• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teen sues DMV after being told to remove makeup

roguenuke said:
Which doesn't mean crap. You are projecting whatever nonsense you believe about men wearing women's clothing or accessories on everyone. The plain truth is that most men who wear women's clothing and/or accessories, including makeup and/or hairstyles, are not trying to disguise themselves. They are simply being themselves.

I have brothers who wear women's clothing, one is transgendered and will one day legally be a woman, the other merely likes the feel of women's clothing on his skin (says it feels better than men's). They aren't trying to disguise themselves, they are simply being who they are. I know many men who wear makeup.

Especially in this case. It wouldn't make any sense for a man to wear women's clothing to get their state ID/driver's license done as a "disguise". What kind of disguise would that be? Especially the way this kid was wearing his.
Click to expand...
Yep.. no bias coming from your end.

I don't give a rat's ass if someone wants to dress up like a woman/man or wants or to change their gender but, when it comes to being able to positively identify someone and make sure they are not a risk to others or are trying to skate the law, silly fetishes need to step aside.
 
WCH said:
Yep.. no bias coming from your end.

I don't give a rat's ass if someone wants to dress up like a woman/man or wants or to change their gender but, when it comes to being able to positively identify someone and make sure they are not a risk to others or are trying to skate the law, silly fetishes need to step aside.
Click to expand...

And your problem continues to be that you want others to meet your expectations of how someone should dress or look based on their gender. Too bad. They are not required to abide by your gender stereotyping. They are not any risk to others just because they are male and wear women's clothing, wear makeup, or look/act feminine. It isn't your place to determine who has a "fetish" or not, particularly when you obviously have no clue what a "fetish" even is.
 
roguenuke said:
And your problem continues to be that you want others to meet your expectations of how someone should dress or look based on their gender. Too bad. They are not required to abide by your gender stereotyping. They are not any risk to others just because they are male and wear women's clothing, wear makeup, or look/act feminine. It isn't your place to determine who has a "fetish" or not, particularly when you obviously have no clue what a "fetish" even is.
Click to expand...

Your problem is comprehension. Get some!
 
WCH said:
Your problem is comprehension. Get some!
Click to expand...

You have failed to show how a man dressing as what you feel should be exclusively reserved for women is any kind of threat to anyone. It simply isn't.
 
roguenuke said:
You have failed to show how a man dressing as what you feel should be exclusively reserved for women is any kind of threat to anyone. It simply isn't.
Click to expand...
I don't need to prove anything. ANYONE can be a threat. That's the point of proper vetting and identification.
 
If the purpose is identification, the picture should be of the person as he or she ordinarily looks. Unless this 16-year old is allowed to cross-dress at school, this is not his ordinary look. (I'm assuming that he is still in school, of course.)
 
shrubnose said:
A 16-year old in South Carolina sued the states Department of Motor vehicles on Tuesday because the agency won't allow him to take a driver's license photo wearing makeup.

Read the article here: Teen sues DMV after being told to remove makeup


I predict that this young person will win this lawsuit.

This is all about the state of South Carolina trying to control people.


"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
Click to expand...
 
The reason why men just wear a little eyeliner to rob banks is because it's such a great disguise. When the surveillance is reviewed the detectives are usually stumped as they only look for women suspects.



:lamo
 
WCH said:
I don't need to prove anything. ANYONE can be a threat. That's the point of proper vetting and identification.
Click to expand...

Anyone can be a threat, absolutely, but that has nothing to do with what they wear, no matter their sex/gender. The fact that they do not conform to gender norms does not increase their likelihood of being a threat in any way.
 
roguenuke said:
Anyone can be a threat, absolutely, but that has nothing to do with what they wear, no matter their sex/gender. The fact that they do not conform to gender norms does not increase their likelihood of being a threat in any way.
Click to expand...

Dense much?
 
nota bene said:
If the purpose is identification, the picture should be of the person as he or she ordinarily looks. Unless this 16-year old is allowed to cross-dress at school, this is not his ordinary look. (I'm assuming that he is still in school, of course.)
Click to expand...

He wears these clothes, makeup, hairstyle to school and everywhere, according to him and his mother. In fact, look at his hairstyle. It is clearly a feminine cut. Most schools do not discriminate in what girls and boys can wear to school. Some do, but many of those are coming under fire as well for discriminating based on gender.
 
WCH said:
Criminals often do.
Click to expand...

This boy isn't a criminal. You can't prove that he has/had any intent of having several ID cards. You are making stuff up due to your personal bias.
 
roguenuke said:
This boy isn't a criminal. You can't prove that he has/had any intent of having several ID cards. You are making stuff up due to your personal bias.
Click to expand...

Not my fault you don't understand law and order.

The only bias here is yours.
 
WCH said:
Not my fault you don't understand law and order.

The only bias here is yours.
Click to expand...

I understand law and order just fine. I also understand the Constitution. You cannot tell someone that they can't wear makeup only because of their sex/gender. That is unconstitutional. There is no legitimate reason for it and you are trying to go an extra step by assuming that a guy who wears makeup must be guilty of trying to "disguise" themselves for some sort of criminal activity. This simply isn't true. Innocent til proven guilty.
 
WCH said:
Criminals often do.
Click to expand...
:doh No, two-picture ID required by the state... because this person could present them self as either male or female at any given time... even with no insidious intent at all... because, as you say, anyone can be a threat.
 
radcen said:
Then maybe they should have two photos on their ID, one for each possibility.

:roll:
Click to expand...

My question is, do they then have to make women who don't wear makeup put some on "just in case" they decide to wear makeup one day? I rarely wear makeup. I've only worn it (not counting just some lipgloss) about a dozen or so times in my life, and that was really only when I was dressing up (happens rarely). I look very different wearing my uniform or even just my everyday clothes than I do wearing a dress, makeup, jewelry, contacts, and my hair swept back rather than up for my uniform or hanging limp.

What about those who are androgynous? They normally could pass for either sex without any effort.
 
If this how he dresses every day... eh, yeah, I find it peculiar, but I don't see a problem with having his ID reflect the way he looks all the time. But then, the laws governing these things are simple, and we are dealing with a bureaucracy, so what do you expect?

This doesn't really offend me for his sake or anything, but at the same time I think the law could be adjusted to accommodate, probably should. A "costume" you wear all day every day... yeah, that isn't a costume.
 
JayDubya said:
If this how he dresses every day... eh, yeah, I find it peculiar, but I don't see a problem with having his ID reflect the way he looks all the time. But then, the laws governing these things are simple, and we are dealing with a bureaucracy, so what do you expect?

This doesn't really offend me for his sake or anything, but at the same time I think the law could be adjusted to accommodate, probably should. A "costume" you wear all day every day... yeah, that isn't a costume.
Click to expand...
The laws are simple, but they're also not keeping up with society.
 
radcen said:
The laws are simple, but they're also not keeping up with society.
Click to expand...

It can be hard to do so at times.

Some places take such accommodations to extremes I would find uncomfortable and / or distasteful.

In this case, it is reasonable enough as this isn't a make-up that obscures identity and it is worn routinely; for practical purposes, the picture looking like how he looks would be a good thing. The ID is going to have his picture as how he dresses and it will say: "M" on it. Anyone that NEEDS to read it will notice that discrepancy and know the guy's a transvestite, but I can't envision a scenario where that would matter in any case where anyone needs to read the thing.
 
JayDubya said:
It can be hard to do so at times.

Some places take such accommodations to extremes I would find uncomfortable and / or distasteful.

In this case, it is reasonable enough as this isn't a make-up that obscures identity and it is worn routinely; for practical purposes, the picture looking like how he looks would be a good thing. The ID is going to have his picture as how he dresses and it will say: "M" on it. Anyone that NEEDS to read it will notice that discrepancy and know the guy's a transvestite, but I can't envision a scenario where that would matter in any case where anyone needs to read the thing.
Click to expand...

Here in Austin TX, the city council recently agreed to change the signage on all single person bathrooms in the city because the transgenders felt 'uncomfortable' using M/F bathrooms.

It makes me uncomfortable that this is the direction our society has taken.

Pandering to weirdness.
 
Gringo allstar said:
Then why did you just call him a "him" and not a her? The purpose of ID is not " who you present yourself as" its what you actually are and in HIS case its a male. So if I feel black I can wear face paint and a afro wig for my ID pic?? Like I said pick another cause to give your life meaning because you just sound devoid of commonsense and quite frankly stupid.
Click to expand...

The DMV allows men to be photographed with a beard, do they not? This is something that could potentially mask what your face really looks like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom