Slashdot Mirror
PayPal Pulls North Carolina Plan After Transgender Bathroom Law (reuters.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: PayPal Holdings Inc on Tuesday canceled plans to open a global operations center in Charlotte, North Carolina and invest $3.6 million in the area after the state passed a controversial law targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) citizens. In a letter on March 29, founders and chief executives of more than a hundred companies, including Apple Inc, Twitter Inc, and Alphabet Inc urged North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory to repeal the legislation.
PayPal is one of the first companies to protest the controversial measure requiring people to use bathrooms or locker rooms in schools and other public facilities that match the gender on their birth certificate rather than their gender identity. "The new law perpetuates discrimination and it violates the values and principles that are at the core of PayPal's mission and culture," Chief Executive Officer Dan Schulman said in a statement. PayPal's original plan was to open the operations center in Charlotte and employ 400 skilled workers there.
Are they going question every one of their customers and make sure their values aligned with PayPal's and seize their funds if not?
That law is ridiculous and I am glad other people recognize this. Dan Schulman made the right call here.
I see how the law is targeting transgender people, but how the law is targeting lesbian, gay or bisexual people?
for those who think this isnt an egregious concern for the state of North Carolina, they very much do have a lot to lose.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Research Triangle Park (RTP) is one of the largest research parks in the world, but its been largely a pearl in an otherwise very salty oyster. Its home to Cisco, Redhat, Microsoft, and NetApp among others. Governors and statesmen are wrecklessly gambling with this research park in the hopes that pandering to ten million North Carolinians with rhetoric from the culture war is a sustainable or responsible approach to governing their state.
PayPal has made it very clear: there are 49 other states that will gladly accept our proposition to employ hundreds of high skilled knowledge workers. Your tax incentives are by no means exclusive to the state.
Good people go to bed earlier.
See one problem is the law says gender AT BIRTH. Which means it doesn't matter if you've had the surgery. Alternately, have you seen the photos that some trans men have posted--bodybuilders, with no way you could guess from appearance that they were born any different? Yeah, by this law, they have to use the ladies' room.
If people obey this law, it's going to massively RAISE the number of people who don't look like they belong in the restroom they're in.
If you have a penis, use the boys room. If you don't you'll make everyone else in the womens room uncomfortable.
there are many people with a penis that would look entirely inappropriate in a boys room.
What if some regular schmuck decides for the lulz to dress up as a women for a day and go all perv in womens room?
then hes committed a number of already existing criminal infractions such as disorderly conduct or sexual assault at worst. men already do this. this law wont fix the problem
At this point why not make all restrooms communal or unisex?
Here in West Hollywood, we kinda did. instead of passing a law that stated gender normative restrooms had to be enforced we did the opposite. we made a law that states all restrooms have to be accessible by both genders. Some smaller bars and restaraunts just made both their restrooms locking unisex. Larger night clubs and hotels converted to an architectural model that provides a fully closed rack of stalls, and around a corner enclosed urinals with privacy partitions.
Good people go to bed earlier.
This bill isn't "about" bathrooms (that's just one provision of many, probably added so that people like the submitter can spin the backlash as being about that).
The far more significant provision (the one which actually has PayPal and others abandoning the state) is the one which explicitly permits business to discriminate against LGBT employees and customers under the guise of "religious freedom".
People need to remove the LGB from this discussion because there is nothing about Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexuals in the debate. Except that for positioning people conveniently lump those other groups into the lot. Here is your trigger warning, either go away or hold that rage for a minute. This is about people who dress like the opposite sex. The reasons for dressing like the opposite sex are varied, and can be perverse as well as due to any type of identity condition.
So you are a parent, do you mind if the older principle goes into the boys bathroom to check out the young penis? Prove it's not because she wants to be a man. If you are a parent, do you mind the janitor going into the girls bathroom to check out the young ladies? Prove it's not because he wants to be a woman.
This blanket assumption that everyone is innocent and altruistic is a fantasy that people need to snap out of. The actual amount of transgender people demanding to use any restroom they want is extraordinarily tiny. Blackmailing companies to force them to do it the way .1% of the population wants it is not the way to succeed in society where the other 99.9% of the population does not agree.
People need to wake up to the amount of social engineering being forced down their throat and take action against it. If not, well, you can see how things turned out in other countries when the loonies started running the asylum.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
The comments they make when I release the death fog is fucking hilarious. I don't care how big your dick is, lady. My alien acid shits will drive you out of the men's room FOREVER!!!!
