Quick! Sound the alarms!

DEFLECT! DEFLECT!

You've been asked the question point blank five times now and have refused to answer. The only conclusions to draw are that you A) have no answer or B) are afraid to answer due to how it will make you look.

I'm gonna go with B because you're a ****ing coward

No - it's because arguing with you swine is muddy business. I'm getting dirty and you like it.

Well, set the record straight. Here, I'll give you a soft-ball. No "equivalencies", no "talking points", no whatever else you were spewing about.

Are you against public accommodations anti-discrimination laws, like the CRA, in general ??

"No equivalencies or talking points.....here's an equivalency talking point." WTF? Seriously?

You yellow ****ing coward

No dude. It's just a question.

Dude, you were the one who brought up this whole thingee about these extremely obscure (and perhaps only proposed) trans laws. At the time, it seemed like you felt they were somewhat relevant to this whole SJWer thingee. But, as I pointed out, that don't really make a lick-o-sense, since 100% 99.9% of congress-critters/etc are "virtue signaling" 100% 99.9% of the time. So far... this has all been a futile snipe hunt looking for a clue at a point.

So... since you don't wanna talk about this shiz either, I'll punt. So far we have...

"stood up" to "real" r-word-ism
random tweets from MLB games
name calling in the political-entertainment-complex
random posts from tech geeks
some obscure trans laws
the civil rights acts

Looks like we are once again right back to Square-Zero...

So... are there any SJWers active now here in Baja Politards? If so, and there are more tha one, could you please list their SNs ??

If you bring up the CRA in relation to Trans legislation, you might be an SJW....

Hey look you left the perfect ellipses ...because (blank)

Now fill in the blank you ignorant ****.

You're an idiot. Read it again. Nevermind, don't worry about it.

That's actually funny. You deplorables aren't known for having sense period, nevermind a sense of humor. Gotta give you a WP there, sir !!!1!

JJ also bent over backwards to be big tent and address the white working class, which is probably why he did pretty well in the '88 primaries and won Michigan. Of course he gets remembered as a crook (by Trump supporters lol) and a race baiter because he's black.

Great, so we took a long time to get to the simple point that you don't think there should be rights in place for any workers. A racially abusive boss can call his employees whatever he likes and you're presumably not fine with his opinion, but would support his freedom to do so. It does make it a little odd that you're focused on gender in this regard, really you should be making the argument that workers don't have rights.

Well, okay. I don't know where that's from or what most of it means, but I honestly can't imagine it ever being an issue for me. I'll just refer to them by name if I forget. But this is a very different issue again, because the concern here is defining what a gender is and not whether gender should be protected.



I don't know what a transtrender or a Rachel Dolezal is, so you're going to have to help me before I answer.

Let us begin from the presumption that race is generally immutable. You were born in a place, you have parents and for all intents and purposes, you have a lineage. Yes, there's a spectrum, but let's use the Affirmative Action qualification standards as to what comes to defining one's race. Agreed?

You are also born with a set of chromosomes, agreed? They determine whether you're male or female (we are not addressing red-herrings around intersex).

And we're going to agree that the previous characteristics are immutable and that one should not be discriminated against based on them. You're a human being, you deserve to be treated as such.

However, we provide "entitlements" based on your 'protected' class status. This is why Elizabeth Warren told Harvard she was Native American based on the picture on her fireplace mantle. Did you also know that women are favored in courtroom cases?

Now - we're going to take a previously immutable characteristic and make it mutable. Not only that - those who mutate their characteristic get even GREATER protections than those who don't mutate. A natural born female doesn't have any real recourse to being called a *****. But if I'm a trans-trender and tell you my pronoun is "zer" and you call me a *****, then you have misused my pronoun.

Rachel Dolezal was a white woman who used tanning products to get herself elected as the head of the NAACP chapter in Spokane Washtington. She claims she is black as she has always self-identified as a member of black community. What is the difference? If you can be transgender, can you be trans racial?

Two more questions for you:

Can I self identify as female on college admissions? Can I self identify as any race?

How do you feel about Male to Female athletes competing in sports?

(There is a sick thought that men invented transitioning to prove that men are even better women than women. Caitlyn Jenner was only a woman for 6 months and got woman of the year.)

Except this is 100% false.

Sexual discrimination in public accommodations is directly protected by that CRA thingee we were just chatting about. Female is a protected class. Check it out.

Why don't you do your own research... if this whole SJWer thingee is so damn important to you? Seems to be you are just being lazy here. I'll give you a hint on #2 however: in California it's against the law for any public institution, including the colleges, to even try to collect this type of racial information from peeps. So in California, the answer would be "no"... you can't self-identify as any race, ever, period.

You're a ****ing insane person. How exactly do you get from "equal protection under the law." To "Those who mutate their characteristics" are given greater protection. Do you need a dictionary to understand what equal means? Or for that matter, pronoun (hint: **** is not a pronoun)

It seems like a bad idea to start with the idea that race is immutable when we know that the meaning of race has changed considerably over time. There was a time the Irish were considered a different race to the English. Presumably there were some people alive at the time the usage changed. What are the "affirmative action qualification standards?

Probably got to get somewhere before we decide what's a red herring. This is likely one of those things where I keep stopping you at the premises, because I think the variability of chromosomes and how it correlates to cultural designation of gender matters a lot here. Counter examples might well matter.

So far we're agreed that people have chromosomes.

What "entitlements" did she receive based on her claim? Women in courtrooms is an irrelevancy here.

Now we're all over the place. We've gone from "people have chromosomes" to "there's no recourse to being called by a pronoun". I don't know how we've made this leap.

I haven't done any research or come across the idea of being "trans-racial" before aside from I think I've heard this Dolezal story before and didn't care to read into it. I have come across plenty of research to show a biological basis to be transgender, as well as the psychological findings, as well as the sociological factors.

I don't know if it's meaningful to say "trans-racial", I don't know if there's any research out there to suggest it's a real issue. I know that's definitely not the case for trans folk where the research is overwhelmingly leading us in one direction.

I have no issue with you identifying as either in principle, though I doubt it's meaningful for you to do so in many contexts, nor do I think it should necessarily entitle you to wherever you might be going with this. Sure, call yourself whatever you want.

Are you full of ****???

It is not only legal, but required to collect race and ethnicity in California - both for the state AND Federal government:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/dc/es/refaq.asp#q1

You should learn to use citations. Doing your work for you bores me.

I did notice that California passed Prop 209 in 1996, making affirmative action illegal (which I had to research myself, while you can't watch a ****ing video, you loser). Good on them - how about the rest of the states, like Massachusetts - you know, the state I referenced?

I'd ask you to stop being a ****tard, but...we both know that's not going to happen.

All of this **** seems to stem from this idea we'll head down the rabbit hole and reach "why can't I self-identify as a bus?", and the answer is always going to be "because it's not the same and here's a wall of research to establish that being trans is a real thing".

R*****Mac

RebootMac

The relevant law regarding colleges in CA is indeed Prop 209, and because of Prop 209 it's illegal for UC, CSU, and the JCs to collect any racial information. You didn't mention any other spheres than college. Of course, we get to follow all the federal laws... just like anywhere else, so when we fill out a mortgage application/etc, we'll be asked for voluntary racial information on those forms... just like anywhere else.

I missed your reference to MA... sorry about that.

My point is that it varies all over place, state by state, county by county, and city by city. There is no same answer that works the same everywhere. If you are really interested in this shiz, like you claim... you really should do your own damn research.

It's between 1/32 and 1/16 of a nationality. I've seen as high as 1/8.



What is the variability in chromosomes when it comes to gender? What percentage is neither XX nor XY? Let's put it this way - more people believe in men on the moon. We're not talking about these exceptions.

She received bonus points on her application to Harvard. Are you not following along? And yes, women's gender benefits in courtroom procedings are directly relevent. Moreso for an even further marginalized minority, such as a transgender person, right?

Research is not leading in one direction. Activists are pushing an agenda. The science on difference brains is bunk.

Or are you saying male and female brains are different? Better not tell a feminist that they're "seperate but equal".



Not call yourself. Compete with other athletes.

Should this woman be beating up other women?
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ox-youre-a-man

Should this woman be setting records in weight lifting - by 41 pounds?
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/health...rnd/index.html

How about this runner?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...stars-on-fema/

I posted about false equivalencies now Jiggy talks about them in every post. Someone learned something new today! How cute.

Most of that research is bunk or pushing an agenda, but cite away with your "wall of research". I'm listening.