Prison Guard Instructs Immigrant Detainee to Drink His Semen, Gets Slap on the Wrist

In September 2009 Tanya Guzman-Martinez was sent to Arizona's Eloy Detention Center for undocumented workers to await deportation back to Mexico. While in custody, Guzman-Martinez, who is transgendered, requested asylum under the Convention Against Torture; her argument was that she would be persecuted upon returning to Mexico for being biologically male but identifying as female. While Guzman-Martinez was eventually granted asylum in 2010, she nevertheless faced persecution and abuse as a result of being transgendered—just not from Mexican thugs.

According to a lawsuit filed earlier this month by the American Civil Liberties Union, Guzman-Martinez was harassed and assaulted by Corrections Corp. of America guards and inmates at Eloy between September 2009 and her release in May 2010. (CCA, which owns Eloy, contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain undocumented workers.) 

Despite having "surgically altered her breasts, buttocks, hips, and legs to appear more feminine," Guzman-Martinez was housed with male inmates at Eloy because she still had male genitalia. The lawsuit says she was regularly referred to by male inmates and CCA guards as "dog," "faggot," and "boy." One CCA guard told a group of male inmates they could "have" Guzman-Martinez in exchange for "three soup packets." The lawsuit also alleges that Guzman-Martinez was "often inappropriately patted down" by male officers (keep in mind: she had female breasts).

Two incidents transcended bullying and harassment. One of them involved a fellow inmate, who pushed Guzman-Martinez up against a wall and groped her, then threatened to have her beaten and raped if she reported him. The other incident was even more appalling, and involved Justin Manford, a CCA guard (and U.S. citizen). According to the lawsuit, Manford allegedly forced Guzman-Martinez to watch him masturbate into a cup, and then forced her to drink his ejaculate:

Manford maliciously forced Ms. Guzman-Martinez to watch him masturbate into a white styrofoam cup and then demanded that she ingest his ejaculated semen. Failures by Defendants CCA, DeRosa and Manford to adequately screen and monitor Manford, and to prevent situations where a male officer such as Manford is alone with a transgender woman detainee and out of sight of others, enabled this horrific assault on Ms. Guzman-Martinez.

The assault followed a history of frequent inappropriate behavior and inquiries by Manford about Ms. Guzman-Martinez, including questions about her sexuality, whether she had a boyfriend, and whether other inmates had seen her breasts.

During the commission of the assault, Manford made offensive gestures, faces, and comments towards Ms. Guzman-Martinez and threatened that he could have her locked up in “the hole,” lengthen her detention or have her deported to Mexico if she did not follow his demands.

Guzman-Martinez reported Manford that same day. According to the lawsuit, “Manford was subsequently convicted in the Pinal County Superior Court on June 8, 2010, for Attempted Unlawful Sexual Contact in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes.” Fronteras Desk, a news outlet that covers border and immigration stories, reported on Dec. 9 that Manford “was sentenced to two days, time served.”

For a full (and more horrifying) report of immigrant abuses in Arizona facilities, here's the Arizona ACLU's Detention Report 2011

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • sarcasmic||

    Repeat after me.
    You can't turn an X into a Y.
    You can't turn an X into a Y.
    You can't turn an X into a Y.

  • So...||

    are you saying this was somehow his/her fault, or that he/she had it coming?

    I'm really not trying to assume that or put words into your mouth, but denigrating the person who was abused seems like a strange way to start the thread.

  • sarcasmic||

    The mentally ill should be put in mental hospitals, not prison.

  • So...||

    people should be put in the looney bin for being transgendered?

  • ||

    I'm pretty disappointed by this attitude. This person suffered a horrible violation of their rights, and you're claiming they're mentally ill? And you seem to be insinuating this excuses the behavior of all the people who abused this individual, since you have still not claimed otherwise despite a request for clarification.

  • Rick Santorum||

    I like the cut of your jib, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  • Leo||

    Dude. I'm transsexual, diagnosed and treated. I've been through a very extensive psychological evaluation to receive my diagnosis and can prove, unlike many other citizens, that I am in fact sane and 100% understanding of and capable to make decisions for myself.

  • Juice||

    There's no such thing as a chick with a dick. It's a dude with tits.

  • sarcasmic||

    Can't turn an X into a Y.

