporate abuses and things like modern-day slavery, if I recall. Hell, nonprofit power can be used badly!

Simply saying that government power can be used badly, ergo it shouldn't be used, is therefore silly. If you're going to argue in that direction, you should at least make an effort to balance the potential abuses of government power vs. market power, the advantages and disadvantages of, say, nonprofit organizations vs. governmental methods of achieving social justice.

All power can be used badly. People have died at the hands of governments, corporations, religious organizations, even charities. That isn't a reason not to, in the case of your example, regulate scientific ethical standards. It also completely fails to address the thrust of my original "scientist" example, which was about social dynamics, not government.

QuoteWhat I was talking with the scientist comment was the individual's right and duty to reason out their own path and follow that path, and the duty of everyone to respect and tolerate those differences instead of expecting everyone to conform.

===========

Social dynamics is not a controllable force. It is people's responsibility to take care of them selves which also does not seem to work very well. You are a dreamer if you think that you can live as you like without respecting those who hold power around you.

Quote from: lisagurl on April 30, 2010, 04:53:12 PM
===========

Social dynamics is not a controllable force. It is people's responsibility to take care of them selves which also does not seem to work very well. You are a dreamer if you think that you can live as you like without respecting those who hold power around you.

And you are batting at straw men. One must understand and respect the power that is held by the powerful, whether one chooses to go with or against the grain of power's ideas and actions. Ultimately, though, human beings must constantly struggle to hold the powerful accountable to the powerless as best we can. Bowing our heads to whatever force has seized power at the moment is cowardly, it is small-minded, and it leads societies to collapse into monotony, inflexibility, and eventual decline and crumble.

The concept that social dynamics cannot be controlled is preposterous. Those in control of media mold society's views and beliefs, and those in control of sanctioned force - police, military, prisons - mold both beliefs and actions by giving people an authority both to believe in and to fear. Our society bombards us with messages from every direction - not just television, advertising, and official government policy, but architecture, city planning, clothing,  art and music, and on and on and on. This is how social dynamics work, and this is why totalitarian regimes tend to be so insular; by controlling what is expressed, what is said and published, built and worn, listened to and seen, a government can shape the minds and emotions of its subjects, and overwhelm anyone who dissents with emotions of shame and self-doubt. That's why totalitarians hate the Internet.

If we don't take the time to reconsider and think through the messages with which we are bombarded, we actively contribute to the dumbing and numbing of our society. It is just that simple. An open society depends not just on a secure voting system, but on open and actively inquiring minds.

To put it shortly, there's no point in having a voting system if all the voters are mindless sheep.

QuoteThose in control of media mold society's views and beliefs

Those who do not subscribe to media have no fears of it. I do not have a TV.

QuoteOur society bombards us with messages from every direction

I live in the country without signs and even take off all labels and logos on everything I own.

QuoteThat's why totalitarians hate the Internet.

LOL the Internet is the greatest commercial promoter of all. Why do you think it is free? Everyone has their propaganda working. They follow every key stroke and custom provide information just for you. Computers and recorded data is the biggest cultural manipulator the world has ever seen.  But then I am a spineless non-emotional, unemphatic, independent.  How is that propaganda school treating you?

I wasn't just talking about "media," I was talking about pervasive cultural messaging.

The Internet is the best equalizer produced so far, actually. Many of the dominant voices on the Net are people who just start a blog or a site in their spare time. Sites like BoingBoing, 4Chan, 2Chan, Wikipedia and Slashdot never had commercial funding, and they're playing on the same level as digitized print and television media - often better, because their content is built specifically for the Internet format and audience by Net-savvy amateurs instead of dinosaur traditional media execs.

If you're concerned about people getting your personal info on the Net, do what any concerned and computer-literate Netizen does - run a good firewall, encrypt your e-mails, be discriminating in what you sign up for, and change passwords frequently.

"They" are not reading your every keystroke unless "they" have made a keystroke-logging virus that has spread to your computer, in which case (a) why is your security so poor? and (b) "they" are more likely to be a sociopathic teenager or college student than a large company.

If "they" "custom provide" information "just for you," did "they" create Susan's? I can't see much profit in making a forum and Website for trans people.

It's actually very difficult to make money on the Internet. It's one of the things i like about the Net - there's very little money in it, which means very little corporate interference. The Net was invented by scientists and engineers on the US Military dole - ARPANet, the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network, was the first long-distance computer network operated via packet switching, the proof of concept for the Internet. It was used as a method of communication and data transfer between university science departments. Hardly corporate.

If it provides you with any comfort, I refuse to wear clothing with company logos on it; the only logos I wear are t-shirts and patches for bands making fairly obscure music. Again, not exactly corporate. I take the labels off my pants and shoes and everything.

Accusing others of being duped by propaganda is pretty disingenuous. I don't exactly live in a Wal-Mart myself, you know.

QuoteHardly corporate.

Bell Labs designed the circuits and Western Electric built the electronic switching that made the net possible. Then Reagan broke it up.
Every major switching center has a room with black Government boxes that monitor all traffic. It then in turn is run through huge super computers to identify key words and patterns.  There seems to be more privacy at Times Square.

You seem to hate both the government and the corporations. What would you have us do? Run the entire world as a collection of small nonprofit organizations?

If you're an Anarchist, you should just come out and say it. There's nothing wrong with having a position, however untenable it may be.  ;D

Lisa is right about the government filtering each and every last keystroke.  And if you're using Chrome, FireFox, Facebook, other programs are also doing the same.

I didn't say they stored them, I said they scan them, running them through a filter looking for certain words, phrases and the like.

Haven't you heard? The world we live in isn't real! We're actually being farmed as living batteries by sentient machines, and our brains are plugged into this fictional world to keep us ignorant of the truth.

Plus, there're hot people.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fonemoreoption.files.wordpress.com%2F2007%2F08%2F5-the-matrix-trinity-dodge-this.jpg&hash=4ed488a8d42e1a447f7bf4dcfe2347ed3dea9108)

QuoteYou seem to hate both the government and the corporations.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is better to have weak small city states than a powerful global force.

---

Post Merge: May 20, 2010, 01:34:33 PM

---

Quote from: tekla on May 11, 2010, 10:00:32 PM
I didn't say they stored them, I said they scan them, running them through a filter looking for certain words, phrases and the like.

But Twitter wants to store every tweet it has saved.

---

Post Merge: May 20, 2010, 02:37:38 PM

---

Quoteour brains are plugged into this fictional world

Try to not promote fiction and you might see a real world.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 20, 2010, 02:33:10 PM
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is better to have weak small city states than a powerful global force.

Oh, come ON. Answer my question!

If you're against the power of both corporations and government, are you an Anarchist? If not, what are you?

This time, don't dodge the question. Actually answer it. Pretty please?

QuoteIf not, what are you?

This time, don't dodge the question. Actually answer it. Pretty please?

I am an independent. I do not believe in force of any kind including Government, churches and corporations forcing its form of culture as well as religion of Secular Humanism and consumerism. It seems to me that they are heading for a goal of globalization with 2 classes, ruling and workers.

QuoteIt seems to me that they are heading for a goal of globalization with 2 classes, ruling and workers.

Uh... Aren't we pretty much already there?

In the meantime, back to the topic at hand... Perhaps we workers should encourage our rulers (aka, representatives) to pass ENDA!! :D

Quote from: lisagurl on May 20, 2010, 02:56:06 PM
I am an independent. I do not believe in force of any kind including Government, churches and corporations forcing its form of culture as well as religion of Secular Humanism and consumerism. It seems to me that they are heading for a goal of globalization with 2 classes, ruling and workers.

