|
I though we already had a gay thread!? Nope! There's a thread for marriage equality, but, all things considered, that's a pretty narrow focus. Other issues get brought up there from time to time, but I thought it would be nice to have a thread where more wide-ranging LGBT issues could be discussed in detail and resources and news could be shared. So, what's there to discuss? Well... Workplace Discrimination In most US states, you can be fired for being gay or transgender.21 percent of LGBT people have reported employment discrimination, that number rises to 47 percent when you look at transgender people.Polls suggest that most people think it's already illegal under federal law. Only 21 states , including DC, currently have laws protecting people from getting fired because they are gay or lesbian. 18 of those states also protect people from getting fired because of gender identity or expression, which protects the T in LGBT (Washington, Vermont, and New Hampshire are the exceptions). Numerous cities also have local protections in place, most recently, Houston's mayor has passed protections that apply to private businesses. The uproar over that was as ridiculous as could be expected. If you're a public employee, things are a little better. 11 of 29 states without LGBT protections have executive orders or policies preventing discrimination. The president has proposed and is going to begin implementing an Executive Order requiring federal contractors to have non-discrimination policies in place that protect LGBT people. It's a good thing, but obviously it's not enough. The Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has been introduced in every congress since 1994. It most recently passed the senate with bipartisan support and is stuck in congress. Don't hold your breath, but this is something that's going to have to happen eventually. I predict that as more gay marriage battles are won, resources and organizations developed to fight for marriage equality are going to pivot to fight this battle. Schools LGBT students face a 90% harassment rate vs. a 62% rate for straight students, and are 3 times more likely to report feeling unsafe at school. quote:A 13-year-old boy named Jon Carmichael killed himself during spring break in 2010. Carmichael's case resulted in a recent ruling that quote:...repeatedly removing someone's underwear without his consent "constitutes pervasive harassment of a sexual character" regardless of the attacker's motivation, but the court expressly refused to decide the broader question about whether Title IX covers bullying based on failure to conform to gender stereotypes. The Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA) would put held protect LGBT students from harassment with provisions similar to Title IX, which puts in place strict penalties for schools which allow harassment based on race, disability, and gender. As usual bigots are howling that passing it would prevent people from expressing their beliefs that gay and transgender people are hellbound perverts. Mental Health LGBT people face numerous health concerns. For example, they're 2.5 times more likely to have a mental health disorder. This article is a must-read for the broad strokes - know that gay and lesbian people are several times more likely to suffer from depression, anxiety disorders, and substance abuse. 25% of gay men and 20% of gay women report harassment. As usual in these things, the numbers go up if you look at transgender people. 19% of transgender people report being refused care by medical providers because they were transgender, 28% report harassment in medical offices. Suicide is another crucial issue. 41% of transgender people have attempted suicide (the national rate is 1.6%). LGB youth are 4 times more likely to attempt suicide than straight youth. I encourage everyone to check out The Trevor Project for more information. Other Issues Other issues include homelessness (40% of homeless youth are LGBT!), poverty, AIDS, the justice system, you name it. I'll try and make more effort posts about some of these issues. Obviously, this post has been focused solely on the US, because that's where I am and it's what I know (though I'm not an expert in any of this of course). It would be great if people more knowledgeable about LGBT rights outside of the US could discuss things here. Clearly, anti-LGBT bigotry isn't going to be "solved" by marriage equality. There's a lot of work to be done. Oh, and the thread tag? It's are country too, dammit. 
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
Can a mod please fix the thread title?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
In my experience, and after thinking on the matter, it seems to me that discrimination against LGBT people is on the basis of gender, rather than sexuality. What I mean by that is that the hate comes from the fact that these people don't conform to the binary gender norms of our patriarchal society. Who they chose to gently caress or not gently caress is one of a few or many non-conforming behaviors that create that "unmanly" or "unwomanly" image that society punishes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
visceril posted:In my experience, and after thinking on the matter, it seems to me that discrimination against LGBT people is on the basis of gender, rather than sexuality. What I mean by that is that the hate comes from the fact that these people don't conform to the binary gender norms of our patriarchal society. Who they chose to gently caress or not gently caress is one of a few or many non-conforming behaviors that create that "unmanly" or "unwomanly" image that society punishes. I think maybe 2 or 3 years ago I would be inclined to agree with you, but lately I'd have to say that you're overthinking it. Not to say that the depth and scope of your thought is poor or wrong; but that actually the answer is much more simple; the vast majority of people are meat-robots, with little to no more cognitive digestion than a cat. They're not thinking "You don't conform to my ideal of patriarchal normativity!" they're thinking "f----t." Whereas for us perhaps, an idea or information enters our brain, is processed, digested, filtered and transmogrified into that elusive thing called "understanding", they take in information, and it gets immediately stored as "f----t." Now perhaps this makes me sound like an intellectual elitist, or a nihilistic and pessimistic keyboard warrior; but is that what 'they' would call me? or would they just call me "f----t."? Edit: edited to draw your attention to the juxtaposition of my post content and my username. les fleurs du mall fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
visceril posted:In my experience, and after thinking on the matter, it seems to me that discrimination against LGBT people is on the basis of gender, rather than sexuality. What I mean by that is that the hate comes from the fact that these people don't conform to the binary gender norms of our patriarchal society. Who they chose to gently caress or not gently caress is one of a few or many non-conforming behaviors that create that "unmanly" or "unwomanly" image that society punishes. From what I've seen, the gender non-conforming aspects of queer people are not the sole justification for discrimination, but act as an indicator so bigots can hone in on their deeper prejudices, which often stem from intolerance based on religion. Just a gay or trans person existing on the same planet is often too much for some religious bigots, as demonstrated to the fullest extent by the "kill the gays" bill that recently passed in Uganda. But are these deeper prejudices formed from religious teachings that queer people are "unnatural", or are the extremist religious beliefs used as an excuse to more fully enact bigotry that was already present? This is difficult to say, but from my own experience of having lived in more secular countries outside the US, and having religious extremist parents myself, I'm more inclined to believe the latter. In more secular countries where gay/lesbian activity is still frowned upon, the justification for that is based on not following traditions such as marrying a person of the opposite sex and having children. However, no one is telling gay people they should die from AIDS and are going to burn in hell for all eternity because of the way they are there. The levels of outright hatred for queer people are astronomical in the US or Uganda by comparison. Mercury_Storm fucked around with this message at 12:39 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
^^^those are good points I want to discuss later By no means did I mean to imply that some bigot actually has the words "gender" or "patriarchy" in their heads when they start dropping f-bombs or d-bombs or whatever the slur-du-jour is. What I meant is that the deep-down basis of the hate--and therefore he thing that needs to be addressed to fix it--is gender roles rather than sexual proclivities. For example, almost all of the slurs or putdowns I heard (and thought when I was a lovely little kid) about gay men was that they were feminine and unmanly, not about getting poop on their weiner or anything that was more directly tied to the sex act rather than their expressed gender nonconformity. Another example on the other end is in Oglaf that barbarian conquerer character (forget the name) is funny because he's a hypermasculine ideal, and yet is extremely gay--not what you'd expect. I think that the widespread acceptance of LGBT (well, the first two) is a result of people coming out of the closet and society at large realizing "oh, you can be gay and still 'normal'". Even today, acting like a 'fairy' is ridiculed and punished. I think that's why L and G have made but strides in acceptance and B and T and Q are still lagging. There's this perception I'm noticing online and in far-left communities that gay people "sold out", adopting hetero culture in order to be accepted. To the extent that they've moved away from the 'fairy queen' and 'raging bull' stereotypes (which were lovely stereotypes in the first place), that's true. Ugh if you get what I'm trying to say, good but I don't think I'm expressing myself very well at the moment I'll try and rewrite later for clarity
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
visceril posted:In my experience, and after thinking on the matter, it seems to me that discrimination against LGBT people is on the basis of gender, rather than sexuality. What I mean by that is that the hate comes from the fact that these people don't conform to the binary gender norms of our patriarchal society. Who they chose to gently caress or not gently caress is one of a few or many non-conforming behaviors that create that "unmanly" or "unwomanly" image that society punishes. Considering otherwise gender conforming people get called slurs when they come out, I'd say it's at least equally about the sex. There is some of issues about gender involved too-- I think there's a quote saying "Homophobia is the fear of other men treating you how you treat women". But the main hate is the for the sex act, and more importantly the act of living outside the standard sexual norms of society. It's no surprise that the same people who hate on gays also hate on "loose" women and anyone who doesn't follow the straight and narrow of monogamy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
visceril posted:In my experience, and after thinking on the matter, it seems to me that discrimination against LGBT people is on the basis of gender, rather than sexuality. What I mean by that is that the hate comes from the fact that these people don't conform to the binary gender norms of our patriarchal society. Who they chose to gently caress or not gently caress is one of a few or many non-conforming behaviors that create that "unmanly" or "unwomanly" image that society punishes. There's a lot of truth to that, but I wouldn't say that it's entirely about gender roles, not sexuality...as with a lot of stuff I don't think it's that neatly divided. Plus, it's important to make that distinction on a legal basis. That being said, you can see that even within the gay community more stereotypically "feminine" people or behaviors can sometimes face bigotry... "no femmes" has become kind of a sad running joke, and there's always someone saying "I'm not like those gays, who like fashion and fruity drinks. I'm a real (gay) man!" And you know, be who you want to be, but right behind that statement often comes "And it's the flaming ones who are preventing us from being more accepted."  Quickscope420dad posted:I think maybe 2 or 3 years ago I would be inclined to agree with you, but lately I'd have to say that you're overthinking it. Not to say that the depth and scope of your thought is poor or wrong; but that actually the answer is much more simple; the vast majority of people are meat-robots, with little to no more cognitive digestion than a cat. They're not thinking "You don't conform to my ideal of patriarchal normativity!" they're thinking "f----t." Eh, they may not be thinking "You don't conform to my ideal of patriarchal normativity" in those words, exactly, but those sort of cultural structures are still shaping their reactions. Nobody's immune to this stuff, it just requires the willingness to be aware of it and to work against it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 15:08
|
|
|
visceril posted:For example, almost all of the slurs or putdowns I heard (and thought when I was a lovely little kid) about gay men was that they were feminine and unmanly, not about getting poop on their weiner or anything that was more directly tied to the sex act rather than their expressed gender nonconformity. So I take it that you don't hear gay and bi men called cocksuckers? It's a great insult in that it's double duty against women too. It's also the urban feral/Amish of slurs, in that a bunch of homophobes trying to be on the down low about it use it as coded language. Not that it works in either case really. You also see piles of insults about it in reference to prison rape. Hell, it's the first go to about anyone going into prison. Everyone says give them soap on a rope, instead of something more original. quote:I think that's why L and G have made but strides in acceptance and B and T and Q are still lagging. There's this perception I'm noticing online and in far-left communities that gay people "sold out", adopting hetero culture in order to be accepted. To the extent that they've moved away from the 'fairy queen' and 'raging bull' stereotypes (which were lovely stereotypes in the first place), that's true. Add in that T & Q people tend to be poor helps out in getting them thrown under the bus. Bisexuals (at least female ones) are fetished by the straight male community, but there's a lot of hate out there under the idea that especially bisexual men are faking it or are just lust monsters. Nothing is done to correct this since it doesn't affect the affluent end of the community. Hell, I convinced that the only reason gay marriage made traction in the Democratic party is due to rich gays in the fiancial elite. Without them, the mainstream Democrats would have ignored the issue entirely, as Obama did until well into his first term. EDIT: And to be topical, looks like the Hobby Lobby case is giving a foot in the door for bigots to be able to use MUH RALIGIN as a way to sidestep the law. I'm sure this won't be used as a way to screw over sexual minorities (among other protected groups), like everything in the recent and distant past would indicate. rkajdi fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 15:24
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:the urban feral/Amish of slurs 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:The what? On Freep, the website that gets more recognition here than it deserves, urban feral/Amish is a codeword for black people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Why aren't we punishing schools that allow harassment of anybody? Why aren't we doing across board mandatory reporting laws on school bullying and harassment? That's not an LGBT issue, that's an everyone issue that LGBT people are just more likely to become victims of. Also I'd be willing to bet from what I've seen from research on how homelessness and jails are also largely the new asylum systems for warehousing the mentally ill from our abject failure of a mental health system that the issue of LGBT homelessness rates are directly linked to both the higher incidence of mental health issues and the even worth the straight population treatment they receive. also: rkajdi posted:MUH RALIGIN You know how when conservatives do poo poo like "OBUMMER" on Freep or news comments and you want to throw poo poo because it sounds about as mature as a six year old on a playground? This is not better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:There's a lot of truth to that, but I wouldn't say that it's entirely about gender roles, not sexuality...as with a lot of stuff I don't think it's that neatly divided. Plus, it's important to make that distinction on a legal basis. Just a person being different at all is enough to elicit hatred. We know all too well that even a person's skin color can be enough to set idiots off on racist tirades, so why not discriminate against differences in gender or sexual preference as well? And that some that think their religion supports them in this avenue, it becomes even simpler for the bigoted fool to spout off their hate. Mercury_Storm fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:
Oh yeah I agree but the point I'm getting at is that they literally lack the capacity to question it, and willingness alone isn't enough to summon that awareness. And I guess this also means there's a degree to which they're no longer responsible for being bigots which makes it even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Why aren't we punishing schools that allow harassment of anybody? Why aren't we doing across board mandatory reporting laws on school bullying and harassment? That's not an LGBT issue, that's an everyone issue that LGBT people are just more likely to become victims of. Parents. Parents are the worst things in the world. MY CHILD is perfect and smart and can do no wrong. In the United States, which is the only country that does this besides Somalia, children are not protected by law. We have not signed into the UN Declaration of the Rights of Children because OUR SOVEREIGNTY to treat children like chattel is more important, as is our religious freedom to instill bigotry and ignorance into our children. School administrators and teachers are spineless cowards that hide behind a literal interpretation of the rules that punishes a child that was beaten to a pulp and their attackers equally for both 'being in a fight' or else the parents of that shithead might sue or raise hell at the school board or call Fox News. I would like to say the solution would be for admins and teachers to grow a pair of testes or ovaries and make and stand behind judgment calls, but the courts would back the parents for the reasons I've described above.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
visceril posted:Parents. Parents are the worst things in the world. MY CHILD is perfect and smart and can do no wrong. In the United States, which is the only country that does this besides Somalia, children are not protected by law. We have not signed into the UN Declaration of the Rights of Children because OUR SOVEREIGNTY to treat children like chattel is more important, as is our religious freedom to instill bigotry and ignorance into our children. It also only applies to male children if you read it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
visceril posted:Parents. Parents are the worst things in the world. MY CHILD is perfect and smart and can do no wrong. In the United States, which is the only country that does this besides Somalia, children are not protected by law. We have not signed into the UN Declaration of the Rights of Children because OUR SOVEREIGNTY to treat children like chattel is more important, as is our religious freedom to instill bigotry and ignorance into our children. Yeah same in the UK; schools are powerless over the wrath of the moron parent. It's the bane of every teacher's life, so I've heard. I guess that's part of what I was getting at before though; seems like it's not about "where do we point the blame" or "what policies can we enforce", but rather "how the hell do you recondition the minds of hapless meat robots?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
visceril posted:Parents. Parents are the worst things in the world. MY CHILD is perfect and smart and can do no wrong. In the United States, which is the only country that does this besides Somalia, children are not protected by law. We have not signed into the UN Declaration of the Rights of Children because OUR SOVEREIGNTY to treat children like chattel is more important, as is our religious freedom to instill bigotry and ignorance into our children. Wouldn't mandatory reporting laws and laws the give schools liability for failing to protect children shift administrators risk calculus to "gently caress the bullies"? I'm not sure I agree with your opinion on what the courts would do, I just think the school doesn't want to have to fight at all so they stay hands off, make it so the school has liability for inaction as well as action and that will change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Why aren't we punishing schools that allow harassment of anybody? Why aren't we doing across board mandatory reporting laws on school bullying and harassment? That's not an LGBT issue, that's an everyone issue that LGBT people are just more likely to become victims of. Of course harassment of anyone is bad, but LGBT youth are disproportionately affected by it. There's also a significant amount of pushback against efforts to combat LGBT harassment in schools that you won't get if you're addressing harassment in general. The way to combat this isn't to ignore the reasons why this is, but rather to tackle them head-on, because teachers and administrators can be just as bigoted as anyone else, and unless care is taken to combat it, they can turn a blind eye to the harassment of LGBT students. Not to mention, the harassment or bullying of one LGBT student is a message that's directed to every LGBT student. That message is, don't come out, you're less than because you're gay or trans. It's a threat against every student who's LGBT in a way that bullying someone because they like anime isn't; it's not a part of systemic oppression. This is why SNDA needs to be passed. For homeless LGBT youth, at least, family rejection because of bigotry is the most important factor in why they're homeless: quote:Family rejection on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity was the most frequently cited factor contributing to LGBT homelessness. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 16:38 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Wouldn't mandatory reporting laws and laws the give schools liability for failing to protect children shift administrators risk calculus to "gently caress the bullies"? I'm not sure I agree with your opinion on what the courts would do, I just think the school doesn't want to have to fight at all so they stay hands off, make it so the school has liability for inaction as well as action and that will change. I was a little over the top in my post but really after today's Supreme Court ruling how could you think that the courts would side against religion? How could you think the precious right if the parent could ever be infringed, with this growing antivax and homeschool movement going unabated in this country
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Turning the movement against abuse of gay students sparked by the wave of suicides a few years ago into a general anti "bullying" crusade has resulted in more gay-friendly activists being punished for "anti-Christian bigotry" than actual tormentors of gay students being punished for anything. "Everyone deserves to be protected" is a good principle, but when it's brought up as a counter argument to "it should not be de facto legal to murder gay people" it's unproductive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Of course harassment of anyone is bad, but LGBT youth are disproportionately affected by it. There's also a significant amount of pushback against efforts to combat LGBT harassment in schools that you won't get if you're addressing harassment in general. The way to combat this isn't to ignore the reasons why this is, but rather to tackle them head-on, because teachers and administrators can be just as bigoted as anyone else, and unless care is taken to combat it, they can turn a blind eye to the harassment of LGBT students. I'm having a hard time find any part of this that doesn't apply to people being harassed because of their race, or religion, or because they're fat, disabled, or mentally handicapped. I'm not going to say the SNDA is not a good thing because I'm not one to be "we can't help those people until we help everyone" and if it passes yay, but I think it could be better if it was written to protect everyone and get more broad based support in the process. Some 12 years old white girl from a privileged family committing suicide because she's been relentlessly bullied over her weight is not less tragic or less of a victim because she was statistically less likely to be targeted. The fact that it would not take more resources to protect everyone (in fact less, since it would get more support) makes the idea of supporting legislation which is more difficult to pass, which protects less people, with no purpose other then to "send a message" very short sighted. Sharkie posted:For homeless LGBT youth, at least, family rejection because of bigotry is the most important factor in why they're homeless: Also very good point I didn't think of that
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Considering otherwise gender conforming people get called slurs when they come out, I'd say it's at least equally about the sex.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Workplace Discrimination While Colorado does have protections against discriminating against LGBT people, it is also an "at will" state. Colorado Department of Labor and Employment posted:Colorado follows the legal doctrine of "employment-at-will" which provides that in the absence of a contract to the contrary, neither an employer nor an employee is required to give notice or advance notice of termination or resignation. Additionally, neither an employer nor an employee is required to give a reason for the separation from employment. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDLE-LaborLaws/CDLE/1249391300453 While discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal here in Colorado, since no reason has to be given for firing someone, you'll never know if queerness had anything to do with the firing. Sharkie posted:Suicide is another crucial issue. 41% of transgender people have attempted suicide (the national rate is 1.6%). LGB youth are 4 times more likely to attempt suicide than straight youth. I encourage everyone to check out The Trevor Project for more information.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:I'm having a hard time find any part of this that doesn't apply to people being harassed because of their race, or religion, or because they're fat, disabled, or mentally handicapped. I'm not going to say the SNDA is not a good thing because I'm not one to be "we can't help those people until we help everyone" and if it passes yay, but I think it could be better if it was written to protect everyone ...The fact that it would not take more resources to protect everyone (in fact less, since it would get more support) makes the idea of supporting legislation which is more difficult to pass, which protects less people, with no purpose other then to "send a message" very short sighted. These things are already protected by various legislation. I'll let the Dept. of Education explain it: quote:The statutes that OCR (Office of Civil Rights) enforces include Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 1 (Title VI), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin; Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 3 (Section 5040; and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Title II). Section 504 and Title II prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. School districts may violate these civil rights statutes and the Department's implementing regulations when peer harassment based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability is sufficiently serious that it creates a hostile environment and such harassment is encouraged, tolerated, not adequately addressed, or ignored by school employees. See what's not on that list? Sexual orientation and gender identity, which is what SNDA is hoping to change. That's why it's not leaving out other groups, those groups have protections. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:These things are already protected by various legislation. I'll let the Dept. of Education explain it: Fair enough
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
The Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to California's ban on LGBT conversion therapy. Appeals court upheld the ban on its way there, which means the ban will remain.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Matt Barber sees the Hobby Lobby in a new light quote:"The implications of this victory for freedom cannot be overemphasized as the decision holds essentially that First Amendment religious liberties are applicable to corporations. It protects those with pro-life views from being forced by the government to be complicit in (pay for or provide) abortion homicide procedures, whether chemical or surgical. There will be much analysis to follow and it remains unclear, but this bodes somewhat well for religious liberty in the context of how Christian business owners who sincerely hold to the biblical view of sexual morality may (or may not) 'associate' with others who are engaged in the counter-biblical 'LGBT' lifestyle or other forms of sexual immorality."
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Matt Barber sees the Hobby Lobby in a new light God willing, we will rally the forces of the Austro-Hungarian empire and drive the trans into the sea
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Slate has an article that bravely tries to see the sunny side of the Hobby Lobby case:quote:RFRA could not be used as a “shield” to “cloak … discrimination in hiring” as a “religious practice to escape legal sanction.” RFRA doesn’t permit employers to break a law when there is a compelling government interest backing that regulation, and, according to Alito, the government “has a compelling interest in providing an equal opportunity to participate in the workforce.” If gay and transgender people had actual protections in place at the federal level I might be a bit more comforted in that. The ruling is narrowly constructed to refer only to birth control medication for women, but I can't help but feel they've opened the flood gates for further cases of bigots hiding behind their "religious corporations." Chris James 2 posted:The Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to California's ban on LGBT conversion therapy. Appeals court upheld the ban on its way there, which means the ban will remain.  There's a bill in D.C. to ban it; from reading that article it seems like a done deal: 11 of 13 council members have signed onto it. Conversion therapy is quickly tumbling into the dustbin of history.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Ex-Gay Tears from Matt Staver of Liberty Counsel who pushed for the casequote:“I am deeply saddened for the families we represent and for the thousands of children that our professional clients counsel, many of whom developed these unwanted attractions because of abuse of a pedophile. The minors we represent do not want to act on same-sex attractions, nor do they want to engage in such behavior. They are greatly benefiting from this counseling. Their grades have gone up, their self-esteem has improved, and their relationships at home are much improved. These children have been victimized twice – first by the likes of Jerry Sandusky, and second by legislators and judges who have essentially barged into their private therapy rooms and told them that they must pursue their unwanted and dangerous same-sex sexual attractions and behavior. I can assure you the battle over change therapy is far from over. We will be back."