  • Jews 'n Things||

    I'm transgendered, but I don't feel the need to have myself butchered like Ms. Garrison did on South Park. I would contend that socially forced, gender stereotypes is what causes transgendered people to believe that their only hope is self-mutilation.

    In other news, Justin Manford is a closet fag and deserves to be shot in the head with a .22 caliber pistol.

  • Dan||

    +1 THIS

    The abuser is obviously a closet homosexual. Why would homosexuals and/or transgender be such a big deal if people weren't so uncomfortable with their own sexuality.

  • Dan||

    The second sentence makes no sense. It should be "Why would homosexual and/or transgender be such a big deal if you were comfortable with your own sexuality?"

  • Taylor||

    Repeat after me

    The BSTc will determine the gender more than the chromosomes ever will.
    The BSTc will determine the gender more than the chromosomes ever will.
    The BSTc will determine the gender more than the chromosomes ever will.

  • Juice||

    She? Because he wants to be called "she" he's called "she" by everyone in any situation? Ok, there are hermaphrodites and people with weird genetic fuck ups. It might be a little difficult to decide on what the sex is, but this dude was born with XY chromosomes, a wang, and everything. That's a "he."

    It's a man, baby!

  • And...||

    like sarcasmic, I find it strange that instead of being appalled at the incident, you chose to focus on the sexual orientation of the victim.

  • Juice||

    It's appalling. There.

    I focused on the use of the word "she" by the author to describe a man.

  • ||

    WTF is wrong with you? WTF is wrong with calling someone the gender with which they identify? Cripes. Does it really matter that much to you?

  • Juice||

    No, it doesn't matter that much to me. It's just stupid. That guy is a man, and the author is trying to make it seem like a woman was being raped (keep in mind: she had female breasts) NOT. Isn't a man being treated like this enough? No, the author had to make it seem more dramatic, as if they threw a female in with a bunch of male prisoners.

  • ||

    The author is simply reporting the violation of rights of a human being. Pretty straightforward.

  • ||

    If it was obvious the individual's safety would be compromised by jailing her with the male prisoners, there is a reasonable argument for keeping her with the female prisoners instead, actually.

  • Atanarjuat||

    Or isolated from either group.

  • Shorter Juice||

    I'm massively resentful about the time that chick I picked up in a seedy Bangkok-area bar for a $10 tip to the bartender was actually a male prostitute and use Internet forums to express my hatred of non-straight people.

  • Shorter Shorter Juice||

    I beat off to shemale porn in private, but act like trannies sicken me in public to cope with the shame.

  • Juice||

    yeah, that's it.

    No, it's this simple:

    If you are a man that has permanently mutilated his body and expect me to call you "she" don't get all huffy when I refuse to do so.

  • Coeus||

    If you are a man that has permanently mutilated his body and expect me to call you "she" don't get all huffy when I refuse to do so.

    That sounds reasonable, except that's not what happened. You are the one who took objection to someone else using "she". Why do you get to decide what someone calls another person?

    Look, I hate all this PC stuff with a passion, but don't act like it wasn't you who got "huffy" about pronouns.

  • Dan||

    What is the difference between a man and/or woman being raped?

    The only reason this was brought up is because the author was suggesting she should have been in a female prison.

  • Juice||

    The man should not have been raped (obviously) but a man should not be put into a female prison, no matter what he's done to his body.

  • ||

    "The man should not have been raped (obviously) but a man should not be put into a female prison, no matter what he's done to his body."

    THIS

  • BigT||

    Dagny T.|12.19.11 @ 2:29PM|#
    If it was obvious the individual's safety would be compromised by jailing her with the male prisoners, there is a reasonable argument for keeping her with the female prisoners instead, actually.

    Isn't that pre-judging the other men?

  • Team Red Moron||

    The culture war is too important to be distracted by minor things like sexual assault.

  • Mensan||

    "... there are hermaphrodites ...

    There are, but they're not human, so that is a irrelevant to the discussion. Also, how do you know this individual's chromosomal profile?

  • Xsisten||

    You are implying that any person born with both genitalia, or one who has a chromosomal abnormality (XXX, XXY, X, XXXY, et cetera), is inhuman.

    This implication, when paired with the name you have given, worries me.

