all 12 comments

[–]PanhandleNutter 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What is discrimination, anymore? I feel like that is so muddied now. It's apparently discrimination to not give people access to children. It's discrimination to not give them access to vulnerable women. It's discrimination to not have sex with someone you don't find attractive. It's discrimination to say you don't believe in someone's world view.

When everything is discrimination, it's impossible to address. Impossible.

[–]whateverneverpine 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Men access to children? vulnerable women? sex with men women don't find attractive? It's a men's rights movement.

[–]saidtert 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

on the basis of actual or perceived race.......be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that is funded in whole or in part with funds made available to carry out this title

Does that mean if there are any diversity/affirmative action features to the program, that people can take advantage by identifying as a different race?

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, I don't think so. It means that people can't be discriminated against because of how other people perceive them.

It's long been established that some people are discriminated against because others believe them to be a certain race, ethnicity, sex, religion, national origin etc when that's not actually true - and that such discrimination is just as illegal as it would be if the other person did indeed have the protected characteristic erroneously attributed to them. As when, for example, anti-Semites might discriminate against a gentile they think "looks like a Jew" or "has a Jewish NY accent" or has political views they associate with "commie Jews." Or when some people with anti-black animus might discriminate against persons who are not black but who in their opinion for "sound black," "act black," "dress black" or have "black hair." [Apologies for the offensive examples, but it's hard to illustrate this without citing the objectionable stereotypes & slurs that come into play.]

This reading of the law also prevents people from being excluded from affirmative action programs for not fitting other people's stereotypical views of what people with certain protected characteristics are like. For example, when a person of African American heritage is seen by others as "not black enough" or "too white" to be eligible for a race-based affirmative action program, or a woman is regarded as too "manly" or "mannish" to meet the criteria for programs meant to benefit women.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Always could. There's never been a legally-binding way to enforce quotes, etc.

[–]one1won[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

section 20 249(c) of title 18, United States Code."

Searching federal documents is a pain. Title 18 refers to CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. That’s prisons, if I follow the sections, though I’ve yet to find the referenced section with GI wording.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's from 18 USC 249: Hate crime acts which pertains to

1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.-

Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person-

(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.-

(A) In general.-Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person-

Towards the bottom, there's a section that says

(c) Definitions.-In this section-

(4) the term "gender identity" means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics;

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:18%20section:249%20edition:prelim)

Which obviously isn't very helpful.

[–]one1won[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you! I have only mobile. The “section 20” threw me.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

(4) the term "gender identity" means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics;

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the circular "gender-related characteristics" is defined precisely nowhere in the bill, either?

Edit: yep, of course it isn't, nor is "gender" itself, which is particularly concerning, since

(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.-

(A) In general.-Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person-

omits any mention of 'sex' entirely. I guess it's not a hate crime if you murder someone based on their sex, but it is if based on their gender?

What a clown world, smh