See, but you're cutting yourself off from all forms of recourse except for private nonprofits here. You say that the public sector is bad, and then turn around and say that the private sector is bad too. That's why I ask if you're an Anarchist - you would seem, logically speaking, to believe in running society by some sort of vast network of non-coercive nonprofits, funded by donation. I criticized such a position as untenable because it is. I'd really love for this to be a solution to our problems - I've read a bit of Anarchist theory myself - but it's not. It's completely unrealistic...

...which brings us back to square one. Since we are in fact stuck with the public sector and the private sector, which one do we trust more (or distrust less)? It would seem that you favor corporations over government, which would make you a Libertarian, but I recall that you balked at that label previously.

"Independent" is not a political philosophy. It's a choice not to register with one of the two mainstream parties. I want to know what your political philosophy is. You sound like a right-wing uber-Libertarian about two thirds of the time, and a left-wing Anarchist about a third of the time. The problem is, you just can't have it both ways.

QuoteYou say that the public sector is bad

You are making a straw man argument. I said large is the problem not private or Government. Small local community Government works when you have local knowledge of the people and face to face communication. Small business works fine when you have face to face communication with the business owners and people who support it with their honest labor as they are also members of the community. Where the problem lies is people a thousand miles away telling you how your community should value life.

---

Post Merge: May 20, 2010, 05:22:26 PM

---

Quote from: ƃuıxǝʌ on May 20, 2010, 03:43:53 PM
Yet here you are, using an Internet connection provided by a private telco company and using an avatar from a popular anime (Alita I believe) which gained popularity from being produced and sold by a private corporation. No doubt 99% of the products you buy are part of a chain that ends in wealthy corporations (including the computer you're posting this on and all the components therin) - from your cell phone to your refrigerator.
How ironic.

First I helped build the electronic switching system for Western Electric in Chicago that this information is riding on.  The avatar was given to me by a friend. I have no cell phone or TV. I buy local and farmers market when it is available. I make what I can including building my own house with the help of local labor, (no illegals), I avoid Walmart and China made goods as I live an austere life and not because I have to but to avoid supporting consumerism. It took years to learn about how the education system and American Consumerism lifestyle is killing both America and Freedom .

Quote from: lisagurl on May 20, 2010, 05:13:30 PM
You are making a straw man argument. I said large is the problem not private or Government. Small local community Government works when you have local knowledge of the people and face to face communication. Small business works fine when you have face to face communication with the business owners and people who support it with their honest labor as they are also members of the community. Where the problem lies is people a thousand miles away telling you how your community should value life.

So you're a state's rights Libertarian, with some lefty views on things like food issues and consumerism. Good for you! Our social goals may be closer than you realize - we just have different ideas of how to get to those goals. I'd advise you to own it, though, instead of just piling on this vague, semi-coherent assortment of beliefs and calling yourself an "independent." As my favorite community college professor likes to say to me, There's A Philosophy For That (TM). Own your philosophy! It's very empowering, and a lot better than just spending your time just shaking with rage, resignedness, frustration and fear at the state of things as they are (which many Americans seem to do).

I wouldn't say I was setting up a straw man, I just didn't know that you were in favor of local governance. For what it's worth, I am as well in many cases (though certainly not all - I'm not a right-wing "state's rights" type). I also prefer to shop at local businesses and farmer's markets whenever I can, and I'm lucky to live in a place where I can do that most of the time.

QuoteAs much you try to avoid it, you cannot.

Coops can handle the needs of people having members to control the interaction with things needed that are not local resources. Electric coops, Lumber coops, health coops, and many more . Yes in modern life sometimes we do not have a choice but for instance you said refrigerator. The compressor is made in my town. You can vote with your dollar and control corporations and their ethics. You can invest the same way. Most people are too lazy to be involved or even care about how and where the products they use are made. Price is not the best way to buy. We can also have the laws changed to demand pollution and human rights attached to trade. We can have corporate laws that require charters to include public good as a requirement to be in business and make the officers personally responsible for all corporate activity. Make those people earn their high pay. But do this at local scales not national. Not everyone wants or needs ENDA.

We can have corporate laws that require charters to include public good as a requirement to be in business and make the officers personally responsible for all corporate activity.

Yeah, and then there's Delaware.  There is a reason they get a lions share of corporate charters granted there.

Quote from: ƃuıxǝʌ on May 20, 2010, 07:52:57 PM
You missed out your computer there; it's practically an homage to big business; each component being produced by multinational corporations and their subsidiaries.
Your local farmers use petrol and vehicles to transport their food (oil automotive corporations being some of the biggest and most corrupt in the world) and they use pesticides produced by the big corporations. The building materials from your house are products of corporate enterprises, from the copper wiring in the walls to the paint on the exterior.
As much you try to avoid it, you cannot.
You're a cog in the machine. Accept it.

It's hard being against The Machine when your very survival depends on said Machine, hm?

---

Post Merge: May 21, 2010, 02:47:42 PM

---

Quote from: lisagurl on May 20, 2010, 08:13:11 PMNot everyone wants or needs ENDA.

But many do, and there's a word for not caring about something because you don't believe that it effects you personally. It's called selfishness. You been reading Ayn Rand lately, or what?

QuoteBut many do, and there's a word for not caring about something because you don't believe that it effects you personally

The truth is few want another unenforceable law giving special privileges to a hand full. All the laws we need are already on the books then there is always lawsuits. Each separate community has the power to define its own culture it is not the Federal government's role to play. Besides the civil rights act never solved the problem. Humans will not accept the government telling them to care especially when they have different values. Just as socialism failed,  people work harder for themselves rather than the society. If anything people care for family and friends more than others that do not hold their values. It matters not how it effects me personally what I want is for the human race to continue and it will have much suffering if we keep making more people than we have resources for. Social programs just encourage over consumption.

---

Post Merge: May 21, 2010, 03:54:05 PM

---

QuoteIt's hard being against The Machine when your very survival depends on said Machine, hm?

Fact is we made more people because of the machine and that can not last. There will be great suffering because of it and the plan would be to reduce population the least painful way. Today 5000 children and 23000 adults have died due to lack of clean water and food. Same thing every day. Their survival was depended on the machine but the machine needs resources to work and we have run out of enough to keep on growing much less live on the reserves. If you care you would put a priority on reducing population growth much more than cultural discrimination.

Heh, special privileges.

Surely you of all people realize that trans and queer folks are discriminated against. ENDA is meant to fight that inequity, not to give us "special privileges." I shouldn't have to explain that.

Yeah, overpopulation is a problem. What does that have to do with our dependence on the activities of those around us, regardless of whether we like how those people do business - i.e., our dependence on the Machine?

You're extraordinarily good at evading points and not answering questions. Like a politician, almost?


Incidentally, I'm curious - what do you think of Rand Paul?

QuoteIncidentally, I'm curious - what do you think of Rand Paul?

===========
He is taking advantage of dumbed down America. Anyone who is not a career politician can win this year. Common sense is too simple. The Government is run on greed.

QuoteWhat does that have to do with our dependence on the activities of those around us, regardless of whether we like how those people do business - i.e., our dependence on the Machine?

The machine is not our friend it is our master. We need to create a world that takes the machine power away.  The radicals ( The Invisible Committee) write " The Coming Insurrection " but it will never work as it relies on old ideas. The only way to get improvement is to get people to be responsible for their community and spend time correcting ethical misdeeds. You have to put your life and welfare on the line for the greater good of humanity and set examples. Problem is people have been trained to be greedy. We need a certain amount of personal gain but not at the expense of of others.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 21, 2010, 08:24:33 PM
===========
He is taking advantage of dumbed down America. Anyone who is not a career politician can win this year. Common sense is too simple. The Government is run on greed.

The machine is not our friend it is our master. We need to create a world that takes the machine power away.  The radicals ( The Invisible Committee) write " The Coming Insurrection " but it will never work as it relies on old ideas. The only way to get improvement is to get people to be responsible for their community and spend time correcting ethical misdeeds. You have to put your life and welfare on the line for the greater good of humanity and set examples. Problem is people have been trained to be greedy. We need a certain amount of personal gain but not at the expense of of others.

Wait, did you just go from saying that you don't care about ENDA because you don't think it effects you to exhorting us all to sacrifice for the good of humanity?

:o

QuoteWait, did you just go from saying that you don't care about ENDA because you don't think it effects you to exhorting us all to sacrifice for the good of humanity?

I said we do not need the Federal Government forcing a national cultural law on different cultures. When in Rome do as the Romans. In other words it is everyone's personal responsibility not to upset the local culture. So in San Francisco a southerner should keep their mouth shut about the weird people, and in the South the weird people should not act weird to antagonize the locals. It is common sense and not rights. If you do not want to go with the standard of local culture and respect it then do not go there. That is the sacrifice instead of the personal greed of thinking anything goes. Now I prefer to live as a normal women in the south and not a weird trans-gender. I avoid Big cities because I do not like the lewd behavior. If I do go to a city I mind my own business and stay away from getting involved with the locals.

If you go to Iran you cover your hair.

Right, because conformism is just the backbone on a strong and healthy democracy, ain't it. Whatever happened to liberty, individual rights, personal choice, critical inquiry? I do what makes sense to me, and avoid doing things that interfere with others' pursuit of happiness. I expect others to do the same. That's not "personal greed," that's liberty.

Why should a Southerner conform just because they're in San Francisco? Sure, they shouldn't go around insulting people, but many bigoted Americans, Southern and otherwise, are very nice, unobtrusive people (on the outside, at least). If they want to open up a chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution here in SF, start country bands, whatever it is that they do, why not? As long as they're not making life hard for others, I don't see a problem with it.

As far as I'm concerned, weirdness and individuality ought to be cultivated; people should be concerned to critically evaluate and shape their own lives, and do what they find enjoyable. It's not "greedy" for someone to pursue whatever path in life makes them happy, as long as it does no harm to others. Mindless obeisance to the dominant culture makes for zombie people. It is important above all for people to pursue knowledge, critical thinking and analysis, and to be self-cultivated, self-realized and self-aware. That's what liberal representational democracies are all about.

I wouldn't go to Iran, because I'm not willing to cover my hair, and I'm not about to get myself thrown in jail for that. If I were to go to Turkey, though, I certainly would not cover my hair.
This is why I'm opposed to laws banning burqa and niqab. To me, feminism is about personal choice, and robbing women of the choice to wear "modest" clothing is almost as bad as forcing them to wear it. Culture be damned - people deserve no less than to be able to pursue their own happiness, and live up to their own values and standards. For some people, that's wearing a niqab; for others, that's dying their hair green and getting tattoos on their knuckles and up their neck.

Whatever lifts your luggage, I say...

To get back to ENDA (again), I'll say that without federal legislation and intervention, schools in the south would most likely still be segregated, women and minorities would be unable to vote, and Jim Crow laws would be the norm.

Do federal laws create immediate change in peoples attitudes and bigotry? Hardly. What they do is show future generations that discrimination in this country will not and should not be tolerated. The same is true with ENDA. You and I may never realize it's benefits, but our children certainly will...

As far as I'm concerned, weirdness and individuality ought to be cultivated

Ahh, don't let them fool you, the South generates just as much weirdness as San Fran does.  It's just a different kind of weird.  It's not the weirdness of Wavy Gravy or the radical fairies, or Pink Saturday/HowWeird and Folsom Street, its the weirdness you find in Faulkner, Tennessee Williams and Deliverance.

Quote from: tekla on May 22, 2010, 10:34:52 AM
As far as I'm concerned, weirdness and individuality ought to be cultivated

Ahh, don't let them fool you, the South generates just as much weirdness as San Fran does.  It's just a different kind of weird.  It's not the weirdness of Wavy Gravy or the radical fairies, or Pink Saturday/HowWeird and Folsom Street, its the weirdness you find in Faulkner, Tennessee Williams and Deliverance.

That's probably true.

QuoteThat's not "personal greed," that's liberty.

Liberty comes with responsibility.

"

QuoteRight, because conformism is just the backbone on a strong and healthy democracy, ain't it

"
===========
I do not think democracy works very well with the Demos (mob rule) plus I doubt we need strong anything.

Just as you would not travel to Iran then you should stay in a place that accepts you type of culture. I travel for business only as I like where I live and have no need to leave. The only way I travel is when some one pays me for it. I would not take on a responsibility I do not like to do and I would not compromise my values. But then in a world where anything goes people do not have values.

People have values, just not the same values.

To sort of latch onto a couple points:

I don't know if weirdness and individuality should necessarily be cultivated, but it can be protected, provided said people aren't (unduly) interfering with someone else's liberty.  If people can express a basic level of (at least) tolerance towards others, then policies like ENDA sort of fall into place.

---

Telling people to move to where their beliefs, expressions, and values are accepted is problematic (and yes, everyone has their own values -- thinking otherwise simply demonizes others you don't agree with).  Logistics do not make it feasible for people to move according to their politics -- not everyone has the wealth, access, and enough job opportunities to live where they want.  For example, teachers may tend to have different politics than the rest of the country/world, but every area needs teachers.

People's politics can change over time.  Are they supposed to move each time it happens?  Are couples supposed to separate?

Even if adults can segregate themselves and live where they want (and also insulate themselves from "carpetbaggers"), their children will not have that freedom.  Kids aren't necessarily going to grow up and share their parents' beliefs, and said children will probably receive a less diverse education than they do now.  There is a far bit of tyranny that happens at the federal level, but this abuse will be even more visceral at the regional level if you drive people to group off.

Of course, even if people cluster off according to their beliefs into different regions within countries, the countries themselves still have to function.  The overall demographics are still about the same, but people from different groups will be (even) more ignorant of each other.  And for all the work that sorting does, there is no guarantee that federal government will be set up to stop majorities from abusing minorities.

Heck, it's not even as if it takes a majority to subjugate everyone else -- it's not as if a majority of Iranians approve of requiring women to cover their heads, but Mahmoud and company are not about to let an overwhelming majority of its educated class escape their influence.  We are not a world with open borders, never mind borders that can freely change according to tribal needs.

Whether we like it or not, and whether we sort into groups or not, on some level we ultimately have to learn to live with each other.  ENDA, at least in theory, is a step towards this goal.

QuoteLogistics do not make it feasible for people to move according to their politics -- not everyone has the wealth, access, and enough job opportunities to live where they want.

And Politics do not make it feasible to force people to accept behavior they do not agree with. It would make another unenforceable boondoggle that gives people another reason to topple the Government.

QuoteENDA, at least in theory, is a step toward this goal.

ENDA is not an answer or even close to helping anyone. It will draw stronger divides and in the end lawyers will be the only ones to profit. Each individual proving their worth to the community is the only way to get acceptance. No magic bullets are going to do the work for you.

QuoteAnd how are they going to do that when their only realistic job prospect is prostitution?

That is not a job opportunity it is against the law. How about starting your own business? You could volunteer for a charity or some other cause. How about helping your neighbors? etc. The community is not about money. Realistically if you act normal you have just as good of chance of selling your skills as anyone else. The issue is many do not have the wherewithal to get away from your machine and be helpful in the community. The first day I volunteered for a service one of the other volunteers offered me a job.

QuoteAnd Politics do not make it feasible to force people to accept behavior they do not agree with. It would make another unenforceable boondoggle that gives people another reason to topple the Government.

"Being TG" is no more of a "behavior" than "being Black" or "being a (cisgendered) woman."  Civil rights movements and the generational effects of their accomplishments have led to improvements for adversely impacted groups, even though the results have not been as good for all groups, and even though perfection is a long way off.