  • Matrix||

    This is sexual assault. And sentenced to two days? If the average person did this, they would be in jail for months or years, but this pig gets 2 friggin' days of time served. Give me a break!

  • Hey...||

    "CCA, which owns Eloy, contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain undocumented workers."

    Privatization solves everything! It's not even a pig...he's an up-jumped mall cop. Private security, contracted out.

  • ||

    Yeah, cuz this sort of thing never happens with public sector employees. The solution to this problem is not the type of organization that detains, but the laws that cause this person to be detained. Guilty of being on wrong side of imaginary line? Read the Judge's article on right to travel.

  • Montani Semper Liberi||

  • I...||

    stand corrected. The private facility did indeed do everything in it's power.

    I suppose I would object to a private company being given that kind of authority to begin with, but it's really nit-picking at that point.

  • Coeus||

    I suppose I would object to a private company being given that kind of authority to begin with,

    That's a valid point (and one I agree with), but look at the difference in reactions between public and private for matters like this. If this case (and others like it) are the measuring stick, then private actually seems more responsible.

  • ||

    ""And sentenced to two days? If the average person did this, they would be in jail for months or years""

    And on a list.

  • ||

    ""And sentenced to two days? If the average person did this, they would be in jail for months or years""

    And on a list.

  • ||

    I hear that prison rape is hilarious.

  • Hypnotoad||

    Oz is my all time favorite comedy series.

  • ||

    Registration cannot come soon enough.

  • ||

    Why do we stay here, anyway?

  • ||

    What's that saying about keeping a candle burning or something?

  • T||

    It's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness?

  • A fan||

    SugarFree|12.19.11 @ 2:21PM|#
    Registration cannot come soon enough.

    You always come too soon.

  • This...||

    isn't trolling. It was asking a perfectly normal question to both sarcasmic and Juice for clarification of their comments, as Joe M. also points out above.

    Now, if I came on here and yelled, "Stupid libertards this is what you get!" or went off on some anti-immigrant screed, that would be trolling.

    I think the definition of "trolling" around here has devolved into "people saying things I don't personally find funny".

  • ||

    I don't think they were referring to you.

  • ||

    So this isn't rectal? I've been conditioned to entirely skip over posts where the handle is the beginning of the sentence.

  • ||

    Who cares if it is or isn't? Avoiding having a filterable handle is a sure sign of a griefer. Spoofing regulars is another. Pick a name or get ignored.

  • ||

    Oh, absolutely, fuck this particular whiny little fuck. I'm just mildly surprised that there are two idiots out there who think this trick is clever.

  • ||

    Email me and I'll tell you want's really going on.

  • ||

    *what's* even.

  • ||

    Well shit, now I'm not so sure. I still think the initial post under "So..." made a valid point.

  • Thank you...||

    Joe M, I was trying to make a valid point, not "griefing". I have no idea why I'm being attacked here.

  • So...||

    the content of the post is irrelevant if you don't like the handle?

    I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that seems like what you're saying, which would be strange.

    That's like saying if some politician says an incredibly libertarian thing, if you haven't heard of him before, you will completely disregard it.

  • Tonio||

    You are absolutely right...the validity of an argument does not depend on the identity of the speaker.

    But you're still an asshole and a coward and since you can't be incif'd I'm going to do the old-fashioned thing and just ignore you.

  • Hmm...||

    I can see the charge of "coward", but I'm having a hard time seeing how any of this could be construed as asshole-ish. I've kept a civil tone through this entire discourse, but in return I am called names.

  • ||

    I still think the initial post under "So..." made a valid point.

    Not really the point, Joe M. Feeding griefers just leads to more grief. It's the lack of accountability for what they say on the board that is the problem. One of the reasons that MNG ran off with his tail between his legs is that he said all the Fast and Furious stuff was right-wing paranoid fantasies, and they turned out not to be. So he's on the hook for being wrong. He can come and take his lumps or bitch out and hide.

    The name-hoppers can't be called out for the stupid things they say, so they will say increasingly stupid things. Edward (Max/Morris/Lefiti) learned this a long time ago. Lonewacko (Orange Line Special/24ahead.com) did as well. This new trend of constant name-hopping even further insulates them from accountability.

    You may do as you please, of course. But I'm not reply or continuing to read anyone I haven't seen post at least couple of dozen times. The White Indian Incident makes it an imperative.

  • Please...||

    explain how anything I wrote upthread could be considered "griefing".

    If I had made those exact same statements with a regular handle, would they still be objectionable?

    If not, then why focus/care on what the handle is to begin with?

    If so, can you explain why they would be objectionable?

  • tarran||

    PICK A NAME!!!!!!!!

    Your system of posting fits the profile of a griefer who is a bipolar, unfucked asshole whose unfuckability leads to her constantly shitting over all the comments threads.

    You write like her, and are going to be ignored.

    If that bothers you, go away, or pick a name.

    It's not too fucking complicated.

  • Xenocles||

    You're on a forum with few actual rules but a sophisticated informal code of ettiquite. Part of that code is to post under a consistent handle. There are exceptions, of course, as when a poster uses an obvious joke handle that augments his point. You are in violation of this rule and as such Sloopy is enforcing it by shunning you. After this explanation I will join him. If you wish to converse with the members of this community, as with any community, you would be best served by following its mores. If you have a reason to object to them, you can expect others to object to you, right or wrong.

  • Xenocles||

    I took too long composing that. Shorter Xenocles: Fucking ettiquite, how does it work?

  • ||

    This passive-aggressive little martyr wannabe fuck doesn't deserve all those words, Xenocles. Saying fuck him is enough.

  • Xenocles||

    You're probably right but since I'm waiting for a plane it cost me very little and there's always the chance it comes around.

  • Xenocles||

    Or not.

  • ||

    Yup. Fuck him.

  • So...||

    Content is irrelevant and reasonable debate can be avoided as long as one accuses someone of not following an informal code of ettiquite.

    Free minds, indeed.

  • ||

    If you are the same person who has been spamming threads for weeks (months?) now, you should realize you won't get any respect unless you pick a single handle and stick with it, and focus on quality instead of quantity. I assumed you were just some random poster, but based on your responses here I'm pretty sure you're the same White Indian person now.

    I suggest "Ellipsis" for a handle.

  • I can assure you...||

    I am not "White Indian". I started reading this site on the very tail end of that persona's reign of terror. I have no interest in primitivism. I am indeed a frequent reader/rare poster.

  • ||

    Pick a handle or fuck off.

    See? Free to choose.

  • Crickets||

    chirp, chirp...

  • Do you guys...||

    always reward attempted politeness with cries of "fuck you!" and "asshole!"

    Perhaps you'd have more success in winning people over to your side of arguments if you actually responded appropriately to content, and began ignorning when "griefing" starts, rather than blowing a gasket over the use of a handle.

  • ||

    Still here, guy?

  • As are you...||

    I see. I'd like to think that my consistent efforts to remain polite and calm in the face of this unprovoked hostility are beginning to make an impression.

  • Tonio||

    Passive-aggressive little griefer shitstain is still P-A.

  • Xenocles||

    Thanks for the salient example of the joke handle.

  • Xenocles||

    This thread is too volatile. That was at crickets.

  • ||

    Thank you very much, Xenocles. It is always wonderful to spend time with you on this board. You are gracious beyond compare, and I wish you all the best in your future endeavours.

  • ||

    fag

  • ||

    I hear SugarFree's a big giant|12.19.11 @ 3:34PM|#|show direct|ignore
    fag

    I don't dress anywhere near well enough to be mistaken for gay. Not even schluby baby bear gay.

  • ||

    Do you always reward joke handles with sarcastic thanks, X? For a magazine called reason, you people have no interest in winning over people who have no interest in being won over.

  • Xenocles||

    No sarcasm intended, Warty. And if I get my upgrade to first I'll take a drink.

  • In all fairness...||

    If anyone finds anything I say to be objectionable from the perspective of "trolling" or "griefing", by all means, point it out, and I will endeavor to either clarify the position, or retract the statement. Indeed, I stated up above that I stood corrected when someone pointed something out that I didn't know. I just ask that the definition of trolling not be extended to "positions I disagree with".

    But the insistence on worrying about the handle baffles me, as long as the content isn't screeching over-the-top nonsense, such as the "White Indian" persona, or rather (if indeed she is the Omnitroll).

  • Xenocles||

    (Unshun)
    How do you not get that you're essentially walking into a home, putting your muddy shoes on the coffee table, and giving the finger to anyone who objects? You have to expect others to treat you badly for breaching these expectations. Think of it as a libertarian approach to the Tragedy of the Commons. If you are at all sincere please take this under advisement. If not, fuck you. (Shun)

  • I am indeed...||

    Sincere, which is why I do not hit back to being told to fuck off. I attempt to remain calm and polite.

    That does not, however, mean I will be forced to conform to your desire as to choosing a handle.

    You are free to ignore me. I may not understand that reaction, but it is completely within your rights to do so.

    Just as I am free to continue posting measured, non-inflammatory posts under whatever handle I choose. I don't think it's that big of a deal. You clearly disagree. That's fine; it happens in a free society.

    I would only ask to not be cursed at like I just dropped in to paste a long screed about primitivism or using someone else's name to "spoof" them, none of which I have done, and yet am being treated as if I had.

  • ||

    You are free to ignore me.

    After this response, done.

    I would only ask to not be cursed at like I just dropped in to paste a long screed about primitivism or using someone else's name to "spoof" them, none of which I have done, and yet am being treated as if I had.

    Just as you are free to ignore our requests, and do, we are free to ignore yours.

    Now, kindly get with the fucking off.

  • ||

    Well I've already agreed with you once and am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Why not pick a handle?

  • ||

    Y ARNT U ADRESSING HIS POINTS XENOCLES

  • ||

    This is disgusting on so many levels. First of all, the victim shouldn't have been languishing in a "detention center" in the first fucking place. She didn't do anything wrong and didn't belong in jail (and here's a big preemptive 'fuck you' to the anti-immigration trolls, racists, and law-and-order "but-but-but she broke the LAW" assholes).

    Secondly, obviously real criminals should never be abused like this, but the fewer people we lock up unnecessarily, the less chance power-abusing "authority" figures have to abuse.

  • I, Kahn O'Clast||

    It is obvious that the sentence was far too lenient and the guard should have been incarcerated for a longer period and then placed on some sex crime / predator (or equivalent) list so that this incident can be a life-long burden.

    Of course, in a just world the guard would be sentenced to serve as the recipient/target in 50 consecutive bukkake group ejaculation scenes.

  • ||

    this

  • Appalachian Australian||

    What's up with the invasion of Republicans here lately? When they aren't reminding us of the Newsletters[tm], they're trying to get a Westboro Baptist-style lynch mob started.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    They smell defeat in the air, and are looking to lash out in every possible way.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    “Manford was subsequently convicted in the Pinal County Superior Court on June 8, 2010, for Attempted Unlawful Sexual Contact in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes.”

    Does he have to register as a sex offender as well? Cause what Manford did, and how he did it sounds like he might have some sexual/violence issues.

  • Mr. Mark||

    The victim is a man. Surgery doesn't change that. This whole "transgendered" thing is bullshit. But, the victim is a human being and this crap is infuriating.

    If the victim couldn't be housed with other inmates safely, then commonsense tells you to house them separately.

    This Manford thing that committed this crime against the victim should be put to death.

  • Dan||

    I have studies trannies a lot - it isn't bullshit. Their brains are actually different. It is science.

    You could say that they have a "birth defect" or something like this. But that does not mean we should treat them badly. Do we make fun of people with Down Syndrome and say you don't really have this condition? Berate them and shit?

    Christians need to realize the Bible they study was mostly written by Kings who were trying to build and maintain power. They probably didn't give a fuck if you were gay as long as you were straight enough to have sex with women to have babies to replace the people lost in their armies in war.

    Seriously, the don't be gay rule is right by the don't eat shellfish rule.

  • ||

    Leviticus was a book on public health issues, and how to prepare big fat feasts for the big fat priests.

  • Juice||

    I have studies trannies a lot - it isn't bullshit. Their brains are actually different. It is science.

    No doubt their brains are different, but brains aren't why there are different words for male and female or have different facilities for the different sexes.

  • Tonio||

    And some languages also have a neutral gender (grammar). I don't find your argument persuasive, though.

    And there are many cultures, ie Lakota Sioux (IIRC), that have no trouble with intersexed people and even have like words and protocols for that.

  • Citizen LIttle Big Man||

    He had become a "heemanee" for which there ain't no English word. And he was a good one, too.

  • Juice||

    And some languages also have a neutral gender (grammar).

    So does English...for inanimate objects. I think it's silly for languages to assign gender to inanimate objects too.

    Lakota Sioux, then, have a superior language when it comes to intersexed people because, in that case, male and female words don't really work.

  • ||

    This whole "transgendered" thing is bullshit.

    Eh, live and let live, I say. It doesn't violate my rights, so you can be as transgendered as you want, as long as you don't send me the bill.

  • ||

    the sexual assault aside, housing him amongst the female prisoners would have been more problematic

    he had a penis. he had male chromosomes.

    of course he occupies a "gray area" gender-wise, but biologically speaking, he was a male

    fake breasts are really not much of an issue. i recall a guy who was on the "man show" years ago who, as a dare, got breast implants (he got a bunch of money for winning the dare iirc) and i assume he later got them removed.

    regardless, breasts don't make somebody a woman, as numerous gynecomastia suffering males might attest

    both males and females have the ability to form breast tissue. men will do so in the presence of sufficient estrogen (whether it comes from aromatized testosterone or from taking estrogen supplements).

    if he had been housed amongst female prisoners AND he had raped one of them, with his (apparently) fully functional penis, you know damn well, there would have been heck to pay...

    HECK I TELL you.

    the sexual assault was egregious, granted... sexual assault in many prisons is out of control, an abomination, and a joke to many, who will talk about somebody should get ass raped in prison for their crimes (which i find 100% wrong - it's a violation of human rights. we punish people by sending them to prison. rape is not acceptable no matter WHAT the crime... although i didn't lose any sleep in dahmer's case i guess. gotta be honest... before he was killed)

    i am aware he IDENTIFIED as a female. he could identify as an aardvark, but the fact was he was BIOLOGICALLY a male,. and thus should be housed with males...

    or optimally, housed seperately from both males and females. they do it for cops who are imprisoned, why not for transgenders who would be problematic to house in either normal population.

    granted, any effeminate, physically weak male would likely face similar rape problems in a prison.

    that is simply a crime against humanity imnsho

  • ||

    That's what I was thinking. Someone who occupies a gray area should probably be housed apart from both males and females, since they're aren't precisely either. I'm sure there are more than a handful of these, such that it would be enough to not make it a total waste of resources.

  • Coeus||

    If space is an issue, I vote we kick the cops into GP and let the transgenders use the previously occupied space.

  • ||

    *(smooches!!)

    love you too!

  • Coeus||

    Now I'm almost positive you're actually that cop who grabbed my ass.

  • lolwut||

    Yeah, because an illegal transsexual female worker clearly has a huge chance of being a rapist, as opposed to a violent female criminal.

    How do you know she had a fully functional penis? Hormones taken by transsexuals generally kill the ability for erection, they also tend to lower sex drive.

  • Jerry Sandusky||

    Prison sounds like my kinds place!

  • Xenocles||

    In prison, you'll be the pie.

  • Xenocles||

    *Under no circumstances to be read as an endorsement of prison rape.

  • ||

    lmfao... love that movie

  • Major Johnson||

    What does this have to do with illegal immigration? Do guards only do this to transgender folks of the illegal persuasion?

    Frankly, if you're going to hide your weewee with a dress and drug yourself to grow moobs it's probably a really, really good idea to stay out of situations that will put you in prison anyway, like robbing banks or trespassing in someone else's country. Doesn't justify these prison guards actions, but prisons can't protect you 100% of the time anyway and most of those other inmates are probably even less nice than the worst of the guards.

    And lastly, I refuse to call people with a penis she just like I refuse to refer to a police dog as a law enforcement officer. He's a he, the dog is a dog, a dress or a badge doesn't change that.

  • ||

    A++

  • Dan||

    I bet Major Johnson rides a Harley and drives a truck with huge tires to make up for the fact that he would like to take it up the ass nightly.

  • Tonio||

    The bigger the truck the smaller the...

  • Juice||

    "trespassing in someone else's country"

    There are so many things wrong with this phrase. Are you a collectivist that believes that "we" collectively own all the land within a certain border?

