San Francisco launches Guaranteed Income for Transgender Individuals

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Do you have any comment on the OP...?

Click to expand...

It sure got you worked up, didn't it?

That's the point. It doesn't even matter if it is true. It got your hackles up and that was the purpose. You're being led around by the nose.

Click to expand...

Of course. People whose politics you disagree with cannot and do not think for themselves. They are 'led around'. But you and yours - I'm sure you are not 'led around', nobody has brainwashed you, your ideas are all reasonable and if other people have the same ideas as you, well, that's because your ideas are reasonable, and smart people with the correct values will come to the same conclusion. Great minds think alike.

Click to expand...

Tomorrow morning, I'm going to go to work at my San Francisco-based tech company employer. On our Slack channels - where we communicate - employees are encouraged to put their preferred pronouns in their profile. The company went "all in" on Pride Month awhile back. My SF supervisor I now work with every day is a proud gay man with a husband and - if his appearance in our morning team meetings is any indication - the "gay lifestyle" is treating him very well for a 50 year old man. The watch officer that oversees our incident response team has rainbow hair (at the moment) and one of the senior customer service guys has a rainbow backlit keyboard. The technical learning and development specialist who trained me for this job is a fantastic lesbian and I'm absolutely sure there are some non-binary people I work with but to be honest I don't care because they're good people. One person who just left proudly identified as "on the queer spectrum."

And don't even get me started on the racial diversity.

Based on your OP, I'm willing to bet what I just typed out makes you seethe with hatred and anger.

Click to expand...

If I told you it did not make me seethe with 'hatred and anger', would you believe it? I suspect not, because it is quite evident you do not believe anything you don't wanna believe. Preferred pronouns certainly make my eyes roll, though.

Also...it is clear to me, despite your 'tech' employment, and your wonderfully queer employment environment, that you appear to be unfamiliar with RGB keyboards--which is a gamer thing--and is quite unrelated to the rainbow flag symbol of gay pride.

Ford said:

Why is that, Metaphor? Why does all these people living their lives as they want bother you so much? Are they "brainwashing" me into thinking they're decent people, or are they just being decent people?

But I'll give you this...if you took 18 year old me from 1983 small town Michigan and dropped me into this LBTQIA+ diaspora? That kid would probably freak out.

I'm not that ignorant kid anymore. Time marches on. If my journey from being a parochial child who was afraid of "the homos" to an ally is "brainwashing," then pass me the soap. And fuck your bigoted bullshit.

Click to expand...

I'm not afraid of 'the homos', Ford. If I were, my life would be fucking miserable and scary and existentially inconceivable, frankly, since there has been at least one homo in my bed every single night from when I was about 7 onwards.

Click to expand...

So then...what's your problem?

Click to expand...

What's my problem with what? You will have to be specific about what you perceive I have "a problem" with.

Click to expand...

You posted an OP raging against the trans community, no?

Click to expand...

I posted an OP that (by implication) ridiculed San Francisco's application form for its discriminatory, taxpayer-funded welfare program.

But my OP was not 'raging' (a word you seem fond of) about any one 'community' (a word I think gets too much use). My OP has a mélange of targets, including Democrats, trans activism, San Francisco, bureaucratic madness, and IIDB member attitudes and hypocrisy.

Also, the LGB 'community' is not the same thing as the trans 'community'. Sexual orientation is not "gender identity". I do not have a gender identity.

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Do you have any comment on the OP...?

Click to expand...

It sure got you worked up, didn't it?

That's the point. It doesn't even matter if it is true. It got your hackles up and that was the purpose. You're being led around by the nose.

Click to expand...

Of course. People whose politics you disagree with cannot and do not think for themselves. They are 'led around'. But you and yours - I'm sure you are not 'led around', nobody has brainwashed you, your ideas are all reasonable and if other people have the same ideas as you, well, that's because your ideas are reasonable, and smart people with the correct values will come to the same conclusion. Great minds think alike.

Click to expand...

Tomorrow morning, I'm going to go to work at my San Francisco-based tech company employer. On our Slack channels - where we communicate - employees are encouraged to put their preferred pronouns in their profile. The company went "all in" on Pride Month awhile back. My SF supervisor I now work with every day is a proud gay man with a husband and - if his appearance in our morning team meetings is any indication - the "gay lifestyle" is treating him very well for a 50 year old man. The watch officer that oversees our incident response team has rainbow hair (at the moment) and one of the senior customer service guys has a rainbow backlit keyboard. The technical learning and development specialist who trained me for this job is a fantastic lesbian and I'm absolutely sure there are some non-binary people I work with but to be honest I don't care because they're good people. One person who just left proudly identified as "on the queer spectrum."

And don't even get me started on the racial diversity.

Based on your OP, I'm willing to bet what I just typed out makes you seethe with hatred and anger.

Click to expand...

If I told you it did not make me seethe with 'hatred and anger', would you believe it? I suspect not, because it is quite evident you do not believe anything you don't wanna believe. Preferred pronouns certainly make my eyes roll, though.

Also...it is clear to me, despite your 'tech' employment, and your wonderfully queer employment environment, that you appear to be unfamiliar with RGB keyboards--which is a gamer thing--and is quite unrelated to the rainbow flag symbol of gay pride.

Ford said:

Why is that, Metaphor? Why does all these people living their lives as they want bother you so much? Are they "brainwashing" me into thinking they're decent people, or are they just being decent people?

But I'll give you this...if you took 18 year old me from 1983 small town Michigan and dropped me into this LBTQIA+ diaspora? That kid would probably freak out.

I'm not that ignorant kid anymore. Time marches on. If my journey from being a parochial child who was afraid of "the homos" to an ally is "brainwashing," then pass me the soap. And fuck your bigoted bullshit.

Click to expand...

I'm not afraid of 'the homos', Ford. If I were, my life would be fucking miserable and scary and existentially inconceivable, frankly, since there has been at least one homo in my bed every single night from when I was about 7 onwards.

Click to expand...

So then...what's your problem?

Click to expand...

What's my problem with what? You will have to be specific about what you perceive I have "a problem" with.

Click to expand...

You posted an OP raging against the trans community, no?

Click to expand...

I posted an OP that (by implication) ridiculed San Francisco's application form for its discriminatory, taxpayer-funded welfare program.

But my OP was not 'raging' (a word you seem fond of) about any one 'community' (a word I think gets too much use). My OP has a mélange of targets, including Democrats, trans activism, San Francisco, bureaucratic madness, and IIDB member attitudes and hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

And you figure the right wing is in your corner because...?

The endless fight for "traditional" marriage? The support for "conversion therapy?" The entire evangelical Christian apparatus that thinks any man who shares a bed with another man is an "abomination?" The "pray the gay away" thing?


How do you square that?

The right doesn't just hate trans people. They hate the L, the G, the B, and the rest of the letters. And you're like "yep. These are my peeps. They've got my back."

That's like arguing that MLK Jr. was a conservative Republican.

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Ford said:

Metaphor said:

Do you have any comment on the OP...?

Click to expand...

It sure got you worked up, didn't it?

That's the point. It doesn't even matter if it is true. It got your hackles up and that was the purpose. You're being led around by the nose.

Click to expand...

Of course. People whose politics you disagree with cannot and do not think for themselves. They are 'led around'. But you and yours - I'm sure you are not 'led around', nobody has brainwashed you, your ideas are all reasonable and if other people have the same ideas as you, well, that's because your ideas are reasonable, and smart people with the correct values will come to the same conclusion. Great minds think alike.

Click to expand...

Tomorrow morning, I'm going to go to work at my San Francisco-based tech company employer. On our Slack channels - where we communicate - employees are encouraged to put their preferred pronouns in their profile. The company went "all in" on Pride Month awhile back. My SF supervisor I now work with every day is a proud gay man with a husband and - if his appearance in our morning team meetings is any indication - the "gay lifestyle" is treating him very well for a 50 year old man. The watch officer that oversees our incident response team has rainbow hair (at the moment) and one of the senior customer service guys has a rainbow backlit keyboard. The technical learning and development specialist who trained me for this job is a fantastic lesbian and I'm absolutely sure there are some non-binary people I work with but to be honest I don't care because they're good people. One person who just left proudly identified as "on the queer spectrum."

And don't even get me started on the racial diversity.

Based on your OP, I'm willing to bet what I just typed out makes you seethe with hatred and anger.

Click to expand...

If I told you it did not make me seethe with 'hatred and anger', would you believe it? I suspect not, because it is quite evident you do not believe anything you don't wanna believe. Preferred pronouns certainly make my eyes roll, though.

Also...it is clear to me, despite your 'tech' employment, and your wonderfully queer employment environment, that you appear to be unfamiliar with RGB keyboards--which is a gamer thing--and is quite unrelated to the rainbow flag symbol of gay pride.

Ford said:

Why is that, Metaphor? Why does all these people living their lives as they want bother you so much? Are they "brainwashing" me into thinking they're decent people, or are they just being decent people?

But I'll give you this...if you took 18 year old me from 1983 small town Michigan and dropped me into this LBTQIA+ diaspora? That kid would probably freak out.

I'm not that ignorant kid anymore. Time marches on. If my journey from being a parochial child who was afraid of "the homos" to an ally is "brainwashing," then pass me the soap. And fuck your bigoted bullshit.

Click to expand...

I'm not afraid of 'the homos', Ford. If I were, my life would be fucking miserable and scary and existentially inconceivable, frankly, since there has been at least one homo in my bed every single night from when I was about 7 onwards.

Click to expand...

So then...what's your problem?

Click to expand...

What's my problem with what? You will have to be specific about what you perceive I have "a problem" with.

Click to expand...

You posted an OP raging against the trans community, no?

Click to expand...

I posted an OP that (by implication) ridiculed San Francisco's application form for its discriminatory, taxpayer-funded welfare program.

But my OP was not 'raging' (a word you seem fond of) about any one 'community' (a word I think gets too much use). My OP has a mélange of targets, including Democrats, trans activism, San Francisco, bureaucratic madness, and IIDB member attitudes and hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

And you figure the right wing is in your corner because...?

Click to expand...

My "corner"? It's true that conservative and right wing people are more likely to be aligned with me on this issue than left wing people. But there are people on the left, indeed, people who are otherwise dubbed 'radical', who are also in my 'corner' on this issue.

Ford said:

The endless fight for "traditional" marriage? The support for "conversion therapy?" The entire evangelical Christian apparatus that thinks any man who shares a bed with another man is an "abomination?" The "pray the gay away" thing?


How do you square that?

The right doesn't just hate trans people. They hate the L, the G, the B, and the rest of the letters.

Click to expand...

Everybody hates the B. Greedy smug fuckers.

Ford said:

And you're like "yep. These are my peeps. They've got my back."

Click to expand...

I reason through issues and come to conclusions based on my values and the specific issues, not based on whatever "tribe" you think I identify with.

Two of my best friends are vegan. I haven't even mentioned to them once that Hitler was a vegetarian.

Ford said:

And you figure the right wing is in your corner because...?

The endless fight for "traditional" marriage? The support for "conversion therapy?" The entire evangelical Christian apparatus that thinks any man who shares a bed with another man is an "abomination?" The "pray the gay away" thing?


How do you square that?

Click to expand...

Why would you ask any of that nonsensical stuff?
The only reason I can think of is so that you can make a bunch of unfounded accusations against Metaphor without taking responsibility for them.

Your JAQing. Did you come

to a conclusion?
Tom

San Francisco recognizes that there is an unavoidable fraction of the population who will give trans people the stink-eye to the point where finding any income at all is hard, impossibly so in fact, for some.

The same is true for people who are legally blind or have albinism.

I have a friend up in Connecticut. I'll call him Barry.

Barry is a skilled worker and capable of doing a large variety of farm work. Barry is also legally blind and has albinism. I have never seen Barry have a hard time accomplishing tasks involving reading, assuming he can get the phone close enough to his face. Barry is in fact an artist despite their vision problems, in addition to being a decently skilled farmer and laborer.

Barry, despite their strong work ethic and capability to do good work (and produce works of art which impress me greatly despite being married to a fantastic artist myself), finds it hard to maintain gainful employment... As does his sibling.

I would have no problem with state infrastructure around maintaining the lives of those who are underserved in this way, because their lack of success does not imply a lack of merit; rather the discriminatory hiring practices are what drive it.

In fact, Barry, due to their albinism and vision, has had to resort to working through a halfway house program to find work. Recovering drug addicts in that program who have a history of relapse have an easier time finding consistent work than Barry. The only reason Barry is in this program with them is the "crime" of being born with bad eyesight and no skin pigmentation.

But instead of being angry at folks who would hire a meth head fresh off the farm following their third relapse over a guy with bad eyesight, some people want to be mad at trans people.

Does Barry deserve to be unemployed, and treated as unemployable because they are blind?

No. Clearly they do not deserve this. It is unjust.

And the fact is, nobody else deserves to be treated as unemployable either. Not because they are black, not because they are gay, and not because they are trans.

I would say if people don't want the government printing money and giving it to people, they should quit arbitrarily discriminating against said people, and instead of looking on the government stink-eyed for supporting all it's citizens, to look on the discriminators (who may be themselves) stink-eyed for discriminating, so as to make the support unnecessary.

I wish we could have an actual conversation about this topic, as my thoughts on this legislation are complicated. But because we are instead having an argument with anti-trans bigots about whether trans people even exist or have a right to life, a nuanced discussion of whether this law or its execution were the best way to solve the problem its trying to address is impossible, and I feel like any kind of critique of the law would just be taken as support for their repugnant beliefs.

Common enough in California politics. Half-assed, personally invasive measures that the "blue people" all have to support because the only other option is the "red solution", which is usually death.

Politesse said:

I wish we could have an actual conversation about this topic, as my thoughts on this legislation are complicated. But because we are instead having an argument with anti-trans bigots about whether trans people even exist or have a right to life, a nuanced discussion of whether this law or its execution were the best way to solve the problem its trying to address is impossible,

Click to expand...

You are certainly correct that a meaningful discussion is impossible when you believe people believe this.

Jarhyn said:

But instead of being angry at folks who would hire a meth head fresh off the farm following their third relapse over a guy with bad eyesight, some people want to be mad at trans people.

Click to expand...

Oh no! Somebody is giving a chance to drug addicts and not Jarhyn's personal friend who is better than all of them! And somebody on the internet made a post about San Francisco's discriminatory welfare policy instead of being upset about this situation they did not know and has nothing to do with the OP!

Metaphor said:

Politesse said:

I wish we could have an actual conversation about this topic, as my thoughts on this legislation are complicated. But because we are instead having an argument with anti-trans bigots about whether trans people even exist or have a right to life, a nuanced discussion of whether this law or its execution were the best way to solve the problem its trying to address is impossible,

Click to expand...

You are certainly correct that a meaningful discussion is impossible when you believe people believe this.

Click to expand...

What the fuck do you think people's income is for? Denying people employment is denying them existence in the shitty Randian wasteland that is the San Francisco housing market. So is forcing them to live as something they aren't based on your dumb ass assessment of their birth sex, when a lot of the trans population are already refugees from even worse social environments elsewhere in the country, drug mill "therapists", conversion camps, and all the other horrors conservatives love so much. Suicide is death. Starvation is death. Homelessness is death. If you're gay, trans, undocumented, pregnant, mentally ill, chronically ill, or a victim of traumatic abuse, Republicans are the merchants of death. And there's no point trying to argue about the best solution to a challenge with somone who refuses to admit there is a problem or that it should be solved. Do I think this program is implemented in the best way? Not really. But if the only offered alternative is just "nothing for you", I will defend this legislation to the death. Because it is better than death.

Hmm, the bolded part is “have a right to life.” Bolded by Metaphor. Not bolded is, “whether trans people even exist.” But of course for them to have a right to life, they must first exist. And, if trans people exist (which they do of course) then they have not just a right to life but to the full protection of law. And also I believe they should have access to certain measues, even financial, to help ameliorarte hatred, fear, bigtory and misunderstanding directed toward them that makes it hard for them to get on in life.

One is led to conclude that in quoting Politesse, Metaphor bolded “right to life” but not “trans people exist” for a reason. I can only infer that he thinks trans peopole don’t exist, but if they did, they would have a right to life (but perhaps nothing else). Anyhow, I’m not going to go back and forth with him on word splitting, logic chopping, and such like. I‘ve read his posts. Read quite enough of them, as a matter of fact.

Politesse said:

Metaphor said:

Politesse said:

I wish we could have an actual conversation about this topic, as my thoughts on this legislation are complicated. But because we are instead having an argument with anti-trans bigots about whether trans people even exist or have a right to life, a nuanced discussion of whether this law or its execution were the best way to solve the problem its trying to address is impossible,

Click to expand...

You are certainly correct that a meaningful discussion is impossible when you believe people believe this.

Click to expand...

What the fuck do you think people's income is for? Denying people employment is denying them existence.

Click to expand...

Oh, I forgot you think employers are lunch money bullies.

Politesse said:

So is forcing them to live as something they aren't based on your dumb ass assessment of their birth sex.

Click to expand...

I am not forcing anybody to do anything, except follow the rules that all people must follow.

Also, somebody's "birth sex" is their sex. In fact, the sex of a foetus can be determined in utero, and mammals cannot change sex. I did not make an "assessment" of anybody's "birth sex", but I do have eyes and ears so I generally know what sex babies are, as have most adults throughout history.

pood said:

One is led to conclude that in quoting Politesse, Metaphor bolded “right to life” but not “trans people exist” for a reason.

Click to expand...

Yes, the reason is that I believe trans-identified people exist.

pood said:

I can only infer that he thinks trans peopole don’t exist,

Click to expand...

You could instead infer something sensible, but don't let me pressure you.

Metaphor said:

pood said:

One is led to conclude that in quoting Politesse, Metaphor bolded “right to life” but not “trans people exist” for a reason.

Click to expand...

Yes, the reason is that I believe trans-identified people exist.

pood said:

I can only infer that he thinks trans peopole don’t exist,

Click to expand...

You could instead infer something sensible, but don't let me pressure you.

Click to expand...

One wonders, then, why Metaphor bolded only ”right to life” but not “trans people exist.” Of course the former presupposes the latter, but then why bold only one?

Now just upthread, Metaphor writes that “somebody’s birth sex is their sex.” Does Metaphor mean their gender? Because if he does, then he IS denying the existence of trans people, because trans just means people whose gender identity is different from the gender they were thought to be at birth. I wonder if Metaphor denies that such people exist?

So many questions. My, my.

pood said:

Metaphor said:

pood said:

One is led to conclude that in quoting Politesse, Metaphor bolded “right to life” but not “trans people exist” for a reason.

Click to expand...

Yes, the reason is that I believe trans-identified people exist.

pood said:

I can only infer that he thinks trans peopole don’t exist,

Click to expand...

You could instead infer something sensible, but don't let me pressure you.

Click to expand...

One wonders, then, why Metaphor bolded only ”right to life” but not “trans people exist.” Of course the former presupposes the latter, but then why bold only one?

Click to expand...

pood, I already explained why. I highlighted an outrageous, inconceivably ludicrous claim from Politesse--that some portion of the population think trans people have no right to a life.

But the statement was even more inconceivably ludicrous than I imagined, and "inconceivable" is already a superlative. Politesse thinks the collective outcome of employers shows that people think trans people have no right to a life.

pood said:

Now just upthread, Metaphor writes that “somebody’s birth sex is their sex.” Does Metaphor mean their gender?

Click to expand...

If you have questions for me, why are you are asking other people for the answers instead of me?

I mean what I write. Somebody's birth sex is their sex.

pood said:

Because if he does, then he IS denying the existence of trans people, because trans just means people whose gender identity is different from the gender they were thought to be at birth.

Click to expand...

Nobody was thought to be a gender at birth. A newborn's sex is observed and recorded.

pood said:

I wonder if Metaphor denies that such people exist?

Click to expand...

There are no such people whose gender identity is different from the 'gender they were thought to be at birth', because nobody is thought to be a particular gender at birth.

There are people who, when they become old enough to have an understanding of sex, have thoughts in their head wishing they were or were perceived to be, the other sex.

I don't see what the fuss is about. San Francisco institutes a pilot program of income maintenance (at a low level for up to 55 people) for a group that the city government believes needs help. Either the program is successful and provides useful information for either expansion or other income maintenance programs for those deemed in need.

No one is mandating this program be adopted nationally or internationally. No one is being forced to apply. Taxpayers voted this city government in, and either voters approve or they don't. If they don't, they will have their chances to voice their opposition in meetings, forums and ultimately at the ballot box.

Arguing with someone releasing their emotional bile about this program and making such delusional statements as "nobody was thought to be a gender at birth" or "I don't have a gender" is a waste of effort.

Of course people have been thought to have a gender at birth. I know I thought each one of my children had a gender at birth. I strongly suspect most parents did as well, along with most attending health care professionals. And of course people have genders. Most people's gender is the same as their sex.

Do I happen to think having 97 genders plus a fill in the blank option to be a bit over-the-top? Yes. Do I think it matters? No.

Metaphor said:

Politesse thinks the collective outcome of employers shows that people think trans people have no right to a life.

Click to expand...

That trans people are very, very under-employed compared to their cisgendered counterparts is a fact, not an opinion. I don't think that's because employers have an opinion about whether trans people have a right to live. I think they just don't want to hire trans workers, for any number of reasons. Maybe they are personally offended. Maybe they worry their customers will be. Maybe they're afraid there will liability concerns, extra medical problems, that they will ask for more time off, or that they'll be sued if they try to fire them later. None of it would be a problem if we had a guaranteed income and guaranteed housing for all citizens -- employers could employ whoever they liked for whatever reason. But we don't have that. It isn't and shouldn't be up to a business to decide whether it is more profitable to let someone live or let someone die, in the first place. That is the job of society in general, and if we collectively fail, the government has every right to step in with some solution. What solution? That can be discussed. But "let them die" is not an acceptable answer.

laughing dog said:

I don't see what the fuss is about. San Francisco institutes a pilot program of income maintenance (at a low level for up to 55 people) for a group that the city government believes needs help. Either the program is successful and provides useful information for either expansion or other income maintenance programs for those deemed in need.

No one is mandating this program be adopted nationally or internationally. No one is being forced to apply. Taxpayers voted this city government in, and either voters approve or they don't. If they don't, they will have their chances to voice their opposition in meetings, forums and ultimately at the ballot box.

Arguing with someone releasing their emotional bile about this program and making such delusional statements as "nobody was thought to be a gender at birth" or "I don't have a gender" is a waste of effort.

Click to expand...

I do not have a gender identity.

laughing dog said:

Of course people have been thought to have a gender at birth. I know I thought each one of my children had a gender at birth.

Click to expand...

You knew the sex of your children.

laughing dog said:

I strongly suspect most parents did as well, along with most attending health care professionals. And of course people have genders. Most people's gender is the same as their sex.

Click to expand...

Some people would like to be, or be perceived to be, a sex other than they are, and/or are more comfortable with the sex-role assigned to the other sex.

I don't think social sex-roles should be forced upon people, but that does not mean people can opt out of the sex they are, or have any right to be perceived as the sex they are not.