Oct 30, 2011 -- 9:35PM, REteach wrote:

Oct 30, 2011 -- 6:32PM, Girlchristian wrote:

We don't make rules in school based on what is 'Christian behavior.' You and I are adults and can choose who we do or do not shower with. Teenagers in school and in the school gym don't have that option so the answer is to make everyone comfortable.

And many whites weren't comfortable having to eat at the same lunch counter as blacks.  Clearly we should cater to the prejudiced. 

RE

I live in the city that is the heart of the Civil Rights Movement. Those last two sentences make me wince a bit.

One of my colleagues, a distiguished blackman with whom I worked for over a decade in very high-end, straght commission sales at Rich's here, worked the dock at the original Rich's and was part of the original sit-in at the Rich's lunch counter. There is major prejudice and minor prejudice. This mans daughter dated Rev. Lowery's son when we were working together. He knew all the major players in the Civil Rights Movement and I learned much from him. Black women I worked with at Rich's were friends of Coretta Scott King. I highly admire Rep. John Lewis, congressman almost killed in one march.

Some of this gets to be a bit bogus..................

(And just for fun that colleague and I made a bloody blue fortune in straight-commission sales at Rich's. And we gave service you will never find again. Macy's finally got Federated Stores, of which Richs was one. Others included Bloomingdales, Lazarus, Filenes, etc. Had any great service at Macy's lately? Long after I left Rich's, where I sold very high-end electronics I had customers thank me for my service. I loved selling, qualifying my customers and providing the very best they could afford. Another colleague told me I killed my customers with kindness--I did because I cared.)

Not trying to be mean or snarky--just different experiences.

I remember a black poster here once posting that at least black kids don't have to come out to their parents that they are black.  Kids may have to tell their parents at some point they are gay. At least a lot of people can understand kind of what that means.

I suspect it is harder for a young child to get parents to understand that they have the wrong gender assigned to them.  Not to mention that I have seen one study the indicates most gender dysporia in young children is homosexuality rather than transgender.  Still, some very young children, 4-5 years old, have clearly known something was wrong. It may not settle out until puberty.

When kids get badly burned, or have cancer and have some noticeable change, such as an amputation or hair loss, there are nurses who go into the school and talk to their classmates to prepare them and answer questions. Generally preparation can really help students be accepting and kind to their classmates.  I suspect that children would be much more accepting of a transgender classmate than their parents--some of whom would probably do their best to poison their child. 

Regarding a transgender child in the shower--for the most part kids would have been together for years and really gotten to know somebody.  It wouldn't be showering with a stranger of a different gender. And there are usually private showers in schools somewhere.  

Good point that we make decisions or accepted practices based on gender far more than we need to. 

With registering for the draft, we can remove reference to gender and have all 18 y.o. persons sign up.  Both genders serve in today’s US military, so why limit registration to males? Seems an archaic practice.

 Re: insurance rates.

Charging different amounts based solely on gender is somewhat archaic.  I recall the justification was that teen males are involved with more vehicle accidents than females. Is this entirely true though?  I would think both genders run the entire gamut from the safe driver who takes few risks and incurs no accidents to the horrendous driver who takes many risks, and incurs many accidents and/or tickets.  Rather unfairly penalizes the good male driver and allows the bad female driver to pay less than she should, don’t you think? Why not nix the gender-based criteria entirely and come up with another one? Like one’s actual driving record. Or, make it age-based.  If, statistically speaking, teens or inexperienced drivers are the cause for more accidents, then charge accordingly. Adjust rate when driving history accumulates and justifies the rate charged. 

RE: playing on girl’s basketball team

Would one really want to play on the girls team if one was physically far superior to all other players? Would the male, who identifies as female, be unnecessarily harmed should she play on the boy’s team? Is the consequence really so bad if she decides for herself which team to play on?  Safety of the other female players might be an issue (and I'm not entirely buying this to be the case), but I would point out the girls do play on the football team- and they don't 'dumb down' the physical interaction.

I would suggest that one might consider playing on the team that best accommodates- and challenges- the physical prowess involved.  Are there girls playing on the boys basketball team if they have the physical abilities to do so? Or is it a must that they play on the girls team? If so, maybe it’s time to rethink this practice.

Irene.

Oct 31, 2011 -- 10:52AM, IreneAdler wrote:

Good point that we make decisions or accepted practices based on gender far more than we need to... 

Certainly, Irene, there are many thoughtful ways to address the issues I mentioned.

But the fact is, addressing them isn't on anybody's radar screen, and isn't likely to be anytime soon, in spite of what benefits might have come out of  some of the exposure Chaz Bono has recently gotten.

Fact is, it took the military 20 years to go from no gays, to DADT, to full (at least full legal) acceptance of gays.

So it is nice and commendable that the 7 year old girl in the subect case is being treated decently; but as I said earlier, in 5 or 10 years she will not find things so easy, nor people so amenable, unless things change dramatically.  So, to quote the OP, this is not really a "positive outcome", it merely one little bright spot in what is still  going to be a very tough journey.

Oct 31, 2011 -- 10:52AM, IreneAdler wrote:

Good point that we make decisions or accepted practices based on gender far more than we need to. 

With registering for the draft, we can remove reference to gender and have all 18 y.o. persons sign up.  Both genders serve in today’s US military, so why limit registration to males? Seems an archaic practice.

 Re: insurance rates.

Charging different amounts based solely on gender is somewhat archaic.  I recall the justification was that teen males are involved with more vehicle accidents than females. Is this entirely true though?  I would think both genders run the entire gamut from the safe driver who takes few risks and incurs no accidents to the horrendous driver who takes many risks, and incurs many accidents and/or tickets.  Rather unfairly penalizes the good male driver and allows the bad female driver to pay less than she should, don’t you think? Why not nix the gender-based criteria entirely and come up with another one? Like one’s actual driving record. Or, make it age-based.  If, statistically speaking, teens or inexperienced drivers are the cause for more accidents, then charge accordingly. Adjust rate when driving history accumulates and justifies the rate charged. 

 

RE: playing on girl’s basketball team

Would one really want to play on the girls team if one was physically far superior to all other players? Would the male, who identifies as female, be unnecessarily harmed should she play on the boy’s team? Is the consequence really so bad if she decides for herself which team to play on?  Safety of the other female players might be an issue (and I'm not entirely buying this to be the case), but I would point out the girls do play on the football team- and they don't 'dumb down' the physical interaction.

I would suggest that one might consider playing on the team that best accommodates- and challenges- the physical prowess involved.  Are there girls playing on the boys basketball team if they have the physical abilities to do so? Or is it a must that they play on the girls team? If so, maybe it’s time to rethink this practice.

 

Irene.

I agree Irene there is way to much emphasis based on sex and gender. Maybe if we stopped. As you described above. All people would be treated more fairly. Women would not have to worry about the glass ceiling. It might get rid of a whole host of prejudices we consider normal today.

Wouldn't it be nice it we could see people as "people" not their sex?

Maybe that is why there are a variety of different types of people, to teach us to see each other as "people". Not color, or sex, or size or what have you. But enjoy and celebrate the diversity.