  • ||

    obviously he is.

  • ||

    I am. So yes "WE" have a right to decide who can come in and who we can keep out.

    borders, how do they work?

  • Juice||

    So yes "WE" have a right to decide who can come in and who we can keep out.

    Do "we" all agree on this?

    borders, how do they work?

    By the initiation of violence.

  • ||

    Are you a collectivist that believes that "we" collectively own all the land within a certain border?

    All title to land is derived from the sovereign, you know. So I think an argument can be made that the sovereign retains the right to control access to the country as a whole, even if you want to start from who "owns" each parcel.

  • Juice||

    I can understand when people refer to a "sovereign state" meaning that it is "independent" but calling the state THE sovereign is just creepy.

  • ||

    Did you not read that she requested and was granted asylum she was/would be persecuted in Mexico for being transgendered?

  • John Rohan||

    Which was complete BS, since he/she was persecuted in the USA as well. So why does this person stay? The answer is obvious: this asylum request, like 99% of all such requests, is based on a desire for receiving benefits or improving one's economic situation, not actual persecution.

  • Whit||

    What do you do when you can't tell and make a mistake. And by can't tell I mean you see one of these transgender folks and assume their female. Or do you simply ask all the girls for the angle of their dangle?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    It does amaze me that so many folks posting to a libertarian site would seem to be so uptight about gender issues.
    "He doth protest too much" comes to mind.

  • Xenocles||

    It is certainly an ideology that allows for a diversity of opinions on many subjects.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Pizza, for example.

  • ||

    And beer!

    My opinion on transgendered folks is that its none of my business. As a matter of simple courtesy, I will refer to them by the name an pronoun they prefer.

  • ||

    Finally, a reasonable opinion.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Serious question, would you refer to me as black if I preferred that? (FYI: I'm a ginger)

  • I, Kahn O'Clast||

    You are welcome to identify as African American since we all came from Africa at some point...

    In all seriousness, gender is a lot more complicated than "penis: yes/no" since many gender differences are in the brain.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    If I considered you to be an asshole, I would still try to be courteous enough not to constantly refer to you as one in public.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Or Anus-American, if that's your preference.

  • ||

    Serious question, would you refer to me as black if I preferred that?

    Probably not, because I practically never refer to anyone's race unless I am trying to give description of how they look.

  • Juice||

    If a Usain Bolt decided he was a woman trapped in a man's body should he be allowed to compete in women's track events?

  • ||

    actually, they had a case with a south african athlete who claimed she was a woman, and there was all sorts of controversy. they conducted a # of tests, and it was concluded... woman

    what if, in a sport like track and field, or weightlifting, an athlete trained all his life as a man (with all the hormonal etc. benefits that implied), then had a sex change operation.

    would he/she then be able to compete as a woman?

  • Nope.||

    Sports are very different from general human rights issues. Sports is not so much split by sex as it is by biological equality for participants. If we mixed males and females, females would lose 99 times out of 100.
    Thing is, if Usain Bolt was also taking estrogen, the things get a bit more complicated. Estrogen would remove the edge of his (or then, her) physical abilities.
    This is being debated in the sports community, and has been more so ever since the case of Semenya Caster.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    We like facts.

  • Tonio||

    Not me. I've been here for years. There are still people here who say stupid things about teh gays, and who engage in the most astounding mental gymnastics to deny that marriage is a universal right [looks at RC and scowls].

  • ||

    My apathy about gay marriage is almost boundless. I honestly can't bring myself to get worked up about it either way. I'm just a bad person, that way, I suppose.

    My objections to the current political movement are mostly process-oriented and linguistic.

  • ||

    Still haven't come up with a good name

  • ||

    What's wrong with Pagan Priestess?

  • ||

    I believe Somalian Road Corporation is still available.

  • ||

    meh

  • ||

    Nothing really. Guess I'll go with that until something better comes along.

    ~anonymous poster formerly known as PermaLurker

  • ||

    I would have gone with Priestess.

  • ||

    Not bad music, but their wardrobe seems to have been made by Chuck Testa.

  • ||

    The most important issue is the police abuse, not the victims gender. The gender scheme is a plight my the elites to further divide the working class.

    MUSLIM FOR LGBT EQUALITY

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement