Avatar of Kratesis
  • Last Seen: 2 mos ago
  • Joined: 10 yrs ago
  • Posts: 268 (0.07 / day)
  • VMs: 1
  • Username history
    1. Kratesis 10 yrs ago
  • Latest 10 profile visitors:

Status

Recent Statuses

6 yrs ago
Current The original 'Throw it on the ground.'
4 likes
7 yrs ago
Good luck Tuck.
2 likes
7 yrs ago
When a thread gets locked while I'm in the midst of typing my retort: 3.bp.blogspot.com/-rwro8doo…
3 likes
7 yrs ago
Stone Dragon: Kult of Athena's selection is as good as their website is bad. You can even get an Albion from them though you'll have to wait a year or so.
1 like
7 yrs ago
A Pepsi huh. Have you considered bringing peace to the middle east?
1 like

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

@Silver Carrot In many ways I would agree.
@Silver Carrot 4chan must be a time machine lol.

@The Harbinger of Ferocity

I believe their domain is largely in Spam


They're rousing the proletariat against us.
Yeah we've had actual communists in this thread before. Have we had Nazis yet? They're all over /pol/ right now but I'm not sure if they've spread yet.

(What ever happened to the communist guys anyway?)
Don't like the licence requirements in Cali? Practice somewhere else.


This is a law that you can be imprisoned for violating. Imprisoning people for a disagreement over pronouns is an unjust use of the powers of government. No one should be force to uproot their life and move to another state or face almost a year of imprisonment because they express disagreement with a client.

I thought jail for smoking weed was bad enough but now we have jail for pronouns.
@Penny

Now assume that you had a male nurse whose co-workers consistently called him by a female name (not his own). He has made it clear that this is unwelcome and offensive. He has asked them to stop and they continue to do so.


What you have described is man whose colleagues are jerks, not a title seven violation. They may or may not be in violation of a company policy but the law requires unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature for a given behavior to qualify as sexual harassment.

Furthermore the situations being compared are not the same. In the example you give a man is bullied by his colleagues, who address him with a name that is not his. But that is different than a situation where one individual makes a claim (that they are a certain gender) and those around them do not believe their claim and elect to not behave as if it is true.

That is clear cut workplace bullying and sexual harassment and practically any HR officer would agree with that.


The opinions of a human resources department are not relevant.

...other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that tends to create a hostile or offensive work environment.


(I assume this is a reply to me? If not please disregard this message with my apologizes.)

That doesn't answer why refusal to use the pronouns that someone prefers is sexual harassment. (The italicized line is also tailored to the maintenance of a productive work environment, not a legal system of crime and punishment.)

Why is vocalizing your disagreement with an individuals claims about their gender sexual harassment?
If you ask me to call you Bill and I continue to call you Nancy, that is sexual harassment. Pronouns just depersonalize it one step by using a pronoun instead of a noun.

If one of my staff bought that to me I would go right into the classic pathway of sexual harassment complaints.


But why is that sexual harassment? I ask this not to be persnickety for detail but because when we make something a law and punish violations of that law with being locked inside a jail cell for a year less one day the government needs to demonstrate a compelling case for why their behavior was so wrong as to rise to the level that the government must use force to compel them to change.
@Kratesis

Repeatedly and deliberately misgendering someone is sexual harrassment.


Why?

Kind of strange to focus it specifically on seniors.


Yeah that was kinda weird.
I wasn't entirely speaking of legal ramifications, though I should have been more specific. That's my bad.


Fair play


<Snipped quote by Kratesis>

I mean I'm not going to actually read the article, but I assume the basis of the law is that California feels that repeatedly and deliberately misgendering someone constitutes sexual harassment.


The law makes it a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail for a health care worker to 'willfully and repeatedly' refer to a senior citizen who is also a patient by something other than their preferred pronouns. It does not appear to be related to sexual harassment legislation in any way.
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet