MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

New York City Businesses and Employers Must Now Recognize All Gender Identities, Differentiate Based on None

New guidelines from the city's Human Rights Commission offer an expansive vision of gender discrimination.

iampeas/Flickriampeas/FlickrPeddlers of discounted men's haircuts and ladies-night drink specials beware: you could be subject to big penalties under New York City's gender-discrimination law. Same goes for employers who can't keep workers' preferred pronouns straight or want to impose gendered dress-code standards. Though the Big Apple has barred discrimination based on "perceived or actual" gender identity for more than a decade, a new statement from the city's Commission on Human Rights signals a renewed commitment to targeting perceived or actual instances of unequal treatment. 

The new guidance, issued December 21, extrapolates on the city's Transgender Rights Bill of 2002. That legislation expanded non-discrimination statute to include employment, housing, and public-accommodation protection for people whose "gender and self image do not fully accord with the legal sex assigned to them at birth." The aim of the updated guidance is to make it "abundantly clear what the city considers to be discrimination," said Human Rights Commissioner Carmelyn P. Malalis in a statement.

Inadvertent violators of city policy may face civil penalties of up to $125,000, while "willful, wanton, or malicious" gender discrimination could trigger a $250,000 fine. 

The Human Rights Commission defines gender discrimination as:

  1. "disparate treatment of an individual" on the basis of their "actual or perceived" gender, gender identity, gender expression, or transgender or intersex status, or
  2. harassment motivated by gender, gender identity, gender expression, or transgender or intersex status

Disparate treatment includes offering employee health-inusrance coverage that does not include coverage for "transgender care" or prohibiting male employees from wearing makeup at work. 

Harassment, meanwhile, need not be ongoing, the Commission notes—"a single or isolated incident" will suffice. While "the severity or pervasiveness of the harassment is relevant to damages," any "differential treatment based on gender is sufficient under the [New York City Human Rights Law] to constitute a claim of harassment."

Harassment is further defined as any "incident or behavior [that] creates an environment or reflects or fosters a culture or atmosphere of sex stereotyping, degradation, humiliation, bias, or objectification," including but not limited to "unwanted sexual advances or requests for sexual favors"; comments, gestures, jokes, or pictures that target someone based on gender identity; and "intentional or repeated" failure to refer to an individual by a preferred name or pronoun. 

The "sweeping guidelines" are being hailed by human rights advocates and progressive media. They follow in the wake of an October executive action from New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo establishing a first-ever statewide gender-discrimination policy. 

I want to let my thoughts on the New York City rules ruminate before commenting on any particular aspects, but the one thing I will stress is that this sort of comprehensive gender-discrimination policy is very much a goal of the progressive political agenda circa 2016. City, state, and federal policies like New York City's are an aim of not just LGBT activists and the mainstream feminist movement but liberal legislators around the country and the Democratic presidential front-runner herself. Whether you consider the Human Rights Commission's policy to be a noble trendsetter or a canary in a coal mine, there's no doubt that it's a harbinger of things to come.

You can view the Commission's complete guidance here. Some highlights: 

Pronoun Guidance

"Intentional or repeated refusal to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun or title" may constitute harassment, the New York City Commission on Human Rights states.

Most individuals and many transgender people use female or male pronouns and titles. Some transgender and gender non-conforming people prefer to use pronouns other than he/him/his or she/her/hers, such as they/them/theirs or ze/hir. Many transgender and gender non-conforming people choose to use a different name than the one they were given at birth.

All people, including employees, tenants, customers, and participants in programs, have the right to use their preferred name regardless of whether they have identification in that name or have obtained a court-ordered name change, except in very limited circumstances where certain federal, state, or local laws require otherwise (e.g., for purposes of employment eligibility verification with the federal government). Asking someone their preferred gender pronoun and preferred name is not a violation of the NYCHRL.

In fact, to avoid violations, the Commission suggests that "covered entities [create] a policy of asking everyone what their preferred gender pronoun is so that no individual is singled out for such questions" and "not limit the options for identification to male and female only." 

Transitioning Care

Because it's unlawful to offer health-insurance benefits that deny or exclude services on the basis of gender, "health benefit plans must cover transgender care," which includes hormone replacement therapy, voice training, and surgery, the Commission states. Examples of violations of this policy: 

  • Offering benefits that cover prostate cancer screening for cisgender men but not for transgender women
  • Offering health benefits that categorically exclude from coverage, or limit coverage for, health services related to gender transition
  • Offering a stipend for child care to female but not male employees

"Because there are few health care providers currently performing certain transition-related and/or gender-affirming care," states the Commission, "employers should consider selecting plans that do not prohibit, place limits on, or have significantly higher co-pays or low reimbursements rates for out-of-network care." 

Gendered Dress Codes

Sex-stereotyping, imposing different grooming or uniform standards based on sex or gender, and considering gender when evaluating requests for accommodations are also prohibited. Cited examples of sex-stereotyping violations include:

  • Requiring employees of one gender to wear a uniform specific to that gender.
  • Enforcing a policy in which men may not wear jewelry or make-up at work.
  • Overlooking a female employee for a promotion because her behavior does not conform to the employer’s notion of how a female should behave at work.

Contra federal discrimination law, which allows for differing standards based on sex or gender if they're deemed not to impose an undue burden, the New York City law will allow for no exceptions.  

The Big Bathroom Question

According to the new guidance, employers, housing entities, and public accommodations must allow individuals to use single-sex bathrooms or locker rooms and participate in single-sex programs "consistent with their gender, regardless of their sex assigned at birth, anatomy, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on their identification." Any business or employee of that business who questions someone's facility choice would violate the discrimination law. 

If men's, women's, and single-occupancy bathrooms are available, then requiring trans or gender non-conforming people to use the single-occupancy facility is also illegal.

Lastly, all single-sex facilities must post a sign stating that "all individuals have the right to use the single sex facility consistent with their gender identity or expression" under New York City law. 

Photo Credit: iampeas/Flickr

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.

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    I won't call you "they" or "xi." Sorry. If that means I'm subject to a harassment suit, I can think of, oh, at least half a million better places to live than New York City.

  • buybuydandavis||

    I prefer to be referred to by the pronoun "Ekke Ekke Ekke Ekke Ptangya Zoooooooom Boing Ni".

    And watch the pronunciation, or I'll get huffy.

  • ||

    Here you go:

    Butthurt report form

  • AlmightyJB||

    That's beautiful:)

  • gaoxiaen||

    Need a hip replacement. Tequila/ CIS-gendered. Sorry about the whiskey dick. I can only have sex once a day,

  • BakedPenguin||

    No way that will ever be abused.

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    I'm trying to figure out how anyone is going to quantify damages here. "My boss didn't didn't recognize that my gender fluid identity shifted after I ate that chicken sandwich. He addressed me as 'he' instead of 'she,' even though it was obvious I was feeling more feminine in that vulnerable moment."

    Remember, a single incident can be actionable . . .

  • BakedPenguin||

    There is so much potential cost with so little benefit.

    OTOH, employment opportunities in northern NJ, Long Island & Western CT are bound to increase.

  • Trouser-Pod (The blowhard)||

    Yep. Given that, though - imagine the businesses that do stay.

    And, thee will be people lined up to try and work for those businesses, because patriarchy/social justice/flavor-of-the-month cause.

  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    There is so much potential cost with so little benefit.

    I believe that is the quintessential definition of "government".

  • Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair||

    Damages? Who cares about damages when there are statutory fines?

    Inadvertent violators of city policy may face civil penalties of up to $125,000, while "willful, wanton, or malicious" gender discrimination could trigger a $250,000 fine.
  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    I consider fines to be white male-centric and therefore triggering.

