By on September 20, 2015

 

Included in the United Auto Workers latest round of negotiations was language that protected workers at Fiat Chrysler Automobiles from discrimination based on gender identity.

“During this round of bargaining the union expressed the importance of the parties both maintaining and strengthening policies that ensure the equal treatment of all employees,” the union wrote in its white paper to members.

Michigan and Ohio do not protect workers from discrimination based on gender identity, according to the ACLU. Only Illinois, where FCA currently builds the Dodge Dart, Jeep Compass and Patriot at its Belvidere plant, has a law that protects workers from gender-identity discrimination. 

The equal protection language was included in more than 400 pages of contract changes for the UAW that was agreed upon and proposed to its membership last week.

FCA is offering a $3,000 bonus for UAW workers to ratify the contract within the coming days. The basis for the negotiations for the UAW, which was to close the hourly wage gap between Tier 1 and Tier 2 workers was largely met. In return, FCA said it would send car production to Mexico and move Ram 1500 production back to America.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

104 Comments on “UAW Includes Language in Newest Contract About Gender Identity...”


  • avatar
    carguy

    Hoping for some clicks based on a nearly off-topic hot-button social policy topic?

    You’re doing it all wrong. Go with a story on impact to car makers if Donald Trump’s trade policy with Mexico was enacted. Lead with a big picture of Donald Trump and a controversial headline (maybe “Saving American jobs and persecuting Mexican rapists?”) on the front page and you’ll get a thousand comments in 5 minutes. It works for every other media outlet (in particular the Washington Post).

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      Good point. An update to the boilerplate legal language to include the latest trend. Not uncommon. I’m sure whatever clauses regarding gender identity will get a heavy workout in the union auto factories – not – but it needs to be in there somewhere. Damn lawyers.

    • 0 avatar
      Aaron Cole

      Nope. One of the nation’s largest employee unions offering protection for gender identity before many states isn’t click bait. It’s just news.

  • avatar
    taxman100

    I try to avoid union made vehicles not because of their unionization, but because unions are just a tool of the left wing and their drive to mainstream socialism, and deviancy of every stripe.

    Your union dues are used to undermine your viewpoints or values under the guise of “fighting” for you at contract time. A total fabrication.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Wow, it’s like stepping out of a time machine straight into the 1910s!

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        The 1910s? I don’t know about that. You barely have to go as far back as the 00s for this “gender identity” crap to not have been invented yet.

        I can only wonder what heretofore unknown deviancy they’re going to mainstream next.

        • 0 avatar
          SC5door

          Uh what?

          Gender identity has been studied since the late 1900’s…..only until the 60’s is when it really started getting more attention. A gender identity clinic was opened at John Hopkins University in 1965.

          The only thing that seems to have not gone “mainstream” is people actually doing research before opening their mouths.

        • 0 avatar
          30-mile fetch

          “I can only wonder what heretofore unknown deviancy they’re going to mainstream next”

          Great question, who can we attack next? My vote is for a different direction, to unmainstream religion and recognize it for the “deviancy” that it is. Voluntary hallucinatory belief in magical sky beings to whom we are supposed to cede our freedom and will? Whooo boy, the only reason those folks are institutionalized is because they haven’t built an asylum that can contain the majority of society. Good news though, the percentage is slipping and since there is some vibrant discussion here about how the small % of non-heterosexuality in society is a means of illegitimizing it, the proportion of religious believers here may become small enough that we can apply the same logic.

          Okey dokey, I’ve followed the example of the usual suspects around here and contributed my share of bile and stubborn personal bias to attack the existence of a demographic I have no right to be offended by, so off to the Alfa Romeo 4C review that just landed…

    • 0 avatar

      I’m hoping your username is supposed to be ironic, because in the realm of forcibly taking money from my wage packet and spending it on whatever they want, the tax men make the unions look like rank amateurs.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      The same goes for a high percentage of your tax revenue.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      Your JDM Toyota was built by a union.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        I don’t care what horrors are forced on people in other countries. This one was supposed to offer an alternative to the oppression of nations with unrestrained governments.

  • avatar
    highdesertcat

    “Dude looks like a lady”

    • 0 avatar
      WhiskeyRiver

      This definitely ain’t yer daddy’s union any more.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        How about Unisex bathrooms? Imagine having some lady sidle up to a urinal to use it.

        • 0 avatar
          April S

          Uh, no.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Dan, a couple of months ago we were in Utrecht, Holland, attending a concert at the University, and I had to p real bad. So I ventured out to the nearest restroom.

          Unisex. Men and women going together, chatting away as if there was no distinction. Nobody paid anyone else any mind. I stood there a long time…

          My wife held it all the way back to the Esso rest stop on the way to Arnhem.

          Hey, that’s what I got for drinking too much Cassis.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            I went to school in Hilversum in 1984. There were already very feminine males hanging out in the locker rooms watching young men change. They’re so advanced in europe!

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            CJ, we ate an “Indonesian rijsttafel” at a restaurant located in a vertical shopping mall in Hilversum, during that same visit.

            So much food. So little time.

            Didn’t get to see much of Hilversum city, except Centrum, because it was drizzling that day, but the group of friends and family of my wife’s brother-in-law, were amazing people.

            I had been stationed in Germany for eight years and my wife and I and the kids often visited my best friend at Camp New Amsterdam from 1972 to 1980.

            Small world, and here we were 35 years later visiting again.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          highdesertcat,
          That actually happened to me in Malaysia at a fancy nightclub.

          There I was standing at the urinal and a young lady backed up to the urinal with her ass pointed at it alongside of me, pulled up her skirt and bent right over and pi$$ed.

          I was quite drunk, but I thought it was an amazing experience.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            I know what you mean about “amazing experience.” Eye-opening is more like it, if those eyes had not been closed in an alcohol-induced stupor.

            When I was a young two-striper in the USAF, I shot off my mouth once at a beach party about men being able to p farther than women, standing up.

