Why would my employment be based on my views on transgenderism? What kind of a job do you think I have?
It's not just about you. Quit dodging the question. I'm trying to get you to see what others are dealing with. Now answer the question.
The examples you cited earlier were of people who refused to do their jobs. Maybe they disagreed with school policy, or felt their religious beliefs were more important than the job they were doing...but, in every case, their views made them unable to perform their job. That's why their jobs were in jeopardy. It wasn't just that they disagreed, it was that they refused to do the job they were paid to do because of that disagreement.
No they weren't. If I was hired to pound nails and I've been pounding nails for sometime and someone came along and said I had to refer to them as my wife or I would be fired that has nothing to do with pounding nails. I'm not refusing to pound nails I'm refusing to agree to call someone something they aren't.
Now answer my question, if someone was able to tell you you had to refer to them as your wife and treat them that way or you'd be fired would you accept the same reasoning you are giving to others? Would you then agree that you aren't doing your job? Would you say that your views on not calling them and treating them as your wife were making you unable to do your job?
What if the gun lobby was powerful enough to convince school boards that every teacher had to carry a gun in school. Would you be telling teachers, hey you are refusing to do your job if you don't carry one. I guess you just have to go do something else because if you don't carry a gun you are unable to do your job as a teacher.
Not really. It's the old "I can agree or disagree with something, and not let that affect my job performance" argument.
Exactly. I can disagree with something and not let it affect my job performance. But I'm being told I have to agree or I'm fired. So we are still back to you not caring because it doesn't affect you, meanwhile it is affecting others.
somehow suspect this "transactivist lobby" you speak of has a lot less power than you think. At least, the examples you've provided to date don't prove this vast power. They only prove that some people are unable to look past their own prejudices and do the job they're paid to do. Or, maybe, that they should seek other employment.
You statement is evidence of the power they have. The fact that you are telling people what they have to believe or get another job. What the alternative? Believe one way or get fired. Those are your choices. Believe or quit and if you don't quit your fired.
The examples I've given do infact prove the vast power. How many examples do you need? How many have to be affected before you would agree that they have vast power?
Yeah, all these people are affected. All because some trans people got uppity and demanded they be treated with some degree of respect.
Man, it's almost like they think they're people!
I'm actually surprised at the callousness of your statements. Utterly rejecting how others lives are being harmed and a response as vapid and inapplicable as "respect". Has treating someone with respect somehow turned into you have to agree with them and let them harm you and others? Is that respect now?
And using news stories about some teacher who feels their religious views are somehow being violated by some student's simple request to be called by a different pronoun than their birth certificate would suggest (which school policy supports) doesn't make the case that you're not exaggerating the issue out of proportion.
It's interesting and shows your strong bias that you chose a story regarding a religious teacher. As if somehow religious people's views are inconsequential. It's shows a total dismissal of the point. And you ignored the other people who weren't religious. Went right at the religious person. Maybe you ought to do some introspection on your bias.
And it's not just pronouns we are talking about. Pronouns are just the tip of the iceberg. Women prisoners are not being assaulted by men prisoners just because they wanted she/her pronouns. They wanted to be treated as if they are women.
Women aren't having their privacy stripped away simply because some man wants to be called she/her. It's because they want to be treated as women so they have access to the women's spaces and now women have to undress in front of a man and be exposed to having a man expose his genitals to them.
can remember when I was a kid, my little brother wanted to be called Chauncy. (Just so you know, that's not his name.) My mother simply called him Chauncy, and so did my other brother and I. I think his teachers did too, as I recall.
He's fine now, by the way. And hasn't asked to be called Chauncy in decades.
Another example of the it doesn't affect me syndrome.
I quite frankly don't care what your name is. A name is just name and really says nothing about who or what you are or how you behave. If you as a male have the name Sue I don't really care. I'll call you Sue if you want.
But if your brother wanted to be called Sally would your mother have done that? And if your brother also wanted to be called a girl and she/her would your mother and family done that too? And if Sally wanted puberty blockers then hormones and surgeries would your family have supported all that? Now Sally is your sister. No big deal right?
And later if Sally decided she wanted to go back and be your brother Chauncy again that's no big deal. Let's do it. Except you can't. It's too late. Your brother isn't fine now.
A name. You can bounce back and forth with little to no consequences and be just fine.
Giving a child drugs and surgeries isn't reversible and the kid can't just go back and be fine. Just ask Chloe Cole.