QuoteENDA is not an answer or even close to helping anyone. It will draw stronger divides and in the end lawyers will be the only ones to profit. ... No magic bullets are going to do the work for you.

The Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s and subsequent laws did not end discrimination against the groups they protect, but they did a lot to discourage it, and it made discrimination punishable.  Lawyers do stand to make some money off of court cases, but victims will get the majority share, and employers will get more serious about complying with the law.

QuoteEach individual proving their worth to the community is the only way to get acceptance.

Not everyone can prove their worth by starting their own business.  If someone is best suited to being a teacher, it will be prohibitively difficult to show their potential if every school principal can turn them away.  Besides, even if a TG is most-talented in running a business or working freelance, what is to stop anti-TG businesses from boycotting them?  At least with ENDA, a company doesn't have to look responsible for hiring/promoting TGs (if it doesn't want to) when anti-TG people/businesses are considering engaging in commerce.

QuoteWith what? Young trans women of colour are often kicked out of home and forced to live on the streets. They don't have the resources or capital to start a business!
My god is your privilege showing!

You are showing you short sightedness. Churches as well as many organizations help people get started. You do not need money to mow lawns, baby sit, paint, drive a cab, collect deposit bottles and cans, deliver papers, etc. At the employment office there is a waiting area for day labor. Where there is a will there is a way. Just the thought of doing criminal acts shows that a person is not fit for society. They will also offer you work in prison.

---

Post Merge: May 23, 2010, 07:48:54 PM

---

QuoteLawyers do stand to make some money off of court cases, but victims will get the majority share, and employers will get more serious about complying with the law.

The blacks are in worse shape than before the law as now the whites also have been dragged down. We have more unemployment and criminals then ever before in history with over 3 million in prison. Morals and ethics have fallen to an all time low. Employers have given up as it is not enjoyable to run a business when the Government tells you how to mind your business.

QuoteIf someone is best suited to being a teacher, it will be prohibitively difficult to show their potential if every school principal can turn them away.

They can start as a tutor or sub.

QuoteBesides, even if a TG is most-talented in running a business or working freelance, what is to stop anti-TG businesses from boycotting them?

The fact that they are better and cheaper, bottom line is what is most important to commerce.

At least where I live, churches and "faith-based" organizations have a tendency to refuse TGs and/or deny their identity, and they aren't really equipped to handle every homeless person that comes their way.

Not everyone is particularly well-suited to manual labor jobs (and some will even have a physical disability that makes such work impossible), and such employers may refuse to hire a TG anyway.

Breaking the law isn't something many people typically consider unless circumstances leave them no other outlets for survival, or the law is (or at least appears) unjust.  Some people will steal food, or house squat if they cannot find a place to live, and while their behavior certainly causes harm, it can certainly be justified.  And when people staged sit-ins during the civil rights movement, they were breaking the law, but they were also doing the right thing.

As for prison, I don't think slave-wage prison work is going to matter if the person is refused protective custody and gets murdered for being TG.  And even if they survive, carrying a rap sheet is going to make it difficult for the person to prove how awesome they are.

"The blacks are in worse shape than before the law as now the whites also have been dragged down."

I don't see many Blacks hanging from trees nowadays.  How is it in your neck of the woods (pun definitely not intended)?

"We have more unemployment and criminals then ever before in history with over 3 million in prison."

At least in the US, crime was far higher in the 80s and early 90s than it is today (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States).  Our prisons are bigger than ever, and that's largely because our population is growing and out court systems tend to give longer sentences nowadays.

QuoteThey can start as a tutor or sub.

And they can still be refused anyway.

QuoteThe fact that they are better and cheaper, bottom line is what is most important to commerce.

Even for industries where it is the most important factor, it will not be the only factor.  And if a particular business has a low profit margin to begin with, then the person can get low-balled too much to turn a profit, and the business will fail.  Products made by a TG run business don't get the same demand curve as non-TG run business, even if the product is completely unrelated to the person who makes it.

I've tried pretty hard on a state level to pass GENDA (the gender inclusive ENDA for NYS). I do support a gender inclusive ENDA on a federal level but feel that it's slightly easier to achieve on a state level. The past bunch of years (I think maybe 5 years) I've been going to Albany talking to legislators, telling my story spitting out facts, etc. Of course, every year it's either not brought to vote or isn't voted into law. I could go on and on about it at a state level and how screwed up it is but that would be pointless.

I live in an area where the surrounding counties have gender protection for employment. In the past I have been denied a job as a trans man (I consider myself "non-passing" because I pass way less than half the time). I've been denied food for being trans (by trans I mean gender expression). I've been unemployed for about 5 months and feel as if mentioning that I am trans before employment is the reason why. I cannot afford to get my name legally changed. I cannot afford hormones. I can barely cover my bills with my unemployment money. 

I want this to pass so I don't have to feel as concerned about being trans at work (if/when I get a job). It would be great if people would naturally over look my being trans but that's not going to happen right away.

QuoteNot everyone is particularly well-suited to manual labor jobs (and some will even have a physical disability that makes such work impossible), and such employers may refuse to hire a TG anyway.

QuoteThe "lost my home and job" segment has grown with the bad economy. Most of these people would dearly love to get back on their feet, and into a safe apartment and job. Since 23% of the homeless are children, they probably fall into this category as well.

--- Some of our Veterans are also on our streets. Sometimes they aren't ready to rejoin society, preferring the no-life or no-obligations of the street, to a stressful life they can't handle, or refuse to fit into.

--- The mentally ill have long been a major segment of the homeless, including some Veterans. Sometimes they refuse the "conditions" attached to reintegrating into society, like taking their head-meds and getting a job.

--- Some homeless are more or less healthy, but prefer the no-obligation type of life on the street. They want no part of the rules and regulations of society, or the requirements of getting a job and an apartment.

--- Some homeless have reached that bottom rung of drug addiction: they've been thru all the rehab programs available, lost everything they owned, and still can't stay away from the lure of illegal drugs.

--- Some are on disability, their monthly checks arriving at the local Salvation Army or Homeless Shelter. They usually spend all their money on drugs within the first weeks, and are back sleeping on the streets until the next disability check arrives.

So this is a complicated array of problems to be addressed, and no one answer will fit all the homeless. And there is that segment of the homeless who PREFER life on the streets, and enticing them back into society is nearly impossible

QuoteIn the past I have been denied a job as a trans man (I consider myself "non-passing" because I pass way less than half the time). I've been denied food for being trans (by trans I mean gender expression). I've been unemployed for about 5 months and feel as if mentioning that I am trans before employment is the reason why. I cannot afford to get my name legally changed. I cannot afford hormones. I can barely cover my bills with my unemployment money. 

Fact is you can not at this time afford to transition. Play your old role till you can afford to transition. The Government has no obligation to pay for your survival or transition.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 24, 2010, 11:28:22 AM
The Government has no obligation to pay for your transition.

True

Quote from: lisagurl on May 24, 2010, 11:28:22 AM
The Government has no obligation to pay for your survival.

Not true. In this day and age, no one should be left to simply perish...

Quote from: lisagurl on May 24, 2010, 11:28:22 AM
Fact is you can not at this time afford to transition. Play your old role till you can afford to transition. The Government has no obligation to pay for your survival or transition.

I've been living as male full time for 3 years. I really do not want to work as female under my legal name.

lisegirl's response pretty much ignored my quote.  It doesn't speak at all to the fact that even in low-status jobs that TGs will be discriminated against (maybe even more so), and that (physically-disabled) people are getting turned away from jobs they are able to do (more of the white-collar work).  All it does is insinuate they are typically drug abusers.

And regarding the government's obligation, Jasmine addresses it, but regarding how it affects TGs-specifically, it is not about ensuring survival for them any more than any other group.  Rather, it seeks to stop discrimination (as best it can) so anyone can be guaranteed a reasonable opportunity to be a productive member of society.  In fact, people who disriminate against TGs typically do so for religious reasons (whether directly or indirectly), something that is arguably already illegal -- and what ENDA can do it make that sort of abuse easier to punish.

Quote've been living as male full time for 3 years. I really do not want to work as female under my legal name.

What you want takes second seat to what you need. Too bad you do not want to do the work that is the key to being successful. You will suffer the consequences and ENDA will not change that. The employer will know your real name and gender from a Social Security check.

QuoteIt doesn't speak at all to the fact that even in low-status jobs that TGs will be discriminated against (maybe even more so), and that (physically-disabled) people are getting turned away from jobs they are able to do (more of the white-collar work).  All it does is insinuate they are typically drug abusers.

There are simply not enough white collar jobs to go round. Disabled people are plum out of luck unless they start their own business.

I addressed your quote. It does not matter what you want, fact is employers will hire who they like and get along with. They want people like themselves not some anti-culture person that will lose them business. Fact is if you want to get ahead you will have to conform to cultural expectations. No matter what the law, employers will find reasons not to hire you that are legal and despite a law on discrimination.

Some religions have discriminated in the past but employers are fickle, some might discriminate on what school you went to. Welcome to the real world.

QuoteHaving an indomitable will to work and succeed isn't enough.

You have noticed not all people have equal skills which makes for an unequal world. In competition it takes more than just being alive. You have to be better to get ahead, that requires education, hard work and a willingness to compromise. You can not get your way without giving up some of yourself. Fact is the in the west all people are rich even the homeless compared to the thousands that die each day due to lack of clean water and food. Count yourself lucky to be alive. 

QuoteAnd most of all, it takes luck.

You have no say of who you are born to but you do have control of your life and the things that you put yourself into. Yes if you start in a bad spot it is more difficult to dig your way out. But to use the resources around you to the best of your ability will work much better than depending on luck.

QuoteNo matter how hard you work, bad luck can ruin you for life.

There is no such thing as bad luck , Never let a crises go to waste. Every action has a silver lining if you are creative.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 24, 2010, 08:19:51 PM
What you want takes second seat to what you need. Too bad you do not want to do the work that is the key to being successful. You will suffer the consequences and ENDA will not change that. The employer will know your real name and gender from a Social Security check.

Not a fan of the term "real name" but that's getting on technicalities. If it went down to the point where I would absolutely have to get a job completely as female, female name, etc. it would not be any sort of positive outcome. Some may consider living as the gender you identify as as a want but for me it's pretty darn close to a need. I do want to work but it's a matter of finding somebody who will employ me with the skills I have, the education level, and work experience I have (as well as my being trans).

It's a loop.

QuoteI do want to work but it's a matter of finding somebody who will employ me with the skills I have, the education level, and work experience I have.

Your taxes, driver license, SS and checks will be in your legal name and real physical gender. In a low end job you might find a employer that will let you play a game but in my experience any business that keeps you employment records will eventually leak your legal name. It is best to be upfront with all your friends and workers because it will come back and bit you. Many states allow you to change your name without a lawyer for less than $200 you have to do some research in the legal books for the form to present the judge.

To change your gender requires doctor letters.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 24, 2010, 09:01:44 PM
Your taxes, driver license, SS and checks will be in your legal name and real physical gender. In a low end job you might find a employer that will let you play a game but in my experience any business that keeps you employment records will eventually leak your legal name. It is best to be upfront with all your friends and workers because it will come back and bit you. Many states allow you to change your name without a lawyer for less than $200 you have to do some research in the legal books for the form to present the judge.

To change your gender requires doctor letters.

Gender and sex are not the same thing.

I know that my legal name and physical sex will be on documents but finding somebody that will employ me knowing this knowledge and letting me go by my name and male pronouns has been an issue.

QuoteGender and sex are not the same thing.

Perhaps, but on legal documents they are. Some states also use gender to determine legal rights in private spaces such as bathrooms. You will have problems unless you take care of the legal issues. You may get by with a carry letter from your doctor. Without some legal leg work you could be a criminal.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 24, 2010, 09:22:47 PM
Perhaps, but on legal documents they are. Some states also use gender to determine legal rights in private spaces such as bathrooms. You will have problems unless you take care of the legal issues. You may get by with a carry letter from your doctor. Without some legal leg work you could be a criminal.

I haven't had trouble with bathroom use lately. It's still sex not gender. If it were gender then it would be about what's in my head not what's in my pants. I really don't see anything criminal about taking a crap in a toilet, nor do I feel as if it's really an issue.

QuoteI really don't see anything criminal about taking a crap in a toilet, nor do I feel as if it's really an issue.

It is criminal to misrepresent yourself. With or without ENDA.  These people can help you because ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

http://srlp.org/ (http://srlp.org/)


It is not a matter of luck but ignorance if you continue to think think the way you are thinking you will have problems.

---

Post Merge: May 25, 2010, 08:36:24 AM

---

Quote from: ƃuıxǝʌ on May 24, 2010, 10:36:28 PM
What's the silver lining to being killed?

You do not have to put up with ignorance and you will have died in the name of virtue. That is much better than to live in filth.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 25, 2010, 08:31:30 AM
It is criminal to misrepresent yourself. With or without ENDA.  These people can help you because ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

http://srlp.org/ (http://srlp.org/)


It is not a matter of luck but ignorance if you continue to think think the way you are thinking you will have problems.

Ehrm...isn't that the sort of logic used against trans people?

Would that mean if a person is trans, takes hormones without "the letter" and cannot change their legal name or legal sex must use the bathroom of their assigned gender at birth? A trans man with long sideburns should use the women's bathroom? A trans woman that has visible chest should use the men's room?

QuoteEhrm...isn't that the sort of logic used against trans people?

What is more important that humanity survives with virtue or lawlessness makes everyone's life hell?

QuoteI'd much rather be alive and living in filth than martyring myself for 'virtue'.

At least when you die it is all over, living in hell is not living. If you fear death read -
Facing Death: Epicurus and His Critics by James Warren

Values trump life.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 25, 2010, 08:13:01 PM
What is more important that humanity survives with virtue or lawlessness makes everyone's life hell?

That doesn't address my post.

QuoteThat doesn't address my post.

There is the right way to do things, then there is failure, which do you choose? It is all within your power.

No transition has been successful without conforming to the law. ENDA will not change that.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 25, 2010, 08:47:27 PM
There is the right way to do things, then there is failure, which do you choose? It is all within your power.

No transition has been successful without conforming to the law. ENDA will not change that.

Not answering my questions, again.

There's something to be said for trying to stay alive, with the hope of being able achieve the life we want (and getting that opportunity, even though it may depend heavily on people and legislators having the compassion to reject and fight against discrimination).  Being TG may be the primary thing in life for a lot of people, but it is not the only thing, either.  There are lots of everyday losses, victories, and mixed results that add dimensions to our lives, and the positives can sort of grease the gears a bit.  Besides, a lot of people have "staying alive" as one of their values, and allowing oneself to die or waste away goes against it.

ENDA can change the math so that TG people will be more likely to live their values.  While discrimination will not disappear entirely, it can discourage the practice enough that trans people are more willing to take the risk (getting fired for being trans, which will remain destructive but become less likely) for the reward (being honest and being themselves, which remains as valuable).

Quote from: lisagurl on May 25, 2010, 08:47:27 PM
No transition has been successful without conforming to the law. ENDA will not change that.

Many, perhaps most, transitions require breaking the law in small ways in order to succeed. That should be obvious, even to you.

Quote from: PanoramaIsland on May 29, 2010, 04:10:06 PM
Many, perhaps most, transitions require breaking the law in small ways in order to succeed. That should be obvious, even to you.

If you win by cheating the rules you have not won.

The United States would not have their independence from Britain if not for breaking some laws, and they most certainly "won" against Britain in my book.  Furthermore, several court cases where laws are overturned required people to first break said laws.

Laws are not universal rules, and breaking them therefore does not necessarily constitute cheating.  Even then, rule breaking often involves behavior not regarded as cheating (personal fouls, stepping out of bounds) but mere penalties and does not result in forfeiture of the game, so breaking rules or laws (even ones the player accepts) does not preclude victory.  Even players or teams who outright cheated in pro sports still often do not have to forfeit games or championships and therefore still "win."

Quote from: lisagurl on May 30, 2010, 09:46:43 AM
If you win by cheating the rules you have not won.

The law is not "the rules." My personal system of ethics, which I have spent plenty of time thinking about and plan to spend plenty more time mulling over for the rest of my life, is "the rules." The law serves a purpose and I'm glad it's there, but I'm not going to obey the law just because it exists. My sexuality is illegal in many places; even my gender expression is illegal in some parts of the world (as is yours).

QuoteWe've all broken the 'rules' at one time or another in our lives.

Then do not complain when someone discriminates against you. Without people following the rules you have anarchy. The Government can not enforce the rules it is personal responsibility. Then there is personal virtue which nobody can live in peace by breaking cultural rules.

QuoteI'm allowed to call you a man and beat you death for being a queermo.

==========
You are saying that breaking the rules is normal so I guess I will just carry a gun. So much for special rights.

"I'll carry a BIGGER gun! 
See how this gets stupid really fast?"
===========
I see a quick end to the problem. It is not as stupid as to believe people that are asking for the protection do not follow the rules themselves.

QuoteOver here in NZ, none of us carry guns. We don't need them

And in the U.S. we do not need ENDA.

Is "the rules" supposed to mean "gender binary?" I still haven't figured it out.

QuoteIs "the rules" supposed to mean "gender binary?" I still haven't figured it out.

The rules are what any local culture requires for one to be part of the community. Culture is not equal or fair, culture is a way people live together to survive under local conditions.

Quote from: lisagurl on June 02, 2010, 11:23:27 AM
The rules are what any local culture requires for one to be part of the community. Culture is not equal or fair, culture is a way people live together to survive under local conditions.

So I'll take that as a yes since if you're not what an employer sees as feminine enough as a woman you can be denied a job, or if you're not masculine enough as a man.

Hmm guns or ENDA..I'll take ENDA.

Quote from: LordKAT on June 02, 2010, 12:52:07 PM
Hmm guns or ENDA..I'll take ENDA.

Short and sweet! Perfect LK!! I could not agree more!

lisa, I'm seeing an interesting duality emerge with what you are saying.

One the on hand, you emphasize the importance of obeying rules and such, that if someone breaks rules, then whatever they do is illegitimate.

On the other hand, you have also expressed that if ENDA is place that (many) employers will still discriminate against TGs.  However, wouldn't it also stand that said employers are breaking the rules and cheating and not actually winning?  Considering that employers are more blame-worthy for discrimination than TGs are for being TG, I find shifting the stigma to be a desirable outcome.

QuoteConsidering that employers are more blame-worthy for discrimination than TGs are for being TG,

There is no right to a job. Employers are doing what they do to make money. If a TG hinders their ability to make money it is not discrimination just good business sense not to employ them. If a law tells business they have to hire people that lose them money they will close and all will be looking to start their own one person business and then they can discriminate what customers they want. It seems simple if you do not get along with your employer than quite. No need to make the whole town mad at you. If you do not like the culture move. I understand NZ will welcome you.

---

Post Merge: June 03, 2010, 10:43:41 AM

---

In a free society, the state is there to serve the limited function (by assent of those governed) to secure their already existing rights. In other words a right is not granted by the state to an individual - the individual has the pre-existing right and it defines the limits of what a state can do to him! A right is the way to subordinate the society to the free individual.

Employers and employees alike do what they do to make money.  It may be that the business owners own various property and infrastructure concerning the business, but all levels of staff are involved in making profit possible.

The point of anti-discrimination law is to drive merit as criteria.  Even with ENDA, employers can still turn down and fire employees that can't/don't do their jobs, whether they are TG or not.  The US nationally has various employment non-discrimination acts offering these protections based off sex, race, color, ethnicity, religion, disability, and genetic information for any "public" businesses.  If you oppose ENDA on reasons not related to ->-bleeped-<-, then you should also support the repeal of all these other laws because they might possibly cost a business some money.  Is this a correct conclusion?

Quotesupport the repeal of all these other laws because they might possibly cost a business some money.  Is this a correct conclusion?

I disagree with the words "might possibly". Any reason that a employee does not make the business profitable is a reason for dismissal even sex, race, same as color, religion, disability and any other problem they cause. ENDA even has provisions for religion business to discriminate without penalty. The employer makes a choice based on his best personal abilities not by government decree.

Quote from: lisagurl on June 04, 2010, 01:54:53 PM
I disagree with the words "might possibly". Any reason that a employee does not make the business profitable is a reason for dismissal even sex, race, same as color, religion, disability and any other problem they cause. ENDA even has provisions for religion business to discriminate without penalty. The employer makes a choice based on his best personal abilities not by government decree.

Tell that to someone who's unable to find gainful employment because they're confined to a wheelchair.

Quotei.e. slavery is fine, if it makes money for the company.

To be fair, slavery is a physical denial of liberty sanctioned by the government.  It's more like:

Slavery: bad
Slave wages (because you're a ->-bleeped-<-/girl/foreigner/[insert other derogatory word here]): no problem!

Quotei.e. slavery is fine, if it makes money for the company.

Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor and the Dark Side of the New Global Economy

http://www.amazon.com/Nobodies-Modern-American-Global-Economy/dp/0812971841/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275753199&sr=1-1 (http://www.amazon.com/Nobodies-Modern-American-Global-Economy/dp/0812971841/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275753199&sr=1-1)

Let me get this straight: You are saying that employers can set whatever standards they want (and this includes slave wages), and you consider slave wages to be the equivalent of outright slavery in way it existed in the US up through the Civil War (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,77345.msg543411.html#msg543411), it should stand that you don't have a problem with slavery, even though the US Constitution explicitly prohibits it (all while you emphasize the need for people to obey "the rules.")

I think you have bigger problems here.

Quoteit should stand that you don't have a problem with slavery, even though the US Constitution explicitly prohibits it (all while you emphasize the need for people to obey "the rules.")

If you buy products from China and many other places including made in the U.S. you are supporting slavery with your dollar vote.

The world has too many people to support with the limited resources on earth. That is what makes some slaves according to the rules set forth 13 amendment about involuntary servitude. It seems many here believe that a TS is forced to do prostitution without ENDA.

Fact is that ENDA will not make more resources on earth making it possible for everyone to survive. Some are going to sell their freedoms to eat. Others will die because they can not compete. If you make rules they need to be able to work. Rules that work need to be followed so they can work. Poor ethics and morals got us into this situation and only a large reduction in world population will get us out. ENDA is not a solution.

your right ENDA is not a solution, it is a step in making it more fair in who makes it in the world and will make a difference. It would be more enforcable than you may think.

QuoteWhat does one thing have to do with the other?? You are very confused.

The competition for a job depends on how many apply. Any fault the the employer might perceive will put you further down the list.

If the past enforcement of things like the civil rights bill, immigration or regulations is any indication of the history of the government to control business I rather be business than the employed.

