Man or woman ... what rights.
 

I read an article some time ago, the details and dates elude me, based on a gender crisis for employment.

A male had undergone a sex change, he had spent years going through the process and ended up having the operations required to make him 'female' by surgery. She therefore becomes a registered female.

A time after she had applied for a position with a chemical company and was informed that due to the process and chemicals used it would be detrimental to women and there reproductive system and women where not employed for that role.

The case ended in a court battle.

What are your thoughts?

Almond Joy's got nuts. Mounds's got big coconut mounds. Take off the wrapper, and it's easy to tell the difference.

Though I will grant that when told "this job would screw up the female reproductive system," replying "I don't have one" is a pretty good comeback...

Almond joys got nuts...
 

Ha HA HA ... LMAO

I wasn't going to touch this one.... Literally...

But, if he, converts to a she, then she has no reproductive system organs, so she is really still a he, only disguised through surgery, and make-up, as a she. Therefore, now damage can be caused to the reproductive sys....

Oh forget it. It's just too weird... :confused:

Where is maggie I'd like to know where she stands on this one.

I was thinking the same thing.

I certainly hope the lady won the suit, since the reason that they seem to use to deny the job does not apply in this situation.

Well, given that all postoperative transsexual women are sterile, I would think hazards to reproduction would be moot.

Re: Almond joys got nuts...
 

Yes, you are confused.

A post-operative transsexual woman has genetalia and hormone balance matching those of a born woman. So what "really a he" means is only a matter of genotype...and even that may be questionable.

Unless you use a microsocope that doesn't count for much.

So, just because it's out of site, it doesn't exist? Hear no XY, see no XY. :)

Genetics aren't enough, as there are "natural" XY women. I'm not sure if they are sterile or not.

This case ought to be pretty easy (and wouldn't have come up if someone at the company had been thinking) -- a women with no reproductive organs (whether due to a sex change or surgical removal) isn't subject to the damage caused by the chemicals, so the reason for barring women doesn't apply.

If it has no effect, what difference does it make? If your computer has a program in ROM that isn't run, what is the signifcance of the program? It's Schrodinger's cat....

The somatic effects of an XX genotype are all hormonally moderated, AFAIK. The XY women with androgen insensitivity syndrome are examples of this.

If I'm not mistaken, excluding a post-hysterectomy woman from a job "because of a mutagenic environment" has been adjudcated to be sex discrimination.

Brothers, sisters, transgenders, asexuals, come together!

Sure the correct assumption is : She doesnt have female reproductive organs!
So on that note, shes the winnah!

I mean basically the whole thing is discriminatory to begin with. But this is science. These guys make and break the rules.