Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by moonshadow »

pelmut wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:43 pm
STEVIE wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 5:35 am I know that if there was a dispute that my only legal protection would only be applicable if I was transgendered. That is the law as it stands here and now.
I don't know if the law in Scotland differs on this point, but the law in England would certainly protect you.  There are very few exceptions to the rule that an employer can impose clothing rules which only apply to one sex; in ordinary employment, men and women are equally entited to wear skirts or trousers as long as they comply with the company's dress code and safety rules.  Transgender people don't get any special treatment in this respect.
In the U.S., while it's understood that terminating or otherwise discriminating against someone for their gender identity is now considered illegal (BOSTOCK v. CLAYTON COUNTY GEORGIA). It is also widely understood that most employment situations in the U.S. are "employment at will", which means the employee or the employer can terminate the employment for any reason with or without cause provided it doesn't violate any other form or federal, state, or local law.

So this means that while technically a man probably can't get fired just for wearing a skirt, he could get fired for no reason at all. So is it moot?

Yes. Yes it is.

But thankfully, a growing number of U.S. employers are not firing people under these circumstances, why? Because it's bad business. Most Americans I believe support people's right to be themselves, at least in "off the clock" situations, and as long as you're not popping off, saying mean spiriting things everywhere you go, or in other words, if you're generally just minding your own business, it seems most American's are fine just to leave you alone, and wouldn't condone you being harassed.

It's somewhat surprising, but this is one area where capitalism has the *potential* to shine, provided most of the populous agrees that men have the right to wear skirts, and transgender women have the right to exist, and thankfully, most people seem to agree with this. The fact is, many trans-women and skirt wearing men were not being fired long before this ruling was handed down. This ruling just codified it across the board. Why? Again, because many employers didn't want the bad press, and that could hurt stock prices, which means less money. The system... clunky and imperfect as it can be sometimes, does seem to work...
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by crfriend »

moonshadow wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:42 pmCarl, I understand the point you're trying to make, but I think you're picking at this to the point where it's starting to bleed.
"Tilting at windmills".
We're a world of all types of people, women in pants, men in skirts, transgender people, nonbinary, gender-fluid, etc, we all share in the same bandwidth, that being the freedom to decide our own destiny and direct our lives accordingly.
Not to put too sharp a point on it, but who did you leave out in that statement? [1]
It almost sounds as though you're arguing against the very notion of being transgender. That doesn't sound like you as I've always felt you to be generally tolerant. So I'm just assuming your issue is with perhaps trans* articles being posted on a "men in skirts" website?
Not in the slightest, and if anybody has taken that otherwise they are sadly mistaken.
Yes, I agree, it would be nice if people, including employers would respect men's right to express themselves however they wish, or at least afford us the same liberty that women and females enjoy, but we have to play the cards we're dealt, and unfortunately the former just isn't the world we live in right now, and I don't know if that's going to change any time soon....
Clearly it is not going to change, at least not under current conditions.
[...] OR IS IT? In the last few weeks I've just pushed the envelope a little further with regards to certain family and even my employer. It's been a week now, and nobody is asking me what my "preferred pronouns are".
That's because they know you. My point is that the continual conflation by the press of unrelated matters to what one adorns himself with only steers the ignorant, and right now the ignorant are in the vast majority.


[1] Omitted from the list are gender-normative heterosexual men and women. Women currently enjoy a decent choice in what they wear and nobody makes undue assumptions about them; not so men. Are gender-normative heterosexual men going to be eternally excluded from the club of the privileged?
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: North Lincolnshire, UK

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by Stu »

...and where their reproductive function is irrelevant there is no need to define them.
If we are defining sex (male v female) then it is relevant and that would apply for situations like changing facilities, toilets, competitive sports etc.
They may not be.  Many are inhibited by social pressure, practicalities or just fear of the unknown from taking any of these steps.  They know they are trans but can't or won't do anything about it.
I would define "trans" as someone who is attempting to live as the opposite sex. If they are not, then they may be gender dysphoric, but they are not "trans". Morphologically, "trans" means change or movement.
Male and female are sex, not gender.  It is an issue for them because they are forced to adopt conventions that do not apply to them, including giving false information on official documents that will not allow them to tell the truth.  Society is insisting they are in categories that suit us but do not apply to them - and they are now starting to tell us so.
I was saying that people who call themselves "gender fluid" or "non-binary" are still either male or female in terms of their sex. That's unarguable. How they regard themselves or how they choose to present themselves to the world is not subject to that reality. They don't get to create new categories just to suit their own disposition. I don't see why we need such categories or why we should be compelled to accept them.
Exactly   ...and those taboos have been generated by a binary system which is supported by irrelevant definitions and is enforced by people who cannot see that an over-simplified system like that is not a good basis for interfering in the lives of others.
Biological sex is binary: there is male and female, as any cattle farmer will tell you. Beyond that, there may be people who, for whatever reason, see themselves as somewhere in between. OK - let them get on with it. I won't interfere with their lives if they don't interfere with mine (like insisting I change the grammar of my language). Otherwise, I won't regard it as an issue. They are just people and they are free to dress as they like and live their lives as they see fit.
Last edited by Uncle Al on Sat Jun 26, 2021 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed quoting format
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2649
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
Location: Southeast Michigan

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by Coder »

Heh, well, whoops. Sorry for posting the article! My real intent was just to call light to some legal action that may bring some positive change to fashion freedom. I realize the suit is over trans issues, but with it will come benefits, I think at least.
crfriend wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:43 pm [1] Omitted from the list are gender-normative heterosexual men and women. Women currently enjoy a decent choice in what they wear and nobody makes undue assumptions about them; not so men. Are gender-normative heterosexual men going to be eternally excluded from the club of the privileged?
Maybe that needs to change then? I guess it isn't a story if a regular guy - being a guy - wears a skirt or wants to "fight" an employer for discrimination. But look at Mark - he's had quite a bit of positive press, and while they may put their spin on it generally they don't focus on the cause célèbre at the moment. And frankly, I can't recall a time when a male employee was fired or sued for being fired due to this type of discrimination.
moonshadow wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:42 pm To conclude, I understand we all have things that set us off, my pet-peeve is skirt wearing men who cut their damned heads off or otherwise shield it on photos. In my view it makes skirt wearing men look "pervy" as though this is some fetish that we should be ashamed of. It's a notion that I personally feel sends a far worse signal that anything coming out of the trans-community. And side note: even most trans-women and other non-binary folk don't hide their faces in photographs. But it what it is, and despite my general annoyance at this, I must respect their right to pose for photographs as they wish. I try not to pop off every time I see one, and in fact, I normally just blow right past the photo and make no remark at all.... sometimes.
For me - it's just I abhor social media, and once a photo is on the internet it is public. I don't want someone reusing my photos on Instagram, Facebook, etc... At least without the head it means someone can't masquerade as me by making an insta account, or so forth. I am just generally distrusting of others. I also do *not* repeat *do not* like taking photos of myself. My main purpose has been to get feedback before venturing out into the public eye, and I have no other means. I wouldn't be taking photos and posting if I had some confidence in my abilities to pick out things that work together. I'm not trying to show off my cool skirt, or other such stuff.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by crfriend »

Coder wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 3:43 pm Heh, well, whoops. Sorry for posting the article!
You did precisely nothing wrong, and everything you did had to do with good intentions. The onus is not on you, but rather the editorial staffs of the various media outlets. By repeatedly reinforcing the stereotype of a guy who has the guts to buck style conventions as being "less than a man" there will be no traction is this venture whatsoever.
Maybe that [inequality] needs to change then? I guess it isn't a story if a regular guy - being a guy - wears a skirt or wants to "fight" an employer for discrimination. But look at Mark - he's had quite a bit of positive press, and while they may put their spin on it generally they don't focus on the cause célèbre at the moment. And frankly, I can't recall a time when a male employee was fired or sued for being fired due to this type of discrimination.
Mark is well up in the ranks where he works, and is well known -- and it's nice to see him portrayed that way, married, with kids, a successful career, pretty much the same things that most guys want. But that portrayal is nowhere near common enough to start eroding the pernicious stereotype.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1923
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by pelmut »

Stu wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 3:32 pm Biological sex is binary: there is male and female, as any cattle farmer will tell you.
You do cattle farmers a disservice, they understand sex a lot better than that. Perhaps the one you met was trying to keep things simple for the benefit of a member of the public.  

During the nearly 30 years I was employed designing and developing research equipment for a veterinary establishment I had to work with farmers, breeders, doctors, veterinary surgeons, specialist veterinary geneticists and researchers of all kinds, I never heard any of them claim that biological sex was binary.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.
rode_kater
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:46 pm

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by rode_kater »

moonshadow wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:42 pm To conclude, I understand we all have things that set us off, my pet-peeve is skirt wearing men who cut their damned heads off or otherwise shield it on photos. In my view it makes skirt wearing men look "pervy" as though this is some fetish that we should be ashamed of.
I don't post identifiable photos of myself anywhere on the internet. It's not skirt related at all. Now I see how that can be seen as making it look fetish. But the question is do I want to make an exception for this site?

As to the topic at hand, the freedom to wear whatever you like has been part of the constitution here since forever so we've never had the these discussions you see here. It's very interesting.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by moonshadow »

crfriend wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:43 pm
[...] OR IS IT? In the last few weeks I've just pushed the envelope a little further with regards to certain family and even my employer. It's been a week now, and nobody is asking me what my "preferred pronouns are".
That's because they know you. My point is that the continual conflation by the press of unrelated matters to what one adorns himself with only steers the ignorant, and right now the ignorant are in the vast majority.
But it's not the press. The press is simply reporting on the situation as it's presented to them. If there is a man in a skirt who identified as a man in a skirt, then in most cases, it seems that is how the press reports it, and we have plenty of articles here to illustrate this. If the subject person in the article is identifying under some type of trans, non-binary, fluid/queer label, then the press simply reports it thusly.

As I've stated in other threads, yes, journalism always has a hint of bias and agenda regardless of how well intentioned the journalist is, but I do believe that for the most part, if the subject person declares that "I am a MAN in a skirt", then that's what will be reported. Now his lawyer may advise him to play a card such as "non-binary" for legal reasons. If he chooses to do so, that's his business. But given the exact wording of BOSTOCK vs CLAYTON COUNTY GEORGIA, I don't even think that would be necessary.

The press may pick up on an organization such as the ACLU using transgender terminology in order to win a given case, because that's simply the easiest method to do so. But again, this isn't "the press", rather it's just the press reporting on the legal maneuvering of the lawyers in a given situation in order to manifest the desired result (in this case, not being fired).

It's not a perfect answer, but we don't live in a perfect world. Sometimes we just have to be creative when dealing with problems to solve.

But to bring this back around, there are plenty of articles floating around out there that highlight good old fashioned "men wearing skirts", in the traditional masculine context. And yes, we have plenty of articles floating the trans idea, just like we have religious articles, and atheist articles, we have articles of people who like broccoli, and article so people who think eating broccoli is a sin.

You won't stop certain "male skirt wearers" from considering themselves "non-binary", mainly because that's how they see themselves. Again, it's not the press.. this is how they see themselves, and the press is reporting on it.

I don't know man, I think you and I both are kinda shouting into the wind here. I guess it is what it is. I just hate that this thing seems to be having a profound [and somewhat negative] impact on you. All I'd ask is for you to just not lose yourself to this man, don't let this matter consume you, don't let is ruin your sense of happiness and contentment over who you are, because you're Carl, one of the last few gentlemen left in the world, highly principled, ethical, and man of good judgement. I'd hate to see this thing eat away at you.

You know what you are, don't worry about what the world says. They don't know you.
crfriend wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:04 pm [1] Omitted from the list are gender-normative heterosexual men and women. Women currently enjoy a decent choice in what they wear and nobody makes undue assumptions about them; not so men. Are gender-normative heterosexual men going to be eternally excluded from the club of the privileged?
No. At least not in my experience. Every once in a while I cross paths with someone who thinks I might be transitioning, and if they ask, I just tell them I'm not, and then they say, "oh, okay." And that's the end of it. Maybe more people assumed I'm some sort of "failed attempt at a trans-woman", meh... whatever. I know what I am. The fact is, nobody wanted to share in my life before I started wearing feminine clothes, and that sentiment doesn't seem to have changed. So in all actuality, this practice of mine seems to have had no real measurable consequence on my life, save for maybe being a little more comfortable and pleased with my appearance.

Also, another point I'd like to bring up [again] from previous postings/thoughts:

It seems the source of many-a-member's angst with regards to this whole "media reporting on the trans thing" seems to stem from our overall desire to have male skirt wearing more widely adopted by men. Well, I understand that being associated with being "transgender" may prevent some men from taking the skirt wearing leap, but speaking for myself, I really couldn't care less if men in the great unwashed take up this practice or not. I'm not here to proselytize male skirt wearing to anyone. Lord knows I basically do this alone here in my region, I have no [local] "male skirt wearing" community to fall back on, it's just me... the lone wolf. And that's fine, I've been the lone wolf for my entire life anyway.. nothing new under the sun here.

