Nov 21 2007
The next step in San Fran is to be … trans-specied?
The Drudge Report has this heart warming headline:
San Francisco approves ID cards that exclude gender…
My first question is, why stop there? Are cross dressers and sex-change recipients the only people that have difficulty coming to terms with the confining labels, droupings, and expectations asssigned by society. Should people (is it judgemental to refer to them as people and thereby implying they are to grouped into a classification as being human?) that don’t feel they were born with the correct gender be put on a pedestal and given special rights? What are we doing to protect the rights, wants, and needs of others that may feel unfairly classified as a result of their physical traits?
Trans-eye-color people struggle with licenses that proclaim to all that would card them that they have the eye color that they actually have. These victims often refrain from buying that six-pack because it is too humiliating a process. Imagine yourself in the same situation. You were born (please don’t take offense that I accuse you of being born and therefore not conforming to the sacrament of abortion) with blue eyes and as is often the case, your eyes changed color in your infancy. Now your eyes are brown, but you feel green-eyed! How can you be expected to pull out that driver’s license, that disgustingly confining device, when you know it shows your natural eye-color. How could you bear to show this document to the licquor store clerk when you know deep in your mind that you are indeed green-eyed regardless of the actual pigment of your iris?
Speaking of licenses, how about the profiling that is done to those that have to live with having the date they were born shown for anyone to see? What about those who don’t feel comfortable with the idea that they were actually born? How do we ensure that consideration is given to people that feel more hatched than born?
Where is the ACLU when it comes to the trampling of the rights of trans-specied individuals (is it acceptable to label them as individuals? What if they feel that they are multiples?) Why should people who know in the depths of their hearts that they are invertebrates suffer the shame of being viewed as having the backbones that exist in their backs? What about those that feel canine, and not just because they can’t stick to a monogamous relationship, as opposed to human? Why should they be expected to buy dog food and endure the humiliation of having the check-out clerk thinking that it is for a pet?
I am thinking we all need to work to ensure that nature does not get in the way of the constitutional rights that everyone has to be considered anything of his or her or its choice and to not be recognized as anything that can be construed as traditional, normal, conforming to laws of nature.
[…] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here’s a quick excerpt The Drudge Report has this heart warming headline: San Francisco approves ID cards that exclude gender… My first question is, why stop there? Are cross dressers and sex-change recipients the only people that have difficulty coming to terms with the confining labels, droupings, and expectations asssigned by society. Should people (is it judgemental to refer to them as people and thereby implying they are to grouped into a classification as being human?) that don’t feel they were born with the […]
[…] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here’s a quick excerpt The Drudge Report has this heart warming headline: San Francisco approves ID cards that exclude gender… My first question is, why stop there? Are cross dressers and sex-change recipients the only people that have difficulty coming to terms with the confining labels, droupings, and expectations asssigned by society. Should people (is it judgemental to refer to them as people and thereby implying they are to grouped into a classification as being human?) that don’t feel they were born with the […]