  • ||

    Worse than that, increasing numbers of "transgenders" are being women one day and men the next. Growing their beard and wearing pink jeans one month and going make up and stockings the next. So employers are supposed to ask every day what sex they are? Or would that mean a $250,000 fine. Ridiculous....

  • Entelechy||

    What do you call a spayed penguin restroom anyway ?

  • BakedPenguin||

    Well, I tried to come up with a clever synonym-ic phrase, but failed. If you have a punchline, please continue.

  • jester||

    Male and female penguins have similar looking cloacas. It's a non-issue.

  • Quincy.||

    The Tuxedo Lounge?

  • straffinrun||

    I expect you assholes to prove exactly why this type of Solomonesque legislation is necessary.

  • Entelechy||

    I think it means Salomemonesque

  • Galactic Chipper Cdr Lytton||

  • Entelechy||

    No fish slapping please, English pengiun dog.

  • commodious spittoon||

    I didn't lose a leg in 'Nam so I would have to pretend some Nancy-boy with a wig and an unpronounceable set of pronouns is an honest to God woman.

    Well, I didn't.

  • ||

    I wonder why The Donald isn't saying stuff like this? Could he be a closet transgender??? :-)

  • ||

    http://fusion.net/story/147144.....ald-trump/ I found a stupid joke he made on the topic...

  • AlmightyJB||

    This won't impact job opportunities for transgendered folks

  • ||

    I was just thinking the same thing. It will open up a world of opportunity for them.

  • Sevo||

    In New Jersey.

  • ||

    Every time I start to feel sorry for myself for living in MD, I hear about someone who lives in NJ and I feel better! Thanks, Sevo, happy holidays!

  • gaoxiaen||

    Fat people that Identify with obese Christie should kill themselves. Fuck that fatass.

  • Bill||

    The obvious strategy since it will be such a pain
    in the ass to have them around with these new
    rules will be to never hire them in the first place.

  • ||

    I guess the only benefit of a really bad economy is you have lots of excuses to NOT hire problematic people - i.e., all the people who clearly are MORE qualified anyway.

  • gaoxiaen||

    -one Howard Roarkl!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...there's no doubt that it's a harbinger of things to come.

    They space laughed during the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation for showing male extras wearing the mini-skirt Starfleet uniforms back in 1987, but who's space laughing now?

  • The Hyperbole||

    you misspelled "nerdz"

  • gaoxiaen||

    My underage girlfriend is.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Inadvertent violators of city policy may face civil penalties of up to $125,000, while "willful, wanton, or malicious" gender discrimination could trigger a $250,000 fine.

    I've never been to NYC, is that a lot? Because it sounds like a lot.

  • Morbark 50||

    Dinner and a show on Broadway.

  • jester||

    You don't tip, do you cheapskate.

  • Morbark 50||

    I am going to need some grammar guidelines for ze/hir. Also more pronouns to work with.

  • Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair||

    I figger if my company (NOT in NYC) ever has to implement this kind of crap, I am going to make up my own pronouns, possibly different ones for each day of the week, and possibly demand they be randomized in any computerized documents.

  • Careless||

    Especially since we already pronounce" her" as "hir"

  • ||

    So I can advertise as a surrogate mother. And if anyone complains and points out that I have testicles and no vag, I can sue them?

  • Microaggressor||

    LEARN MY PRONOUNS

  • buybuydandavis||

    This.

    Otherwise known as "dance for me, and I may let you live."

  • Hyperbolical (wadair)||

    actual or perceived

    What could be more clear than this?

    I don't give a damn how another person dresses nor which gender they want to play, but how am I to know what their perception of themselves is at the moment and how to act in that regard? I see reeducation camps down the proverbial track.

  • Microaggressor||

    They're trying to export the university hypersensitivity to the real world.

    NYC is now officially a safe space.

    We were warned that all those kids graduating with useless degrees would end up in a bureaucracy like this, enforcing their will on the bigoted peons. It's already happening.

  • ||

    The problem with the left is they have no built in meter or perception of when they have gone too far. They're already over the line, but they can't stop. I think some of the old university professors have started to realize that they've now created a monster which they cannot control. But it's too late. The left are going to go full on retard and nothing can stop them. The blowback will be very harsh indeed and they will be in total shock when it happens, having never had to deal with any consequences of their own actions their entire life. They will be totally unprepared to deal with it.

    I'm stocking up on popcorn and beer, the show is going to be fucking derptastical.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Colleges today seem to have the political openness of a Maoist re-education camp.

  • ||

    I mean judging by the fact that some guy recently got around 50 of them to enthusiastically sign a petition to repeal the first amendment in only one hour, I would say your statement is pretty accurate.

  • jester||

    It took that long? Must of been one of those private Christian colleges.

  • ||

    The irony of people signing a petition to repeal their own right to sign said petition is beyond .... I don't even ...

  • creech||

    "they have gone too far"

    Really? I think the only political entities that pass these kinds of measures have already rightly decided there will be no blow back from the majority of voters. I don't think the progs lose NYC because this measure was passed.

  • ant1sthenes||

    No, but once all the sane people leave, they'll have downgraded NYC into Detroit, in which case they might as well have lost it.

  • ||

    It won't exactly be Detroit. It will be more like the Sao Paulo of the north. So the Wall Street mega rich will be living in their high rises next to the retard voters who allowed this shit, who will be living in their lean to shacks.

  • ||

    Women who object to this already are getting death threats and "no platformed" and losing job and other opportunities; and some guys are too. It's sickening.

  • ||

    Women who object to this already are getting death threats and "no platformed" and losing job and other opportunities; and some guys are too. It's sickening.

  • Michael||

    According to the new guidance, employers, housing entities, and public accommodations must allow individuals to use single-sex bathrooms or locker rooms and participate in single-sex programs "consistent with their gender, regardless of their sex assigned at birth, anatomy, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on their identification."


    If you think it's difficult finding a public restroom in NYC now...

  • blcartwright||

    So I may have a dick, dress like a guy, and have "M" stamped on my driver's license, but if I go into the health club and wish to use the women's locker room, they can get fined $250k for telling me "No".

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Cows ruminate.

    Ideas germinate.

    hth

  • jester||

    Rapists inseminate.

  • Quincy.||

    Todd Akin diagrees.

  • Seguin, the Mighty Monoclops||

    Boba disintegrates.

  • Quincy.||

    Trannies instigate.

  • bluecanarybythelightswitch||

    Lewinskies Bill-fellate

  • ||

    That is not correct.

  • bagoh20||

    They have to use a person's prefered title? Oh, that's gonna be fun. I can tell my boss I prefer to be called King Schlong, the Vanquisher, and she has to do it? She's gonna love that development.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    All people, including employees, tenants, customers, and participants in programs, have the right to use their preferred name regardless of whether they have identification in that name or have obtained a court-ordered name change

    "Henceforth, you shall address me as, 'Your Celestial Eminence'."

  • Swiss Servator||

    Doctor Field Marshal President for Life, if you please!

  • Zunalter||

    perceived or actual instances of unequal treatment.

    That sounds like a recipe for justice and fairness.

  • ||

    My typing skills are often impaired when I drink and post. Therefore I make frequent type-os. Therefore, I feel that Reason is treating me unequally by not providing an edit feature. I demand 100 billion dollars in compensation for this 'perceived' injustice!

  • DenverJ||

    Your ideas intrigue me, and I would like to join your class-action lawsuit...

  • gaoxiaen||

    +100,000,000

  • jester||

    Top men are especially gifted at perception. Why don't you trust the people who built the country you live in?

  • ||

    The ACLU supports this crap and they've been hearing from me everytime they email me...

  • ||

    This entire gender neutral thing is probably not going to go over too well with the hundreds of millions of latin romance languages speakers out there. Gender seems to be pretty important to them, their entire fucking language is structured around it. Are we going to force everyone on the planet to speak one gender neutral language or what?

  • jester||

    I understand that Icelandic is very pronoun happy. I guess they just have to expand from 62 choices to 6,547 or so.
    For example, one choice for *they* would go roughly: the transgender who was born with male apparati and is planning but not yet accomplished the surgery and the woman who thinks she might be a man but isn't really sure yet.

  • Eman||

    that sounds like dan streetmentioner's time traveller's handbook

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    This entire gender neutral thing is probably not going to go over too well with the hundreds of millions of latin romance languages speakers out there. Gender seems to be pretty important to them, their entire fucking language is structured around it. Are we going to force everyone on the planet to speak one gender neutral language or what?


    They have them covered...

  • ||

    In their deranged imagination they do.

  • ||

  • Notorious UGCC||

    Chelm is its sister city.

  • jester||

    Most folks can't even figure out when to use 'who' or 'whom' and start off sentences with 'him and I', so now they have to grasp a whole new set of *pronouns*? Why not just ban pronouns and require that a person's name be used every single time. [I know, I know, what if they identify with a symbol like hashtag or that former post-Prince moniker. Well we figured a way out then.]

  • commodious spittoon||

    Nobody said the reeducation campus wouldn't have ancillary benefits.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    It will be like a feminist hymnal - "God will protect God's people."

  • IceTrey||

    Human rights activists are hailing a policy that strips human rights from business owners and employers, nice.

  • ||

    Well, business owners are evil, so they don't get any rights.

  • Entelechy||

    I for one welcome our new gender neutral Mayor Billum De Blasium's decree that all New Yorkers are entitled to their own facts as well as someone else's bathroom.

  • jester||

    Bathroom politics is very serious business. Remember, if you can't find one and take a piss in the bushes, you are a sex offender.

  • Libertymike||

    Well, Jesse Jackson warned us, back in 1992, to "stay out da bushes."

    In retrospect, he was right.

  • Eman||

    that's a very good point

  • ||

    "Harassment, meanwhile, need not be ongoing, the Commission notes—"a single or isolated incident" will suffice. While "the severity or pervasiveness of the harassment is relevant to damages," any "differential treatment based on gender is sufficient under the [New York City Human Rights Law] to constitute a claim of harassment."

    Harassment is further defined as any "incident or behavior [that] creates an environment or reflects or fosters a culture or atmosphere of sex stereotyping, degradation, humiliation, bias, or objectification," including but not limited to "unwanted sexual advances or requests for sexual favors"; comments, gestures, jokes, or pictures that target someone based on gender identity; and "intentional or repeated" failure to refer to an individual by a preferred name or pronoun."

    Jesus. Fucken. Christ.

    With apologies to the King of Nazareth.

  • ||

    +1 libertarian moment

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Well, Rufus, at least that's one kind of idiocy I cannot imagine getting any say in Quebec.

    Vancouver on the other hand... I give it four years before we have a code like this.

  • Libertymike||

    How would the policy apply to Cytotoxic? What about the environment he creates?

  • ||

    Just figure out how it relates to open borders and bombing everyone on the planet. Once you've figured that out, you'll have your answer.

    Now that Canada is getting 50k Syrian refugees, he must be in his bunk.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Are you in competition with sarcasmic to see who can be lamest and most repetitive? It's obvious enough that neither of you hold a candle to me intellectually you don't have to sing it from the showers.

  • sarcasmic||

    Intellectually? Haaaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha! No one bothers to debate you because your idea of an intellectual debate is to hurl insults at anyone who disagrees with you. Intellectual. Too funny.

  • ||

    this

  • sarcasmic||

    What bathroom do war-boners use? Do they have shower stalls to piss in?

  • RAHeinlein||

    First-time EVER writing this - I LOL'D...

  • sarcasmic||

    :-)

  • ||

    Urinals on the ceiling.

  • sarcasmic||

    Drip drops on the ice.

    Cyoto's a prisoner here.

    Of his own device.

  • sarcasmic||

    In his master's chambers.

    They all face the East.

    As the piss at Mecca.

    They all think it's neat.

  • Wasteland Wanderer||

    Last thing he remembers, he was
    Running for the door
    turns out the Muslims want to make
    it like the place they were before

  • Cytotoxic||

    I create an environment where smart people do smart things.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    lol

  • Swiss Servator||

    Oh, I know I enjoy your armchair generalship. I only wish I had your strategic sense and grasp of the operational art when I was just some dumb field grade officer running around with 13000 other idiots.

  • ||

    Quebec is a strange place when it comes to stuff like this.

  • ||

    Even on the radio French-Canadian hosts get away with stuff no one would get away with in North America. You can hear a Don Imus type comment a day here.

  • Eman||

    ive wanted to call a band the nappy headed hos for almost a decade. that was a special moment.

  • ||

    It's because no one else can understand them.

  • ||

    That's PRECISELY why they get away with it as my F-C buddy keeps telling me.

  • ||

    They could secede and have their own little libertarian paradise. But they're French Canadians, so probably not.

  • BakedPenguin||

    boy-on-don!

  • ||

    The last time I was in Canada (Ontario), we were in a restaurant and there were a group of them at a table next to ours. I was just imagining their conversation going something like 'Look at all these English speaking retards. They know nothing about cheese or wine and they smell like hamsters! Now let us taunt them a 2nd time!'.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Sorry, that's an old one. I should have just wrote Tabernak!

  • ||

    Those people speak shit french. First time I heard them, I didn't think it was for real. I thought it musb some kind of fucking joke. Gullah is more English than Kébekwazi is French.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Even on the radio French-Canadian hosts get away with stuff no one would get away with in North America. You can hear a Don Imus type comment a day here.

    That's it! Time to institute War Plan Red.

  • Swiss Servator||

    Excellent - I always wanted to conquer a Tim Hortons, and rule it with an iron fist.

  • Cytotoxic||

    It's like mirror-universe Canada, without the beards...?

  • BakedPenguin||

    I just posted this anecdote on PM links, but it fits better here:

    I worked in the same area as a M-to-F trans for a while. I once referred to her and the other people she worked with as "you guys". After a short pause, it occurred to me that could be misinterpreted, and I went back over to talk to her and make sure she understood I was using it only as a collective noun for her work group.

    Fortunately, she understood, and told me she used "guys" the same way all the time herself.

    This law would make that a $125,000 mistake.

  • jester||

    The sad thing is that most individuals, such as the one you worked with are rational about it. Seriously, it's a hobby horse of some non transgender who is picking the heroic fight against bigotry to be heroic. [remember that student who asked for black students to be exempt from testing and she was non-black?]

  • Akira||

    "The sad thing is that most individuals, such as the one you worked with are rational about it."

    And the rational transsexuals who just want to get a job and mind their own business are now going to have trouble getting hired, because the New York government has made it a gigantic financial risk to hire any of them.

  • ||

    As long as there is a state, the IRrational people will get their way...

  • ||

    And the rational transsexuals...

    This is a funny statement.

    Not that I think these people don't exist, but the idea that mobs of cisgender advocates are crazy and ruining it for the 'rational' transgender community strikes me as very backwards thinking.

    Like saying the crazy legions of brony advocates are overwhelming the silent minority of rational bronies who just want to enjoy their unusual infatuation with horses in peace.

