Turn the outrage meter up to TRANNY!

"Ansel, I saw my boss fuck prepubescent children up the ass in his office!"

Do you need proof if he works at Uber?

Pull that kind of crap in my cab, and you're walking. My boss will back that up, too.

116, not if your boss or you like your job. It is a criminal act in this state to discriminate based on gender or sexuality. Just ask Arlene's Flowers & Gifts how fighting this is going. Or you can look at Elane Photography v. Willock, the Klein case in Oregon, or the Phillips case in Colorado. Given the massive amount of evidence that this is a crime, and even considered such in places like New Mexico, I think your boss would fire you. If not, his boss would fire you both.

@120, the second use of man, intentionally to harass, after being corrected, is harassment and discrimination based on gender. Rudeness without the gender based insult would have been fine. The second use of "man" is what makes it harassment.

122, the use of "man" does not imply gender? Continuing to do so twice (with a span of four days between incidents) is harassment by your admission, yet somehow not harassment in this case when it is exactly what happened? Nobody is asking anybody to change their speaking patterns when they have nothing to do with gender. If this was a case of "man" being used as common vernacular, the accused had two occasions when they could have mentioned that. Instead, they reacted with hostility. What is stressful about getting pizza during lunch on a community college campus? It does not matter whether the accused understood they were committing a crime or not. A person doesn't get away with murder or assault because they didn't realize they were committing a crime. You're just making pathetic excuses.

"if you're a hammer, everything does start to look like a nail."

While I'd love to respond to this, my urge to self-Godwin will be restrained. Suffice to say this line of logic can be used to excuse all kinds of atrocities if used in the manner you are attempting.

"@120, the second use of man, intentionally to harass, after being corrected, is harassment and discrimination"

Err, it's not discrimination in any legal way. It's perfectly legal and quite frankly the perfect response to this drama queen.

Oh lordy, call the speech po'lice!

So what is he decides he's a cat next week, do I have to call him Pussy and put kitty litter out?

" committing a crime"

What crime, exactly, did the customer committ? Failure to translate Calfornia surfer speech into stick-up-ass, politically correct Seattle speech?

Welcome to Seattle's Trans-Taliban.

@124, the use of the term Drama Queen towards Dylan Paul in his presence would also be harassment based on sexuality or gender identity. It is also discrimination, and is considered such in at least 4 states in the Union (Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, and Colorado). Three of those states have already had judges rule to that effect, with at least one using up all appeals and having their case thrown out by the state and Appellate Courts.

" It is also discrimination, and is considered such in at least 4 states in the Union (Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, and Colorado"

Horseshit. It's protected free speech. This customer is guilty of no crimes you moron, in this state or any other.

I can call you anything I fucking like. Faggot, poof, katoey, tranny, drama queen, nancy boy and there's no law to stop me. No cop would arrest me. No prosecutor would charge me. Learn the law you dumbshit.

#127, when does "thanks, man" NOT have everything to do with gender? The perfect response is not required, no. But that does not justify harassment based on sexual identity.
Nobody but you cares if this was intentional or not. It was. It happened. Who cares what the motivation was? We have means, opportunity, and evidence. That's easily enough to convict, even in criminal court.
I am not saying that the accused should have tried to enforce a gender dichotomous paradigm on the victim. That would be stupid and disingenuous. The accused should have apologized. Trying to say "It's okay, it's just casual speech." is precisely the kind of backhanded harassment that anti-discrimination law is designed to prevent.
Yes, murder. Crime is crime, full stop. That you choose to quantify the level of criminality, for whatever reason, has nothing to do with me or the behavior in question. Your moral relativity has no place here.
Using you hammer/nail analogy, one could justify the Holocaust. "If you're a Jew, every internment camp looks like a concentration camp." "If you're a black person, every white person looks like a racist." Your analogy is awful. It is woefully ignorant of labelling to negate, and in point of fact seems to support it. In short, the foundation of modern psychology would suggest it is a dangerous and anti-social position, one that encourages sociopathy and diminishes the community.
There is nothing understandable about the level of dysfunction you advocate. In point of fact, it is downright inhumane.
#128, you also seem to want to hand-wave harassment away after projecting your own person on that of the accused. I don't care whose speech it is where. That justifies nothing. It saddens me to even see people trying to justify this as colloquial speech, as if that had any bearing on the act itself.

"is precisely the kind of backhanded harassment that anti-discrimination law is designed to prevent."

What law? Please site the law and code number.

"The accused"

Accused in what court?

