Not My Blogpost

(first a private note: dianegirl44 ~ please drop me a note before I publish yesterday's comment.  And anyone else who'd like to write me, feel free ~ youCanCallMeMeg@gmail.com )

I'm reaching into my comments and mailbox to pull some relevant links for today's post.

First, this important one.  This was in a comment by Sonora Sage, in response to my post about perceived gender identity.

She linked to this post by a friend of hers, and wrote:

 The "perceived" closes the loophole that would allow someone to discriminate against a straight, cis gender woman because they think she's too butch, and is probably a lesbian. It prevents them later saying "Oh, she's not actually a lesbian, so the policy doesn't apply". There have been several cases that illustrate this. For more interesting reading, try my friend Abby's scholarly article: [link is above]

In my mind, it boils down to the fact that anti-discrimination policies are about the behavior of the person doing the discriminating - which is based on how they perceive the subject of their discrimination. Not about who the subject is (or how they identify.)

I added a comment to Abby's blog.  She followed-up and helped me flesh out a personal conundrum.  Sort of.  I won't repost my comment here; read Abby's post and look for my 29 June comment.

The article is excellent.  I wish I could explain legal issues as well as she does!

On another topic, I received e-mails on the same day from two different readers.  Both relate to flying pretty, in a manner.  One says "go for it", the other says "hold on a minute."

One is about a man flying wearing women's underwear (and little else).

The other is about how the flight crew has too much power and can reject you based on your appearance.  If Meg was flying pretty and that happened, three things would follow: a lot of publicity, a lawsuit, and the need to come out would be moot.

---