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Slate has an article that bravely tries to see the sunny side of the Hobby Lobby case: Chris James 2 posted:The Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to California's ban on LGBT conversion therapy. Appeals court upheld the ban on its way there, which means the ban will remain. Despite all the sky-is-falling rhetoric about how Hobby Lobby is going to lead to the end of minimum wage and the reinstitution of Jim Crow, the fact is that the Roberts Court is the most gay-friendly in American history and is not going to invalidate anti-discrimination laws.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:Despite all the sky-is-falling rhetoric about how Hobby Lobby is going to lead to the end of minimum wage and the reinstitution of Jim Crow, the fact is that the Roberts Court is the most gay-friendly in American history and is not going to invalidate anti-discrimination laws. Since it involves Kennedy making a good vote, we're effectively screwed out of positive rights that will allow us equality from anyone except the government. Also, he was willing to be a coward on the voting rights of racial minorities, so expecting him not to stab us in the back if given the chance seems laughable to me. To a large extent, a court just like a person is judged by the things they do wrong, not the things they do right. This decision opens the door to a million different challenges by religious and fake religious regressives to take swings at the basic positive rights developed for all minorities over the last 60 years. I expect to lose the basic right to housing and employment over this, at least for some employers. It also effectively creates downward wage pressure for businesses that don't otherwise discriminate, so I look forward to making 75 or 80 cents on the dollar within my lifetime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I expect to lose the basic right to housing and employment over this, at least for some employers. I'll bet you $10,000 that won't happen. (not a Mitt Romney joke)
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I'll bet you $10,000 that won't happen. That's a dumb bet to make in any case, and shows that you're entirely out of step with normal people over money. You also have hope. I see a reality where I'm still insulted daily by asshats at work about this stuff (it's either getting called a cocksucker or a communist, sometimes both) despite being against the rules in federal workplaces for over a decade-- it's career suicide to bring up so I just have to lump it if I want to keep my job long term. And with this ruling, I have no garauntees that my state's anti-discrimination law won't be effectively destroyed so some rapture trash can try to make quick points with their god. I've got about a million things working against me for a new jobs already (older in tech, former union member, federal civil servant) so this is just one more thing to gently caress me over. I don't see anything reason to be hopeful that the situation would fix itself in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
I agree we should just kill ourselves because the world is garbage and despite objective facts saying things are moving forward you're pessimistic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:That's a dumb bet to make in any case, and shows that you're entirely out of step with normal people over money. I almost stopped reading as soon as you implied there was something wrong with being a cocksucking communist. I for one pride myself on contorting my body into the shape of a hammer and sickle just for the sake of performing fellatio. And yeah, maybe the problem lies somewhere in the reasons for an anti-discrimination LAW in the first place. I mean if you literally have to say "hey guys, don't be an unforgivable turd or we will punish you" then NOT being an unforgivable turd is apparently not an idea that's catching on. As the lazy majority, weed smokers are pretty energetic about defending their right to set fire to a plant and blacken their lungs with it, regardless of laws. Gunna have a hard time beating down the wall of bigotry if you can't even get a stoner bum to shut up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Huttan posted:I don't know about where you grew up, but when I was growing up, boys called each other things like "homo" and "fag" long before they knew what sexuality was, and in some cases before they could spell the word "sex". So boys have been conditioned (by getting beaten up) from a very early age not to be whatever those words were. A similar example could be made for "cocksucker". One of the worst insults a male can give to another male. What does it mean to your girlfriend when you want her to give you a blowjob? How should she feel about it when she hears the hate/anger/emotion in your voice when you say it about another male? That really hammers it home to me that it's about the sex. We teach kids these ideas even before they understand sex, so it forces the default position to be gay sex is negative. I've also brought up the whole thing about cocksucker being insulting to girlfriends/wives with the idiot that still uses it constantly in my office. Shockingly, he's too dumb or dense to figure out he's insulting some he loves (or at least lusts) for doing something he likes her doing. That's a special kind of stupid you don't find anywhere else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:From what I've seen, the gender non-conforming aspects of queer people are not the sole justification for discrimination, but act as an indicator so bigots can hone in on their deeper prejudices, which often stem from intolerance based on religion. I personally believe there are universal rights and wrings, but I can appreciate cultural relativism from the perspective of "things are the way they are due to specific environmental and culturally endogenous factors". I think that hate can be stoked like a fire with things like religion, but that the initial spark is at its root the nonconforming aspect. Hell, bald-ponytail-liberal-strawman is seen as a thing to despise and evasively compare yourself to because he tries to see all sides and appreciate other cultures that are obviously wrong (from the dominant society's perspective).
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
rkajdi posted:
rkajdi posted:I see a reality where I'm still insulted daily by asshats at work about this stuff About what stuff, white male in a straight monogamous marriage?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:36
|
|