            So, a group of Sergeants, one and all, male and female, dropped their drawers right there on the beach and let it fly, on queue.

            The men were beaten badly. Badly, I tell you. By several feet!

            Oh, and I have the pictures of a bunch of bare-assed necked NCOs on the beach to prove it.

            That was before I got married.

  • avatar
    mikey

    Seriously ??? … ” equal treatment of all employees ” should be just a given, in these enlightened times. A shame that it needs to be entrenched in the contractual language. I certainly can’t see it being much of an issue with the rank and file.

    The $ 3000 bonus ??? Now there’s something , that everybody will pay attention to.

    • 0 avatar
      April S

      You would think so but Transfolk experience high levels of harassment and discrimination in the workplace.

      :/

      • 0 avatar
        FromaBuick6

        Non-Transfolk experience high levels of harassment and discrimination in the workplace, too. Many of us have worked with and for some truly hideous people and don’t have the luxury of getting them fired due to differences in sexual preference. I’ve witnessed some of the garbage LGBTs have to put up with firsthand and I sympathize, but life sucks sometimes.

        That said, I have zero issue with the UAW adding this language to their latest contracts; I’m frankly surprised and disappointed that this isn’t already covered by anti-discrimination laws in all 50 states.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      Mikey, you are the voice of reason today.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    I stand in awe at the leverage gained by the LGBT contingent in American official and corporate life. Where the hell did this power come from when they’re ostensibly such a small percentage of our aggregate population?

    I don’t resent this, I’m just impressed.

    • 0 avatar
      Xeranar

      They’re a cross-sectional group. They exist at every class, race, sex, and ideological position/group. They’ve also had the groundwork laid since the end of the Civil Rights Movement. Arguably they’ve been visible from the early 1970’s onward, so we can really say it’s been sometime coming. Especially since Matthew Shepard was killed in 1998, the AIDS discussion was until just a few years prior to that considered a ‘gay problem.’ But we made huge leaps in the past 15 years because Gen X/Y came of age for the most part and displaced the socially conservative inter-war generation for the most part.

      But it’s definitely more so a cross-sectional thing, having white social elites who are gay does wonders for a movement more than anything else. I think the unions are simply making an effort to go towards a more progressive model ahead of the concerns that may crop up.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      3% of the population, 30% of the newsroom goes a long way.

      • 0 avatar
        RideHeight

        But who hired them for the newsroom? There must be a larger undercurrent of sympathy among straights than will ever be admitted to.

        Or LGBT commandos have been the most successful infiltrators since Japanese dentists in Honolulu.

        • 0 avatar
          Dan

          Whatever crossed wire it is that leads to homosexuality, at least among men, also seems to lead to performance arts ability. We all remember what the school drama club looked like. I didn’t even know what a homosexual was back then, or a pedophile either, an innocence which suited me fine and to which I’d like to return, but I knew those kids were different.

          Those “differents” are half of Hollywood and the other half are close enough to see them as people instead of weirdos. In a media driven, celebrity focused culture with the screens on 24/7 that’s all it takes. The media are them, the women and betas in academia love them, the dinosaurs like me don’t have a brightly flickering soapbox so we may as well not exist.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            I still don’t see any great harm to our society relative to all the damage done by robustly hetero pieces of sh*it out there.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            I agree with you that the public play is out of all proportion to the size or harm of the issue. Logically it doesn’t make much sense to get excited about it.

            But like the other great wedge issues it has a visceral impact on people.

            Tough to fight the feeling.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            “But like the other great wedge issues it has a visceral impact on people.”

            Yeah, looks like some sneaky German engineers just gave us another entertainment gem.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        Where exactly are you finding the 3%? Most conservative estimates put it at 5%, I generally agree with the 10% one. I can’t imagine a newsroom with such a disproportionate group outside of white males…

        But to answer RH: In 1990 the interwar generation was averaging 60. In 2000, averaging 70, in 2010, averaging 80. Until that time they were measurably in the population since the average life expectancy for them was in the mid-70s. Also until 2010 most of Gen Y was still under age. It’s the demographics march. It’s mainly why the Reagan voter is really gone from this planet while the Bush II voter is almost gone too.

      • 0 avatar
        VolandoBajo

        Can’t resist piping in…the ten per cent figure arose out of Kinsey and Masters and Johnson research. Kinsey both used a loose definition of homosexual, and used sampling techniques that introduced a bias towards the percentage of homosexuality in the American public, perhaps in part to reduce his own cognitive dissonance in having to deal with his own somewhat latent homosexuality/bisexuality at a time when that was more heavily stigmatized than it is now.

        I am unaware of any studies of truly random-sampled populations of sufficient size to be statistically valid, that show a ten per cent figure…perhaps in places like NYC, SF and other gay meccas, but for the US population as a whole, the promotion of the ten percent supposed homosexual population for the most part takes on the role of a self-serving myth, rather than a scientific fact.

        And no, I don’t hate homosexuals or fear them. I just believe that truth should, and does, trump (no pun intended) propaganda, however well-meaning or socially desirable the outcome of such propaganda is perceived to be.

        And if you think that there are true random samples that show that ten per cent is a good number ACROSS THE ENTIRE US POPULATION, not in a subculture or geographic region, I will gladly look at them and consider their evidence.

        But I have never seen that challenge met. Instead, all we get is “Kinsey studies show…” kind of pseudo-science.

        • 0 avatar
          April S

          I think the 10% figure is fairly accurate. While 3% of females and 3% of the males are 100% homosexual there are just as many that fall somewhere else on the Kinsey Scale (Bisexual). Even if we take the 3 percent figure that still equates to something like 7.5 million of the 250 million adults in the United States. Not exactly a trivial number.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            That’s a lot of Subarus!

          • 0 avatar
            VolandoBajo

            I think CJinSD’s 1.8% is probably closer to a general population average.

