Not allowed to work because of my avatar?

I don't get Gor, but deal with them a lot.

The OP is furry. Some clubs don't want staff that is furry and others want nothing else but furry. If I would go to a club, specially a stripclub (most in sl are) I would prefer to go to a club that has female human dancers. No matter black, white, or whatever race.

Like I said before... What is the nature of the club he was refused at?

Words I thought I'd never hear myself say: "I agree with Pep and Peggy."

Yes we do!

I don't know what the nature of the club in question is, unfortunately.

To be honest, I really DON'T have a problem with restricting furries, tinies, vampires, and so forth, because discrimination against these doesn't have an RL counterpart. I say that somewhat tentatively, because I know that there ARE furries, and so forth, who VERY strongly identify with their avis. But for me, the test case is whether a case of discrimination parallels racism or sexism or what-have-you in RL.

(Which is one of my problems with Gor. There IS a very real sex slave trade in existence right now, and it's not just in comfortably far-away "foreign parts": its tendrils take it deep into the heart of the West too.)

So, seriously, to ask the question I asked of Peggy: you'd be ok with a club that insisted that its employees represented only whites?


No, no, no, you don't. You REALLY don't! And I haven't the strength . . .

quite a few posts from people thinking that they are entitled to whatever they want, access to places and jobs.

I think there needs to be more instruction upon entering SL about how private persons own most of the sims and they dont owe you or have to give you access to anything.

I am not saying this to be rash or crude, but it seems to me from he amount of people lately I've had to eject from my land that they feel they are entitled to rezz there freebie shit or move there beds into a house on anyones property or they have to give you a job.

Nicely put.

PS. What in god's name is a baby diaper fur? A furry who wears diapers???

It wasn't pretty - the talking diapers are, let us say, 'interesting'. At first folks were taken aback, but after a few weeks of just consistently good music from the baby fur DJ - the crowd mixed and was fine. And the diapers kept on talkin'.

OMG I think this thread has touched upon every single SL archetype. Oh wait! What if a club discriminated against child avatars! They have real counterparts! I saw one walking down the street. There... now this thread is complete.

In law there are different tests for discrimination based on race than on gender and on free association.

Being a furry is not a recognized legal status, nor is it any kind of status other than say, being a fan of football that refuses to take off the jersey when in an Opera house.

Race comes under the strictest form of scrutiny in a Constitutional test (remember that LL is in the US, so US law applies). You have to have a very very compelling interest to justify racial discrimination - examples are extremely few.

Gender faces a lighter form of strict scrutiny. Compelling reasons are required, but they are easier to come up with. A great example is a restroom or a sauna - you can make those bio-gender specific. The same can be said of some gathering places, but not of others - and the cases on this can give you a headache as some of them seem to be in direct conflict with each other even when Supreme Court explicitly says they are not...

Being a furry has no legal recognition and no legal status under the 14th amendment equal protection, nor the implied (4th I think) federal equal protection. As a result, there is nothing that can overcome the other Constitutional right of free association...

/me tries hard to stifle her laughter lest anyone think she discriminates against talking diapers.

That's really not the legislative intent behind Title VII. It's that all people are entitled to equal treatment and consideration with regards to employment by private employers (with over 15 employees) under the concept that race, color, national origin, religion, and sex bear no valid impact on an individual's qualification to do a job. It's for that same reason that the law recognizes an exception for certain physical criterion if they constitute a bona fide occupational qualification (which is rarely found to be the case outside of sex, disabilities under the Americans With Disabilities Act, and age under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act). If the reasoning behind the laws were that the person has no control over who or to whom they were born into this world then religion would not be one of the protected classes. SL is different because discrimination is not based on actual race, color, national origin, religion, or sex (it's also questionable whether "employment" in SL in these kinds of jobs even constitutes employment in the legal sense).

There is no slavery in SL.

If you can find me one person who is forced to log into SL and do things there, then you might have a case... but I'm reasonably confident that doesn't exist, at least on any recognizable scale.

This seems reasonable to me, and rationally applicable to SL. Although if it WERE applied, it would wreak havoc, I imagine, on any number of types of RP.

Interesting case in point of where gender discrimination is legitimate. We have at least on rape crisis centre in SL that I know of. It deals with RL victims. It seems to me entirely legitimate, indeed necessary, to demand of volunteers some kind of test to ensure that those counselling victims are, in fact, female.

/me waves at Dag, and wonders where she is hanging out these days now that Latte is gone . . .


This is a good point. We may be talking apples and oranges here. Perhaps the real issue here relates to hate laws?

We card. Please see the 'Linden ID cards' thread for more clarification.

This is a fallacy. There are real BDSM Masters in SL that have their slaves living their homes with them in RL that do force that slave to log into SL when they tell them to - and only log on using restraint life viewer so they have no control over what that Master does to them.

I believe one of my brothers was never sexually assaulted, but I might be wrong. If so, he would be the -ONLY- male relative I have that is not a victim, an assailant, or both. Which is not to say I am not related to some women who are also in -both- camps...

I'm one of the lucky ones, having only been 'felt up' by a friend of my mother when I was a tween. I managed to avoid the other trauma by luck of the early age at which I left home.

I'm mentioning this just because your example is one area where I think it is a major problem in western society that we assume males can only be perps and women can only be victims. If you grew up around the sort of environment I did your instincts on that would be very different.

If that is the case, and I doubt it is what you seem to imply, then call the police. Slavery has been illegal in the US since 1865, and your right to be free is very unusual in having an express Constitutional protection.

But, if you are speaking of people who choose to be in the D/S lifestyle, then you are seriously confused if you think that is slavery.

Understood, and acknowledged.

This is PURE speculation on my part, but I wonder whether women who have been victimized by other women would still not prefer to be counselled by a female? Counselling effectively requires a degree of identification and bonding that would certainly be facilitated by shared gender. But I don't know whether that would outweigh the traumatic associations of the fact that the damage had also been done by a woman.

There have been, and maybe still are, RL Gorean communities. I THINK that they have, in fact, been targetted by law enforcement agencies for exactly this reason.

/me waves back.

I've been busy with RL but I can sometimes be found at that certain cafe with often banal voice conversations (you know the one I am talking about). I've also popped by Junco but it's kind of hit or miss for me and I try to catch a show or two at the Kasbah each week.

Federal hate crime laws in the U.S. only cover acts of physical assault motivated by a person's race, color, religion, or nation origin. It is limited in that manner because of our claimed reverence for the right to freedom of expression so I am not sure it is helpful in trying to discern something that is conceptually offensive with SL employment discrimination. I will however acknowledge that the notion of limiting hate crime laws in such manner is not universal. There are certainly countries whose priorities differ from ours. Germany for example takes a different stance when it comes to even conceptual representations and expressions of Nazism.

Yeah, that more or less is what I've gathered. If so, then the issue of intolerance of this type in SL may simply not be covered by US statute.

In Canada, we do have hate laws that cover speech, writing, and images, but they are relatively weak, and seldom and inconsistently enforced.

i saw a kid avatar walking down the street waving Brenda's dedicates in a preemptive move against a possible Godwin, but he hit a ban line and was bounced into a gorean sim that catered only to Octopi.

And all this discussion because a Furry (that does not exist in RL) whined discrimination in employment opportunities in SL. Now we are all legal eagles discussing laws and the Constitution.

It's funny how some will take a simple case of someone being bothered over a make believe job..........and turn it into a disussion about hypothetical cases where real law can be applied to make believe life. Makes we wonder how healthy an environment like SL really is for some people.