  • Akira||

    I'm not saying that ALL transsexuals are rational. Clearly, there are more than a few who are happy to jump on board with the grievance industry bullshit in hopes of a big payout in court.

    But it stands to reason that there is a portion of the transsexual demographic out there who just want to go to work, mind their own business, and not participate in the political uproar over sex changes. I was pointing out how this law forces employers to collectivize all transsexuals because of this law; how are employers supposed to know which transsexuals will sue over an imagined slight and which ones will not? They can't tell the difference, so the incentive is for them to never hire transsexuals in the first place. They have to spread out the risk over the entire group, because that's how risk management works.

    And so those transsexuals who had no thoughts of starting a lawsuit are less likely to be hired because employers are worried about a lawsuit, and they've got good reason to worry: the irrational transsexuals and their cisgender "advocates" are doing a victory dance over this law that will levy gigantic fines for even the slightest pronoun slip-up.

  • ||

    Where I grew up, "you guys" was an expression used specificly to insinuate that the persons addressed were gay. Then I moved out to other places, and it seems like it's used as a totally neutral expression everywhere else in the country. It's still hard to get used to hearing it and not inferring that the speaker mus believes were are gay.

  • Trigger Warning||

    Where the fuck was that?

  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    Isn't it "youse guys"?

  • blcartwright||

    I think 'yinz' is gender neutral

  • BearOdinson||

    We have lost out collective minds.
    Aside from the obvious bs from a libertarian political view, this is ludicrous.
    "...legal sex assigned at birth"?!?!?!?!

    This isn't just derp. This is truly delusional.
    Humans, like all mammals are sexually dimorphic.
    There is no fucking spectrum for sex. You are male, or female.
    This has nothing to do with gay or lesbian issues. Homosexuality was correctly removed from the DSM because that was a case of a value judgement and a preference that was being questioned. This is purely delusion.
    That isn't to say an adult can't decide that they may want to change their sex (I am not getting into the argument about whether surgery and hormones change a persons sex). But that person is still changing from one, to the other.

  • ||

    Look, the Democrats are running out of categories to divide people by. If they can't divide people up some more, how can they save us? You obviously hate the children and want the terrorists to win.

  • Zunalter||

    +51

  • sarcasmic||

    Oh, come on! You actually judge a person's identity by their plumbing? That doesn't mean anything you bigot! A person is what they feel they are! Plumbing? *scoffs*

  • Zunalter||

    What a great era of empiricism we live in!!

    /Science

  • BearOdinson||

    Yep.
    Good Science: computer models that make catastrophic predictions based on a ~.6% increase in global average temp (because global avg temp means something) that may or may not be primarily due to anthropogenic effects.
    Bad Science: genetics, brain science, 2500 years of medical learning going back to Hippocrates.

  • sarcasmic||

    But those computer models are made by scientists. They're like actual scientists, unlike stupid engineers and computer programmers who, despite graduating from schools with stupid names like "School of Applied Science," know nothing about science. Only scientists know that stuff. And they're like really smart and stuff so they must be right.

    /Tony

  • Zunalter||

    Be sure to make the sign of the test tube and genuflect once you are finished speaking about our most Holy practitioners of the One True Faith, Scientists.

  • ||

    unlike stupid engineers

    Like that Bill Nye who freaking loves science and is one of the warm mongers most vocal proponents.

    I called Tony out on that one and he has no response.

  • Cytotoxic||

    You know some people have bizarre plumbing right? There was a guy who just recently found out he had a uterus.

  • ||

    So what? I know a guy who just found out that he had a prostate. It had been there lying low for sixty-four years. He never even suspected it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Humans, like all mammals are sexually dimorphic.
    There is no fucking spectrum for sex. You are male, or female.

    Serious question: What's an XXY? Or an X-, for that matter?

  • Seguin, the Mighty Monoclops||

    Iirc, the presence of an active X chromosome deactivates, either partially or completely, any other X chromosome, rendering it a Barr body. I would image an XXY individual would be a male and X- female...although I do know its more complicated than that in all likelihood.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I agree with you, but my point is that such a determination is based on qualitative factors outside of the number and type of sex chromosomes. That is, as the concept of male and female obvious predate genetics, or even science as we know, the semantic field of the terms must be larger than the OP suggests in order for us to accept those with Turner Syndrome as women and Klinefelter's as men. And we are willing to do so despite the obvious physical differences between Klinefelter men (micropenis and gynomastica) and average men and Turner women (no menses, no breasts, sterile) and average women.

  • Six of One||

    This is beyond the level of even your typical sophistry. The difficulty in fitting a few extremely rare cases of chromosomal abnormality into the male-female categories does not delegitimize those categories for those with a normal chromosomal makeup. If you really believed they did, you should similarly question the distinction between quadrupeds and bipeds, as genetic abnormalities can produce specimens with the "wrong" number of legs. One suspects that the reason you don't question that distinction is that there's not political points to be scored on behalf of humans claiming to be antelopes or the reverse.

  • BearOdinson||

    The presence of a tiny number of people with a significant enough disorder that makes it very difficult to identify as male or female doesn't negate the fact that humans as a species have 2 identifiable sexes. We have 5 senses. Just because some people are blind or deaf doesn't change that.
    Besides, all the arguments regarding Kleinfelters or other genetic disorders have nothing to do with this phenomenon. These people are arguing that your sex is what ever you feel it is. They are literally arguing that a person with perfectly normal genitalia and hormonal profiles for a given sex aren't that sex if they don't feel like it.

  • Six of One||

    Extremely rare and usually accompanied by major health problems.

    We don't deny the existence of race as a category because of albinos.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Ipse dixit!

  • Six of One||

    Do you disagree with the statement?

  • Just say Nikki||

    He didn't deny the existence of sex as a category either.

  • Azathoth!!||

    What's an XXY? Or an X-, for that matter?

    Defective.

  • Cytotoxic||

    "Humans, like all mammals are sexually dimorphic."

    When everything works right. Sometimes it doesn't.

  • Six of One||

    You better not be calling humans bipedal, when Siamese twins are born with four.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Hey! Look at that black swan!

    *gunfire*

  • ||

    Yeah, some assholes on Wikipedia HATE that idea so much they are always attacking the article and the author of the concept...

  • Six of One||

    Not the greatest analogy to bring up. What you're peddling is analogous to saying that swans don't have a color that can be identified objectively.

  • Just say Nikki||

    Lol. You think you can objectively identify a color?

  • ||

    Doesn't matter. This is about making subjective preferences, imagination, and whim "objective". It forces others to pretend that whatever one claims is in fact true. This law is not agnostic as to sex or gender (neither in its assumptions, nor in its orders). If there is an objective truth regarding sex, the law denies it, shreds and replaces it. If there is no objective truth regarding sex, the law imposes absolute nonsense: it gives a myriad of speakers the right to define sex and gender, and to impose these mutually exclusive definitions on the people who are forced to interact with them. The implications are astounding. If we were to handle all objective truths or contested matters that way, we'd go down, descend into madness. This does away with principle, logic, epistemology, autonomy, and reason.

  • BearOdinson||

    But that is not even the point these people are making. This argument isn't about genetic disorders or birth defects. They are literally arguing that genitals and hormonal profiles don't matter. It is merely how one feels that determines their sex.

  • sarcasmic||

    Mens rea just rolled over in its grave.

  • straffinrun||

    Menses/diarrhea? What bathroom can I use?

  • ||

    Any bathroom you want, apparently.

  • ||

    About a year ago I had to change a web form regarding population data, such as gender, nationality, race, etc, to include in the gender category a checkbox along with male and female for 'neither' and 'I'm not sure'. You cannot make up shit like this.