            And as I noted before, Kinsey had a subconscious or perhaps not so subconscious bias towards making bisexuality seem normal, due to his personal history.

            So for him, if an eight year old boy had a crush on the shortstop for his favorite baseball team, but never dated a man or had sexual contact with one, by Kinsey’s “sliding scale” that person was counted as being bisexual, as the attraction to the adult male was clearly, to him, a sign of homosexuality.

            Yet any rational person would call a person like that “straight”, not “bi”.

            If you set the bar at having experimented with homosexual experiences (and not just having feelings for a member of the same sex during pre-puberty), perhaps the 3% might be close. But again, most people would, including those people themselves, would not consider themselves to be bisexual, as their orientation, after a period of exploration, would have been exclusively heterosexual.

            Yet it is part of the so-called homosexual agenda, to convince the general public that homosexuality, active practicing homosexuality, runs at about one in ten adults, which is a different, and unsupported, conclusion.

            I am not in favor of depriving even 1.8% of the population of their right to pursuit of happiness, according to their own lights. But I am opposed to trying to brainwash the other 98.2% of children into thinking that homosexuality is so common that the average classroom of thirty students probably has three or four homosexuals in it, when (a) the odds are it is more like fifty-fifty whether there would be one in a class of thirty, and (b)for every young person who ends up in a homosexual lifestyle who thought or knew that they were homosexual while in their teens, there are probably ten times as many who didn’t expose themselves to homosexuality or bisexuality until they were adult and on their own.

            But the idea that some of your friends in your very own classroom are probably closet homosexuals is used to help curry a favorable attitude towards homosexuality in young people, even to the point of making some of them feel uncomfortable if they are not going along with it.

            In NJ for example, public schools were requiring children in elementary schools to crossdress in school, in order to condition them to acceptance. But what it did was instead condition many of them to be confused about why this was being done, or why they might be abnormal for feeling funny about doing so.

            I realize that not every homosexual or bisexual person is in favor of such programs, but it is the existence of that sort of thing, foisted off on essentially pre-sexual children, as part of a program to teach “acceptance” that creates much of the backlash against such tactics to try to gain acceptance.

            As a parent, I knew I had to have a talk, or series of talks, about such subjects with my child, when he was old enough and mature enough to understand them in context. But I was not in favor of having him come home from elementary school and telling me that he learned that there was no reason why he couldn’t go to school in a skirt if he felt that it would get him extra points on a school project, or something like that.

            Acceptance and freedom should be able to be brought about on their own merits, and not piggybacked on a program of conditioning young people, and that based on a false impression that probably several of their friends are closet homosexuals, when the numbers just don’t support it.

            So flame on, if you wish, but those are the facts…or to steal a phrase from Al Gore, they are an uncomfortable truth. And it is one of the reason that people pull their children out of public elementary and high schools, which only serves to weaken the delivery of the schools’ primary function, an unbiased education.

            Fighting bias with misinformation does not result in an unbiased population…it results in backlash. And that backlash is not entirely so-called homophobia…much of it is opposition to social manipulation with misinformation.

            And when you sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind, a fact our country is discovering the hard way.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          Kinsey looked at people who were institutionalized. The actual population is closer to 1.8% confused about what to do with their genitalia. Whenever the general population is polled, the number hovers around 1.8%. Unfortunately, we live in an age dictated by the .01%, so only a few of the misanthropes pulling the strings have to be LGBT to prioritize this in public policy over human rights. They probably appreciate the opportunity to erode Constitutional protections in favor of minority rights. It just brings us closer to the return of feudalism that much faster.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            Well, if I were 40 years younger with my present mindset I’d enthusiastically support any gender revolution that resulted in fewer babies, especially underclass ones.

            But old as I am and minimally as these changes will improve any society during my lifetime I’m going to take MEH for $400, Alex.

            However people may wish to rearrange or eradicate their own protuberances/concavities is fine by me.

  • avatar
    Xeranar

    It’s a welcome benefit and certainly earned since the empirical data is in and our current generation of LGBT teens and young adults suffer worse depression and dramatically increased suicide rates due to harassment. Even though they’re a small percentage of society (most peg it around 10% with a 2-3% margin of error) they have no control of their sexual and gender identity. I have a close friend who is transgendered (MtF) and has been lucky enough to work for large corporations where they have a progressive policy giving her access to the protections she needs.

    I wasn’t expecting a negative response though here, TTAC may be right-wing on some issues but it’s clear they’re fairly socially normative at worse. Especially since they’ve got a writer who falls into that group and they’ve not seemed to have had a problem with that.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Oh there were people who had issues with that.

      Stupid, ignorant, hypocritical, self righteous…

      But yes they had problems with a writer who wasn’t born in the gender they identify with.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        Eh, I guess I missed those moments? I tend to read the articles and only comment if I’m interested enough…I kind of got that her secret was open but not widely discussed? That’s what I get for being a 3rd tier member of the B&B. :P

        • 0 avatar

          That’s about right. I don’t bring up my gender identity unless the circumstances call for it. Once those circumstances fade into the ether, I can go back to writing for whomever will pay handsomely for my services, and it remains an open secret until the next time.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            I hate to say it but I’m a total snoop when it comes to these situations. Once I’m on to something I tend to seek confirmation so I googled you pretty thoroughly when you came on the block. I’ve never been one to discuss it here though as it wasn’t relevant or polite regardless of how you felt about it. Really, I just wondered when you had the MLP avatar and now the RWBY avatar (nice choice by the way).

            I’m sorry for dragging you into this discussion but it find became relevant enough to mention in passing. I did try to be polite to atleast leave you room if you wanted to address it either way. Sorry if I caused you distress.

          • 0 avatar

            No distress. I saw the headline while scrolling through TTAC on my way to writing a new feature article, had to see the carnage in the comments.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            I’m glad I caused no offense. On the whole I actually prefer your writing to some of the others who have handled the UAW in the past. But that’s neither here nor there. Glad you were able to come back it seems? :D

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          There were a couple of real idiots on this site who gave Cameron a lot of trouble. Fortunately there were only a couple of them, but it was still upsetting to see such ignorance combined with callousness.

