Xref: utzoo misc.legal:5528 news.admin:3179 soc.women:12269
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ames!acornrc!tekbspa!mathon
From: mathon@tekbspa.UUCP (John D. Mathon )
Newsgroups: misc.legal,news.admin,soc.women
Subject: Re: A real sweetheart
Message-ID: <343@tekbspa.UUCP>
Date: 29 Jul 88 23:36:40 GMT
References: <12624@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <1809@iscuva.ISCS.COM>
Organization: Teknekron Software Systems, San Jose, CA.
Lines: 33

> In article <12624@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> era1987@violet.berkeley.edu (Mark Ethan Smith) writes:
> >[...]
> >The "truth" that you think (and all your friends agree) that
> >somebody is, in truth, a real sweetheart, is perhaps a defense
> >in a defamation suit, but not in a suit for discrimination andor
> >harassment if you persist in calling them sweetheart andor referring
> >to them as sweetheart, and they object.
> >[...]
> 

Common sense says to me:

    1) mark is mark's correct name and should be referred to thus

    2) the pronoun issue is valid in that I don't go around saying:

	    yellow catholic heterosexual thai chen said recently ...
	    meet Mr. black thick nosed short protestant Andy Sharp ...

	It's too personal and unnecessary to know somebodies sex, 
	sexual orientation, race religion or any number of these
	qualities to transact business, have a conversation, 
	or virtully anything.  And in today's world it should be a
	matter of private concern.

    3) however, calling somebody him when they are a her should not
       be a punishable offense, because her/him are pronouns and 
       refer to facts.  I imagine the only legal claim might be made
       if somebody suffered damages after somebody else referred to
       them as the wrong sex.

	    mark is a he and cannot participate in the beauty pageant
	    next week. when mark is actually a she.