  • ||

    'I'm not sure'.

    Who hasn't been there, amirite?

  • Zunalter||

    It was a cold day, and I was feeling some flu-like symptoms coming on.

  • BearOdinson||

    This is so true. I get that people have gender identity issues. Guess what, humans have all kinds of psychological issues. And we should try to be compassionate towards people with these issues.
    But that doesn't negate basic biology!!
    "Neither"? So they have a fucking cloaca? Or are they a Ken doll.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Sure, we've got a surge in homeless people accosting everybody, but the biggest fucking problem NYC needs to address is the scourge of people using masculine and feminine pronouns.

    This is going to be an abject disaster. It's almost enough to make you miss Giuliani.

  • jester||

    Miss Giuliani: was that his name when he dressed in drag?

  • buybuydandavis||

    Video of Trump hitting on Giuliani in drag. Is this what will bring Trump down?

    http://www.motherjones.com/moj.....liani-drag

  • jester||

    Come to think of it, these new directives are a bit superfluous. Isn't *bullying* already illegal?

  • sarcasmic||

    Bullying is totally legal. If you innocently say something that offends someone in a protected class, they can use government to bully you out of a whole bunch of money.

  • jester||

    Enough with your white male privelege and how dare you culturally appropriate the concept of *bullying* from its official understanding!

  • __Warren__||

    “There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
  • DenverJ||

    Prediction: This will be struck down by a federal court on First Amendment grounds; those old, white, slave-owning dudes weren't s dumb as you look.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Harassment is further defined as any "incident or behavior [that] creates an environment or reflects or fosters a culture or atmosphere of sex stereotyping, degradation, humiliation, bias, or objectification," including but not limited to "unwanted sexual advances or requests for sexual favors"; comments, gestures, jokes, or pictures that target someone based on gender identity; and "intentional or repeated" failure to refer to an individual by a preferred name or pronoun.

    So, IOW, the law is a complete fucking violation of 1A?

    Fuck off slavers!

  • sarcasmic||

    That's verbal assault, man! Sticks and stones aren't the only things that break bones, man! And violent language isn't protected by the 1A, man!

    Oh, shit. Did I call you "man?" What if you don't identify as one. Crap.

    *scurries off and runs away*

  • ant1sthenes||

    Pretty much. A person is entitled to think they are whatever they want, but they don't get to dictate what others think about them or call them (and that's basically what identity is -- other people's assessment of you). "Male" and "female" are adjectives, and you have no more right to demand other people use them to describe you than you have to demand they call you "pretty" or "intelligent" or "not a fascist piece of shit". Nor do you have the right to make up bullshit words and demand other people use them upon pain of legal sanction -- that shit is straight out of 1984.

  • Homple||

    Yes. I'm happy to let people live in their fantasy world but I object to the government forcing me to live in it with them.

  • ||

    It's bizarre how folks have got so invested in what other folks think of them. When I was a youngster, we didn't even have self-esteem. Nothing seemed to suffer for it. Things actually seemed to function a lot better.

  • ||

    "intentional or repeated" failure to refer to an individual by a preferred name or pronoun.

    Hi everyone, this is your new co-worker, Fantasia. Fantasia is a transgendered otherkin from the planet Uburu. Fantasia demands that you refer to herheshexihis as 'Your otherkin highness Fantasia of Uburu and your better or off with your heads you privielged CIS shitlord fuckers'. Failure to refer to Fantasia in these exact terms even once will result in your immediate termination. Also, Fantasia prefers to change her preferred name 3 times a day. Please keep up or else.

    This will never, ever be abused.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    I propose a constitutional amendment that provides for the tar and feathering of politicians that enact unconstitutional laws. Get a little skin in the game.

  • ||

    I think we already have it. It's also known as the 2nd amendment.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Vote Woodchipper 2016!

  • ant1sthenes||

    Why not just follow the rules the government uses for itself regarding its treatment of the people? Tar and feather the politician first, and then if a court decides after the fact that you went too far, steal some of the government's money and use it to pay damages to the politician.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    By zod, you've got it!

  • Bill Dalasio||

    I propose a constitutional amendment that provides for the tar and feathering of politicians that enact unconstitutional laws.

    I could not agree with this more.

  • CZmacure||

    Doesn't the Constitution say something about "cruel and unusual punishment," maybe somewhere in the back?

  • Six of One||

    You can always just point.

    If only third-person pronouns are subject to the new regulations, perhaps you can just say "you"?

  • Six of One||

    The argument is going to be that employers don't have First Amendment rights in their relationship with employees. They could always sell their business and move into their mother's basement. Given precedent, it would probably win.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    I thought this matter was settled?

  • GILMORE™||

    Who believes that this sort of shit is going to make employers rush out and hire as many trans-people as they can?

    I mean, won't the human resources calculus be, "Cost of Lawsuit if we don't hire them Vs. Cost of Lawsuits if we do?"

    What the Do-Gooders seem to want to do is hand a "no one will ever be able to mess-with-you"-card to their Special-Victim-Classes, but seem to be oblivious to the fact that doing so is explicitly identifying these people as *potentially dangerous liabilities*.

  • sarcasmic||

    Don't worry. I'm sure there are hoards of trial lawyers champing at the bit to represent these trans-people who fail to get hired, ready to challenge the potential employer to prove that they have a legally acceptable excuse for failing to hire a member of a protected class.

  • ||

    Don't worry, the best possible thing for a society is to put people in jobs and positions of power based not upon their skills but upon identity politics. Nothing could possibly go wrong.

    Upon departing on your next international flight it will be great to hear, once you get in the air, 'Hello everyone, I'm your pilot. I have no experience flying an airplane and as a matter of fact, this is the first time I've tried. In fact, I have no fucking idea what I'm doing, but I'm transgendered! Have a great flight everyone.

  • Homple||

    I have decided to identify as a qualified 777 pilot. Relax and enjoy your flight.

  • sarcasmic||

    Oh, now I get what you wrote. The lawsuits after hiring them may be more expensive than the lawsuits from failing to hire them. Never thought of that.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    If experience with other groups is any indication, the expected expense of lawsuits after hiring them is much higher than the expected expense of failing to hire them. For any one candidate it's extremely difficult to prove that you weren't hired because of your identity.

  • Quincy.||

    We just need mandatory insurance policies protecting against trans-discrimination lawsuits. Do I have to think of everything around here?

    #InsuranceIndustry #WhatCouldGoWrong?

  • GILMORE™||

    You're absolutely right. And these things exist. They already have "sexual-harassment" coverage via Employment Practices Liability insurance. Its simply matter of updating these policies. Data on average settlements and the frequency of suits are out there...

  • GILMORE™||

    e.g.

    http://www.iii.org/article/wha.....rance-epli

    "The number of lawsuits filed by employees against their employers has been rising. While most suits are filed against large corporations, no company is immune to such lawsuits. Recognizing that smaller companies now need this kind of protection, some insurers provide this coverage as an endorsement to their Businessowners Policy (BOP). An endorsement changes the terms and conditions of the policy. Other companies offer EPLI as a stand-alone coverage.

    EPLI provides protection against many kinds of employee lawsuits, including claims of:

    Sexual harassment
    Discrimination
    Wrongful termination
    Breach of employment contract
    Negligent evaluation
    Failure to employ or promote
    Wrongful discipline
    Deprivation of career opportunity
    Wrongful infliction of emotional distress
    Mismanagement of employee benefit plans

    The cost of EPLI coverage depends on your type of business, the number of employees you have and various risk factors such as whether your company has been sued over employment practices in the past.
    "

  • ant1sthenes||

    At some point, maybe organized crime should step in and provide a similar policy. Someze files a bullshit lawsuit, and you pay nothing because neither the plaintiff nor their lawyer ever shows up in court. As the young nobles raised in SJW madrassas gradually inherit or usurp positions of power and punishment for crimethink accordingly gets harsher, the option to pay protection money that buys you real, meaningful protection from your enemies is going to appeal more and more.

  • Rhywun||

    My company sells BOP policies. I can find out what this coverage costs; I'm curious.

  • Quincy.||

    Does it become exponentially more expensive every year? At $125000 for a fumbled xe/hir, I believe it does.

    #WhatCouldGoWrong?

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Would it be terribly un-libertarian of me to propose that the first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers?

  • Cytotoxic||

    Yes, since those are the only people that can defend us.

  • cavalier973||

    Only lawyers have guns?

  • Swiss Servator||

    Well, they have money.... so if we arm them, then we will have lawyers, guns and money - for when the shit hits the fan.

  • Eman||

    right. i have ms so im covered by the ADA, but that has put me in a lot of bad positions. really all i want from my boss is honesty about the kind of job im doing, so if im doing something wrong i can fix it, but everyone's always walking on eggshells so i dont know if im doing anything wrong, which makes it awfully hard to do things correctly. employment of the disabled dropped by like 7 or 8 % after that passed, but there are still some people somewhere who are forced (or are brainwashed into choosing) to do things that might not be entirely enjoyable just for the paycheck. that's gotta be a human rights violation or something.

  • straffinrun||

    How are they going to determine if someone is using the appropriate term in an inappropriate tone?

  • Lee G||

    Feeeeeelings..... nothing more than feeeeeeelings

  • Quincy.||

    Xe fucking annoys me.

    Xe fucking annoys me.

  • straffinrun||

    I've never seen a person speak in air italics before.

  • Quincy.||

    I don't like your tone.

  • Lee G||

    I note the Federal government gets a pass on using preferred pronouns

  • Rhywun||

    This is insanity. And I am sympathetic to the folks who are impacted by these issues.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Agreed, on both counts. It's just a gift to lawyers, more than anyone else.

  • Rhywun||

    The thing is, at some point, the 0.01 percent of 1 percent of people that might actually be affected should probably just suck it up and deal. [It's the same phenomenon as the disabled requiring the entire country's infrastructure to be arranged for them at massive cost.] I don't hang with the perpetually aggrieved but the few trannies I have known already understand this and they do deal. You're probably right that this a sop to lawyers and moreover I would bet that this was cooked up by hetero lefties that have no skin in the game at all.

  • GILMORE™||

    "this was cooked up by hetero lefties that have no skin in the game at all."

    Without a doubt.

    However, the hetero-lefties want to use the trannies as a weapon /lever.

    People will yell and scream about the trannies as if its all their fault, and the hetero-lefties will call it a win-win.

  • BakedPenguin||

    My experience is pretty limited. But that one person I know who would fit under this just wanted to be treated like a human being, AFAICT. Simple decency was all it took.

    And you're right about the lawyers. Something something Shakespeare...

  • widget||

    At some point we be able to harvest energy from Lou Reed spinning in his grave.

  • GILMORE™||

    What are you talking about, I saw Lou Reed just the other day.

  • cavalier973||

    Sounds like a perfect day for you.

  • straffinrun||

    Isn't it possible that your self identifying as the opposite gender occurs in a single moment? So if I'm halfway through snapping off a loaf and my road to Damascus moment hits, do I have to penguin waddle to another bathroom with my turtle head emerging? If I don't, do I sue myself?

  • sarcasmic||

    Squeeze, wipe, run, repeat.

  • Rhywun||

    You write purdy, staff.

  • straffinrun||

    ^this

  • ||

  • Rhywun||

    Old news. Try to keep up.

  • ||

    /falls down running.

  • ant1sthenes||

    And now we start to see why thousands of people are rioting over refugee centers. Basically, the old joke about the government electing itself a new people is no longer a joke. Seems like civil war throughout Europe is inevitable. About the only positive thing about it is that the leftists who don't figure shit out pronto are going to be annihilated regardless of who wins, either by their own people for being traitors, or by the people they're importing for being infidel filth.

  • AlmightyJB||

    "civil war throughout Europe is inevitable"

    No doubt we'll be involved:(

  • Cytotoxic||

    "Seems like civil war throughout Europe is inevitable."

    Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound?

  • Cytotoxic||

    "the old joke about the government electing itself a new people is no longer a joke."

    Lets hope not. Europeans seem stuck in perma-decline and some fresh blood is needed to shake things up. Short term side effects should yield to long term positive results, like they have elsewhere.

  • Six of One||

    Europe's current problematic state looks like a golden age compared to the societies the "refugees'" culture has produced.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Their 'culture' didn't produce that though. That was decades of Arab socialism.

  • Six of One||

    They weren't any better before the socialism.

  • Cytotoxic||

    The socialism empowered the worst of them. They would be better off if not for the socialism. Look to Morocco for what could have been.

  • lap83||

    Trump is conflicted

  • Cloudbuster||

    I'm so tired of how this shit is being used to troll normal people by every mentally-deranged nutball who decides to put on a skirt.

    At the last two gatherings for a hobby of mine there's been this big, burly bald guy with a skull tattoo on the back of his head (sometimes he wears a wig), who shows up in a dress, insists he's transgendered and wants to be called "Emily." It's fucking ludicrous, but everyone goes along with it, because nobody wants to be called intollerant.

    Hey, folks, that emperor, he ain't got no clothes....

  • Quincy.||

    But where did he pee?

    /NYCHR

  • Crusty Juggler||

    At the last two gatherings for a hobby of mine there's been this big, burly bald guy with a skull tattoo on the back of his head (sometimes he wears a wig), who shows up in a dress, insists he's transgendered and wants to be called "Emily."

    Does anyone care to guess Cloud's hobby? I am going with knitting.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I'm going to go with "swinging".

  • Rhywun||

    I dunno, but I was thinking that the "big, burly bald guy with a skull tattoo on the back of his head" part might have something to do everyone going along with it.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Not so much. Plenty of other big, burly knitters there. If the trans* person had looked like this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....ge-op.html

    it would have at least been more believable.

  • Quincy.||

    Hight frequency daytrading.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Knitting's a manly sport.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Actually LARPing, which is part of why he was accepted -- everybody's in costumes anyway, but this guy wasn't just playing a female character. LARPers are a pretty non-judgmental bunch (except for nasty ol' me), Even for me, it wasn't worth making a big deal out of it: he wasn't hurting everyone and wasn't disruptive. I managed to avoid having to interact with him much or engage in the dreaded choosing of pronouns. Just a huge inner eyeroll: he was almost comically unsuited to presenting himself as a woman, and incredibly lazy about it (as I said, going without the wig a lot).

    Quite a few years (10?) back, we had another trans person who wasn't so easy. That one actually thought he was Xena, Warrior Princess, couldn't distinguish between the game and reality and was just completely fucking nuts. That one wasn't welcome back.

    I think all trans people have serious mental issues, and I'm just keeping an eye on this one hoping he doesn't cause any problems.

    LARPing both attracts and is a terrible place for anyone with identity issues or trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality. For your typical player, it's just improvisational theater, and an elaborate game of D&D with simulated combat. People who can't keep that straight are a real problem and don't last long.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I identify as God. You all need to treat me as such or I'm going to sue. Fucking children.

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    Finally I can ask God the question that's been eating me all these years: What pronouns does God prefer anyway?

  • AlmightyJB||

    sinner

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    I am going to parse this as "sin 'er."

  • AlmightyJB||

    That's cool. I'm not a grammar Nazi.

  • Quincy.||

    I identify as an obnoxious atheist. I have Chris Hitchens on retainer. Bring It.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Me and Hitch are getting high right now with Lou Reed

  • Quincy.||

    Hitch has been spending his time in hell going to law school. As I said, bring it.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Seeing how I'm omnipresent, I fail to see your point.

  • Quincy.||

    Hitchens, honing his skills in the law schools of hell? This is why nobody believes in you any more.

  • Animal||

    And the colored girls go "doot, dedoot, dedoot, doot dedoot doot..."

  • GILMORE™||

    I identify as.... The Silver Shroud!

  • SusanM||

    Here I was thinking you were Mr Soupcan

  • GILMORE™||

    You are confused. I frequently attend illuminati sax potties. And I wear a tie.

  • SusanM||

    ;)

  • commodious spittoon||

    Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt is pretty good. The nontroversy over Jane Krakowski portraying a native American is even more moronic than I expected: the joke wouldn't be a joke if Krakowski were anything other than a white woman.

  • Quincy.||

    Agreed, the Jane K is a Navaho subplot is hilarious.

  • commodious spittoon||

    “But I'm watching Law Squiggle Order!"

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    Does this law invalidate differential rape laws? In many jurisdictions, rape is more or less a uniquely male offense. Can a burly offensive lineman packing five unmistakeable inches of schlong cite his nascent female identity on the stand as a valid legal defense against rape charges after he's forced that hot little coed to take his steely scepter?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Well if said lineman was drunk and identifies as female than the coed is guilty or at least a co-defendant right?

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    More to the point, what if this unfortunate lineman trips and falls and her penis just happens to find its way into the hapless coed's fragrant secret garden?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Is the lineman Muslim?

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    Mormon. And gay.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Wow that's a tough one. Mormon = oppressor but gay = victim. Tripping's already an established defense though so...

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    Also, can those of us of Fixed Binary Gender Identity now take umbrage at the pronoun "you" for failing to explicitly acknowledge our preferred gender identification?

  • AlmightyJB||

    How about bitch? That's Gender neutral.

  • Quincy.||

    "Y'all"— second person whatever.

  • Rhywun||

    It's too bad English lost the distinction between singular and plural "you". Not to mention "thou" vs "you". This could be so much more fun.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Don't they use yous in NJ.

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    The distinction has never been fully lost. It's simply been replaced by barbarisms like "you guys" (itself questionable from a gender-neutrality standpoint) and "y'all." Then there's "youse," popular in isolated pockets around the country.

    It is interesting, though, that English speakers adopted the formal plural as their standard pronoun and ditched the informal singular. Considering American culture is supposed to be rooted in egalitarianism, maybe it's time we bring back "thou" and "thee." The Quakers never let it fully die, though they royally butchered it by using "thee" as a nominative pronoun.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Shouldn't the new pronouns address the persons race identification as well?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Shouldn't the new pronouns address the persons race identification as well?

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    I would fear for my safety testing out neologisms like "yougga."

  • AlmightyJB||

    Yeah, I think letting the victim class come up with their own is the safest route. Not that we'll ever comply anyways.

  • AlmightyJB||

    maybe we just call them all snowflake like we do here.

  • AlmightyJB||

    maybe we just call them all snowflake like we do here.

  • Rhywun||

    Not that we'll ever comply anyways.

    You will when failing to do so costs you $125000.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Quincy.||

    Yasian
    Yacker
    Yexican
    Yatino
    Yindian
    Yindi
    You’reNotOffendedByThis
    YouTaxiLinguist

  • Rhywun||

    It is interesting, though, that English speakers adopted the formal plural as their standard pronoun and ditched the informal singular.

    Same in most European languages except they kept the informal singular that we ditched.

    I think I shall henceforth use the royal "we" in reference to myself. Comply or pay up.

  • Rhywun||

    Argh except it occurs to us that we don't have the adequate pronouns anymore to allow you to give the proper respect to us.

    Dammit.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Social-relational deixis is a bitch.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Language nerds. *solemnly shakes head*

  • Six of One||

    The distinction has never been fully lost.

    Yes, it has. The phrases you cite are not separate pronouns, just the same pronoun with the addition of other English words to clarify who is being addressed, in the rare case of the second person's number being unclear from the context. Nobody thinks "We the People" is a separate pronoun from "we".

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • blcartwright||

    Should tell that lady there's an 'h' on the end of 'Pittsburgh'

  • Six of One||

    It's hilarious that you're citing book titles as proof mere minutes after falsely accusing me of ipse dixit.

  • Six of One||

    And that you're citing examples of "y'all" being used in both singular and plural contexts as evidence for a distinction between singular and plural pronouns! Good enough logic to get by as a liberal arts professor, but a higher standard would be nice.

  • Rhywun||

    Correct. It is impossible to tell whether "you" by itself is referring to one or more people.

    This sort of ambiguity with pronouns is surprisingly common in Europe, actually - not just in English. German pronouns are particularly rich with ambiguity.

  • Six of One||

    It's unusual for the context not to make the number clear. You couldn't get away with that for "I" and "we".

  • blcartwright||

    yinz or yunz, depending on which side of the mountain yunz are from

  • widget||

    On a similar topic Heroic Mulatto referred to the consequence of this type of law (or whatever) as a "Struggle Session".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session

    No one will be shot in the back of the head for violating this law. Yet. But ...

    Inadvertent violators of city policy may face civil penalties of up to $125,000, while "willful, wanton, or malicious" gender discrimination could trigger a $250,000 fine.

    That would be the life savings of most small business owners. Gimme all your money and live under a highway overpass. That'll learn ya.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    That would be the life savings of most small business owners.

    Yet, I'd be very, very surprised if charges were ever brought up against, say, a Pakistani convenience store owner.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    a Pakistani convenience store owner.

    Yeah, like those exist.

  • Swiss Servator||

    True! Everyone knows they are all Indian!

    /Biden

  • Six of One||

    "up to" means "less than"

  • ||

    Gee, is it my imagination but does the author fail to CONDEMN this draconian law?? Does Reason condemn it? I know a few "libertarian feminists" (which seems to be increasingly dominated by male to "Female" transgenders, is very touchy on the subject so maybe they support these laws? How far down republican lane are libertarians going to go to try to kiss the butts of screwed up liberal statists??

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    I was noticing this myself. There are a few descriptions of the law in this article that verge on making the law sound almost rational.

  • Quincy.||

    Men might want to get their nails done too?

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Thank you.

  • widget||

    You will get your affirmative action set-aside one day for being creepy. It's not like you have any choice in the matter.

    There's a place on woman's body just above her knee that can drive me crazy with lust. I have no idea why.

  • SIV||

    which seems to be increasingly dominated by male to "Female" transgenders

    "Why's every newborn baby get spanked?"

    "KNOCK THE DICKS OFF THE DUMB ONES!"

  • Six of One||

    Yep. Leftist coercive lunacy gets ruminated upon and accepted as the inevitable wave of the future, while the slightest conservative law-and-order overreach gets denounced from the rooftops. Welcome to the new Reason.

  • chemjeff||

    Can we give NYC back to the Dutch?

  • Galactic Chipper Cdr Lytton||

    I cringe my dribbles at NYC's resplendent pofflesnue! When are they going to protect the right into enter into triple spousoids?

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    I would appreciate if you keep your dribbles out of my restaurants.

  • Nonstopdrivel||

    Speaking of cloacas, how does a human with a persistent cloaca identify?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_cloaca

  • GILMORE™||

    Teflon Trump Displays Matrix-Limbo-Like Rhetorical Evasion Skillz; Asserts: "Schlonged" is Not Vulgar

    "#MSM is dishonest. 'Schlonged' is not vulgar. When I said Hillary got 'schlonged' that meant beaten badly," he said in one tweet."

    AND STILL THE #MSM ATTEMPTS TO CONFOUND VOTERS WITH PEDANTIC SEMANTIC PARSINGS

    "Trump may have confused "schlonged" -- a vulgar Yiddish word for a penis -- for "shellacked," which does indeed mean to be beaten badly."

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Donald Trump would make a terrible president, but this "schlonged" kerfuffle is so fun.

  • Six of One||

    Allowing Hillary to play the victim and avoid questions about her integrity is not fun.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Hillary will gain few if any new supporters by election time, at least those that are not Sanders supporters, so any time she can get her hefty balls busted it is fun.

  • Six of One||

    She doesn't need supporters. She needs people who dislike her opponent more than her.

  • Quincy.||

    "Trump may have confused "schlonged" -- a vulgar Yiddish word for a penis -- for "shellacked," which does indeed mean to be beaten badly."

    One of these expressions involves nasty solvents, so choose wisely.

  • Six of One||

    Schlonged' is not vulgar. When I said Hillary got 'schlonged' that meant beaten badly

    Not mutually exclusive. It's common to say someone got "raped" to mean beaten badly, which I assume is what he meant.

  • GILMORE™||

    Wow you talk english real smart i guess your a fag then

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    He came in guns blazing with a a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid fallacy and is now pretending to be the heir to Noam Chomsky.

    All in all, a stellar cameo by Tulpa tonight.

    And with that, I bid you all a good night.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    *an

    Good night.

  • Six of One||

    Turning up the pretentiousness to 11 again, I see.

    If you can't actually argue for your claims, a good backup for saving face to (falsely) invoke a bunch of rote-memorized Latin names for fallacies that have perfectly good English equivalents. I confess I don't remember the Latin phrase for taking your ball and going home, so the English will have to do for describing the most recent pathetic behavior.

  • Six of One||

    Turning up the pretentiousness to 11 again, I see.

    If you can't actually argue for your claims, a good backup for saving face to (falsely) invoke a bunch of rote-memorized Latin names for fallacies that have perfectly good English equivalents. I confess I don't remember the Latin phrase for taking your ball and going home, so the English will have to do for describing the most recent pathetic behavior.

  • GILMORE™||

    reductio ad squirellum, esse tulpapurgamentum

  • Cytotoxic||

    You just schlonged and shellacked all up and down this here thread. PWND

  • widget||

    You supposed to shellac your wood after you stripped it.

  • widget||

    "You're supposed to shellac your wood after you've stripped it." For those of you who read something like English.

  • straffinrun||

    Rapists are now using snuff videos of Trump to recruit. FFS, this election cycle is gonna be a heavy flow one.

  • straffinrun||

    Talking with a group of young professional Japanese guys yesterday. They asked me what I thought of Trump, cuz he's a raging bigot. "You know, Trump's proposed ban on Muslim immigration is about the same as Japan's actual immigration policy." "But, but, America was built on immigration. Japan wasn't! Also, they wouldn't fit it here." Outside of Europe and the US, politicians like Trump seem to be rule, not the exception.

  • widget||

    I don't believe your anecdote.

    But is it true that Japan has an immigration policy that keeps Japan populated by Japanese.

    Is this a good or bad policy? It is no way obvious to me that it is bad.

  • straffinrun||

    Don't believe it. I don't care.

  • GILMORE™||

    "I don't believe your anecdote."

    why bother saying so? just to be a dick?

    FWIW, i've had british friends of mine ask about "what's all this about Trump". People abroad find the idea of the "most powerful nation on earth" being ruled by a boorish hotel magnate who wants to Schlong Hillary the most bias-confirming kind of amusement imaginable. They already have a cartoonish stereotype of American citizens as brash, loutish, anti-intellectual bigots... now they have a politician to solidify the impression.

    IOW, i don't find his anecdote implausible at all. Or the easy hypocrisy of a very-closed society like Japan poo-pooing America's sudden flirt with xenophobia.

  • straffinrun||

    Yes, it's the hypocrisy that I find amusing.

  • Six of One||

    I believe the polite term is "schlong".

  • GILMORE™||

    Avis in caput magnum futuens tuum cacet.

  • Sevo||

    Hertz disagrees...

  • Bubba Jones||

    The Japanese invented xenophobia and then inspired it in the rest of us.

  • Sevo||

    The Chinese beat 'em to it.

  • Cytotoxic||

    It's clearly bad policy. I have every reason it contributes to Japan's political stasis, which is driving that country into the ground.

  • Real American||

    why do leftists hate science so much?

  • Lorenzo Zoil||

    It's going to be interesting to see what the feminists do when this gender flippity floppity they now align with bites them in the ass. Think about it, men don't give a fuck if that guy in the men's room is actually a girl in a practical sense. Women on the other hand tend to get annoyed when a sausage invades their private enclaves. Worse yet, imagine when the WNBA becomes littered with non lottery players who cut their dingles off the play pro ball. Or how about when the Olympics is all men except gymnastics and skating. In the effort to punish the patriarchy and its gender bias they are are going have an opportunity to learn about unintended consequences. That is if they're intellectually honest.

  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    In my building, the women's bathroom has a pass code and the men's does not.

    The implication being that there is a "women's" bathroom and an "everyone else" bathroom despite what the signage says. That is the feminist victory.

  • Lorenzo Zoil||

    I hear ya, it is certainly a "let the men deal with the issue for a change," approach.

    It is not however compliant with what the state is saying. To be compliant, those with dicks who claim to be women have to have access to the women's restroom. The dick it would seem is no longer relevant, it is one's own perception of whether he/she/it wants or does not want a dick attached.

  • Dr No||

    On the bright side, you can now walk in the ladies' room and wave your dick at a coworker to get her fired (for her reaction).

    Was that the intent of this fair and woman-friendly legislation?

  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    People with penises do not get the security code for the women's bathroom where I work.

  • blcartwright||

    not until your employer gets fined for having a security code

  • ||

    In short: 1) What the fuck. 2) Got to appreciate the consistency. It approaches - or has reached - the totalitarian concept of ("gender") equality. Naturally it hasn't solved the contradiction of denying and demanding that "gender" is "real". Go, equality. Go, feminism. 3) If that thing is found constitutional then the law (as an insitution, in its essential elements) has a big problem.

  • Batgirl Esq.||

    In other words, don't be a business or employer in NYC

  • Batgirl Esq.||

    My preferred title is now She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.

  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    The legislature is just trolling now.

  • Trigger Warning||

    What happens when a cis black lesbian feminist doesn't want to share a bathroom with a white transgender who identifies as a woman?

    Answer: the Progocalypse.

  • Azathoth!!||

    I really am started to wonder what's happening to this place when I see this--

    Inadvertent violators of city policy may face civil penalties of up to $125,000

    and it's followed by this--

    I want to let my thoughts on the New York City rules ruminate

    There is nothing to ruminate on here. This is extremely bad law--when you refer to someone as 'xe' when that person prefers 'zir' and you've engendered a $125,000 fine by doing so there's no need to think this over.

  • ||

    That's it in a nutshell, which even nutcases should get.

  • Rockabilly||

    Pliny the Elder assigned eunuchs and hermaphrodites to the "third gender called half-male," saying this category also included men whose testicles were destroyed, either by injury or by natural causes (Natural History 11.49).

  • ||

    Looks like North Korea has already taken over a part of United States.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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