      • 0 avatar

        Hello again!

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Xeranar – my 2 son’s have a friend who is gay. We clued in to this about 3 years ago. He would of been 11 at the time. We talked it over with my sons and I told them not to tell anyone until he chose to “come out”. My wife was worried about him “hitting” on our boys. Surprisingly it was my wife worried about it and not me. I talked to them about sexual preference and was okay with what ever they were. Admittedly, I was happy to hear both of them say they liked girls not boys. That was partially because I wouldn’t want then to carry that “social burden” and partially because I’ve just come to terms with accepting it myself.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        You know, I’ve had a few gay men hit on me in the past and I always felt flattered. Like I earned the praise that I’m attractive to some people. That being said, I hope to not have gay children because I want them to have that full life where they don’t need to be singled out or precluded from the majority any more than they will by choice.

        But I am extremely accepting of transpeople because while I like being the sex I am, I’m not wholly opposed to the idea of being the opposite sex, merely that I wouldn’t go through any effort to change. I’m not genderfluid, I’m just ambivalent on all levels. I’m glad you’re so progressive about your children’s behavior, Lou. I think people in this case are more frightened about the gender roles changing than anything extremely vengeful.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Xeranar – I used to be homophobic but the thing that turned me around was after my second son was born my wife asked me how I’d feel if one of my sons turned out to be gay. Her next question was, “would you love him any less if he was gay?”

          Finally, I ended up working with a fellow who was gay. He was in a long term stable relationship with a fellow for almost as long as I’ve been married.

          The story about my son’s friend illustrates the fact that for most people, it isn’t a choice. An 11 year old doesn’t have the world experience or even any “sexual” experience to chose that path.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            Exactly, people deep down are just that…people. Nothing is inherently evil about that or needs to be controlled and submerged.

  • avatar
    1998S90

    I really don’t understand this gender identity stuff. You either have a penis or a vagina. If you have a penis but wish to wear a dress, who am I to judge? But when start entering the women’s restroom because you feel like you’re a women or demand special treatment, that’s when I draw the line. I suppose a small percentage of the population has both organs but that tie can be broken by your XY or XX chromosomes. Am I off base here?

    • 0 avatar
      BuzzDog

      Really, you don’t understand this gender identity stuff? Gee, I kind of figured that out when you focused on what’s between people’s legs (versus their ears), and went straight for the restroom fear-mongering.

      I’m not sure why I’m wasting my time, or the bytes on this, but here goes. Despite living in a rather conservative community and working in a conservative industry, I’ve had the pleasure of knowing and working with people at all points along the gender spectrum (and you very well may have too, but you don’t necessarily know it). I’ve known a delightful young person who appears female, was born with a vagina, but is chromosonally XY. Likewise, I’ve met a very handsome person who appears male, was born with a penis, but is XX. Now, please tell me which restroom they should use, based on your seemingly logical rules?

      As a wise woman once told me, “You need to treat folks like human beings, not humans DOING.”

    • 0 avatar
      Charliej

      Yes, you are off base. You are going to draw a line? It is not up to you to draw a line. I guess that the religiosity of Americans makes them so damn prudish. What others do has no bearing on you. If others offend you, look the other way. But, you do not have the right to try and discriminate against others, no matter how you are offended.

    • 0 avatar
      April S

      Thing is if you have used a public restroom with more than one stall you have already dealt with transfolk. Because just like everyone else they want to pee and/or poo in peace and quiet. With the absolute minimum of drama

      P.S. There are plenty of people chromosome-wise who are XXY or have other Intersex conditions (such as Androgen insensitivity syndrome). Where do they go to do their bathroom business?

    • 0 avatar
      Compaq Deskpro

      That’s the way I see it. Gay people have the freedoms to act, dress, think, and f### like their opposite sex as openly as they want. It’s like they walk and talk like a duck, and its not enough. They want to actually be a duck. It doesn’t make a difference anyway, its a biological thing, you can change it as much as you can change your height.

      Hell, the only place where that distinction makes a difference in today’s society is in your example of the bathrooms, and I’m all for getting rid of that anyway.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        CD, we live in wondrous times in America.

        Look for the legalization of pedophilia and incest before January 20, 2017.

        Whole lotta “love” going on there too.

        Ahhhh, America. Land of the free and home of the brave…….

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        Overlooking the fact that you seem to have confused LGBT and trans (apparently there’s a lot of animosity between the two groups), you can change your height. Haven’t you seen Gattaca? Leg-lengthening is a real thing.

        HDC: Slippery slope fallacy.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Dr z, I agree.

          I will not be surprised when NAMBLA and NAWGLA start advertising freely on college campuses to attract the like-minded.

          Hey, on today’s college campuses they have contact points for sugar-daddies to meet coeds, don’t you know?

          Whole lotta love, Dr z, whole lotta love.

          “All you need is love. All you need is love. All you need is love, love. Love is all you need. Love is all you need. Love is all you need.”

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            Care to give any reputable sources that say when those things will happen?

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            Consenting adults are consenting?

            I get you’re arguing that because two consenting adults have a relationship you have a disdain for that we’re suddenly going to authorize children to have sexual relationships they can’t consent to in the name of liberalism. Once again, you miss the point. It’s about consenting adults making conscious decisions about their lives. But it seems your cavalry just isn’t coming..

          • 0 avatar
            brenschluss

            Being able to equate a consensual adult relationship with child rape because you somehow see them as equally “deviant” displays a complete lack of innate morality. Disgusting.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html?smid=fb-share

            You can’t get any more progressive than by destroying military careers of soldiers that defend boys against being raped by Muslims.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            CJ, I saw that article earlier this morning and fought the urge to post it in my comment. I’m glad you did.

            My youngest son was stationed in Afghanistan and was aware that this was happening, along with the raping of young girls and women. No US troops involved. A technique more effective than waterboarding.

            Even back in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, prior to his retirement from the US Army, the US forces were instructed to leave well enough alone. It was tough for someone with what used to be widely-accepted American values of decency.

            This happens in Africa all the time but the US is not involved in Africa, nor is the US involved in Iraq or Afghanistan any longer.

            O’b*m*’s War (OW!) is now more one-dimensional, as in air-to-ground.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            Ok, CJ, being the resident right-wing kook gets you some leeway but at some point you need to be told to stick a sock in it. Your story you posted is tragic and arguably an issue of why we need to remember human rights are universal since these boys are being raped against their will with coercion.

            But if you really want to equate a liberal point of view with child rape you’ve lost any semblance of honesty and valor. You’re just a degenerate who lives to taunt and tease with no real value as a person or an intellectual. I’ve learned to brush off most of your insane views but somebody just needs to point out you’re an irrational and undeserving poster at this point.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            HDC-

            Do you really think our military isn’t involved in Africa? I served for almost 4 years and saw combat, but not in Iraq or inside the country of Afghanistan.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            bbal, you and I know that the US is involved in other conflicts, but the official policy is Clintonesque: deny, deny, deny.

            That’s the official guidance provided for OW!

            All I can say is, I’m glad none of my kin is involved in this covert and clandestine war that O has embarked on with his war.

            My 25-yo grand daughter’s husband is an F-16 Instructor Pilot, heavily involved in training pilots (of several nations) in air-to-ground tactics.

            This is why the insertion of Russia’s Air Force in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon is such a concern for the US aviators because of the exit routes pilots used to fly after splashing their targets.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            I’m with CJ, there’s not a dime’s difference between the two in my book either.

            Sex is either between a man and a woman as biology and our creator intended or it’s not. That distinction has been such a cornerstone of Christian civilization as to be taken for granted for centuries. If reasoning as sound as YOLO and calling the opposition bigots can tear that down, and in less than one generation it did, how long do you think your brand new distinction between adults and children is going to last? Between adults and relatives? Between adults and animals?

            We live in interesting times. I would prefer if they did not get any more interesting.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            Ah yes, the ‘man and his lawnmower’ argument. Newsflash, homosexuality was common and accepted in various christian societies until a few hundred years ago. It just wasn’t allowed equivalent rights. More than a few historical leaders and church leaders have been homosexuals. The argument that somehow consenting adults is going to get turned into inanimate objects or child abuse is silly.

            Do you really think that or are you just trying to pretend there is some equivalence? I honestly have to question that since homosexuals have existed since the beginning of time and we know with some certainty it is a biological issue so if you’re some kind of strict creationist, why would god make the mentally ill? It’s all so silly at it’s core and this argument that somehow it’s all going to be made legal because gay people can marry now (instead of just have unofficial relationships) that we’ll be marrying lawnmowers soon shows the ignorance in the crowd.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            You are correct. It took awhile to get my Combat Infantry Badge because many of the conflicts I “assisted” with weren’t qualifying conflicts.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            New Scramble for Africa.

            http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/empire/newscrambleforafrica/2014/07/new-scramble-africa-2014723203324932466.html

            Btw in general, whats happening with the child rape is abhorrent no matter the ideology. The administration is very good at sticking its nose where it does not belong and fundamentally changing everything, I’d like to see it say something constructive on this matter instead of ignoring it.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Dan, see my earlier comment. We live in wondrous times in America.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Why must people create a slippery slope that doesn’t exist?

          • 0 avatar
            brenschluss

            “You can’t get any more progressive than by destroying military careers of soldiers that defend boys against being raped by Muslims.”

            What a bizarre non-sequitur response. What you linked has nothing to do with “progressive” or “liberal” anything, if you think the officers who directly authorized this behavior were bleeding hearts, or it wouldn’t have happened under a conservative president, you’re deluded. It’s universally evil behavior which is very unfortunately being accepted in the midst of an impossibly bad situation with no potential positive outcome.

            “Deviations” from normality are not created equal: Some adults want to have sex with other adults in costumes or while covered in food; neither are a problem as long as I’m not involved. Other people want to have sex with people who can’t or don’t consent; that’s a big problem indeed.

            None of this has anything to do with being on one team or tribe versus another, it’s about basic human decency and tangible effects. Again, if you equate two people who cannot breed wanting to be romantic with the destruction of an individual through what is effectively torture, I do not believe you have an an internal morality. You may serve well your family and others in your direct circle, but you’re still a psychopath who must be told right from wrong, rather than being able to feel this innately.

            In other words, HDC, CJ, were either of you born in Afghanistan, I have to believe you would absolutely be willing to have sex slaves, or tell your children to behead people on YouTube, because it would be what you’ve seen and experienced throughout your life, and learned to be just and righteous, and of course what your elders have taught you must be true.

            Just as you’re able to find plenty of people from these cultures who are reasonable enough to flee such circumstances, there are plenty who swallow what they’re told and know in their heart it’s the only truth. You two are very open about being the latter.

            EDIT: Dan too, imagine how vociferously you’d be supporting the creation of a worldwide caliphate were you raised in a Muslim society!

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            28-Cars-Later, my understanding is that the policy of the current administration re: interference is only in support of the legacy it is trying to create.

            Like my son, many dedicated Regimental senior officers are voluntarily retiring at first opportunity.

            DA told my son that he would be promoted to O-6 if he would stay for another three years.

            My son took O-5 at 22 years and went to work as a Senior Supervisor Agent for the Border Patrol at the GS-12 level, instead.

            Lotta good men (and women) leaving the US armed forces, just doin’ time until they’re eligible for retirement.

            Retired On Active Duty (ROAD).

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Dan, it’s so awesome that you brought up the subject of Christianity and “our” creator as the proper model of sexual conduct.

            May I refer you to the story of Lot and his daughters? Oh, it’s such a read. He offers up his own daughters for rape to save the grown men in his company such a fate, and later engages in incest with them to keep his genetic line going because someone had the omnipotent foresight to turn his wife into a pillar of salt. And if that’s too controversial, let’s think 0.5 seconds about how 6 billion people sprung from Adam and Eve.

            Your concern about losing the distinction “between adults and relatives”? Yeah, apparently we’ve been there. Don’t worry about it, the big guy has you covered.

            This wasn’t long after your god supposedly wiped out all of humanity for misbehavior, so 1) apparently times were even MORE interesting in Genesis than they are now, and 2) anyone who cherry picks Christian doctrine and scripture to grandstand about sexual morality between legally consenting adults gets zero credibility in my book.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            No I don’t think it’s going to stop there, because it already didn’t stop there. Look at what else happened in that same historical blink of an eye that turned gay OK.

            The heterosexual hookup culture exploded at the same time. The divorce rate doubled. The marriage rate halved. The illegitimacy rate quadrupled. The internet is a third pornography.

            I don’t blame homosexuals. I don’t particularly dislike homosexuals. I certainly don’t envy them. But I don’t see a lot of good in this revolution and the homosexuality push is the most assertive public face of it.

          • 0 avatar
            brenschluss

            Dan, HDC, CJ, I’m honestly curious now, who do you think you’d be if you were born in rural Afghanistan, 1955?

            Do you think you would sense in your gut that something is wrong, and eventually question the teachings of those who raised you? Would you migrate to a western country to escape what we consider here to be massive crimes against humanity?

            Or would you have faith in what you learned to be true, and work to spread this truth if this was the path you knew would lead to your glorious afterlife?

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            Just imagine how many effing VW posts there’d be if we didn’t have homos and benders to distract us.

            Thanks, homos and benders!

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            “Dan, HDC, CJ, I’m honestly curious now, who do you think you’d be if you were born in rural Afghanistan, 1955?”

            I’d be thirty years dead in all likelihood.

            But failing that, I wouldn’t be any happier to throw away my father’s heritage there than I am here.

            Buried bombs and veiled ladies it’d be. What an awful thought that is.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            Dan, as a conservative Lutheran I have to say: You’re committing the slippery slope fallacy once again. Please stop. You’re just making Christianity look bad. “The homosexuals” are not out to destroy us. There’s really no way to measure what percentage of the Internet is porn, but’s it’s certainly not 1/3rd. What the Bible has to say shouldn’t have any bearing in a secular society. Jesus Himself instituted the seperation between church and state. And no, not all of the Founding Fathers were Christian, either.

          • 0 avatar
            brenschluss

            “Buried bombs and veiled ladies it’d be. What an awful thought that is.”

            Dan, this is a good honest answer, which I appreciate.

            Rural Afghanistan, 1955 was stretching a bit, I’ll admit. Let’s say you’re between 25-50 living in Riyadh today, do you look around you and feel a knot in your stomach, and dream of living anywhere else, or do you go to watch the beheading/crucifixion and throw stones because he insulted Islam?

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I do find it repugnant to see those who proclaim to be Cristian but seem to only quote the “Old Testament” when it comes to sexuality and/or orientation.
            Christian or believing in Christianity means believing in Jesus Christ. I don’t recall him saying anything against gays. The only time he really got angry/violent was when he chased the money lenders out of the temple. He also commented that a rich man stands about as much chance getting into heaven as a camel through the eye of a needle.

            Strangely odd that those right wing Christians never mention that when defending capitalism.

            I get sick and tired of the self-titled “moral majority”, the self titled “religious right” misusing and abusing Christ’s teachings.

            If you don’t want to study Christ and prefer to quote the old Testament then you might as well go out and get your foreskin trimmed and move to Israel.

            brenschluss did a very good job of pointing out that blind adherence to a belief exists on the Muslim right and the Christian right.

            How are atrocities committed under a Muslim banner any worse than those perpetrated under a Christian banner?

            Citing rape as an outcome of homosexuality is preposterous. Rape is an assault upon a victim. It has no bearing on sexual orientation.

            Human beings have an intrinsic dignity that needs to be protected. That is irrelevant of race, creed, religion or sexual orientation. Too many place extrinsic conditions on human dignity. Sexuality for most isn’t extrinsic.

            I posted this in response to a different comment which applies to this tread:

            “common sense” just gets people into trouble. It was once common to use slaves, wipe out aboriginal cultures, stone to death adulteresses, and to persecute gays.

            What is “common” among a tribe, group, population, country etc. has very little to do with what is fair, just, and morally right. Case in point, those in ISIL think it is “common sense” to execute heretics, and any religion that is not theirs.”

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      “You either have a penis or a vagina.”

      Not necessarily. Both organs and chromosomes come in lots of different combos. Not everyone is XX or XY (people may have extra, missing, or different chromosomes), and not everyone who is one of those combinations develops in the most common way for those chromosomes.

  • avatar
    50merc

    Everybody is missing the real problem: just the contract CHANGES ran more than 400 pages. Is there nothing in the auto industry that can be decided by good will and common sense? That is, where the UAW is in control?

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      Once businesses go beyond a certain size, “good will and common sense” go out the window. You don’t reach the corner office at a multi-billion-dollar company by being a good person; you just won’t be competitive. One thing that’s very good about unions is that they, unlike a single worker, have the institutional muscle to go toe-to-toe with the battalion of lawyers and HR professionals that very large employers employ to figure out ever more ways to extract more work from workers and pay them less for doing it.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        dal20402 – you raise a valid point.

        We have seen VW cheat emissions, Ford cheat MPG and safety ratings, GM bury an unsafe ignition switch, Toyota waffle on unintended acceleration, FCA on sluggish recalls and on and on and on.

        Companies, especially large ones base decisions upon what they are legally allowed to do and based upon the lowest common denominator that makes them money. They push the envelop and frequently cross the line.

        Large Unions in some cases do fall into similar behaviours exhibited by large companies. Both follow what lawyers and other advisor’s tell them what they can get away with legally. Morality does not enter the picture as that has little to do with what is determined to be legal.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Wow, do you guys really need a union to enact basic rights??

    Why do you pay taxes?? Why do you pay another tax to the union to do what should be commonsense.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Big Al from Oz – “common sense” just gets people into trouble. It was once common to use slaves, wipe out aboriginal cultures, stone to death adulteresses,and to persecute gays.

      What is “common” among a tribe, group, population, country etc. has very little to do with what is fair, just, and morally right. Case in point, those in ISIL think it is “common sense” to execute heretics, and any religion that is not theirs.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      I am curious as to what rights the labor (or in this case, labour) laws of Australia guarantee for its citizens. I don’t want to sound overly confrontational here. I am genuinely interested in the laws of other countries. Thanks!

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Drzhivago138,
        The info below should help. We have a much more liberal society. This liberalism doesn’t translate into “left wing” ideals, as some would like to make out. The US is a much more socialist society, with more government intervention in all aspect of life, industry, welfare, etc.

        I do travel to the US very often for long periods of time as I’m an American. What I have noticed is the US is very “old fashion” and people are just to politically correct.

        We complain about the minorities controlling public opinions and lobby power. At the end of the day we don’t have a greater separation of religion and politics.

        The American view on freedom does differ from others. I do feel many Americans consider it their right to do what they want, even if it has an adverse affect on others. Just being polite and politically correct doesn’t give you those rights to offend and affect others.

        Do we really have freedom when our freedom removes others’ freedom?

        ……………………………………………………………………

        We can help you if you have been:
        ◾refused a job
        ◾dismissed from a job
        ◾refused a promotion, transfer or other benefit associated with employment
        ◾given unfair terms or conditions of employment
        ◾refused training opportunities
        ◾refused flexible work arrangements
        ◾harassed or bullied

        and you believe this has happened because of your:
        ◾sex (this includes pregnancy, marital status or relationship (including same-sex de facto couples) status, breastfeeding, family responsibilities, sexual harassment, gender identity, intersex status and sexual orientation)
        ◾disability (this includes intellectual, sensory and psychiatric disabilities; diseases or illnesses; medical conditions; work related injuries; past, present and future disabilities; and association with a person with a disability)
        ◾race (this includes colour, descent, national or ethnic origin and immigrant status)
        ◾age (this includes young people and older people)
        ◾sexual preference
        ◾religion
        ◾criminal record
        ◾trade union activity
        ◾political opinion

        The Commission can also help if you have been sexually harassed at work.

        Who can complain to the Australian Human Rights Commission?

        We cover all types of workers including if you are:
        •an apprentice or trainee
        •on probation
        •a part-time or full-time worker
        •a casual or permanent worker
        •a labour hire worker
        •a contract worker
        •working on commission
        •on a work visa.

        We cover all types of employers, no matter how big or small, including:
        ◾the Commonwealth Government
        ◾the State Government (except for sex discrimination)
        ◾private companies
        ◾small businesses
        ◾charities
        ◾partnerships
        ◾faith based organisations

        We also cover recruitment and employment agencies.

        https://www.humanrights.gov.au/work-out-your-rights-info-employees

  • avatar
    mfgreen40

    Volandobajo—- excellent — well said

    • 0 avatar
      VolandoBajo

      Thanx, mfgreen40. I just try to call them like I see them. That, and I try to be fact driven rather than agenda driven. Sometimes gets me in trouble though, especially with those who like to revert to name-calling whenever they disagree with your position. But I guess that comes with the territory when one dares to offer opinions.

      Not all of those who think that they are part of the B&B actually are, unfortunately. But those who are make it worth putting up with non sequiturs and ad hominem attacks from the few.

      And part of the irony is that Cameron Aubernon is one of my favorite writers on TTAC, at the top tier occupied only by Jack Baruth and a couple of others, whom I won’t name, so as not to offend some who are above average (and whom I respect also) but whom I don’t consider to be at the highest level.

      TTAC is somewhat unique in the sense that the ratio of intelligent comment and truly humorous comment to dreck is fairly high when compared to the Net and to the world as a whole.

      There are several among the staff writers and among the B&B whom I wish I was able to know and interact with in real life. But since geographics preclude that, being able to know and interact with them here is the next best thing.

      I just read an article about a one hundred year old man who still actively participates in track and field events, and who holds several age group world records. Kind of inspiring to me, but it also means that although I have already earned old geezer status in life, I may still be around for a while longer to do as was once said was the mission of good journalists, to comfort the afflicted and to afflict the comfortable.

      Beats sitting around and doing nothing, or sitting around reading things like TTAC and just grumbling to myself. My life is enriched by the interactions with, and input of, some of the B&B. And apparently others feel the same way, which is likely the energy source for this community being as remarkably unique as it is.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        VolandoBajo – great post. This is a great site with above average intelligence. There are many whom I have great respect for and you are one of them.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        Sorry, I wanted to reply to you earlier because your well-spoken rant is still wrong on a few issues but a breathe of fresh air by comparison to some others.

        I had two things to address: First off it’s 3.8% according to Gallup, noting that homosexuality is still a very hidden subject for many Americans regardless of the gains 10% isn’t really that crazy a number, assuming even that the full-total is only 50% over the admitted number (essentially a 1/3rd are still hidden) that would peg them at 5.7% as strict only-homosexual. Meaning that 4.3% could be strongly leaning towards Bi/Homosexual partnering. So 2% is completely incorrect and Gallup is pretty trustworthy. Though Americans wildly overestimate at 1-in-4.