I'm fully well aware that my outfits are jarring to many both in the male skirt wearing world, transgender world, and just the normal mundane world alike. Despite there being thousands of photographs of me floating around out there, you won't find me featured in one of those articles like Mark is, or elsewhere. I'm a short, fat, pale, balding white guy who wears eccentric and colorful "granny" skirts, tops, and shoes, but with a hillbilly hat. My style doesn't generate a lot of fans. But that's okay, I don't do this to win fans, or to have the world cast roses before my feet. I do this because I like the person I see in the mirror when I do. I don't do this to be "an ambassador" for gender freedom for anyone. Lord knows, if I wanted to be popular among my locale, I'd wear normal clothes and start attending church.

Perhaps that's one reason these trans things really don't bother me. Trust me, when you're as out of touch, out of style, odd ball and fugly as I am, nobody is clamoring to have you in their circle, cis, trans, or otherwise! :lol: :mrgreen:
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: North Lincolnshire, UK

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by Stu »

pelmut wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 5:02 pm
Stu wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 3:32 pm Biological sex is binary: there is male and female, as any cattle farmer will tell you.
You do cattle farmers a disservice, they understand sex a lot better than that. Perhaps the one you met was trying to keep things simple for the benefit of a member of the public.  

During the nearly 30 years I was employed designing and developing research equipment for a veterinary establishment I had to work with farmers, breeders, doctors, veterinary surgeons, specialist veterinary geneticists and researchers of all kinds, I never heard any of them claim that biological sex was binary.
So you are saying cattle farmers don't treat cattle as either heifers or bulls? There are non-binary cattle, are there, which are neither male nor female?

Seriously?
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by moonshadow »

Coder, rode,

My comment about photos shouldn't be taken personally, and whether or not you post a photo of your head or not is really none of my business. FWIW, given the choice I think it's better to see the head cropped out of the photo rather that it blurred our of blacked out. The latter is just somewhat irritating.

I understand the reasons some do this, but I can assure you, if you wear skirts out in public anyway, you're on social media, whether you realize it or not. If nothing else, you've been recorded on countless CCTV cameras in various stores and other public settings. The idea of hiding your face seems somewhat pointless to me in this current era we live in, but to each his own.
Coder wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 3:43 pm I don't want someone reusing my photos on Instagram, Facebook, etc... At least without the head it means someone can't masquerade as me by making an insta account, or so forth. I am just generally distrusting of others.
Your concern is understood, but I doubt you have much to worry about, besides, if someone was wanting to make a "spoof Coder" account, they could just use one with your head in it anyway. I'm sure there have to be at least a couple of photos of you, even wearing pants. But like I said, to each his own, I'm just saying I don't share this concern. True privacy has been dead for a long time now.

Come to think of it, I do recall one of my photos making "the cut" on one of those YouTube video's that people put out. I admit to having mixed feelings about it, but at the end of the day, I was just somewhat flattered that someone thought I looked good enough to use in their video.
Coder wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 3:43 pm I also do *not* repeat *do not* like taking photos of myself. My main purpose has been to get feedback before venturing out into the public eye, and I have no other means. I wouldn't be taking photos and posting if I had some confidence in my abilities to pick out things that work together. I'm not trying to show off my cool skirt, or other such stuff.
Well, from what I can tell (from the neck down) you seemed to have nailed your style down. I think you coordinate outfits just fine. As a matter of fact, (FWIW), you've even inspired me to acquire more printed tee-shirts in my collection, and I've been wearing them more and more often.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2649
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
Location: Southeast Michigan

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by Coder »

moonshadow wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:28 pm Your concern is understood, but I doubt you have much to worry about, besides, if someone was wanting to make a "spoof Coder" account, they could just use one with your head in it anyway. I'm sure there have to be at least a couple of photos of you, even wearing pants. But like I said, to each his own, I'm just saying I don't share this concern. True privacy has been dead for a long time now.
Yeah, I'm not overly worried, mind you. Maybe cautiously paranoid? Not sure why. The robot overlords (after the robot uprising) will be able to locate me whether or not my photo is on Facebook :P
moonshadow wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:28 pm
Coder wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 3:43 pm I also do *not* repeat *do not* like taking photos of myself. My main purpose has been to get feedback before venturing out into the public eye, and I have no other means. I wouldn't be taking photos and posting if I had some confidence in my abilities to pick out things that work together. I'm not trying to show off my cool skirt, or other such stuff.
Well, from what I can tell (from the neck down) you seemed to have nailed your style down. I think you coordinate outfits just fine. As a matter of fact, (FWIW), you've even inspired me to acquire more printed tee-shirts in my collection, and I've been wearing them more and more often.
Thanks! I always think I'm breaking some fashion law/faux pas when I try to make my own style... always figured I was alone and people here thought I lacked taste or sensibility (and my style is more conservative than some here).
pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1923
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal - OT

Post by pelmut »

Stu wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:18 pm So you are saying cattle farmers don't treat cattle as either heifers or bulls? There are non-binary cattle, are there, which are neither male nor female?

Seriously?
Two questions there. Yes, cattle famers usually treat cattle as heifers or bullocks - but - Yes, there are also non-binary cattle which appear to be neither or both.  

These are sometimes slaughtered as soon as their condition becomes apparent, especially if the farmer is primarily concerned with their breeding potential.  Alternatively they may be raised as beef cattle and slaughtered for meat along with the other bullocks at a suitable age and weight.  There may be problems with this as beef cattle are usually castrated and some apparently intersex animals may actually be fully male with undescended testes which develop internally and generate hormones that can lead to less weight gain and make the animal more aggressive.

In rare cases the animal may be part of a particularly valuable breeding line and the farmer is axious to breed from it if at all possible.  Then it can be investigated further to see if it really is fertile but incapable for some physical reason.  It is then referred to a speciaist research unit (like the one I worked at) where chromosome tests can be used to determine whether it is truely intersex or just externally 'non-standard'.  As chromosome testing has become more routine and not just confined to a single blood sample, all sorts of variations have begun to show up, including different chromosomes in different organs of the same animal.

Sex is neither binary nor simple.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by moonshadow »

Coder wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:54 pm Thanks! I always think I'm breaking some fashion law/faux pas when I try to make my own style... always figured I was alone and people here thought I lacked taste or sensibility (and my style is more conservative than some here).
No criticism from me! As a matter of fact, I've employed some of your styles particularly on days where I want to wear a skirt, but don't want to be seen as too femme. A lot of times, I think the top (shirt/blouse) is what sends people [jerks] over the edge. A very feminine top tends to draw out more obnoxious behavior in the great unwashed, and may send a signal that you might actually be transitioning, or one of "those people".

A simple, fun, basic printed tee-shirt is very unisex, something enjoyed by both men and women alike, and paired with a basic fun knee length skirt really brings out the "I'm just an easy goin' guy" look, and I believe helps to keep society off our back. Again, the printed tee's are my shirts of choice when I want to wear a skirt, but don't feel like being laughed at, as is normally the case when I wear the more feminine tops.

I like Carl's style too. But I imagine someone of his height and style roaming around Russell County Virginia would probably get a lot of dropped jaws. I doubt too many people who heckle him with "what tha f--ks" and other such nonsense (as Carl is pretty tall), but I can see the music stopping when he walks into the room! :lol:

I'd like to get him down here one day, and hang back out of the way and just observe the local's reaction.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14431
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by crfriend »

moonshadow wrote: Sat Jun 26, 2021 9:16 pmI like Carl's style too. But I imagine someone of his height and style roaming around Russell County Virginia would probably get a lot of dropped jaws. I doubt too many people who heckle him with "what tha f--ks" and other such nonsense (as Carl is pretty tall), but I can see the music stopping when he walks into the room! :lol:
At which point I'd circle my finger in the air and call out, "Resume the music!"

Seriously, I get along with most anybody so long as they're reasonably congenial. I only look imposing; in person I'm a bit of a teddybear.
I'd like to get him down here one day, and hang back out of the way and just observe the local's reaction.
Be careful in what you wish for... :twisted:
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Forbes: ACLU: Forcing Flight Attendants To Dress As Either Male Or Female Is Illegal

Post by moonshadow »

crfriend wrote: Sun Jun 27, 2021 12:08 am At which point I'd circle my finger in the air and call out, "Resume the music!"

Seriously, I get along with most anybody so long as they're reasonably congenial. I only look imposing; in person I'm a bit of a teddybear.
You may get a few of these:

Image
It's funnier when it's cropped in a circle...

... "ibbity ibbity ibbidy... that's all folks!"

:twisted: :lol:

FYI: I do hereby release the above image into the PUBLIC DOMAIN...

Feel free to meme the hell out of it! :mrgreen: :P

See Coder... I bet this jolly old fella never thought his friendly face would grace the pages of SkirtCafe! :lol: You never know where you'll wind up!
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
Post Reply