I don't buy particularly much stuff from China, but I still buy some.  Why?  At the very least, sometimes it's my only choice, and I don't care to launch my own AC adapter-manufacturing business to make a point.  I only have so much energy and capital to spend (and Chinese-manufactured products are going to be at a competitive advantage, not just because they pay slave wages, but because the country is manipulating its currency), so I pick my battles.  It may sound cold-hearted, but I can't achieve every goal I want without drastically minimizing what I can do (which makes it hard to actually make good things happen) or without getting some help -- however, I do try to keep sight of what is the right thing to do.

The issue of Chinese-manufactured products (and similarly produced products) is better dealt with through foreign policy and regulating imports (which I would fully support -- there is a cost to pay, but I find it much more palatable than making my own parts).  It's much like having roads to drive on; it takes a community, not just individuals acting on their own, to get them built.

Quotelisa: only a large reduction in world population will get us out. ENDA is not a solution.
Laura: What does one thing have to do with the other?? You are very confused.
lisa: The competition for a job depends on how many apply.

That's not very relevant.  If you cut 90% of the population, then about 90% of the jobs will be gone (because 90% of the consumers will be gone).  While addressing resource scarcity in this way has some practical benefits, most of the scarcity is not tied to hard resource limits but too much demand outstripping output (and output's going to be way down if you take out 90% of the population).  Nothing is an end-all solution (short of annihilating the entire human race, and that's not a very good solution), but you can talk about ideas that help.  ENDA, as LordKAT mentions, helps.

Quotemost of the scarcity is not tied to hard resource limits

Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of "Energy Independence"


Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle for the Right to Water


It has little to do with labor or consumers. It has to do with limited renewable resources, materials, and climate.

The world is in competition for survival and giving special privilege to some takes away rights of others.

I somehow don't completely buy the thought that people don't know what's best for them. This may be true for some people, but I can't see a government having the authority to determine what's best for them. Does this uniformity and social acceptance make it the best for society as a whole? I don't believe it does.

I see the closest practical application of  philosophy being sovereign cities independent of each other's laws, therefore establishing local governments, but a lack of a national government. Less concentrated power means less corruption and more local control. Like the states or Greeks each can form an alliance for defense against aggressors.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 09:01:02 AM

---

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed


edited for commercial links

Quote from: lisagurl on June 06, 2010, 12:55:07 PMIf the past enforcement of things like the civil rights bill, immigration or regulations is any indication of the history of the government to control business I rather be business than the employed.

Anyone who doesn't support government regulation of private industry should read Upton Sinclair's, The Jungle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle).

We had unregulated business at one point, as pointed out, there were reasons to regulate it.

QuoteIt has little to do with labor or consumers. It has to do with limited renewable resources, materials, and climate.

These are nowhere near the entire economy.  Sometimes manpower is the limiting factor, and curtailing population cannot help the manpower issue.

QuoteDoes this uniformity and social acceptance make it the best for society as a whole?

Sometimes.  If competitors can produce goods in a way that (1) gives them a competitive advantage and (2) involves practices that are abusive [currency manipulation] or are illegal [child labor] within the consuming country, the government *may* regulate or block imports produced from such an advantage (to protect goods and services produced within its own borders).  "May" is a key word, because discretion is in order -- one foreign company may employ children as young as 14 instead of 16, or the country may have slightly more lax environmental restrictions, but it still generally operates under similar rules.

QuoteWhat does reducing the world population have to do with ENDA? If I found a way to kill 4 billion people at once, trans issues would still exist.

As long as there is competition, trans do not fair well on a competitive scale. They in general fail to be aggressive and take charge of  giving back to the community. Because they disagree with the community culture and standards the community shuns their behavior. If the community needed their services they would be more accepting but as long as there is cheap abundant labor willing to be slaves they have no reason or incentive to hire someone that disturbs their culture and could be a legal threat.  Demanding more legal power only makes TS less desirable.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 07:19:21 PM

---

Quote" "Sometimes manpower is the limiting factor,"

"
===========
Manpower in not a problem with 10% unemployed and another 18 % underemployed and many more just have given up. It is certain skills that can be lacking and the TS community is not interested in accruing those skills or want to perform those jobs.

Quote" the government *may* regulate or block imports produced from such an advantage (to protect goods and services produced within its own borders).  "

"

This does not work because the materials we need and do not have come from other countries. If we block their goods we will not get what we need.

Quotelax environmental restrictions, but it still generally operates under similar rules.

In this country we would be asking for the death penalty for many of the crimes that go into the making of our imports.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 08:23:27 PM

---

QuoteWe had unregulated business at one point, as pointed out, there were reasons to regulate it.

There has always been standards set by the community. Failure to meet those standards would be met by people unwilling to buy. Today there is too much consumption so people do not care about companies meeting standards before they buy. People spend too much time thinking about money rather than their fellow citizen.

QuoteManpower in not a problem with 10% unemployed and another 18 % underemployed and many more just have given up. It is certain skills that can be lacking and the TS community is not interested in accruing those skills or want to perform those jobs.

Bull.  The Trans community is too small to be credited for these employment numbers (regardless of fault, besides the idea that discrimination is a more credible explanation than innate Trans-specific character).

A great deal of these unemployment numbers can easily be attributed to the sub-prime disaster.  While the market likes to have freedom (which you so love), the market also enjoys having certainty (among other characteristics, such as innovation).  The disruption associated with ill-advised sub-prime loans created a lot of uncertainty, leading to a ripple effect on the economy (even with governments stepping in), and unemployment has been affected by that.  While energy prices had gone up during this time, the price of oil is about where it was in 2005 (in inflation adjusted dollars), when unemployment was at about half of where it is today. So much of this unemployment is demonstrably unrelated to resources.

It probably doesn't help that the US is fairly light on competition.  In many fields, there are coercive monopolies and oligopolies that place too many barriers to entry for new competitors, and it means that prices will be artificially high and supply will be artificially low, which drives up unemployment as well.

It's not that resource limitations are not relevant, but they haven't really come to a head yet in the United States in the way you suggested.  Interestingly, if you are looking for a way for the US to deal with resource limitations, it could try instituting regulations and incentives encouraging "good behavior," namely using renewable energy sources and conserving finite resources.  But, you know, that requires government intervention, which you generally seem to be against.

QuoteThis does not work because the materials we need and do not have come from other countries. If we block their goods we will not get what we need.

If our own country is that dependent on an ill-behaved country, what chance does an individual have of fighting against it?

QuoteIn this country we would be asking for the death penalty for many of the crimes that go into the making of our imports.

Those crimes are prime candidates to ban imports for.  Like I said, minor violations and discrepancies are not the point.  It's to go after blatant and egregious violations.

QuoteSo much of this unemployment is demonstrably unrelated to resources.

People have spent more than they have made and defaulted on the loans because there is not enough resources to provide everyone with all the products they have borrowed to buy.

Quote, if you are looking for a way for the US to deal with resource limitations, it could try instituting regulations and incentives encouraging "good behavior," namely using renewable energy sources and conserving finite resources.  But, you know, that requires government intervention, which you generally seem to be against.

There is no such thing as renewable energy sources. They require material and resources from the earth to work and the amount of energy produced over there lifetime is less  than what they require to build and maintain. What you have is just another Government ponzi scheme to keep people paying taxes.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 07:17:27 PM

---

If you want good behavior reward people with time off from work not money. Make less desirable and slow down multitasking. Stress quality not quantity.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 08:20:07 PM

---

QuoteIf our own country is that dependent on an ill-behaved country, what chance does an individual have of fighting against it?

Stop buying things we do not need for survival such as computers, cell phones, entertainment, automobiles, TV, etc.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 09:23:33 PM

---

QuoteIt's to go after blatant and egregious violations.

But our leaders such as Clinton have signed and agreed that it is OK to have slaves and pollution as long as we do not see it. We have been sold down the river with propaganda and ENDA is part of it.

QuoteThere is no such thing as renewable energy sources. They require material and resources from the earth to work and the amount of energy produced over there lifetime is less  than what they require to build and maintain. What you have is just another Government ponzi scheme to keep people paying taxes.

Solar energy is "renewable" as long as the Sun remains in place (and while the panels needed involve scarce resources, we are not in immediate danger of running out of such supplies), and wind power will remain viable for as long as wind remains (and while the means of harnessing the power also involves scarce supplies, we are not running out in foreseeable future).  If we are faced with a limiting factor, it will fall upon us to innovate more efficient means.  Tidal and geothermal energy provide similar benefits.  The fact that the government has done very little to actually facilitate these tools show these aren't schemes wielded by the government, much less ponzi schemes.  Unless you're talking about the likes of ethanol, "clean coal," electric not backed by a renewable resource, or any similar fake renewable resource, in which case you're not getting any argument from me, but that's a case of where some (rather than all) "renewable" resources don't live up to their billing.

QuoteIf you want good behavior reward people with time off from work not money. Make less desirable and slow down multitasking. Stress quality not quantity.

Government-mandated holidays or time off can help (most of the developed world actually uses them).  Not mandating employers to provide benefits to its full-time employees (which compels employees to work "full-time") but instead having the government provide or facilitate access to those benefits might work (as it is, it is mainly the underemployed in the middle who don't get them).  Improving quality can come from the government instituting higher product standards can help, although making this practical would require the same standards be applied to imports.  The government can also publish reports that reflect quality of life and not just GDP can help.  However, getting to a lot of these answers seems to involve government intervention, with the only example of loosening regulation coming from ending employer mandates... and that's only going to shift some responsibility to the government (since I'm pretty sure the working masses are going to want to retain easy access to services like medical coverage).  I'm open to these kinds of solutions myself, but will they work for you?

QuoteStop buying things we do not need for survival such as computers, cell phones, entertainment, automobiles, TV, etc.

If I don't have a computer or a phone, I don't have a have a job.  And if I don't have my automobile, then my maternal grandmother would probably be dead now.  And if you don't have a computer, then you probably aren't having this online discussion.

Like I said, I need the government to intervene so "legitimate" competitors can exist.  The government can fight another country better I can.

QuoteBut our leaders such as Clinton...

Bad policy is bad policy, whether it came/comes from Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, or anyone before that.  (Actually, laws generally come from Congress rather than the President, but that's besides the point).  If you want to discuss environmental policy, I would agree that none of these have done much to improve it.  However, while the ENDA in practice has shortcomings (and we've discussed them here a while ago), the principle of ENDA is a good thing.  An even this ENDA in practice is probably still going to blow the last three decades of environmental regulation out of the water (not that it's saying much).

No surprise, Vexing upside down thinks she's smarter than Newton.  Well, a Fig Newton at least.

Energy can neither be created or destroyed.  But don't let real science interrupt your fantasy land.  After all, that's pretty much the most fundamental point in physics, or don't they teach that in New Zealand?  Perhaps you were hom-scooled by Southern Baptists?

It was most likely a day you missed school out hittin' the crack pipe, but the difference between 'theory' and 'law' in science is kinda huge.

And, just for the sake of conversation, nothing in string theory disproves or goes against conservation of energy.  But your so good at talking out your ass that I'm surprised that Revlon hasn't created a shade of lipstick to match your butt cheeks.

It says no such thing.  It says that there are infinite possibilities, not an infinite reality.  Huge difference.  It also very clearly states that there may be, as well as infinite universes, only one universe.  Either - and all points in between - are possible, but not all are equally likely.  And, in the end, whatever the number of universes are, it is, when counted, finite.

And I have never abused drugs, I've creatively used them for recreational purposes.  You might try it.  At this point, what could it hurt, certainly not your personality.

I worked with the guys in the DOE who invented it.  I'm pretty sure I do, but then again I did graduate school in hard science, not just a high school course.

QuoteYou clearly don't understand String Theory.

You clearly do not live in this physical reality.

---

Post Merge: June 09, 2010, 11:07:12 AM

---

QuoteLike I said, I need the government to intervene so "legitimate" competitors can exist.  The government can fight another country better I can.

Would there be no fighting on large scale if we did not believe in Governments?

The only successful thing government does is propaganda.  " Public Opinion" by Walter Lippman

You clearly do not live in this physical reality.

As awesome as that would be, it would be awfully hard to use a computer if I didn't.

Clearly, you have never been to a ______________CON event where most of the guys there are total virgins because even their hands won't have sex with them dressed in that Wookie/Star Trooper costume.

I'm not sure you have enough people in NZ to have a ____Con.  I mean you don't have nuclear weapons, I'm kinda shocked you have the internet.  Well, except for the fact that you have American corporations there.  Really.  The largest export your nation had this decade was the LotR movies.  And, at that, I bet the money that LotR made was deposited in LA banks, not NZ banks.  In California, movies are not even even in the top three moneymakers here.

How many people do you need?

One real fat girl (who really, really needs deodorant) to dress like Princess Leia in the Jabba the Hut scene.
One fat boy (who really, really, really needs dental work) to dress like Luke Skywalker
One kid with so much acne that the Stormtroopers outfit is the only choice
And one very fat crossdresser (who needs both the deodorant and the dental work) to dress like a 12 year old girl

And a bunch of very, very fat guys in sweatpants and an classic rock band Tshirt that almost hits 3 inches above the waist band of the sweatpants selling comic books by the pound.

Oh yeah, and about 1/2 a personality between them all, with even less social skills.

Quote from: ƃuıxǝʌ on June 07, 2010, 10:46:50 PM
That's some pretty backward thinking. The Earth is a speck circling a slightly larger speck in a galaxy containing billions of specks - which is one of billions of galaxies.
The Earth isn't the only resource in this massive Universe.
Think beyond your tiny box.

I don't think that's how it works but even assuming for a second it dose work like that. Whereas before we had 1 universe and 1 problem now you've hypothetically given us a billion universes with a billion problems, not helping the situation. :P

Although I agree with you if I had no choice I'd choose dishonourable life over honourable death. The fact that I'm a ->-bleeped-<- now instead of a headstone is proof of that. How true is that for any of you guys.

Quote from: tekla on June 10, 2010, 01:19:53 AM
How many people do you need?

One real fat girl (who really, really needs deodorant) to dress like Princess Leia in the Jabba the Hut scene.
One fat boy (who really, really, really needs dental work) to dress like Luke Skywalker
One kid with so much acne that the Stormtroopers outfit is the only choice
And one very fat crossdresser (who needs both the deodorant and the dental work) to dress like a 12 year old girl

And a bunch of very, very fat guys in sweatpants and an classic rock band Tshirt that almost hits 3 inches above the waist band of the sweatpants selling comic books by the pound.

Oh yeah, and about 1/2 a personality between them all, with even less social skills.

Thank heavens Star Trek conventions aren't like that!! :P

QuoteNew Zealand's politics has been hit by a parliamentary expenses scandal.

It involves the misuse of official credit cards by members of the last Labour government.

One MP, marked out as a possible leader of the Labour party, admitted to charging 20 pornographic films to his official card.

Thank heavens Star Trek conventions aren't like that!!

Yeah, it would be hard to find 1/2 a personality at a Star Trek Convention, in total.

Yet we're still the least corrupt nation in the world
Well you'll grow up someday, one person's corruption is just someone else's business as usual in New Jersey, or New York, or Illinois, or Louisiana, or South Dakota, or...

That might well be true.  I thought there were sections of the US that were corrupt until I traveled overseas and found out that the local officials (just about everywhere except Europe) wouldn't even talk to you until you passed them some cash.  It's not corruption to them, it's a major part of their salary.