        Second, I searched high and low on El Goog for this instance of crossdressing in New Jersey and it appears to have had zero to do with the trans community and instead was based around women’s fashion and feminism. Hell, I even cited fox news on this crazy topic…But more to the point, social engineering is effective and has been done since the beginning of time. It’s just now that you’re too old to be manipulated so easily you’re uneasy about others manipulating children away from your preferences. I grew up in a generation that was taught how racism was truly awful, for most of the older B&B here it was barely touched on. My generation is the least racist generation in America for that reason alone. I agree that we need to be careful how we wield that power and for what use but I teach college on US Government, you’re not going to stop me from my appointed goals, to put it bluntly. :)

        http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/13/nj-school-cancels-cross-dressing-fashion-complaints/

        http://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx

        • 0 avatar
          VolandoBajo

          @Xeranar Thank you for your research on the subjects I brought up.

          As to percentages, I doubt that we are able to arrive at a definitive percentage…at best, we have conflicting methodologies, some of whose conclusions can be discounted as being biased, and others that differ, but which cannot be discerned as being the correct one, when others seemingly as valid arrive at different numbers.

          Still, it is/was good to have some discussion about the possible range of percentages, even if we could not arrive at a final agreement. Even informed differences are better than blind acceptance of what are probably biased and widely misunderstood percentages.

          And as you and others point out, that doesn’t change the fact that whatever the percentage, those who fall within still face difficulties, and deserve inherent rights, even if the majority disagrees with their path. That is part of the American way…that there be no “tyranny of the majority” at the expense of minority rights.

          But I especially appreciate your expanding on the crossdressing experiment. Your information is more complete than mine was. Mine was based on the fact that my wife knows and is friends with a woman who was a school nurse when this was going on, and who was disturbed by the amount of emotional turmoil it was causing to young children, some of them less than ten years old.

          It seemed as if it was part of a broader agenda, and part of one designed to force acceptance of cross-dressing, but the article you cited clearly shows that while that may have been someone’s hidden agenda, it was couched in different terms, and was much narrower in its application than I had believed. I am relieved both that calmer heads prevailed, and that there was not a concerted effort to push a broad social agenda that was behind this.

          While my beliefs about the supposed inevitability of homosexuality do not match those of many people, still I have known and had friends, some of them close friends, from among the homosexual community.

          One in particular was a close friend of my ex-wife’s best female friend, and there was many an evening we would all hang out and cook a special weekend meal, and sit around and watch a movie together, or just engage in good conversation on a variety of subjects.

          Sadly, his penchant for gay relationships with strangers overlapped with his difficulties with alcohol as a result of his conflicted feelings, and it led to his being beaten to death in a back alley near a Wall Street bar on weekend evening.

          A sad and premature end to the life of a very talented and interesting individual.

          And I would hope that my son was not gay, but primarily because it would be an additional heavy burden to carry in his life, but I would not add to it by rejecting him. He is still the same talented, active and interesting individual, whether he marries and perhaps has children, remains a bachelor, or ends up choosing the gay lifestyle.

          I do believe that a percentage of gay people end up in that life style as a result of conditioning, rather than destiny, but that doesn’t change the fact that they have the right to choose their path.

          I do think that others should have the right to try to help others who may want to try to leave that lifestyle, and they should be entitled to their free speech rights to do so, but that does not mean that I feel that homosexuality should be penalized or stigmatized in any way. It is a hard enough lifestyle as it is.

          I only feel that other people should also be free to dissent from the acceptance of such a lifestyle, as long as they do not seek to harm or limit the rights of such people. But I also don’t feel that people who as a matter of conscience are opposed to supporting homosexuality should be compelled by force of law to participate in activities endorsing such a lifestyle.

          Our country, and its citizens, should be openminded enough to be able to accommodate both those in the homosexual lifestyle, and those who chose to oppose it on principle, provided forceful coercion is not involved.

          But of course, this is modern America, and the tendency is to believe that either you are with us or against us. On both sides…I know…I am pressured by friends who are opposed to homosexuality in principle to stand against it on all fronts, and am pressured by homosexuals I know or encounter to either push for its acceptance, or be considered an enemy of their freedom.

          Neither is true, but too many people can’t grasp the simple concepts behind that political and social stance of tolerance for all non-violent, non-coercive viewpoints across the spectrum.

          It is always good, however, to have clarifying acts added to skeletal information, even if it is my skeletal information that is being fleshed out.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            I think whether it’s 5 or 10% is really irrelevant as well, any visible minority like that deserves respect and a place at the table like the rest of us. The trans community really is tiny, a fraction of a percent, but obviously there shouldn’t be an acceptance of violence against them.

            As for what else you wrote, I think we can stop calling it a ‘lifestyle’ since like being black or having a third nipple it isn’t a choice. In fact, I think that’s the problem with your worldview/argument here. People don’t go out and decide ‘you know what? I want to be ostracized by people I love because I think same-sex relationships are just fun!’ If your friends hate bowling and you love to bowl you stop bowling. If you’re gay and your family hates you for it, you don’t stop being gay. That’s the fundamental difference.

            I also feel like this false dichotomy of anti-homosexual freedoms and pro-homosexual freedoms is unfair. The problem with the anti-crowd is that they’re fundamentally unaffected by the acceptance under legal standards. Nobody is forcing anybody to get a SSM. The fear of changing social mores is complex and always challenging but that’s up to society to decide and not the government to prohibit when a clear minority needs to be given equal rights. You’re welcome to think what you want about the LGBT community but you don’t have a privilege to seek government recourse on their rights which is really all anybody on the pro-side is asking.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • markf: In most states the ticket isn’t is not valid unless issued by a sworn peace officer. When I lived in...
  • SCE to AUX: @Lie2me: Only one party wants to fix the cities. The Dems lifeblood is the cycle of dependency between...
  • Crosley: The Tony Stark character was created in the 1960’s comics, so definitely not inspired by Elon Musk.
  • Corey Lewis: A guy on Twitter finds and posts these sorts of things for fun.
  • conundrum: Old Musk knows how to push those old American buttons. Yes sir. All that matters is the zeo to 60 time....

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber