Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I’m LGBTQ, and I am not a federally protected class. It is legal to fire me for my identity in many states, and the current republicans in power are continuing to make it legal and condoned to discriminate against LGBTQ people at the federal level- rolling back several policies that benefited marginalized folks along this umbrella. These changes happen with very little fanfare or any notification safe for observant reporters and the spread of social media.

I find this comment overtly dismissing that there might be very real, legitimate reasons to be keyed into social media and the news.

I'm also LGBTQ - and I believe effectively we're being used a pawn to score points with the conservative base. Employment protections I believe do very little, because in most states you can fire someone for any reason, or no reason at all. It's a law that effectively only punishes stupid people.

I find that catching up on what’s going on once every week or so provides enough information to make the decisions I can. Social media, in contrast, serves up a sub 24 hour news cycle that prevents focus and produces emotional exhaustion and constant anxiety.

I’m sure there are people for whom it’s valuable (e.g. if immigration raids could affect you directly), but for members of most groups, being plugged in all time probably does more harm than good.

And I am simply arguing that that is not always the case and the original statement, that it is a privilege to be able to unplug from news and social media, may be true given that I as an LGBTQ person often feel the need to keep abreast of new and rarely-covered updates to local and federal policy that are associated with LGBTQ issues. For example, the department of labor moving through fairly recently to make it legal for federal contractors to fire LGBTQ or unmarried pregnant women on the grounds of religious beliefs.

Did you change anything about your behavior immediately when you found that out?

I’m saying the high proportion of button-pushing click-bait and the low probability that I need any particular info in real time means i’ll be better off getting news through other sources.

You don’t win a war by maximizing fear, outrage, and low quality info on your own side (which, IMO, social media does).

YMMV, obviously. What do I know?

> Did you change anything about your behavior immediately when you found that out?

Yes. I removed any involvement with LGBTQ organizations off my resume.

That sucks. I’m sorry you have to deal with that shit.

So far, I haven’t run into any “shit, if only I had known that five days ago!” situations. I doubt I ever will, no matter how hostile the current administration is to women. But who knows; you pays your money and you takes your choice.

well a problem is that lgbtq doesnt belong together anyway because what are you fighting for? sexual orientation or gender identity? those are really different and are people really being fired for it?

> what are you fighting for?

Simple: Freedom to be who the fuck you are. I don't know why that's so damned difficult to understand.

you already have that freedom

literally nobody is stopping you

maybe you should try protesting in saudi arabia then?

Wow. Was that really needed?

>are really different and are people really being fired for it?

Absolutely not. The nice thing about being LGBTQPA+* is all the constitutional lawyers that will take your case pro-bono to persecute anyone you can speculatively accuse of discerning something about you.

If you are straight then there is basically no such free help available to protect your rights, and have fun trying to bring something up to the supreme court all by yourself if you don't want to be forced to express homophilic opinions.

Actually, as I said, it is legal to discriminate against LGBTQ people in much of the country and the federal government had recently rolled back protections for LGBTQ people. Lawyers are not going to take pro bono cases because LGBTQ status is not constitutionally or federally protected.

Care to give any example of this happening?

Yes. This is a case the supreme court refused to hear in 2017 of a woman who claims to have been fired for being a lesbian. https://www.newsweek.com/jameka-evans-lgbt-workplace-discrim...

Here is a case in 2014 of a man who was fired because his new manager went through his phone and found male gymnast photos. https://www.npr.org/2014/11/10/363049315/for-people-fired-fo...

Here are 5 more examples: https://www.mic.com/articles/11738/5-people-who-were-fired-f...

That links to a study citing that american LGBTQ people experience much higher rates of workplace discrimination: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/lgbt/news/2011/06/02...

None of which the recently rolled back protections would fix had they occurred while the protections were in place as they only applied to the federal government. You can't guarantee a civil right with an executive order.

That was not the requested ask.

have you thought that maybe lgbtq people are just harder to work with and then blame any fault on them being discriminated against for lgbtq?

I suspect that the LGBTQ people in these cases must have really done something that broke the law in these cases. In the news just the other day there were TWO gay lawyers who defended a gay person PRO BONO who murdered two kids in a school with 100 witnesses just because he said those kids teased him for being gay (though witnesses said no such thing ever happened).


I'm curious where in the US Constitution you think it states that discrimination on the basis of LGBTQ identity is legal.

The question is about changing federal law to make LGBTQ identity a protected class, under the same principle that race, gender, religion, etc are currently protected.

The first amendment.

The first amendment protects the right to fire someone on the basis of their LGBTQ identity?

Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact