Like a lot of right wingers, she posts her opinions with the perfect confidence the whole world agrees with her. Such folks most often assume there will never be any consequences for their behavior, and can't understand it when they come. I'm a straight person, but would never patronize any business that refused to serve gay people and the trans-gendered.
Welp, I guess that's one way to keep it classy. /s
With that charming combination of dehumanization, name calling, and attempted bullying, I wouldn't want her so much as running a comb though my hair. Claiming she's fine with the LGB but not the TQ+ comes off as some sort of attempt to pretend her position is reasonable, the + is intended to be inclusive, not add criminals to the abbreviation. Honestly, this woman has apparently been in the right wing echo chamber long enough she's convinced she's taking a stand for some sort of values when she should be sitting down and thinking for herself.
2. "Hey you" is often fine. Tbh, it's your own customer reviews you influence when you are rude to your customers.
3. You are free to refuse service for *legal* reasons. Not illegal ones. And yes you are bound by nondiscrimination laws the same way realtors may be.
4. "Conservatives have had enough" is a completely invalid justification, since SCOTUS has ruled about *religious* freedom, not political ideology freedom. But thank you for providing future plainiff lawyers with a quote that demonstrates your objection is not religious, it's political.
5. "Letting them be" would be serving them and using their preferred pronouns, not kicking them out. The same way that if Robert comes into your store and says "call me Bob," the way you "let it be" is call them Bob and give them a haircut.
You alluded to it already - the salon probably already has serviced someone trans. But that doesn't matter. Nor does this specific case matter, it's just the first drops before the dam breaks. The wider fundamental religious ideology has found a new toy designed on the dais of SCOTUS and delivered by the milquetoast media to allow people with low self control to be assholes in public cloaked in religious finery. When your government is actively finding ways to bring about suffering for select people, is that a government for the people, by the people? Should it exist in the framework of our Constitution at all?
The Supreme Court notwithstanding, finding exceptions to laws of general applicability which forbid discrimination simply underlines why we have those laws to begin with.
Any person in any service industry, whether wedding photography, website design, or hairdressing should understand that the only face a client should ever see is pleasant, interested, concerned, and polite. Back in my working days, I made a lot of money because of the other photographers who didn't understand this simple fact.
She has decided that her tribal politics are more important than her customer relations. She has FA'd. May she find out, and soon.
"She added that anyone who uses personal pronouns wouldn’t be welcome either."
I doubt it's possible to hold an intelligent conversation on any subject without using personal pronouns. The fact that so may conservatives/christians can't seem to understand that is difficult to fathom. Do they not get the concept of what pronouns are, or what? It's tempting to put this down as one more failure of America's education system, like their ignorance of science, the Constitution and a host of other things, but I daresay this is more like WILLFUL ignorance. They claim to have free will, after all; it's not much of a stretch to assume their near-total ignorance must be a product of their will.
"If a human identifies as anything other than a man/woman..."
Honeybun, trans people DO identify as men and women, because that's exactly what they are. Get it?
"This is a free country and I am not a slave to any narrative." Except the narrative in a 3000-year old collection of preposterous stories, of course.
As for your damnfool nonsense about how your kind used to just let LGBT people alone to be ourselves, yes, absolutely--you left us alone to live in constant feat of arrest, assault, unemployment, imprisonment, castration, electroshock, losing our families, and whatever other foul rewards you felt like dishing out to us. The days when people like you were free to treat us any way you chose are long gone, and if you think we'll go compliantly back to living that kind of life, you damn well better REthink.
Bet Geiger has no issues providing service to customers who are either on their second or third marriages or cheating on their spouses. Then it's "Don't ask, don't tell."
Must be tough for her to carry a double standard into battle.
As Clarence Thomas said, "While I did not except our ruling on the free speech and the religious rights would be used to oppress minority communities and no one could have foreseen us saying that it is ok, would result in people thinking that it was ok. But now that it has happened, I fully support it. And it has not gone far enough."
As John Roberts said as he stuck his fingers in his ears., "Our ruling won't cause persecution of minority groups. NANANANANANA I CAN"T HEAR YOU!!!"
As Brett Kavanaugh said, "This just proves that white male men are the actual victims here. Also if one were to butt chug a bud lite, hypothetically, does that make that supreme court justice gay? Just asking for a friend. Hypothetically."
“We used to “just let them be”. Most of us kept our opinions to ourselves. I mean why look for unnecessary conflict; right?“
Does “just let them be” mean beating them to death?
I’m confused.
Like a lot of right wingers, she posts her opinions with the perfect confidence the whole world agrees with her. Such folks most often assume there will never be any consequences for their behavior, and can't understand it when they come. I'm a straight person, but would never patronize any business that refused to serve gay people and the trans-gendered.
Nothing says “I own my convictions “ like deleting your social media accounts and hiding.
Welp, I guess that's one way to keep it classy. /s
With that charming combination of dehumanization, name calling, and attempted bullying, I wouldn't want her so much as running a comb though my hair. Claiming she's fine with the LGB but not the TQ+ comes off as some sort of attempt to pretend her position is reasonable, the + is intended to be inclusive, not add criminals to the abbreviation. Honestly, this woman has apparently been in the right wing echo chamber long enough she's convinced she's taking a stand for some sort of values when she should be sitting down and thinking for herself.
1. Trans folk generally identify as men/women.
2. "Hey you" is often fine. Tbh, it's your own customer reviews you influence when you are rude to your customers.
3. You are free to refuse service for *legal* reasons. Not illegal ones. And yes you are bound by nondiscrimination laws the same way realtors may be.
4. "Conservatives have had enough" is a completely invalid justification, since SCOTUS has ruled about *religious* freedom, not political ideology freedom. But thank you for providing future plainiff lawyers with a quote that demonstrates your objection is not religious, it's political.
5. "Letting them be" would be serving them and using their preferred pronouns, not kicking them out. The same way that if Robert comes into your store and says "call me Bob," the way you "let it be" is call them Bob and give them a haircut.
*coughs*
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-questions-whether-ocean-could-063036283.html
Former President Donald Trump declared that Las Vegas could “maybe someday” have an ocean at a campaign stop there on Saturday.
You alluded to it already - the salon probably already has serviced someone trans. But that doesn't matter. Nor does this specific case matter, it's just the first drops before the dam breaks. The wider fundamental religious ideology has found a new toy designed on the dais of SCOTUS and delivered by the milquetoast media to allow people with low self control to be assholes in public cloaked in religious finery. When your government is actively finding ways to bring about suffering for select people, is that a government for the people, by the people? Should it exist in the framework of our Constitution at all?
ಠ_ಠ
As I've said many times…
The Supreme Court notwithstanding, finding exceptions to laws of general applicability which forbid discrimination simply underlines why we have those laws to begin with.
Any person in any service industry, whether wedding photography, website design, or hairdressing should understand that the only face a client should ever see is pleasant, interested, concerned, and polite. Back in my working days, I made a lot of money because of the other photographers who didn't understand this simple fact.
She has decided that her tribal politics are more important than her customer relations. She has FA'd. May she find out, and soon.
OT: Iowa legislature passes 6 week abortion ban, governor to sign bill at a FamilyLeader event on Friday.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/iowa-lawmakers-hold-special-session-pass-6-week/story?id=101082504
I spoke in the Senate subcommittee. It was..... interesting. 😉
https://twitter.com/Rushthewriter/status/1678830123930251280
"She added that anyone who uses personal pronouns wouldn’t be welcome either."
I doubt it's possible to hold an intelligent conversation on any subject without using personal pronouns. The fact that so may conservatives/christians can't seem to understand that is difficult to fathom. Do they not get the concept of what pronouns are, or what? It's tempting to put this down as one more failure of America's education system, like their ignorance of science, the Constitution and a host of other things, but I daresay this is more like WILLFUL ignorance. They claim to have free will, after all; it's not much of a stretch to assume their near-total ignorance must be a product of their will.
"If a human identifies as anything other than a man/woman..."
Honeybun, trans people DO identify as men and women, because that's exactly what they are. Get it?
"This is a free country and I am not a slave to any narrative." Except the narrative in a 3000-year old collection of preposterous stories, of course.
As for your damnfool nonsense about how your kind used to just let LGBT people alone to be ourselves, yes, absolutely--you left us alone to live in constant feat of arrest, assault, unemployment, imprisonment, castration, electroshock, losing our families, and whatever other foul rewards you felt like dishing out to us. The days when people like you were free to treat us any way you chose are long gone, and if you think we'll go compliantly back to living that kind of life, you damn well better REthink.
Love how kkkonservatives whine that they've "had enough."
Funny. We feel the same way about YOU, kkkonservatives.
Ms. Geiger:
Hate can't be prettied up with a haircut.
Bet Geiger has no issues providing service to customers who are either on their second or third marriages or cheating on their spouses. Then it's "Don't ask, don't tell."
Must be tough for her to carry a double standard into battle.
Um... look at her hair in that picture. I'd rather go to a poodle groomer, they have skills.
Barberbarian.
As Clarence Thomas said, "While I did not except our ruling on the free speech and the religious rights would be used to oppress minority communities and no one could have foreseen us saying that it is ok, would result in people thinking that it was ok. But now that it has happened, I fully support it. And it has not gone far enough."
As John Roberts said as he stuck his fingers in his ears., "Our ruling won't cause persecution of minority groups. NANANANANANA I CAN"T HEAR YOU!!!"
As Brett Kavanaugh said, "This just proves that white male men are the actual victims here. Also if one were to butt chug a bud lite, hypothetically, does that make that supreme court justice gay? Just asking for a friend. Hypothetically."