Transgendered NDP candidate

[jbg]

He made an educated guess, not a judgment, based on probability.

It turns out he was correct.

What a surprise.

It's time people start making logical conclusions based on the obvious. When people make such bizarre life-style choices as transgendering questions about someone's sanity are natural.

[gc1765]

Scott did make a reasonable guess based on the facts.

Based on the facts? What facts? Scott had his mind made up before he even knew the facts (i.e. before he even read August's post). If I assume that someone is violent based on the colour of their skin, and they turn out to be violent, does that justify my original assumption based on a stereotype?

Are you saying that there is never a valid reason for a stereotype to exist?

I'm saying there is not a valid reason to assume that someone who is transgendered has "psychological problems".

[gc1765]

When people make such bizarre life-style choices as transgendering questions about someone's sanity are natural.

I don't question people's sanity because they choose to worship some magical being in the sky, even though to me that seems bizarre. That they choose to do so seems irrelevant to me. So why should you question someone else's sanity because they do something that you find bizarre?

[Michael Bluth]

I'm saying there is not a valid reason to assume that someone who is transgendered has "psychological problems".

It was a correct assumption in this case.

Even the GLBT community admits that "psychological problems often accompany gender identity problems." Link

I apologize for adding the bold, but be reasonable.

If I meet a guy who wants his weiner cut off I don't think I am behaving outrageously in assuming buddy has "issues".

[gc1765]

It was a correct assumption in this case.

So, back to my question that you didn't answer. You would have no problem with me assuming that someone is violent based on the colour of their skin so long as, by sheer luck, my assumption turned out to be true?

[Michael Bluth]

So, back to my question that you didn't answer. You would have no problem with me assuming that someone is violent based on the colour of their skin so long as, by sheer luck, my assumption turned out to be true?

Show me one racial group in which the group itself admits that the majority of it's members are violent. It wasn't a matter of sheer luck. According to the GLBT community itself transgendered individuals often have psychological problems.

Why did you ignore my link?

Edited December 17, 2007 by Michael Bluth

[jbg]

I don't question people's sanity because they choose to worship some magical being in the sky, even though to me that seems bizarre. That they choose to do so seems irrelevant to me. So why should you question someone else's sanity because they do something that you find bizarre?

One has to compare such beliefs to societal norms. One's squarely within such norms; one isn't.

[gc1765]

One has to compare such beliefs to societal norms. One's squarely within such norms; one isn't.

I know you don't actually believe that. Remember this?:

I really don't care what world opinion is. Right is right, wrong is wrong.

Most of the world opinion, or at least opinion in the US and Canada favored segregating Japanese people during WW II and taking their property. Did that make it right? In the US prior to Truman's gutsy decision to integrate the armed forces most people believed in subjugating black people because of their color and segregating them. Did that make it right?

So, I think we both agree that what is the "norm" is irrelevant...

[gc1765]

Show me one racial group in which the group itself admits that the majority of it's members are violent.

Your link didn't say that the "majority" of transgendered people have psychological problems, and even if it did that wouldn't necessarily make it true. Of course there are some transgendered people who have psychological problems, just as there are some people from every race who are violent.

Now, do you think the people who do have psychological problems could be because of the way they are viewed in society, and not vice-versa?

[ScottSA]

So, back to my question that you didn't answer. You would have no problem with me assuming that someone is violent based on the colour of their skin so long as, by sheer luck, my assumption turned out to be true?

That's a false question. A ridiculous one in fact. It's not even a strawman; it's the ashen remains of a strawman.

If someone walks down the street on their hands, and sues someone for not hiring them in their present state of mobility, and asserts that walking upside down is a "lifestyle choice," there's a high probability that they're screwed in the head. Call it bigotry, call it unprogressive, call it a kumquat, but chances are that when someone points out that they're screwed in the head, he's right.

That's a far cry from arbitrarly calling an entire race violent. It's not even in the same ballpark.

[gc1765]

If someone walks down the street on their hands, and sues someone for not hiring them in their present state of mobility, and asserts that walking upside down is a "lifestyle choice," there's a high probability that they're screwed in the head. Call it bigotry, call it unprogressive, call it a kumquat, but chances are that when someone points out that they're screwed in the head, he's right.

And what if someone points out that they're screwed in the head BEFORE they even knew that?

[August1991]

She's a lawyer. She does her own sewage...oops, I mean suing.

Scott, you've only sewn up part of the threads.

As linked above, she agreed to quit her job at Cegep Garneau in return for compensation of a lump sum equivalent to two years salary:

Professeur depuis 10 ans au département de techniques juridiques du Collège, celui qui portait encore le prénom Pierre signe une lettre de démission en décembre 1997, peu de temps après avoir commencé à s’habiller en femme, et le début du processus pour changer de prénom.

L’entente avec le Collège prévoyait que le professeur démissionnaire toucherait son salaire jusqu’en août 1999. Le Collège payait également un programme complet de réorientation de carrière. En échange, Me Montreuil s’engageait à ne prendre aucune procédure contre le Collège.

She then did exactly that. She sued the college.

Le 4 décembre 1997, j'ai perdu mon emploi de professeure en techniques juridiques au Collège François-Xavier-Garneau à Québec où j'enseignais le droit depuis 1987, au motif que j'avais été vue habillée en femme dans le centre d'achat des Galeries de la Capitale à Québec et que j'avais participé à une soirée d'Halloween habillée en femme

Her web site

At present, she's the computer-person at Quebec's professional verification body:

Ce site a �t� enti�rement mis � jour par Me Micheline Anne Montreuil en date du 24 avril 2007. Si vous d�sirez soumettre une suggestion, une am�lioration ou un commentaire ou si vous constatez la pr�sence d'un lien qui n'est pas fonctionnel, n'h�sitez pas � nous en informer par courriel.

LINK

(Note that the Conseil has now removed her name from their website. The link above is to the waybackmachine.)

BTW, this Conseil is charged with deciding the qualifications of people who sit on rent review committees and professional certfication tribunals.

----

Does any of this matter? Not really. She is one person among several million.

I am bothered more by the idea that (hundreds of) thousands of people just like her spend time every day looking for an angle to get some of my tax dollars. Their efforts to get the money, and the honest efforts of thousands of bureaucrats to prevent them from getting the money, add up to alot of wasted effort. Unless a politician has the courage to stop this, Canada will soon be 10 million people trying to get money, 10 million bureaucrats trying to refuse them and 10 million kids who want to go to school.

When that happens, despite our oil and natural gas and hydro-electricity, Canada will officially be a Third World country, and we'll all be poor. Unless some rich country sends us Third World aid.

Edited December 17, 2007 by August1991

[Michael Bluth]

Your link didn't say that the "majority" of transgendered people have psychological problems, and even if it did that wouldn't necessarily make it true. Of course there are some transgendered people who have psychological problems, just as there are some people from every race who are violent.Now, do you think the people who do have psychological problems could be because of the way they are viewed in society, and not vice-versa?

If you are going to be pedantic the word was "often".

Often, frequently, generally, usually refer to experiences that are customary. Often and frequently may be used interchangeably in most cases, but often implies numerous repetitions and, sometimes, regularity of recurrence:

I really don't get the question.

Are you saying that somebody who wants to change their gender could have 'issues' because society thinks it is strange to want to change their gender?

That's a possibility in some cases but I would think in the majority of cases the 'issues' came before the desire to change gender not afterwards.

[gc1765]

Are you saying that somebody who wants to change their gender could have 'issues' because society thinks it is strange to want to change their gender?

That's a possibility in some cases but I would think in the majority of cases the 'issues' came before the desire to change gender not afterwards.

Yes, that is what I'm saying. Think of how many people commit suicide because they are ashamed that they are gay. Do you really think those people would be doing so if being gay was more accepted in society? Now imagine something that is even less accepted, like being transgendered.

[jbg]

I know you don't actually believe that. Remember this?: So, I think we both agree that what is the "norm" is irrelevant...

That's not such a "gotcha". I think that there's a far cry difference between race, which one is born with, and transgendering.

[gc1765]

That's not such a "gotcha". I think that there's a far cry difference between race, which one is born with, and transgendering.

That's not the point, the point is what is the "norm" is irrelevant - don't you agree?

[jbg]

That's not the point, the point is what is the "norm" is irrelevant - don't you agree?

You make a good point, and I'm not going to launch into insults, since I know you won't either. This is one of these matters defined by consistency being the hobgoblin of small minds. And I am using the expression, not calling you small of mind.

[August1991]

Think of how many people commit suicide because they are ashamed that they are gay. Do you really think those people would be doing so if being gay was more accepted in society? Now imagine something that is even less accepted, like being transgendered.

So, to have a gain of $10 for one person, you want to impose a cost of $10,000 to society?

gc, if someone commits suicide because they are gay in Canada, it is their choice. No one put a gun to their head. As much as it is possible, we in Canada live in a civilized, free society. I refuse to accept blame for someone's personal problems. Montreal has ample place for alternative lifestyles. Do you know Montreal?

(In Roman Catholic Irish English, don't play your Catholic guilt game... )

----

Returning to this thread, a transgendered person does not have the right to impose their internal conversations on the rest of us. And if they do so, I would expect that any financial settlements would be donated to charity. If not, I might begin to wonder about motivation...

Money? It's not money. I'm not alone to suspect that the 'he' who's a 'she' is a Drama Queen, First Class.

Does the Human Rights Charter protect one's right to be a Drama Queen? If a shopkeeper refuses to serve or hire a Drama Queen, must the shopkeeper pay a fine? Will Canada's Supreme Court (in 2017) interpret this as a reason to intervene in a private contract and award damages?

Edited December 17, 2007 by August1991

[Pliny]

Think of how many people commit suicide because they are ashamed that they are gay. Do you really think those people would be doing so if being gay was more accepted in society? Now imagine something that is even less accepted, like being transgendered.

Yes, it is my opinion, they would be doing so even if it were more accepted.

Do I have this straight? You think that ScottSA should not hold the opinion he does and no opinion should be held without the facts? Experience and education are the basis for anyone's opinion. As long as he realizes it is an opinion, which I believe he does, I don't see a problem.

When can someone form an opinion? Only when it is objectively proven to be a fact?

[gc1765]

So, to have a gain of $10 for one person, you want to impose a cost of $10,000 to society?

gc, if someone commits suicide because they are gay in Canada, it is their choice. No one put a gun to their head. As much as it is possible, we in Canada live in a civilized, free society. I refuse to accept blame for someone's personal problems.

Whaaaaaaat???? Where did I say anything about money?

I'm not blaming you if someone who is gay commits suicide, but if you constantly tell people how bizarre they are for being transgendered don't be surprised if a few of them grow up with "psychological problems".

[gc1765]

You think that ScottSA should not hold the opinion he does and no opinion should be held without the facts? Experience and education are the basis for anyone's opinion. As long as he realizes it is an opinion, which I believe he does, I don't see a problem.

Pliny, you are a conservative. That means I think there is a pretty good chance that you are selfish and don't care about anyone but yourself. It means you probably want to jail the homeless as well as homosexuals. It means you probably live in Alberta and own 6 guns. It means you probably don't care at all about the environment. It means you are probably quick to support invading other countries, even without all the facts. No, I don't have a single fact to back up those *opinions*, just "experience".

Note to anyone about to jump in at this point that I am obviously being sarcastic here. Read the context.

When can someone form an opinion? Only when it is objectively proven to be a fact?

How about when they have even the slightest shred of evidence to support their opinions other than which gender a person identifies with?

[Riverwind]

This story reminds of a case in Vancouver where a former man wanted to be counselor at a rape crisis center. He/she was rejected because he/she did not know what it was like to grow up as woman. I felt that was a legimate argument even though the case went to the human rights tribunal (don't know the outcome).

I think it is important to be accepting in society but it is unrealistic for any transgendered person to expect to be treated as if they were born with their gender choice. They will be forever between the two and no amount of legal finger wagging will change that from the perspective of the majority of people.

More importantly, transgender people cannot expect to get employment in positions where perception/image is an important part of the job - being a politican is one of those jobs.

Edited December 17, 2007 by Riverwind

[August1991]

Whaaaaaaat???? Where did I say anything about money?

I'm not blaming you if someone who is gay commits suicide, but if you constantly tell people how bizarre they are for being transgendered don't be surprised if a few of them grow up with "psychological problems".

Money? $10,000 of personal therapy (100 hours of discussion) to achieve at best $10 of benefit for one person.

Some people are just lonely or confused and they want to talk to someone. Some people seek attention, and they measure their success by headlines or court decisions. When people measure success by how much money they can obtain, then democratic society faces a serious problem.

Edited December 17, 2007 by August1991

[gc1765]

Money? $10,000 of personal therapy (100 hours of discussion) to achieve at best $10 of benefit for one person.

Some people are just lonely or confused and they want to talk to someone. Some people seek attention, and they measure their success by headlines or court decisions. When people measure success by how much money they can obtain, then democratic society faces a serious problem.

And where did I say that this person should get $10,000 of personal therapy or seek attention in court cases?

[gc1765]

More importantly, transgender people cannot expect to get employment in positions where perception/image is an important part of the job - being a politican is one of those jobs.

Maybe not, but shouldn't that be up to the people in the riding to decide?