November 10, 2009

"It's like I've been terrorized by this for years."

"I wanted to take them to task. I didn't want to settle and pay them. I told them that they weren't going to get a penny from me. I didn't care if I ended up homeless because of this."

27 comments:

traditionalguy said...

This is the same con-men posing as a discrimination fighting court and prosecutor asking for a fee to go away that Mark Steyn and his friend Ira wrestled with for two years. Courage to fight back will be needed or they will do this here next.

ricpic said...

An attempted shakedown by a shemale who couldn't shake it any more 'cause he didn't have it anymore to shake.

David said...

"I'm stubborn."

Yup.

MadisonMan said...

Good for him. The still-him him, that is, not the now-not-him him. I don't understand why he doesn't get money now from not-him.

EDH said...

I don't understand why he doesn't get money now from not-him.

Maybe the adjudicator denied costs because if this type of action is discouraged then the adjudicator will wield less power?

Tyrone Slothrop said...

I don't know. I think I would have settled for a medical determination that he/she/it was no longer a male in any biological sense. While I agree that this was probably a shakedown, I think this would have blown right over if he had just let he/she/it have his/her/its way.

Palladian said...

"I think I would have settled for a medical determination that he/she/it was no longer a male in any biological sense."

This is impossible. DNA cannot be changed. The hardware may have been changed but the operating system remains the same.

edutcher said...

And they can't figure out why everyone doesn't accept and approve of what they do.

I'm reminded of the old Super Chicken line, "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it."

traditionalguy said...

The gist of this shake-down is that there is no such thing as being not guilty...if the complaint is filed, that is proof that the complaining person was offended. No trial, no jury, no confronting the accuser, no appeal, Just a record as a bad person and a high fine to pay set by a Panel of bureaucrat Justices, who it turns out split the fine loot with the complainant.

Bill said...

edutcher-

Thanks. Thanks a lot. Now I'll have that stuck in my head for hours.

edutcher said...

We live to swerve.

Skyler said...

Fulton's legal battle began in the summer of 2006 when a man, who had transitioned into a woman,

Sorry, can't be done. Still a man. Being a transvestite, even a surgical transvestite, does not stop one from being male. He may not be a man, but that's a character issue, not an issue of identity.

traditionalguy said...

Skyler...Do not move to Canada. There your little free speech comment would cost you a huge fine and you would have no defense, and God forbid you ever had a second offense.

Seven Machos said...

Jesus, people. This is easy.

Do you currently have a penis?

1. If you have a penis at this moment, use the men's room.

2. If you have no penis at this moment, use the women's room.

If you have both, see 1. If you have neither, see 1.

Problem solved. Your gratitude is accepted.

vbspurs said...

You know, but I kinda agree with Seven Machos.

What would bother me is a man in a changing room with women, able to ogle our naked bods, which raises all kinds of privacy issues, not to mention safety ones.

But having snipped that part of his anatomy that makes him male, and clearly not lusting sexually over women anymore, I wouldn't be that rattled by having him in the ladies (after say, communication to that effect by management).

But I'm glad this man stood his ground. It seems to me this is indeed a money shakedown. The one acting on principle is the fitness club owner, not the she-male.

Cheers,
Victoria

shoutingthomas said...

Gay marriage is the same shakedown.

People will twist their sexuality deliberately for social and economic gain.

The white kids (those reared during the 1980s and 90s) realized that they had to find a way to glom onto the victim thing, or they's have to spend their lives kissing black's asses, like their parents did.

So, they decided to go gay. Automatic inclusion into one of the oppressed minorities. And, it worked!

We live now in the era of the closeted hetero.

Gay marriage is a shakedown devised to put us in a moral hammerlock.

Once we've been beaten into submission by the spoiled brats on this one, what will be the next form of bigotry the brats discover?

kentuckyliz said...

The tranny should be required to purchase a lifetime membership to that gym, in return for the $100k expense of redesigning the facilities for him/her.

S/he never joined! Bitch.

vet66 said...

I am woman hear me bore!

