If you choose to change your gender to female, you should bear the consequences like a man. That's my take, anyway. Tracey Nicole Sturchio, whose lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is proceeding, has another view.
According to a brief overview of Sturchio's case from the Human Rights Campaign (10th item down):
...a transgender woman employed by the U.S. Border Patrol since 1991, (Sturchio) sued her employer in April for compensatory and punitive damages, as well as mental anguish and emotional distress, for gender identity harassment. Sturchio was allegedly denied access to the women’s bathroom, prevented from wearing female attire to work, and subjected to harassment, including a survey of her co-workers about their perceptions of her physical condition and appearance.
While this has little to do with the government's attempt to dismiss the case, I believe that if you beg the question of changed gender identity, you had better get ready to bear the consequences. No matter what anyone says, there is something inherently disruptive when a co-worker decides to have his male organ removed, and makes that choice known. To think that co-workers will not notice, or have comments, is utopian. If I were Sturchio, and I shudder at the thought, I'd use a combination of wit and aggression to repel any comments or actions from co-workers I found to be offensive.
Unfortunately, in this day and age, "victims" like Sturchio hold their employers responsbile for the expected and imperfect human reactions to things such as sex-change surgery.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at December 22, 2004 07:55 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.rosenblog.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/626
One phrase in that article jumped out at me: "...who is undergoing a sex change..."
So, the plumbing revisions haven't even taken place yet (that's always the last step). Wait 'til the work is complete before complaining, I say. Is it too unreasonable to have a rule like "as long as you've got the schlong, you've got to use the men's room."
Posted by: Jeff at December 22, 2004 09:20 AMAs long as our society insists upon separating the sexes in restrooms, the men should remain in the men's room. The ability to use a stand-up urinal is as good a way to determine who goes where as any.
Not that I expect any form of objective analysis to prevail here, but if I can not have a creche in city hall due to the possibility of someone being offended, what could be more offensive than an anatomocally male person insisting upon using the ladies room? But no one can expect to profit from a suit against this pervert, yet the pervert needs only a shyster and a credulous jury to score big against the U.S. Border Patrol. Our national lottery continues....
Posted by: Michael Gersh at December 22, 2004 06:20 PMShut the door and move on. Who cares?
We all make our choices, need to respect that.
So Mike is Michelle, give a shit.
Posted by: Bob at December 22, 2004 10:09 PMBob: Urinals don't generally have doors, so which one are we supposed to lock? The one to the whole bathroom? Those don't generally have locks, either. Are you proposing throwing out on the street entire restaurants and locking the entire establishment up just so you can take a piss?
Posted by: Jeff at December 22, 2004 11:55 PM