@130, this is already settled law in Oregon, New Mexico, and Colorado. It was in New Mexico that the case was denied by both the State Supreme and Federal Appellate Courts. New Mexico didn't even have a law protecting alternative sexualities against discrimination when the suit was filed and they still ruled in favor of these kinds of laws.

Bullshit it is protected free speech. It is no more protected than saying "I'm going to kill you, you GD N-gg-r!" (sans censoring) or "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.

@131, how do you know? Were you there? Even if what you are saying is true, it still doesn't change the fact of the matter. The harassment happened. What the customer thought is completely irrelevant.

@132, if you said as much to my face, I'd call the cops and pursue civil litigation. And I'd win, too. I could use the money. Where shall we meet? BTW, the state AG has already prosecuted for similar. Not only would prosecutors charge you, they already have charged similar, and are in the process of convicting for similar in this state right now.

@135, it is buried in RCW 19.86. The same law that protects consumers from being harassed by companies over their sexual orientation also prohibits employees from being harassed over their sexual orientation while it work. It is deep in the legalese, but it is a matter of settled law. The AG can prosecute, but the litigation is civil in nature. Still, a finding of guilt by the AG does have credence in those legal proceedings. How the AG determines guilt in these cases isn't mentioned in 19.86.

'Bullshit it is protected free speech. It is no more protected than saying "I'm going to kill you, you GD N-gg-r!" (sans censoring) or "Fire!" in a crowded theatre".

Wait, are you really that stupid you really think that me calling you a drama queen, poof or tranny is illegal?

Again, show me the Washington State law. Give me the RCW # please the shows me calling you a drama queen is illegal. Or calling a tranny a man is illegal.

"@135, it is buried in RCW 19.86. The same law that protects consumers from being harassed by companies over their sexual orientation also prohibits employees from being harassed over their sexual orientation while it work"

That law doesn't protect you from me, a member of the public coming into business and calling you an Nancy boy. It has no legal jurisdiction over that. The business would have a right to not serve me but it could be prosecuted for calling you a 'drama queen' or tranny. Otherwise Dan Savage would be in jail.

@140, you've made yourself very clear. You've also shown an inability to then explain why it happened twice. You've also shown more concern for the mindset of the accused than for the victim. You've shown us quite a bit, really. Maybe a little more than you realized.

Even if your alternate interpretation is correct, it changes nothing. That you continue to shove a tangential hypothetical down our throats in a vain attempt to justify the unjustifiable has also shown us all quite a bit. There is nothing genderless about "Thanks, man", and to further support that ludicrous assertion is to dig yourself deeper and deeper into the hole you appear to enjoy being in. That you are trying to "convince me" smacks of gaslighting. I assure you I am not attempting to do the same. Rather, I am pointing out your dysfunction to the other readers, so that they may not follow your lead.

@144, I suggest you read RCW 19.86 a lot closer. Pagliacci's did, and they are coming down on the manager in charge at the time because they know how right I am. They're trying to avoid being sued by the way they handled this.

Try to look at this from an adult perspective for a change. The owner of a medium-sized chain business is personally getting involved, saying they would have thrown the customer out. Why would he say or do that if the customer didn't do anything wrong? Why risk the PR hit? Businesses follow the CYA model. They don't cover up just for shits and giggles. Millions of dollars and hundreds of employees have already said you're wrong better than I ever could.

@146
"gaslighting? Really? What I am saying is TRUE."
Better proof could not have been written by anybody.
"I have "dysfunction"? What the hell, man? Which I just typed automatically without thinking about its application to this topic, seriously."
Your train of thought goes beyond illogical and irrational, reaching the realm of either the absurd or the dysfunctional. You are either so out of touch with reality you don't know what you are saying, or you are trolling on the internet.
Are you trolling?

this type is shit is what happens when you let the freaks of society think they are normal.

Dylan belongs in some serious therapy or a nuthouse.
your confusion over your sexuality is NOT my fucking problem.
and for gods sake, pull that silly shit out of your face.

reading the comments has cemented the fact that seattle is truly home of the biggest oversensitive pussies on the planet. you dont even realize how pathetic you are.

146, meet 148. You share the same position, but one of you comes across as clueless while the other comes across as some kind of 50's era Neanderthal.

Ah yes, argumentum ad hominem. Completely expected after the argumentum ad nauseam and breakdown into absurdity. I'm a little surprised that g themself isn't the culprit though. They certainly showed an ability to devolve into such petty tactics, and I never would have guessed that other people would want to so willingly jump onto the informal fallacy train.

What if the "accused" is a woman ? Can she sue Dylan for threatening her ? Dylan's confrontation sure sounds threatening to the customer in my eyes.

I honestly can't believe you people are doing this. I mean, I know this is one of the most liberal and thus inane sites on the internet, and I guarantee this comment will be up for about five minutes before I'm either inundated with speech about how all cis white men should die (I'm not white, but I know that won't matter to you) or my comment will be pulled for "obvious trolling", even though everything I'm about to say is 100% true and backed by fact.

Fact number one. This person is a MAN. Period. He's not a "man in a woman's body" a "woman in a man's body" or someone who's looking to "find themselves". Dylan Paul is a male by every metric we have to measure maleness or femaleness. The subject of his mind is another matter. Which brings me to:

Fact number two. Because Dylan says that he is really a woman trapped in a man's body, that does not make him a unique special snowflake deserving of internet accolades, that makes him mentally ill. If I were to say that I, as a demi-otherkin tiger must eat people to survive and I'll only be happy when I become a cannibal, you wouldn't think of me as special, you'd think I was insane and would get me treated. Likewise, if someone said they were hearing voices in their head that were telling them to kill their family, they'd say that that person was mentally ill and needed help. But somehow, if you're "born as the wrong gender" or now, even "as the wrong species", we don't say "Hey, you may be harmless, but your brain is still messed up and you need to get some treatment for that," we say, "Hey! You're absolutely perfect just the way you are and anybody that says otherwise is just a white cishet BIGOT."

It's interesting on two points, actually, that the majority of the modern wave of Tumblr transgenders are often elder teenagers or young twenty-somethings with autism, and often a poor life at home. I'm sure that I will get "Correlation doesn't equal causation, you shitlord!" shouted at me, which is true, but saying those four words does not give you carte blanche to ignore any contradictory evidence to your worldview.

Fact three: Even *with* corrective surgery, transsexuals and transgenders are still committing suicide at a rate that is well over the general population. The fact is, the best-case analysis of this indicates that corrective surgery is not fixing the root of the problem--which is of course their mind. A more realistic analysis of this, however, would take decades. And as this has only really begun to enter the public sphere, it will take time before a 20+-year research project can be considered even remotely "complete".

Fact four: Transsexuals, transgenders, and the rest of the LGBTQQIA (or whatever they're calling it now) make up 2% of the population. That's right. TWO PERCENT. Yet everything is being geared around them now. If you don't have a gay romance in your videogame, you're a bigot. If you don't have transgender bathrooms in your university, you're bigoted. If you refuse to serve a wedding cake to a couple getting married in New York (not what happened, and it's not like there are hundreds of other cakeries in NYC that would DIE to serve you and be progressive), you're run out of business. I thought democracy was about the will of the majority?

Please note in your attacks that not once have I said that transsexual and transgender people are an abomination, that any violence should be levied against them, or that they're any kind of "freak of nature". That would be cruel of me. I'm trying to inject some objective, scientific facts into this debate--something that has been sorely lacking.

As someone who worked for Pags for many years, I knew Matt Galvin personally, and know he is taking this very seriously. He always had am open door policy and cares immensely for his employees. This resounds throughout the company. Though I didn't agree with them on some things, I always thought they did the right thing by their employees on the store level.

Just because the issue concerns a trans employee does not mean the company can be said to have issue with trans people. Dylan deserves to be treated with respect and care, just as the company's values tout, and this customer had a definite poor choice of words, and I see how it was offensive, but also he sounded nervous maybe, and it was the worse time if he meant to use "man" casually like that.

The manager maybe made a hasty call that the reputation of the company overrides the respect of a single employee. This sounds like a big misunderstanding on how to deal with a bad customer. Give folks a chance to make right and they probably will.

Seattleblues, try picking up a modern DSM. Dylan has no disorder, and his mind is not disturbed. This is not Dylan's problem. It is our problem for permitting this as a society. Dylan didn't do this. "We" did. We killed Kenny. We're bastards. Continuing to deny these facts only speaks to your dysfunction, not anybody else's.

Brent_b, "Dude" is a gender laced term. From 1867 to present, it has only referred to men. It was originally synonymous with dandy. The feminine is dudette. You see this in popular culture all the time. Ever heard of the song "Dude (Looks Like a Lady)" or the movie "Dude, Where's my Car?". Look through the last 20 years of dude use in popular culture. It is pretty much exclusively male.

#54, where to begin. The brain is part of the body. If Dylan's brain is not fully male, then Dylan isn't fully male. This is why brain scans are used as an indicator of gender dysphoria. You won't catch me calling for the death of white cisgendered men, because for the most part, I am one.

You are technically correct with fact number two, but you are using it to obfuscate. The customer acted reprehensibly. If he started calling a white cismale "Chick" I'd be just as upset. The gender of the accused and the gender of the victim are irrelevant. Harassment through gender discrimination is wrong, full stop. Also, your diatribe, accusing many transgendered people of being autistic, is both uncalled for and statistically untrue. Neither people on the Autism Spectrum nor twenty-somethings have any higher rate of gender dysphoria. This is about as accurate as most of your "facts".

Fact three, while again technically true, is followed up by simply horrible diatribes and attacks. There is nothing in a gender dysphoric person's mind that needs to be fixed. They aren't broken.

Fact four is playing fast and loose with numbers. First of all, you're off by about half. Intersex people alone make up one percent of the world's population. Even at two percent, you may be happy to write off and dismiss 140 million people, roughly a third of the US population. That however, is a mental disorder covered by the DSM. That's a sociopathic neuroses. Even then, the thought that everything is being geared towards the LGBTQI (the Q covers the A) community is so out of touch it is laughable. Very rarely do video games include non-heterosexual couplings (The Dragon Age and Mass Effect series are two notable exceptions, and they both have received terabytes of complaints for it).

Democracy is about the will of the majority. The majority has spoken. They say you're wrong, out of touch, and possibly in need of therapy.

Calling gender dysphoric people autistic minorities with broken brains that are catered to at every turn is cruel. It is calling them a freak of nature. You just pulled an "I'm not a racist, but..." and apparently can't even see it.

One look at its picture was enough for me. Thanks for the laugh, maaaaaaaan.

This is an entirely disturbing story, to me. I work for Matt Galvin, and he is a great guy, and I am slightly horrified that he has to be dragged into this. He actually really cares about this sort of thing. I also have six friends who are trans (though ftm, maybe it's different, somehow...), and I cannot imagine any of them doing this. And I am mildly autistic. And work in retail and have had the occasional complaint about me for my supposed slights, which I never meant, which I tried to rectify, due to my slight social difficulties. Just, no. Entirely stupid reaction, over-reaction, to relatively nothing. It was not entirely nothing to Dylan, obviously, but such is life. It sucks. You don't get what you want, you don't get treated in the ideal way, but you muddle through and deal with shit like a big girl. You don't know what your customer was going through that day or in his life, just as he didn't know what you were going through that day or in your life. Maybe he was having a fucking bad day. Maybe you fucking ruined his day by getting mad at him the second time around, maybe he (probably not, but who knows) was autistic like me and didn't fucking recognize your fucking face, or couldn't even fucking discern anything about you from your fucking face. I cannot. I cannot tell most faces apart, also, discern gender from faces, even with my intimately knowing gender is very personal and variable.
I have no point here. I am drunk. This whole thing just angered me, on at least two personal levels.

If you're in the service industry, you serve. I'm a server with the same age as Dylan, and I don't bring my problems and issues to the workplace. No one in any job should. Customer is having a bad day? Smile then go talk shit about them afterwards. He needs to chill out and realize not everyone cares about your personal problems. Grow the fuck up

"Misgendering is harassment" ? Give me a freaking break. The LEGAL definition of harassment is the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The customer did not make threat nor demanded Dylan do any unwanted actions; it's the other way around. The management went out of their way to let Dylan not have to deal with this customer. It's people like Dylan make people not taking equal rights for all seriously.

#168, this is a case of systematic and continued unwanted actions of one party. While there were no threats or demands, that whole "including" word means that is not a comprehensive list. A customer intentionally misgendered Dylan in an effort to harass.

#170, then you must be discriminated against wherever you go, since you like to call people junior lawyers, self-righteous bitches, and drama queens rather than show an ounce of compassion. If I knew what your business was, I'd be sure to never darken its doors on principle alone.

@172 It's its hormones. They're raging.

@172, had the customer shown so much as apologized once with sincerity, they'd have my compassion too. Is that a low enough barrier of entry for you?
The head of Pag's has my compassion already.
Calling Dylan "potentially disruptive"? Priceless. You've shown everyone exactly how compassionate you are right there with your labelling to negate.

@181, aka myself, this is what you get for trying to post before breakfast but after a migraine. Let this be a lesson to us all.