Now I ain't gonna actually click to find out - cause, seriously, fuck Robert Jordan, but is there really a girl thread in H/A that makes a Wheel of Time reference?
I can do the first one, but it takes too much effort in my rubber-soled shoes. Don't know the second one very well, yet, but this girl was trying to teach it to me earlier, and I picked up some things.
Excited about starting my road trip tomorrow. I wonder where it'll take me.
You'll have good times, bad times, find love, have zany adventures, break down at some point, and cherish the experience for the rest of your life.
Unless you're in a horror road trip movie then expect to run into an abandoned middle of nowhere place where slack-jawed rednecks hunt you down for fun.
I... might bring a .38 revolver and stick it in the glove compartment.
Don't go for the .38 special. That's just asking for trouble.
Where'd you decide to go?
I'm going to go to Cincinnati first and visit some old friends, run through Dayton and see my ex's sister's baby and drop off her crap, and then over to Boston to visit another friend, circling around and head south to NJ to visit Mike and nexus and Var and such this weekend mayhaps.
Wonder_Hippie on
0
Options
BobCescaIs a girlBirmingham, UKRegistered Userregular
edited September 2008
morning [chat].
today there will be the re-reading of books, the making of lists of more books that need to be re-read, and the general mewling of cats.
And wait, Elki -- you mean you can only do the first step, the wiggly front-back with the toes? And you can't do the leg kicks then after that?
Haha -- I'm a better dancer than you, fucker. Both those steps are easy as shit, and I don't even take dance classes. So nyah.
I can do them, but I'm not comfortable enough to do them with a partner, and with turns and such, so not really do them.
Oh -- okay. Dancing with partners is obviously a different beast. And I can't do them as fly as those guys in the video. Those steps are dope as hell. I wish I could do those little variations they sneak in there as well.
Why is it legal for Safeway to require male employees to have short hair in a state where sex and gender identity are both protected classes state-wide? Am I wrong in interpreting I have an auto-out if pressed about conforming to that part of the dress code?
Why is it legal for Safeway to require male employees to have short hair in a state where sex and gender identity are both protected classes state-wide? Am I wrong in interpreting I have an auto-out if pressed about conforming to that part of the dress code?
Yes. Courts have routinely ruled that employers have the right to administer dress codes. If you have a problem with Safeway's dress code, you'd have to bring it up with your manager.
The Safeway next to my house has a transgendered man who works there, so obviously it's something with some flexibility. Don't look to the law to back you up, though.
EDIT: I wouldn't be looking to existing law, I'd be looking to the ACLU and setting precedent myself.
The ACLU probably wouldn't take your case, because the courts have been pretty consistent in ruling in favor of employers in this regard.
Tattoos -- I was just reading an article about the growth of tattoos (maybe in the New York Times?) among young people, that's where I just read this. Courts have been pretty consistent in finding in favor of the employer. Deal with it.
I mean it's partially because my personal life has forced me to accept gender as something fluid -- or else I will cease to be -- but there's just something deathly absurd about having separate stipulations in your male and female dress codes when the right of your employees to switch between the two is protected
EDIT: I wouldn't be looking to existing law, I'd be looking to the ACLU and setting precedent myself.
The ACLU probably wouldn't take your case, because the courts have been pretty consistent in ruling in favor of employers in this regard.
Tattoos -- I was just reading an article about the growth of tattoos (maybe in the New York Times?) among young people, that's where I just read this. Courts have been pretty consistent in finding in favor of the employer. Deal with it.
You're completely missing the larger situation. This isn't about dress codes themselves, it's about by-gender/sex application of a dress code when it's not (there's a specific legal term for this, but I don't remember it) relevant to the position being worked, and when your employees have a protected right to be whatever gender they wish to be.
I mean it's partially because my personal life has forced me to accept gender as something fluid -- or else I will cease to be -- but there's just something deathly absurd about having separate stipulations in your male and female dress codes when the right of your employees to switch between the two is protected
Congratulations -- you've blown open the bizarre world of gender restrictions and their peculiar institutions.
It's a stupid policy. It's also Safeway's policy, and it's not going to change, or at least I seriously doubt you're going to be the one who changes it. I'm sure if they could legally discriminate against transgender people, they'd do that, too, but in this regard the courts have ruled against employers.
C'est la vie.
The Green Eyed Monster on
0
Options
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited September 2008
Neckbeard is an insult now?
I'm laughing really hard at anybody who thinks it counts as an insult. It ranks up with calling someone an "idiotic twit."
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
You're completely missing the larger situation. This isn't about dress codes themselves, it's about by-gender/sex application of a dress code when it's not (there's a specific legal term for this, but I don't remember it) relevant to the position being worked, and when your employees have a protected right to be whatever gender they wish to be.
Dude, you're fighting windmills, Quixote.
As long as Hooters is allowed to operate the way they operate, I seriously doubt the issue of hair length is about to be blown wide open. Think about it a second.
It's not just about hair length! How can you fucking argue from the position of court precedent and then not recognize that I'm arguing to court precedent?
You're being obtuse, and I don't know why, but it's bothering me. I respect you too much for you to be such a cynical, pessimistic, cock-blocking clod.
1. (a) Explain Aquinas’s and Fuller’s natural law accounts of law, and the essential differences between their views. (b) Explain the three “doctrines” that Hart identifies as the theses of legal positivism, as well as what precisely the legal positivist do not deny and they indeed deny. (c) Use these doctrines and ideas to clarify the nature of the debate or the differences between natural law theory and legal positivism.
Because dress codes are dress codes. I don't like them, but I accept them. If an employer wants to run their business that way, then so be it. I don't seriously think it's that serious an impingement upon your personal liberties to ask you to regulate your hair length based on the gender you choose to represent. I wash and clean every morning before going into work, and I make sure to do things like get haircuts and wear nice clothes when I know I have important meetings, not necessarily because I want to, but because I understand it's part of my work. It's just how the world works.
1) Are pre-operative transgendered people a protected class in the state of Washington?
2) Would the hair length code be applied to a cisgendered female?
3) Have any prior cases asked the first two questions?
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Again, I don't think you even get what I'm talking about, nor do I think you care, and nor do I think that I can convince you to care, so ... whatever. I'll keep fighting important causes, you can go fight video game rappers. :P
EDIT: 1) is tentatively yes but I am unsure of Washington-specific precedent (though nationally there is pre-operative precedent), 2) I don't understand. They have separate hair length codes, which are simply labeled 'male and female' which I would assume are assuming cisgenderism.
It's not just about hair length! How can you fucking argue from the position of court precedent and then not recognize that I'm arguing to court precedent?
You're being obtuse, and I don't know why, but it's bothering me. I respect you too much for you to be such a cynical, pessimistic, cock-blocking clod.
Dude -- Hooters.
The courts have consistently ruled in favor of the employer to regulate dress codes, also w/r/t sex codes by sex and gender discrimination in hiring and all kinds of things. I get your distinction about gender, but it's irrelevant.
Sexuality is protected by the Constitution, thus transgender being a protected class. Hair length, emphatically not. It's not my fault for misunderstanding your argument, it's your fault for failing to separate the two categories.
Again, I don't think you even get what I'm talking about, nor do I think you care, and nor do I think that I can convince you to care, so ... whatever. I'll keep fighting important causes, you can go fight video game rappers. :P
Posts
Haha -- I'm a better dancer than you, fucker. Both those steps are easy as shit, and I don't even take dance classes. So nyah.
No man!, shut up I feel so dumb
How 'bout you give me one more chance?
She don't want your revolution if she can't dance (whoa-oh-ohh)
She don't want your revolution if she can't dance (whoa-oh-ohh) :whistle:
I can do them, but I'm not comfortable enough to do them with a partner, and with turns and such, so not really do them.
I'm going to go to Cincinnati first and visit some old friends, run through Dayton and see my ex's sister's baby and drop off her crap, and then over to Boston to visit another friend, circling around and head south to NJ to visit Mike and nexus and Var and such this weekend mayhaps.
today there will be the re-reading of books, the making of lists of more books that need to be re-read, and the general mewling of cats.
Worse, an irrational hobo.
around the world around the world
my favorite part of the song
I love you so much Mike. Soon, very soon, I will be able to show you that love.
The Safeway next to my house has a transgendered man who works there, so obviously it's something with some flexibility. Don't look to the law to back you up, though.
it's in their best interest not to bring it up
EDIT: I wouldn't be looking to existing law, I'd be looking to the ACLU and setting precedent myself.
Tattoos -- I was just reading an article about the growth of tattoos (maybe in the New York Times?) among young people, that's where I just read this. Courts have been pretty consistent in finding in favor of the employer. Deal with it.
hehehe
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
It's a stupid policy. It's also Safeway's policy, and it's not going to change, or at least I seriously doubt you're going to be the one who changes it. I'm sure if they could legally discriminate against transgender people, they'd do that, too, but in this regard the courts have ruled against employers.
C'est la vie.
I'm laughing really hard at anybody who thinks it counts as an insult. It ranks up with calling someone an "idiotic twit."
Why are you such a hater all of a sudden, cel?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
As long as Hooters is allowed to operate the way they operate, I seriously doubt the issue of hair length is about to be blown wide open. Think about it a second.
You're being obtuse, and I don't know why, but it's bothering me. I respect you too much for you to be such a cynical, pessimistic, cock-blocking clod.
lol, brb.
Well typically, people with neckbeards are "of a lesser calibre." Not always true, but that is the stereotype.
1) Are pre-operative transgendered people a protected class in the state of Washington?
2) Would the hair length code be applied to a cisgendered female?
3) Have any prior cases asked the first two questions?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
EDIT: 1) is tentatively yes but I am unsure of Washington-specific precedent (though nationally there is pre-operative precedent), 2) I don't understand. They have separate hair length codes, which are simply labeled 'male and female' which I would assume are assuming cisgenderism.
I was going to comment on this but I realize i'm a little scruffy right now and I have no right to do so.
There's a lot to be said for the trimming and care of one's facial hair.
The courts have consistently ruled in favor of the employer to regulate dress codes, also w/r/t sex codes by sex and gender discrimination in hiring and all kinds of things. I get your distinction about gender, but it's irrelevant.
Sexuality is protected by the Constitution, thus transgender being a protected class. Hair length, emphatically not. It's not my fault for misunderstanding your argument, it's your fault for failing to separate the two categories.