Another case of "Aren't I special? These narcissistic exhbitionists need to learn that the world doesn't revolve around them. One would think the self-loathing was snipped at the same time the offending member was removed.

Pogo said...

Victoria said: "What would bother me is a man in a changing room with women, able to ogle our naked bods, which raises all kinds of privacy issues, not to mention safety ones."

My sister-in-law played college hoops and learned never to use the locker room because of the ogling and being hit on by teammates.

As to the topic at hand, by Canadian standards, what difference does it make what the women prefer, when one man by himself decides what gender he will be and you must comply?

paul a'barge said...

One day all the trannies
will be spanked on their fannies
and made to parade to the bank
to pay for their spank

downtownlad said...

Lots of bigots on this thread as usual.

Sorry - but if she had completed her transition to a female, then she was likely LEGALLY a female in the eyes of the law. So this is a clear case of sex discrimination. And the only reason to stop her from using the women's changing room is bigotry.

downtownlad said...

And by the way, in the United States right now I am not currently allowed to marry another man.

But if I transition to female, then I am allowed to marry another man.

So this has nothing to do with Canadian law. The same thing would happen in the United States, where sex discrimination is against the law.

The law is treating the transgender person exactly as they would a gym owner who discriminated against a women just because she looked like a man.

Cut It said...

vbspurs:

Don't be so sure. As a lawyer, I once handled a case for a dude who had had sex-reassignment surgery. He was now a she, but still liked girls too. Not-him wanted to be a lesbian.

Pogo said...

"where sex discrimination is against the law.

His sex is still male.
His gender is female.

Prosecutorial Indiscretion said...

As a result of some of that mind-broadening life experience I didn't have as much of in the past, I'm a lot more sympathetic toward transgendered people now than I used to be. But the bathroom issue is still a big one, and I'm pretty sure the only way to solve it is by offering single-user unisex bathrooms. Any other arrangement potentially allows for sneaky men to get into the women's bathrooms, and the opportunity for abuse there is unacceptable (not to mention the discomfort and fear women will feel in the presence of someone of undetermined gender and intent).

It would be terribly rude and humiliating to perform some sort of "penis check" on everybody who exhibits male-to-female characteristics. Apparent from potential cruelty to the transgendered individual, who's going to perform the check? If you just rely on IDs, those are easily faked. While there are certainly sincere transgendered individuals out there looking for society to recognize their internal gender, we know there are plenty of creepy perverts around, too. It's just way too much trouble to sort out the bathroom issue.

Sorry - but if she had completed her transition to a female, then she was likely LEGALLY a female in the eyes of the law. So this is a clear case of sex discrimination. And the only reason to stop her from using the women's changing room is bigotry.

My understanding is that transition is not necessary biological. I did a little Googling, and it looks like some states don't even require proof of a sex change operation to change a driver's license - in some cases, a therapist's certification that you're living as your non-birth gender will do, and it looks like in some states you can just declare it and change the license. I expect, in light of that legal context, that efforts to press the sex discrimination claim would end up causing a setback to sex discrimination law rather than guaranteeings transpeople the right to the bathroom of their choice.

One last point: referring to anybody as "it" is bullshit. No matter how weird someone's lifestyle is, that person deserves to be recognized as a human being. The dehumanizing "it" just ain't right.

shoutingthomas said...

downtownlad,

I'd rather be a bigot than a gold plated asshole...

... which is precisely what you are.

Ah, for the good old days when an asshole had to fear a good beating in the back alley. Nasty business, but it does have a purpose.

c3 said...

I'm missing something here (and so is this plaintiff ;-) )
anyway. If I go into an Athletic Club to inquire about membership and I'm dressed as a woman and look like a woman, why would I say "Oh by the way, I used to be a guy"? I assume the owner doesn't ask every applicant to drop his/her drawers.

And if she's gone through an operation to approximate female anatomy this is all a moot point.

so what's the problem?

(Or is it that he's CONTEMPLATED the surgery but not actually gotten it. In that case he, in my mind, is not much more than a "glorified" and (apparently legally protected) transvestite)

WV: flatio (say no more)