Whose freedom is more important? The transgendered man who wants to use a woman's restroom or the women who don't want to share their restroom with a transgendered man? Who should prevail? You can't make one happy without making the others unhappy. This is the nature of politics. You have to decide and say "you get your way, and you, just deal with it."
The governor of NC chose to side with 51% of his state over probably 0.001% of his state. Sure, there are women who would agree with sharing the restroom. The governor can't know how many. All he probably knows is that he's likely never met a woman in his state except a few activists that like the idea. Therefore he is doing precisely what we ordinarily value which is letting the majority rule.
Stop bullshitting. It was done to ensure individual communities couldn't pass laws that prohibit discrimination. In other words, the Jesus-yokels in the state house said "We're looking at YOU, Raleigh, Charlotte, and especially you hippies in Asheville, and we don't like you getting all fag-friendly and whatnot."
The law also limits the definition of sex to the sex at birth, meaning that even if someone was a complete post-op transsexual, they're still considered be their original sex by the state.
You're as entitled to your opinion on this as anyone else, but at least have the balls to admit what the law really is, instead of all this double-talk about "different and contradictory laws" in different communities. What happened to that conservative maxim of keeping power out of the hands of central government and letting local communities decide what's best? Oh, that was hypocrisy? What a shock.
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
Remember, this is the same company that excludes its users from commerce in legal but politically incorrect products & services.
https://www.paypal.com/ca/weba...
Nice try. You left out that whole bit about how the law "bans local jurisdictions from offering any LGBT protections beyond what the state does, which is "none". Cities had local laws saying, for example, you couldn't refuse to rent to a gay couple just because they were gay...those city laws are now struck from the books by state mandate." My thanks to Sowelu (713889) for articulating this.
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
Unisex bathrooms.
And make them with closed stalls. So nobody will know which way the feet are pointing when they take a leak.
Have gnu, will travel.
As a citizen of North Carolina, I am grateful to Paypal for standing up to protect people from discrimination. As bad as the treatment of transgender folks is in this law, the real impact is much broader. This law removes the right of all citizens to access state courts to sue for employment or housing discrimination based on age, race, national origin, or sex. The Republicans are using the bathroom stuff as cover because they think a majority of voters don't identify with transgender people. But the real impact is to legalize all forms of discrimination in North Carolina.
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
See one problem is the law says gender AT BIRTH.
Ever heard of 'born again'? Hallelujah! Praise the lawd!
Have gnu, will travel.
People have the right to do whatever they feel like doing. The consequences for their actions are a different story. If you are male and want to pretend you are female, that is fine. When you DEMAND that others agree with you is when there is a problem. Why post AC?
Even if they don't, there are stalls in most bathrooms. I see this as an issue so minuscule, it is only worth political discussion.
When I started my transition in 1990, I would have never imagined such support and solidarity. Thank you Pay Pal.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
And you don't think a judge can't tell the difference between a genuine transexual and a pervert?
Other posters are right. This is just cover for holding Jeebus up high and striking out at people that don't conform to your views. This is exactly how the "Family Values" types try to claim that all gay men are pedophiles. Now suddenly all transexuals are actually peeping toms who want to wear dresses.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Where aliens will be found, computers will be sentient, brains will be uploaded, and Linux will have a year on the desktop, all believed with the fervent faith of a religious nutter...
but the idea that gender identity is an innate function of the brain, which may not always develop to the identity dictated by chromosomes or genitalia, is just too damn mind blowing for them to handle, despite oodles of scientific evidence.
Actually, no. Before this law was passed, North Carolina was going to gain 1200 new jobs; 400 from Paypal and 800 from whatever company you work for. Now, they're only getting 800, because the other 400 are going somewhere else.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
The same crime he was always convicted of.
Let's imagine for a moment a female sex predator sneaking a peak at young girls in a women's washroom, or a male sex predator doing the same in a men's washroom. Are you saying these individuals cannot be prosecuted because they have the right bits under their clothes?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Wrong; the law removes the right of local governments to pass any anti-discrimination laws that are broader then the state.
The 'bathroom issue' is a smokescreen and a scare tactic used to hide the usual 'its okay to discriminate against gays because religious freedom' laws that are all the rage in the south these days.
As there are NO state laws protecting -- for instance -- employment or housing with regards to sexual orientation on the state level, and there were local laws, this explicitly removes those local protections.
So your wife has bought into the bullshit fear-mongering. Lucky you and lucky her.
Yes; speaking as a transgender woman, I can tell you first hand that from the time I decided to transition until the time I had my hormone prescription in hand, 15 months had elapsed along with many visits to psychologists, social workers and a psychiatrist. And that's in a place that's generally very supportive of trans people and doesn't put roadblocks in the way of transitioning.
All good then. Gender != Sex. Sex is what is between your legs. Gender is not known until the child has identified with one. It can't be known at birth.
Inn Seattle, just after a LGBT friendly law was passed a man walked into a women's changing room at a pool and undressed in front of young girls. He was wearing standard men's clothing and after swimming he returned to the dressing room and repeated the process. At no point were any police called because he said he 'identified' as female and the staff were unable to prove otherwise. He was told he could use a separate room but he refused and they were not legally allowed to force him.
It's not going to happen everywhere but with 'feelings' based laws there is little anyone can do about it unless the person has prior sexual convictions and then they would most likely be in violation of something else besides these laws.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
You do realize that most of the South is going to pass these laws, right? And having locations in the South is much cheaper. So you're going to find that most corporations will just move from one state to another. Sorry, but that's corporations for you. Fine taking a stand until they have to lose money and explain it to the stockholders.
No they're not--or at least if they do, the laws won't last long. The laws are blatantly unconstitutional and there's a 90%+ chance they won't survive a challenge at the appellate level in a federal court anywhere in the country.
No one is talking about the baby changing station. Think about it. You're a guy. People already look at you funny if you're with your own child and the mother is elsewhere. Now you can't even use the baby changing station, because it's in the women's restroom.
Or maybe you can, after all, people understand right? Baby needs a new diaper. It's obvious. So you take a chance. You go in, and a nice lady inside smiles at you because she finds the image of a young father with a baby adorable. And so you're in there, changing the babies diaper, you come out and...
You're surrounded by cops, (or worse, Asset Protection.) Wait, what?
Onlookers, confused, and trying to fill in the missing data, assume the worst. Because it would be asinine (but correct) to assume it has to do with your chromosomes, they make more reasonable assumptions like, "he stole a baby," and "he's a peeping tom."
Welcome fathers, to the future! You're now officially a creep until proven otherwise.
If we as a society weren't irrationally concerned with people seeing other people's bodies outside narrowly defined, culturally relative bounds of acceptability, that would be a complete non-issue.
There are nudist colonies where children of any sex can see adults of every sex all the time and they're not psychologically traumatized by it.
There are and always have been societies around the world where all sorts of people routinely see all sorts of people naked and nobody fucking cares.
Our culture's hangups about what parts of which sex have to be covered by what garment is just a slightly lesser version of the same ideas that lead to mandatory burkas in Islamic countries.
The law should not mandate anything about clothing except where it might be a public health concern (e.g. the kinds of places where hairnets or gloves or whatnot are mandated).
Laws about clothing are the "feelings" based laws in the first place. Oh noes, you're offended by the sight of someone's body; or worse, by someone else's sight of someone else's body! Who fucking cares. You're free to be offended and to shame or disassociate from such people as you like, free speech and association and all that, culture's going to do what culture does and if naked people are uncool, whatever; but they should be legally free to dress (or not) as they like, because it's not harming anyone.
Also, bathrooms should all be unisex (as far as the law is concerned) for similar reasons, except in that case who the hell's genitals are visible to other people even in a bathroom? (At least without going to creepy, obvious efforts to look at them, which should be as much a problem for cis men creeping each other in the men's room as transwomen creeping other women in the women's room... not that it's even really possible in a women's room, since there are no urinals and toilet seats get private stalls).
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
And how often do you think this is going to happen? Do you think it is irrational to punish all trans because very infrequently, some asshole takes advantage of the changed rules?
All liberties can be abused, and to some point they can be abused in such a way that there is precious little anyone can do about them. That's hardly an argument for revoking liberties for everyone. Punishing every trans person because some asshole wants to show off doesn't strike me as a very wise or desirable use of state power.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
PayPal seems to have no trouble doing business there. What are Saudi Arabian bathroom policies like? How are LGBT rights doing there?
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
That's not quite 100%, though. If your chromosomes and dangly bits agree, though (which is almost everyone), use that restroom or you'll be creeping out the womenfolk.
There is no situation that avoids the creep-out factor though.
Birth gender = Men creeped out by shemale trannies, women creeped out by bodybuilder trannies
Mental gender = Men creeped out by bodybuilder trannies, women creeped out by shemale trannies
Third toilet = Trannies freaked out by each other
So maybe people could just learn to not get freaked out by other humans and the problem will go away?
No, it isn't. We have separate public toilets as a remnant of a policy of excluding women from public life and enforcing class divisions. Female public toilets did not exist until the early 20th century and were still rare well into the 20th century.
Additional fun facts: In West Virginia, women were barred from jury service until 1956 because courthouses didn't have female toilets. In the US Capitol building, there were no toilets for female senators until 1992.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
See one problem is the law says gender AT BIRTH. Which means it doesn't matter if you've had the surgery.
False.
North Carolina transgender law: Is it discriminatory?
Stam: "In North Carolina, you can have your birth certificate changed if you do reassignment surgery. It has been reported several places that we said it's your sex as designated at birth (that government agencies will use to define who can use bathrooms or changing facilities). And that is not correct. ... It's not what you are at birth. It's based on your birth certificate, which can be changed."
--------
If people obey this law, it's going to massively RAISE the number of people who don't look like they belong in the restroom they're in.
That would only be true if there were "massive" numbers of "trans" people, which there isn't. Even homosexual only comprise about 1.5% of the population and they are more common.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Yes? The Seattle case was done as a stunt by a guy specifically protesting the law.
The Toronto case, as you say, happened even before the law existed... so not having the law offers women no protection whatsoever.
OK, now please tell us: In that time period, how many women were assaulted or harassed by "normal" guys who didn't claim to be trans? Hint: In Canada alone, over 400,000 per year.
2. You do not have the right to trample other people's rights int he process of the above.
When I go to the ladies' room, I'm not trampling anyone's rights. What the hell are you talking about?
I've had precisely one comment from a woman in a public washroom. And her comment was: "I really like your necklace."
And secondly: You and your ilk do not have the right to force me to risk my safety. You do not have the right to make it legal to deny LGBT people housing or employment.
www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-rules-abercrombie-fitch-discriminated-against-muslim-woman-over-338191
But there is no way, whatsoever, that I will now or ever support a law that allows a [...]former man to be allowed in a public bathroom with my daughter when she's old enough to go into the ladies room alone.
Why on earth not?
I support LGBT but I'm no more trusting of a transgender than a perverted uncle.
In other words you don't support transgender people because you think they're untrustworthy scum.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
"Myths vs Facts: What New York Times, Huffington Post and other media outlets aren't saying about common-sense privacy law"
https://governor.nc.gov/press-release/myths-vs-facts-what-new-york-times-huffington-post-and-other-media-outlets-arent-0
Of course, the validity of it's assertions is still in question, but it seems relevant to your statement. Particularly the part that says, "this law establishes a statewide anti-discrimination policy in North Carolina which is tougher than the federal government’s." It will be interesting to see how things play out over time.
In the technical terminology that's more than twice as old as you (turning 66 this year!), "man" and "woman" are the names of social categories, while "male" and "female" are the names of biological categories. I myself have some disagreements about naming things this way (I would have coined New Latin terms-of-art instead or repurposing common English) precisely because it breeds this exact confusion (and for other reasons related to nonbinary genders), but that's how they got named and there's not much to be done about it by now.
And the need for two sets of terms is very real, and originally had nothing to do with transgender issues. Rather, the distinction was coined because there are some people, intersex people, who are not biologically male or female, but somewhere in between, and yet still get put into one of the social categories of "man" or "woman". In some cases, they are biologically much closer to the sex opposite their gender, but because they were ambiguous at birth and people feel compelled to put them into one of those two boxes they picked one, and picked wrong, and someone who's biologically much closer to female was raised as and identified as and is identified by everyone else as a man, etc.
Technically, your gender per se is that social box that other people put you into; a social property of you, a social status, like a rank or title. By that super pedantic technical standard, only passing transwomen are truly "women" (and likewise transmen); if society sees you as a gender, you are that gender, because gender is nothing but the state of how society sees you. Your gender identity on the other hand is a mental property of you, a mental state, about or regarding that social status: it's what box you would like other people to put you into, relative to the box you were put into at birth. Super pedantically technically, nobody (who knows what they're talking about) claims that "wanting to be a gender makes you that gender"; rather, being seen as a gender makes you that gender, because gender is all about how people see you. But in an effort to not be massive assholes to people, it's generally considered polite to consider people to be in the social category they would like to be considered as, even if that wouldn't be your first assumption.
Which is all a long way of saying: no, a trangendered man is not a woman who wishes she was a man. A transgendered man is a man -- someone considered by society to go in that social category -- who was not considered a boy when he was born. And if you're not an asshole, you'll put people into the imaginary social boxes that they want to be in instead of the imaginary social boxes you want them to be in, and consider a biological female who wants to be considered a man as a man, at which point he is a man... to you. He was already a man to himself. And any argument between you and him over which imaginary social box he belongs in is literally a matter of baseless social opinion, like arguing over whether the new kid is cool or not; it's entirely about nothing more than either accepting or shunning someone, so the only question is whether to be an asshole or not.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."