Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Metro)   Asylum seekers claiming to be gay told they have to back it up   (metro.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Sad, UK Border Agency, immigration officer, Stonewall, refugees, Home Affairs Committee  
•       •       •

8025 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2013 at 5:53 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-10-11 05:00:41 PM  
6 votes:

EmmaLou: Not in US.  If your story sounds pretty much legit, most of the time you're approved.  Even if the asylum officer thinks there's something hinky with your story (like they JUST heard the exact same story down to the details earlier that day) many immigration judges will just approve the asylum anyway.

Hooray America?


I have no problem with that.  I'd say we should open our borders more anyway.  Immigration was one of the driving forces that made our country great in the first place, let's keep it going.
2013-10-11 10:51:18 PM  
3 votes:
you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)

Still insufficiently inclusive, but making progress. We'll get to LGBTIS (straight) presently and everyone can just refer to themselves as "people", which is a bit less awkward.
2013-10-12 09:59:39 AM  
2 votes:

ciberido: I suppose, for practical purposes, you'd need to prove that you had been in a homosexual relationship, and I'm not sure how you would do that except for photos or videos of you actually having sex. And that's a disquieting thought.


Not to mention unfair to those who simply have never had a chance to be themselves and have any real relationships where they're from, because there's no opportunity to do so without fear of getting caught and beaten/arrested/killed... And, I'd think those would be the ones most in need of asylum! The ones who have managed to get away with being themselves without getting caught arguably have less need of asylum...
2013-10-12 12:31:29 AM  
2 votes:

ciberido: No offense, but you and Maggie both seem to be confusing the terms "transgender" and "transsexual."  They are different terms that mean different things.  And no, I am not ( as far as I know), conflating or confusing sex and gender:  I do understand that they mean different things, but I was trying to avoid getting into that for the sake of simplicity.  In any case, I'm just using the terms I was given.  I didn't choose them; I'm not trying to imply any special meaning inherent to the term itself; it's just a label.  If you don't think "transgender" is the right word for the umbrella term, then lobby for a different one.

Now, getting away from what the experts say (or what I think they say) and venturing into my own opinions, what transgender, transsexual, and interesex all have in common, that set them apart from being gay (or bisexual or lesbian or pansexual or asexual), is that they concern how you see (and how others see) your OWN sex and/or gender.  They deal with who YOU are, while gay, lesbian, bi, pansexual, and asexual all concern to WHOM you are attracted.

That said, I am not an expert on this topic and any or all of what I've said in this thread could be wrong.  If anybody really cares that much whether what I said is correct or not, I urge them to go read a book written by someone who actually is an expert on the topic rather than waste more time reading my drivel.


I think I understand this a bit better than you do Cib. Ya, I love your links and mostly you are correct. Now (sorry) I'm gonna hit you with a hypothetical so you may understand.

A child is born with ambiguous genitalia. The DR decides to make the child female as far as sex characteristics go. No on can determine the child's true gender yet. Time goes on the little girl starts growing up happy (hey it's a 50/50 chance right? Well as far as I know) but then when she hits puberty she starts having problems. It turns out her body isn't that of a girls but a boys and her brain was as she was designated at birth female. Is she transgender? Sure it could be vice versa.
2013-10-11 10:16:31 PM  
2 votes:
As Monty Python fans will know, the old Australian immigration rules included Rule Number 1: No Poofters.

Turns out it's now no vague or insubstantial gay asylum seekers:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/court-rejects-deportation-appea l- by-lebanese-man-who-claims-he-is-gay/story-e6frg6n6-1226737029597
2013-10-11 07:22:01 PM  
2 votes:

0z79: 0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you

In case you were still wondering... No, it is not fun at all. Rather miserable, actually.


Not freaked out at all. Sorry to hear it's miserable. Just wondering what the term meant.
2013-10-11 07:13:47 PM  
2 votes:
If someone is claiming legal relief from a law or regulation...why would anyone think it was unusual to seek proof that you actually fall into a legally protected catagory?
2013-10-12 09:33:35 PM  
1 vote:

ciberido: Fafai: jjorsett: ariseatex: What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?

The fact that you'd find yourself granting asylum to the entire world once people learned that saying, "I'm gay and fear persecution" is an automatic visa?

This. I doubt this is done to discriminate or intrude upon or humiliate gay people. They're just protecting against fraudulence. Of course, that would depend on what this means, precisely: applicants had even given photographic and video evidence of a highly personal nature to officials.

There are certain physical traits that are (or might be) correlated with homosexuality, like hair whorl and finger length, but so far as I know there isn't any scientific test that could "prove" a person was gay or, conversely, prove that a person WASN'T.  There seem to be some differences in brain structure that would show up on an MRI or other brain scan, but again, nothing that has any strong statistical validity yet.

I suppose, for practical purposes, you'd need to prove that you had been in a homosexual relationship, and I'm not sure how you would do that except for photos or videos of you actually having sex.  And that's a disquieting thought.


A person who is seeking asylum based upon a claim that he/she is being persecuted for being gay should not have to show that he/she is gay. He/she should only have to show that they were being persecuted for it. It could be the case that somebody was being persecuted for being gay but is in fact a straight person. The same standard could be applied for anybody else seeking asylum for persecution for other things. The pertinent fact is the persecution, not the underlying reason for the persecution.
2013-10-12 10:36:58 AM  
1 vote:

kg2095: There is also the visa lottery but UK citizens are ineligible because the UK already sends to many immigrants to the US.


You don't need a visa.  Fly to Mexico, then cross in the US from Mexico, it is relatively unguarded.  If you go into California they will issue a drivers license, health care and everything.  Way things are going you will get amnesty and everything, becoming a US citizen faster than those foolish idiots in the UK trying to do things legally.
2013-10-12 09:40:13 AM  
1 vote:

kg2095: hasty ambush: TuteTibiImperes: think the better solution would be to offer amnesty for everyone here, require that they complete the path to citizenship within a set period of time, ease restrictions making it easier for new people to come here legally, but require that they also complete the path to citizenship within a set number of years after coming over, or else they have to leave.

I think just issuing a work visa is a better way,.  Believe or not not everybody, including illegals, who comes here wants to be a citizen.  They send a lot of money back home and are building houses back the home country.

Those that want citizenship got the back of the line behind all those who first arrived legally and they have to met the same requirements

Also we need to do away with the option of dual citizenship in this country-pick one, no hedging you bets.

I once looked into immigrating to the US (pre Tea Party).

There was no way I would ever qualify even with many years ecperience as a software developer because I don't have a degree. No degree means no chance of getting a US employer to sponser me.

There is also the visa lottery but UK citizens are ineligible because the UK already sends to many immigrants to the US.


This college degree nonsense needs to stop. We need trade/skills exams that measure actual ability. that allow for a substitution of experience in place of a diploma that may not be worth the  paper it is printed on.

Prefer immigrants from UK they have less problems learning the language/terminology and they readily adapt to drinking beer at the correct temperature.  It takes them longer to adapt to the increased sunlight though.
2013-10-12 03:31:37 AM  
1 vote:
jjorsett:
What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?

The fact that you'd find yourself granting asylum to the entire world once people learned that saying, "I'm gay and fear persecution" is an automatic visa?


I'm gonna say that if fear of gay persecution in one's native culture is proven to be a legit concern worthy of asylum, (they kill gays there), then the likelihood of a person from that culture falsely claiming to be gay in an attempt to game the system is pretty low. What if they fail? Even if they succeed, what do they tell the extended family back home?

Another problem, one can be killed for being "gay" without actually being gay. If the accusation is there, and the death threats are there, prove that, and asylum should be given. Requiring a something like a porno submission in that case would be absurd and inhumane.
2013-10-12 03:15:37 AM  
1 vote:

jaytkay: hasty ambush: Fine as long as we go back to the same level of Federal social welfare programs that we had "back then". Immigrants can get expensive.

Cuz immigrants never work and never pay taxes.


Canada -IMHO- does a good job of targeting professionals and people with specialized jobs/skill sets.
I think they fast track them or give them priority. Something along those lines.

Policies like this are especially important in places where you have an aging population and know that pretty soon social security/social programs will end up with more people taking their dues than putting in.
2013-10-12 02:29:47 AM  
1 vote:

ReverendJynxed: TuteTibiImperes: EmmaLou: Not in US.  If your story sounds pretty much legit, most of the time you're approved.  Even if the asylum officer thinks there's something hinky with your story (like they JUST heard the exact same story down to the details earlier that day) many immigration judges will just approve the asylum anyway.

Hooray America?

I have no problem with that.  I'd say we should open our borders more anyway.  Immigration was one of the driving forces that made our country great in the first place, let's keep it going.

That was also at a time when the land was pretty empty after the government had done a fair amount of ethnic cleansing of the indigenous nations as official policy and the hunting were a plenty was formerly decent but was rapidly becoming a relic of bygone days by the time the US had an official immigration policy--in no small part because targeted extirpation of entire species was part and parcel of aforementioned policy of ethnic cleansing of indigenous nations. We're running out of room what with all the private land ownership and government owned bits actually doing OK as far as room for new immigrants who want to stay go--what we have serious issues with are companies using H1B work visas as a form of indentured servitude and unskilled and semiskilled workers coming in as undocumented immigrants thanks to the official immigration policy not really having a legal way in for those people.


Fixed that for you in spades:

a) The US, as a nation, did not have an immigration policy per se up until after the Civil War; the first act that really defined citizenship in the modern sense was the 14th Amendment (which is the basis of jus solis citizenship in the US); until then, citizenship by naturalisation was (by and large) explicitly restricted to free white persons of "good moral character" (under the Naturalization Act of 1790 and its subsequent amendments) who had been landed immigrants for a considerable amount of time--by 1798 until 1865, the limit was up to fourteen years that one had to be a landed immigrant before one could THINK of applying for citizenship.  Technically, until 1865 there WAS no real path to citizenship for anyone who would be considered a Brown Person, and even Irish Catholics sometimes had issues in getting citizenship as Catholics were often considered to not be of "good moral character" (in that they tended to be of the wrong kind of Christianity); freedmen African-Americans and (as we'll get into) "non-registered" First Nations people were legally and effectively stateless.

b) The US had a policy--at first semiofficial and then blatantly so--of ethnic cleansing against First Nations despite treaties that recognised them as sovereign (even to the point that US citizenship was EXPLICITLY denied, both on a Constitutional and Congressional-act basis, to people of First Nations descent until 1924; full citizenship rights including the right to vote in federal elections were not granted to people of First Nations descent until 1940...yes, you're reading this right: Puertorriquenos were considered citizens before the Lakota or Dine) that persisted WELL into the modern era.  This ranged from blatant disregard of Supreme Court precedents ruling that First Nations were sovereign (the Trail of Tears was the direct result of Andrew Jackson deciding he had a Unitary Executive) to destroying food sources used by First Nations reliant on hunting and gathering (traditional hunting and fishing lands were not only explicitly opened to development but buffalo herds were explicitly wastefully hunted in a deliberate attempt to starve out First Nations reliant upon buffalo hunts) to essentially making First Nations culture illegal (children were sent to boarding schools where any expression of traditional culture was severely punished--even speaking in indigenous languages; First Nations religious practices were largely illegal until the 60s and even now sacraments in the Native American Church have been under legal threat) to even the equivalent of "sundown town" laws that literally created the crime of Existing While NDN (most Southeastern states promptly passed laws after the ethnic cleansing of the Five Civilised Tribes prohibiting First Nations people from being within the state or owning property within it; the laws are still technically on the books in many cases, and it's a big reason why there are a disproportionate number of "Non Dawes Act" people of First Nations descent in areas where the Five Civilised Tribes once existed...with a few exceptions, most remnant groups and escapees from ethnic cleansing had to hide out as "Black Irish" or "Black Dutch" or even as free "high-yellow" multiracials because laws still provided for people to be forcibly evicted at gunpoint and marched out of the state).

(And no, I'm not going into the controversy over whether biological warfare was attempted against First Nations peoples--I'm just going on the shiat that is documented and was explicitly admitted to by the US government at the time.)

c) In addition to First Nations peoples (well into the modern era) and Insufficiently White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Folks in general (well up until 1870), immigration policies in the Golden Age of Ellis Island actually tended to restrict a LOT of categories of immigration.  Citizenship was outright prohibited to people immigrating from East Asia until the mid-40s (and THIS was only changed because of the Chinese civil war); immigration was effectively only allowed for labour purposes in these populations (in what amounted to a predecessor of the present H1B program), was outright prohibited in 1883 (when Chinese immigration was shut down), and persons remaining in the US could not apply for citizenship but essentially had to apply for proto-H1B-visas to remain in the country.  There were also similar restrictions on Southern Asians in that they could only apply for the equivalent of H1B visas, and this even proceeded to the direct equivalent of "sundown towns" and similar racist institutions restricting persons of Malay or Indian (naan, not frybread) descent from certain areas and industries.

(Ironically, the Supreme Court judgement establishing jus solis citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants happened around this period--concerning the case of a Chinese-American man (born in the US to Chinese immigrants who--thanks to a bit of a Racist Moral Panic at the period--HAD no legal path to citizenship and were basically H1B workers) who was blocked at the border from returning home by Customs and Immigration on the grounds that Asian People Could Not Be Citizens Even If Born Here.)

Similar restrictions were in place for pretty much every country known for Brown People and even for non-Blah-People of disfavoured groups; Africans were generally not allowed to immigrate or to become citizens until the 1950s, Jewish immigration was severely restricted after 1920 (and even well into the period of the Holocaust, to the eternal shame of all).

Particularly interesting is the treatment of Mexican-Americans--and the discovery that there actually used to be a legal means for the sort of "work for hire" now done by undocumented immigrants. Mexican-Americans were only allowed in the US (not for a path for formal citizenship--just as guest workers) for a brief period in the 40s where they served much the same purpose as undocumented immigrants do now--only as part of an official government "farmhand H1B" program known as the bracero program instituted due to extreme labor shortages due to the war effort.  (This was--notably--just after a massive deportation of Mexican farm workers during the Great Depression.)  Bracero visas actually continued on after World War II up until 1967 (when the program was discontinued)--and arguably the use of undocumented immigrants on farms is a de facto continuation, only with far less government controls and safety measures for los braceros.

d) There has not really been a legal means for the sorts of folks coming in as undocumented immigrants and asylees to enter the US UNTIL the post-Immigration-and-Naturalization-Act era.  In general, even asylum seekers seen as Insufficiently Pale and/or Insufficiently Christian would be routinely turned back to their home countries in past (in one of the more infamous instances, the US government explicitly denied asylum to Jewish passengers aboard the MS St. Louis who were attempting to escape Nazi persecution; the ship eventually did find countries in Europe willing to take the asylees, but a fourth of the passengers were eventually murdered in the Holocaust as those countries were subsequently invaded by Nazi Germany...it should also be noted that well up to World War II there was a very strong streak of anti-Semitism in the US promoted by the likes of such well known people as Charles Lindberg and Henry Ford, and it was routine for neighbourhoods to explictly include "no Jews" along "no blacks" in their redlining).  Even H1B work visa equivalent programs have been periodically under attack (as noted above), and there is not and has not been any path for work visas much less citizenship for semiskilled and unskilled workers save via marriage and asylum programs.  (H1B is considered "skilled labor", despite the fact most of the "skills" tend to be taught in what amount to cram schools.)  We definitely don't have an equivalent to the bracero program anymore, so now farms tend to do the same thing with considerably less regulation.
2013-10-12 02:02:09 AM  
1 vote:

Bandito King: It's incredibly hard to get dual citizenship. It's actively discouraged. Which is pretty stupid. Citizens who are able to be movers and shakers in other nations ought to be highly sought after.


Currently (and it changes every decade it seems), it's relatively easy to have dual citizenship if one is American. The viewpoint, as it was explained to me, was that you're an American citizen at all times, in America and abroad. If you choose to whip out some silly paperwork from another country* to talk to some silly bureaucrat who isn't American, then go right ahead. But for all intents and purposes legal and monetary, you are American.

Now renouncing American citizenship is still a complete nightmare, from what little I've heard.

*Unless that country is one we don't like.
2013-10-12 12:48:20 AM  
1 vote:

ciberido: Fafai: jjorsett: ariseatex: What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?

The fact that you'd find yourself granting asylum to the entire world once people learned that saying, "I'm gay and fear persecution" is an automatic visa?

This. I doubt this is done to discriminate or intrude upon or humiliate gay people. They're just protecting against fraudulence. Of course, that would depend on what this means, precisely: applicants had even given photographic and video evidence of a highly personal nature to officials.

There are certain physical traits that are (or might be) correlated with homosexuality, like hair whorl and finger length, but so far as I know there isn't any scientific test that could "prove" a person was gay or, conversely, prove that a person WASN'T.  There seem to be some differences in brain structure that would show up on an MRI or other brain scan, but again, nothing that has any strong statistical validity yet.

I suppose, for practical purposes, you'd need to prove that you had been in a homosexual relationship, and I'm not sure how you would do that except for photos or videos of you actually having sex.  And that's a disquieting thought.


Especially for anyone who may be in an asexual relationship, yes. I'm going to assume by "highly personal nature" they mean just like documented photos of the couple in question being together in various settings over the years. If they were asking for photos of sex I think the article would be all over explicitly saying so.
2013-10-12 12:27:55 AM  
1 vote:

wallywam1: 0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you

I think it's fascinating. Western society on a foundational level defines sex assignment in binary terms. Intersex is relatively rare, so many people are never introduced to the concept until well into adulthood. I can only imagine how marginalized that would make someone feel. Mr. and Mrs., men's and women's restrooms, M or F on forms and on and on. The constant message that they are fundamentally flawed. That's a horrible way to be treated.


CSB: When I was fifteen or so, I explained (in non-vulgar, scientific terms) what a hermaphrodite was to a couple of kids who were maybe thirteen. An authority figure overheard and berated me for discussing something "obscene".

Good thing there were no intersexed kids listening, I guess. Shame to find out you're obscene that way.
2013-10-12 12:24:18 AM  
1 vote:

Fafai: jjorsett: ariseatex: What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?

The fact that you'd find yourself granting asylum to the entire world once people learned that saying, "I'm gay and fear persecution" is an automatic visa?

This. I doubt this is done to discriminate or intrude upon or humiliate gay people. They're just protecting against fraudulence. Of course, that would depend on what this means, precisely: applicants had even given photographic and video evidence of a highly personal nature to officials.


There are certain physical traits that are (or might be) correlated with homosexuality, like hair whorl and finger length, but so far as I know there isn't any scientific test that could "prove" a person was gay or, conversely, prove that a person WASN'T.  There seem to be some differences in brain structure that would show up on an MRI or other brain scan, but again, nothing that has any strong statistical validity yet.

I suppose, for practical purposes, you'd need to prove that you had been in a homosexual relationship, and I'm not sure how you would do that except for photos or videos of you actually having sex.  And that's a disquieting thought.
2013-10-11 11:58:19 PM  
1 vote:

jjorsett: ariseatex: kvinesknows: "'People should accept the statement of sexuality by those who seek asylum. This practice is regrettable and ought to be stopped immediately.' "

why?  no one automatically accepts proof of marriage or birth.  They demand documentation of some kind.

how else are they supposed to prove they are homosexual?

Quote Steel Magnolias?

Seriously though, many of these asylum seekers are fleeing countries where they will "test" you to see if you're gay, then punish you if this "test" confirms it.  So they try to get asylum in a more "civilised" country, only to be told they have to be "tested" there as well?  It's making them re-live their trauma.

What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?

The fact that you'd find yourself granting asylum to the entire world once people learned that saying, "I'm gay and fear persecution" is an automatic visa?


This. I doubt this is done to discriminate or intrude upon or humiliate gay people. They're just protecting against fraudulence. Of course, that would depend on what this means, precisely: applicants had even given photographic and video evidence of a highly personal nature to officials.
2013-10-11 11:53:28 PM  
1 vote:

12349876: ciberido: I'm saying TransGENDER includes a number of groups, including transSEXUAL and intersex. It's like Transgender is Asia, Transsexual is Japan, and Intersex is Mongolia.

The problem with this little debate here is gender doesn't have a universally accepted definition.  You're conflating gender and sex like some do, but others like to separate the two terms.  A little insight on this issue from Wikipedia.  I personally feel there are ample enough differences between those whose brains and bodies don't match (my definition of transgender) from those who have genitals with both male and female characteristics (my definition of intersex) to give them separate terms.



No offense, but you and Maggie both seem to be confusing the terms "transgender" and "transsexual."  They are different terms that mean different things.  And no, I am not ( as far as I know), conflating or confusing sex and gender:  I do understand that they mean different things, but I was trying to avoid getting into that for the sake of simplicity.  In any case, I'm just using the terms I was given.  I didn't choose them; I'm not trying to imply any special meaning inherent to the term itself; it's just a label.  If you don't think "transgender" is the right word for the umbrella term, then lobby for a different one.

Now, getting away from what the experts say (or what I think they say) and venturing into my own opinions, what transgender, transsexual, and interesex all have in common, that set them apart from being gay (or bisexual or lesbian or pansexual or asexual), is that they concern how you see (and how others see) your OWN sex and/or gender.  They deal with who YOU are, while gay, lesbian, bi, pansexual, and asexual all concern to WHOM you are attracted.

That said, I am not an expert on this topic and any or all of what I've said in this thread could be wrong.  If anybody really cares that much whether what I said is correct or not, I urge them to go read a book written by someone who actually is an expert on the topic rather than waste more time reading my drivel.
2013-10-11 11:46:47 PM  
1 vote:

gja: tinfoil-hat maggie: f you have the "T", then the "I" is already covered.

[www.i2symbol.com image 256x256]
/possible symbol?


There already is one thanks.
si0.twimg.com
2013-10-11 11:45:39 PM  
1 vote:

ciberido: I'm saying TransGENDER includes a number of groups, including transSEXUAL and intersex.  It's like Transgender is Asia, Transsexual is Japan, and Intersex is Mongolia.


I understand what you are saying, and sure they may fall under the transgender umbrella but if you read my earlier link then you know intersex peoples problems start much earlier in fetal development than transgender and transsexual.

/I know I posted that earlier post with things missing.
//Posting on Fark while drinking well almost done drinking isn't easy.
2013-10-11 11:08:40 PM  
1 vote:

tinfoil-hat maggie: wallywam1: 0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you

I think it's fascinating. Western society on a foundational level defines sex assignment in binary terms. Intersex is relatively rare, so many people are never introduced to the concept until well into adulthood. I can only imagine how marginalized that would make someone feel. Mr. and Mrs., men's and women's restrooms, M or F on forms and on and on. The constant message that they are fundamentally flawed. That's a horrible way to be treated.

Actually IIRC it's not really that rare, something like 1 in 10,000 births or less. It's just DR's hid the condition through surgery, a lot of the time never informing the parents. The push as I understand it from the majority of the intersex community is to leave things alone till the kid can decide how to proceed.

Here's a nice informative link on how the sexual genital development happens in the first trimester and the gender identity of the brain is formed in the last trimester.
Sexual differentiation of the human brain in relation to gender identity

From the link: This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
If you're curious it's an interesting read.


I just read the summary and skimmed through it a bit. Looks extremely interesting. Thanks!
2013-10-11 11:06:49 PM  
1 vote:

anuran: wallywam1:

I think it's fascinating. Western society on a foundational level defines sex assignment in binary terms. Intersex is relatively rare, so many people are never introduced to the concept until well into adulthood. I can only imagine how marginalized that would make someone feel. Mr. and Mrs., men's and women's restrooms, M or F on forms and on and on. The constant message that they are fundamentally flawed. That's a horrible way to be treated.

It's not just "Western society" which does this. Most do and so far as I know have done. Not all. Sometimes there was cultural space for those who didn't fit the binary. Often it was as magical freaks to put it bluntly.


The reason I phrased it that way is because I'm ignorant about how this issue is approached outside my own culture. I could imagine the mystical or spiritual side of things coming into play.
2013-10-11 11:04:00 PM  
1 vote:

Fafai: ciberido: For lesbians it would be Tegan and Sarah and Sleater-Kinney, or Meslissa Etheridge, k.d. lang, and indigo girls for older women.

Liking Sleater-Kinney indicates one thing only: good taste in rock and roll.


I was about to say.
2013-10-11 10:57:22 PM  
1 vote:

ciberido: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Born with both male and female genitalia (or otherwise not clearly one or the other).  But you don't really need it as a separate category, as transgender includes both transsexual and intersex, among others.  If you have the "T", then the "I" is already covered.


While I understand what you're saying, from everything I've heard and read intersex people go through a different set of problems and while I would like solidarity I begrudge them not at all for wanting their own sort of recognition and well I believe inclusion is important.. While Transsexuals( people who want some form of SRS (some links may be NSFW) But may end up doing just HRT, ) have the same problems in the beginning, intersex people to my understanding can have very different problems
2013-10-11 10:55:21 PM  
1 vote:
wallywam1:

I think it's fascinating. Western society on a foundational level defines sex assignment in binary terms. Intersex is relatively rare, so many people are never introduced to the concept until well into adulthood. I can only imagine how marginalized that would make someone feel. Mr. and Mrs., men's and women's restrooms, M or F on forms and on and on. The constant message that they are fundamentally flawed. That's a horrible way to be treated.

It's not just "Western society" which does this. Most do and so far as I know have done. Not all. Sometimes there was cultural space for those who didn't fit the binary. Often it was as magical freaks to put it bluntly.
2013-10-11 10:51:06 PM  
1 vote:

ciberido: For lesbians it would be Tegan and Sarah and Sleater-Kinney, or Meslissa Etheridge, k.d. lang, and indigo girls for older women.


Liking Sleater-Kinney indicates one thing only: good taste in rock and roll.
2013-10-11 10:27:00 PM  
1 vote:

you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?


Born with both male and female genitalia (or otherwise not clearly one or the other).  But you don't really need it as a separate category, as transgender includes both transsexual and intersex, among others.  If you have the "T", then the "I" is already covered.
2013-10-11 10:22:42 PM  
1 vote:

uncleacid: Show them that you downloaded Cher's new album?



www.spinnyverse.com

For lesbians it would be Tegan and Sarah and Sleater-Kinney, or Meslissa Etheridge, k.d. lang,  and indigo girls for older women.
2013-10-11 10:15:42 PM  
1 vote:

ariseatex: What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?


People who weren't gay would claim to be gay in order to increase their chances.  And since there's presumably a limited number of "slots" available and it's a zero-sum game, that means some other applicant loses out because some guy lied.

Or is it wrong to assume it's zero-sum?  Is there no sort of limit or quota on asylum?   I presume it varies from country to country.
2013-10-11 10:09:33 PM  
1 vote:
So, uh, if they actually implement this policy, they're gonna need testers, right?

/asking for a friend
2013-10-11 09:47:42 PM  
1 vote:

wallywam1: 0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you

I think it's fascinating. Western society on a foundational level defines sex assignment in binary terms. Intersex is relatively rare, so many people are never introduced to the concept until well into adulthood. I can only imagine how marginalized that would make someone feel. Mr. and Mrs., men's and women's restrooms, M or F on forms and on and on. The constant message that they are fundamentally flawed. That's a horrible way to be treated.


Actually IIRC it's not really that rare, something like 1 in 10,000 births or less. It's just DR's hid the condition through surgery, a lot of the time never informing the parents. The push as I understand it from the majority of the intersex community is to leave things alone till the kid can decide how to proceed.

Here's a nice informative link on how the sexual genital development happens in the first trimester and the gender identity of the brain is formed in the last trimester.
Sexual differentiation of the human brain in relation to gender identity

From the link: This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
If you're curious it's an interesting read.
2013-10-11 09:32:34 PM  
1 vote:
Or we close the Border, and then they can fight such things out where they came from.
2013-10-11 09:24:39 PM  
1 vote:

0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you



So is your 23 chromosome pair XX or XY?  Or is it one of the rare alternate combinations (that isn't fatal)?
2013-10-11 09:10:02 PM  
1 vote:

wallywam1: 0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you

I think it's fascinating. Western society on a foundational level defines sex assignment in binary terms. Intersex is relatively rare, so many people are never introduced to the concept until well into adulthood. I can only imagine how marginalized that would make someone feel. Mr. and Mrs., men's and women's restrooms, M or F on forms and on and on. The constant message that they are fundamentally flawed. That's a horrible way to be treated.


Or after they win Olympic gold in the women's 800M.
2013-10-11 08:21:33 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: EmmaLou: Not in US.  If your story sounds pretty much legit, most of the time you're approved.  Even if the asylum officer thinks there's something hinky with your story (like they JUST heard the exact same story down to the details earlier that day) many immigration judges will just approve the asylum anyway.

Hooray America?

I have no problem with that.  I'd say we should open our borders more anyway.  Immigration was one of the driving forces that made our country great in the first place, let's keep it going.


That was also at a time when the land was pretty empty and the hunting were a plenty. We're running out of room what with all the private land ownership and government owned bits.


/NO VACANCY
2013-10-11 08:02:47 PM  
1 vote:

SpdrJay: I might be willing to screen these applicants on a case by case basis....


damn, why can't gay guys be hot girls.

did I say that out loud? what do you mean I failed?
2013-10-11 07:43:35 PM  
1 vote:
We really don't need to worry. This in in the UK

America is much, much worse as a rule. We go by racial quotas, income, etc.
2013-10-11 07:40:43 PM  
1 vote:

hasty ambush: Fine as long as we go back to the same level of Federal social welfare programs that we had "back then". Immigrants can get expensive. That is why most Europeans nations are even tougher on immigration than we are. Those social welfare programs they have for citizens are expensive enough without the added expensive of non-citizens. Many EU countries require you to have private medical insurance, as an immigrant, for a period of time before you are allowed to use the government one.


So you're suggesting we increase our social welfare programs to where they were before the Republicans gutted them, then open the borders and require immigrants to have the same medical insurance that is currently required under Obamacare?
2013-10-11 07:40:16 PM  
1 vote:

Radak: fusillade762: I hear the Saudis have a test for that...

I can't find a screegrab of it, but I remember a while back The Daily Show had a bit about people in Texas wishing to adopt being asked to prove they  aren't gay, and their example question was:

"At first I was afraid, I was __________."

A) petrified
B) I don't know

/I guess that test can go both ways...


I'm thinking it would be pretty hard for an unmarried couple to adopt.
2013-10-11 07:39:34 PM  
1 vote:

ariseatex: kvinesknows: "'People should accept the statement of sexuality by those who seek asylum. This practice is regrettable and ought to be stopped immediately.' "

why?  no one automatically accepts proof of marriage or birth.  They demand documentation of some kind.

how else are they supposed to prove they are homosexual?

Quote Steel Magnolias?

Seriously though, many of these asylum seekers are fleeing countries where they will "test" you to see if you're gay, then punish you if this "test" confirms it.  So they try to get asylum in a more "civilised" country, only to be told they have to be "tested" there as well?  It's making them re-live their trauma.

What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?


evrybody will just say they are gay, let me in.
2013-10-11 07:35:17 PM  
1 vote:

kvinesknows: "'People should accept the statement of sexuality by those who seek asylum. This practice is regrettable and ought to be stopped immediately.' "

why?  no one automatically accepts proof of marriage or birth.  They demand documentation of some kind.

how else are they supposed to prove they are homosexual?


two years worth of browser hsitory
2013-10-11 07:33:09 PM  
1 vote:
I had a coworker that had to deal with that in Canada.
She had the hardest time getting permanent residence status. I think she said something about getting married would be her only option for staying in the country. I suggested she marry her BFF Andrew and she said that for her to stay it would have to be a woman. That was the first time she'd admitted to us that she was gay. That was also the reason for her leaving her home country.

As someone else said upthread, it's quite difficult for these people, often because they come from a place where it's unacceptable to be gay and are often told there is something wrong with them. It's difficult for them to even admit or accept it in general.
2013-10-11 07:18:01 PM  
1 vote:

0z79: you_idiot: LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?

Intersex is when someone is born with any combination of both male and female sexual characteristics, such as hermaphrodites (both a penis and a vaginal opening) with varying degrees of maleness/femaleness.

/is intersex
//born that way
///if it freaks you out, block away
////I have no time for you


In case you were still wondering... No, it is not fun at all. Rather miserable, actually.
2013-10-11 06:55:38 PM  
1 vote:
LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex)


Wait, there's an "I" now? What's intersex? Is it fun?
2013-10-11 06:49:59 PM  
1 vote:
They should have to prove their homosexuality by having to be able to stuff a 4 pound pineapple into their rectum.
2013-10-11 06:15:59 PM  
1 vote:

hasty ambush: TuteTibiImperes: EmmaLou: Not in US.  If your story sounds pretty much legit, most of the time you're approved.  Even if the asylum officer thinks there's something hinky with your story (like they JUST heard the exact same story down to the details earlier that day) many immigration judges will just approve the asylum anyway.

Hooray America?

I have no problem with that.  I'd say we should open our borders more anyway.  Immigration was one of the driving forces that made our country great in the first place, let's keep it going.
Fine as long as we go back to the same level of Federal social welfare programs that we had "back then".  Immigrants can get expensive.  That is why  most Europeans nations are even tougher on immigration than we are. Those social welfare programs they have for citizens are expensive enough without the added expensive of non-citizens. Many EU countries require you to have private medical insurance, as an immigrant, for a period of time before you are allowed to use the government one.

End of free NHS care for migrants under new bill
Major restrictions on migrants' free access to the NHS are to be introduced.


I think the better solution would be to offer amnesty for everyone here, require that they complete the path to citizenship within a set period of time, ease restrictions making it easier for new people to come here legally, but require that they also complete the path to citizenship within a set number of years after coming over, or else they have to leave.

Make it such that everyone is welcome, but if you're going to make this your home, you need to become a citizen and accept the rights and responsibilities that come with that.
2013-10-11 06:12:26 PM  
1 vote:

hasty ambush: Fine as long as we go back to the same level of Federal social welfare programs that we had "back then". Immigrants can get expensive.


Cuz immigrants never work and never pay taxes.
2013-10-11 06:11:49 PM  
1 vote:
Well, at least they weren't asked to bareback it up.
2013-10-11 06:10:31 PM  
1 vote:

TuteTibiImperes: EmmaLou: Not in US.  If your story sounds pretty much legit, most of the time you're approved.  Even if the asylum officer thinks there's something hinky with your story (like they JUST heard the exact same story down to the details earlier that day) many immigration judges will just approve the asylum anyway.

Hooray America?

I have no problem with that.  I'd say we should open our borders more anyway.  Immigration was one of the driving forces that made our country great in the first place, let's keep it going.

Fine as long as we go back to the same level of Federal social welfare programs that we had "back then".  Immigrants can get expensive.  That is why  most Europeans nations are even tougher on immigration than we are. Those social welfare programs they have for citizens are expensive enough without the added expensive of non-citizens. Many EU countries require you to have private medical insurance, as an immigrant, for a period of time before you are allowed to use the government one.

End of free NHS care for migrants under new bill
Major restrictions on migrants' free access to the NHS are to be introduced.

2013-10-11 06:07:48 PM  
1 vote:

kvinesknows: "'People should accept the statement of sexuality by those who seek asylum. This practice is regrettable and ought to be stopped immediately.' "

why?  no one automatically accepts proof of marriage or birth.  They demand documentation of some kind.

how else are they supposed to prove they are homosexual?


Quote Steel Magnolias?

Seriously though, many of these asylum seekers are fleeing countries where they will "test" you to see if you're gay, then punish you if this "test" confirms it.  So they try to get asylum in a more "civilised" country, only to be told they have to be "tested" there as well?  It's making them re-live their trauma.

What would be the harm in doing away with the "gay test"?
2013-10-11 06:05:10 PM  
1 vote:
Would that be anything like the eunuch test in History of the World Part One?
2013-10-11 05:57:55 PM  
1 vote:
 . . .but we are willing to learn.
2013-10-11 05:48:09 PM  
1 vote:
My jaw is sore, do you accept old Donna Summers ticket stubs?
2013-10-11 05:08:01 PM  
1 vote:
"If they're gay, let's see them do the Hat Dance."

"You're thinking of the Mexicans. The gays have the Buttsex."

"Okay, let's see you do that, then."

"I should've just done the Hat Dance."
2013-10-11 05:04:34 PM  
1 vote:
I hear the Saudis have a test for that...
2013-10-11 04:38:52 PM  
1 vote:
Not in US.  If your story sounds pretty much legit, most of the time you're approved.  Even if the asylum officer thinks there's something hinky with your story (like they JUST heard the exact same story down to the details earlier that day) many immigration judges will just approve the asylum anyway.

Hooray America?
 
Displayed 57 of 57 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report