The Editorial staff speaks out on matters of importance.  Unafraid of sponsorship restraints or sacred cows, we tell it like it is.  Read our columnists here, updated at least weekly.  If you'd like to write a column, please click here for more information on how to join us!   We're  always looking for fresh ideas and viewpoints.  Join us at  It's All About Communication.

Get Over It...Commentary by Delphi

Comments by Delphi..Delphi

I Can Too Wear What I Want

I was poking in the news again, before my dinky stinky ISP decided I am not cool enough to live, and therefore will be denied access to ordinary text files, instead of just funky graphics and useful things that tell me how much money I owe them.

Anyway, I found this blurb about a bill in California that prohibits
discrimination in the workplace based on someone's perceived gender. In other words, you can't fire some guy for looking femme or some woman for looking butch. Mind you, California already prohibits job-based discrimination on the basis of someone's gender or sexual orientation. Needless to say, there are opponents of this bill, who throw their hands up in disgust, crying, "Honest American businesses will be forced to allow cross-dressers at work!"

Really, folks. Let us get a grip here. First of all, isn't it kind of obvious by now that there is only one legitimate reason to discriminate against a worker? That reason being, for the slowpokes in the audience, that the someone in question is incapable of doing the job which they are seeking. Of course, if you have a dress code in your business, all well and good, but I have to point out that these are often sexist and discriminatory as well. After all, if a woman can
wear two earrings to work, provided they match and do not exceed a certain length, why can't a man?

Second of all, if you do have a legitimate dress code, and a worker who is a cross-dresser (notice we're talking men here; no one ever seems to object to women in suits), and you've made it clear to your worker how they must dress and they refuse, what is the big deal? How is this any different than firing a cook for working barefoot? My personal opinion about cross-dressers is that if you are clean and neat and dressed appropriately for your position who cares whether you wear a dress? But that's just me.

While I feel certain that there must be valid circumstances of some woman who was denied a promotion because she was too much like one of the guys, or some fellow who was fired because he refused to join in a round of jokes centered on a) fags or b) bitches, I have to wonder at the necessity of a law that says, "You cannot discriminate against a person who doesn't meet your gender expectations." Or
maybe not, and that's the sad part. Once you get past all the silly scenarios which present themselves when you hear about a law like this (which was approved by lawmakers, in case you are wondering) what it boils down to is that we have to pass laws which require us to behave like grown-ups. You'd think we'd learn that on our own, but apparently not. Anyone else find that pathetic?

Shop at
Hey, we know!

Art's Link Letters
Below The Fold
Crazy Talk
Dept. Of Huh?
Full Disclosure
Get Over It
New World Hors Doeuvres
Patriarch's Planet
Scene & Herd
Strange Bedfellow
Impact This!
Go Go Joseph
Reality Check
Know your Equinox
Fat Heads
The Lawsuit Lifestyle
Pass The Grape
$100-Million Letter
How To Grow Up In A Hurry
That's Smarts?
Home Email | Message Boards | Sites | News | Sports | Weather | Voice Chat | Reference | Search | Privacy Policy

What makes your first choice for information? It's all about communication. GetDetails. It's News To You!  Copyright © 1999-2000, All rights reserved.