vla1ne Posted May 20, 2016 Report Share Posted May 20, 2016 my points about the current laws protection of transgendered people, were all proven to remain standing in the prior comment for the reasons i outlined and quoted above. there's nothing needed to discuss further regarding that. the points still stand (as i said from the start), and gender identity is about as relevant as dragonkin to me as far as conversational value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VCR_CAT Posted May 20, 2016 Report Share Posted May 20, 2016 my points about the current laws protection of transgendered people, were all proven to remain standing in the prior comment for the reasons i outlined as quoted above. there's nothing needed to discuss further regarding that. the points still stand (as i said from the start), and gender identity is about as relevant as dragonkin to me as far as conversational value. Yes, you were right about the transgender stuff. As for gender-identity stuff; could probably just call it here, then. Like I said; the grounds for what hate-speech is for legal matters (inciting violence/disturbing the peace) remain the same; the definitions are just being updated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.