Dear Sir/madam: Sorry..... we don't accept ladyboys

 

Picture: Sanook

 

A recently graduated lady boy has gone on Facebook to say that they have been turned down for a job at a trading company.

 

They posted a screenshot of an email in which the company said "sorry but we don't accept 'type two women'" (the term used in Thai language for ladyboys.

 

Reaction from friends and netizens was swift - they asked angrirl "What era is this?" condemning the email and the company.

 

One poster said that he should be glad they turned him down - they are clearly not a professional company, reported Sanook.

 

Legislation exists in Thailand whereby those who believe they are the victim of sexual prejudice can make a case in such circumstances.

 

Source: Sanook

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2018-06-19

There are many companies that lose a lot of business because their staff are ladymen. Then there are many companies that gain a lot of business because they hire mostly or all ladymen. It depends on the needs of the company and their customer base. It's ludicrous not to consider the grassroots issues. They are over 18, they are not boys at all. They are men. Or transgender men to be precise. Most understand this and prosper very well in the areas of life where they can excel. Such as healthcare services, in the beauty industry, elderly care, fashion, jewellery. A company that was involved in male body building might not be suitable. Be who you are and get over it for goodness sake. 

19 minutes ago, webfact said:

Legislation exists in Thailand whereby those who believe they are the victim of sexual prejudice can make a case in such circumstances.

Sexual prejudice. Perhaps the ladyboy might be taken to court for masquerading as a female?

 

17 minutes ago, greenchair said:

There are many companies that lose a lot of business because their staff are ladymen. Then there are many companies that gain a lot of business because they hire mostly or all ladymen. It depends on the needs of the company and their customer base. It's ludicrous not to consider the grassroots issues. They are over 18, they are not boys at all. They are men. Or transgender men to be precise. Most understand this and prosper very well in the areas of life where they can excel. Such as healthcare services, in the beauty industry, elderly care, fashion, jewellery. A company that was involved in male body building might not be suitable. Be who you are and get over it for goodness sake. 

They are being who they are and this transgender woman has allegedly been punished for having the courage to be so. 

Respect for this person!

Rather silly of them to give this as a reason. It's easy enough to say "someone more qualified got the job". 

 

In my case, I've had a lot of gay employees - male and female, never had an LB come to interview. I never had a problem with gay staff but I did have a problem with the other staff making fun of them, which I didn't stand for.

 

At the end of the day (and as an employer), I would certainly think twice - but the decision would come down their personality - just like any other employee.

 

Perhaps the best example of sexuality impacting the workplace is Starbucks with it's high percentage of overtly gay/lb employees. There's 2 Starbucks in particular that I visit where the gay staff act out all the time. At both establishments, the gay staff will flirt with male customers. As a straight man, I find it unprofessional and tiresome. Leave it at home. It's not cute, it's pathetic. I don't care what your sexuality is, so keep it to yourself.

 

With ladyboys - we know a lot of them act out in similar ways. You'd not see this in the interview, so yes, the easiest thing might be to give the job to someone that doesn't have that risk attached.

i avoid ladyboys/men for massage like the plague,

i will go to the place that have real woman giving massage.

...and no, i dont do happy ending,

but its almost impossible for thai men to leave my dick alone,

i feel like i'm done with that shit

I guess it´s just to seek another work then. Not even newsworthy.

If the person in this case that applies for a job has been given the freedom to alter gender, and wish to be classified as a transgender or ladyboy. That is thier freedom of choice.
If a company wish to employ a certain type of employees. That should be their freedon of choice.

We can not give one side the freedom to do like they want, if other parts are not given the same freedom to choose.

3 minutes ago, Get Real said:

I guess it´s just to seek another work then. Not even newsworthy.

If the person in this case that applies for a job has been given the freedom to alter gender, and wish to be classified as a transgender or ladyboy. That is thier freedom of choice.
If a company wish to employ a certain type of employees. That should be their freedon of choice.

We can not give one side the freedom to do like they want, if other parts are not given the same freedom to choose.

People have the right to be identified as the gender they know them selves to be. It's not a choice, it's who they are.

 

Companies should not be allowed to discriminate against someone because of who they are.

 

This applies whether they are gay, straight, transgender, male, female.

 

And let's not forget the unacceptability of discrimination based on colour, age, faith...

2 hours ago, poanoi said:

but its almost impossible for thai men to leave my dick alone,

i feel like i'm done with that shit

too much information!

No furries. If he has a social sciences degree, the government might have a job for him soon.

 

 

 

Interesting juxtaposed to recent threads on TVF about Thailand's acceptance of ladyboys.   Age discrimination is rife here as well, a few different dynamics going on with that.

54 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

People have the right to be identified as the gender they know them selves to be. It's not a choice, it's who they are.

You are what you are born as. That´s who you are! Everything else is an altercation of body or mind.

 

Quote

 

Companies should not be allowed to discriminate against someone because of who they are.

So now you just stated that a perosn with repeated criminal offenses regarding stealing shall not be refused a work at a bank if he has the qualifications?
A child molester should noe be refused a work at a daycare center, just because they have the qualifications? That would be discriminating!

Hera we must try to understand that some companies have the use for different kind of staff and employees. That is not discrimination. It´s only a way for the company to be accepted in the line of business they are active in.

 

Quote

 

This applies whether they are gay, straight, transgender, male, female.

That is not rue. It would be a fantastic world if it was. Unfortunately it is like described above. Different people can be used for different kind of work. The wrong choice of staff can lead to devastation for a comany and it´s business.

 

Quote

 

And let's not forget the unacceptability of discrimination based on colour, age, faith...

Yeah, right! Try a german that is opening a Restaurant in China-town. Why ain´t there any white guys in Harlem? Last but not least. Why don´t we have schools for bombmaking in France?

23 minutes ago, Get Real said:

You are what you are born as. That´s who you are! Everything else is an altercation of body or mind.

 

So now you just stated that a perosn with repeated criminal offenses regarding stealing shall not be refused a work at a bank if he has the qualifications?
A child molester should noe be refused a work at a daycare center, just because they have the qualifications? That would be discriminating!

Hera we must try to understand that some companies have the use for different kind of staff and employees. That is not discrimination. It´s only a way for the company to be accepted in the line of business they are active in.

 

That is not rue. It would be a fantastic world if it was. Unfortunately it is like described above. Different people can be used for different kind of work. The wrong choice of staff can lead to devastation for a comany and it´s business.

 

Yeah, right! Try a german that is opening a Restaurant in China-town. Why ain´t there any white guys in Harlem? Last but not least. Why don´t we have schools for bombmaking in France?

A: I agree that people are born as who they are. I just don't share your extremely narrow vision of what this means.

 

B: No one is born a criminal. That is what they are, not who.

 

C : A child molester is a criminal scum bag. Not the same thing at all. It is disgusting that you try to link such filth to this story.

 

D : Someones sexual orientation or gender does not make them unsuitable for a job. That is discrimination.

 

E :  What you post does not in any way undermine what I said.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

E :  What you post does not in any way undermine what I said.

Yes, it does!

3 hours ago, poanoi said:

but its almost impossible for thai men to leave my dick alone,

See it from the bright side! You will always be a desirable choice.

15 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Yes, it does!

No it doesn't!

You clearly have no grasp of what it means, when you say "what you are born as,  is what you are", because you completely neglect that there is not only a physical side to someone but also a psychological one!

When will you people finally understand, that "being gay" or "being transgender" is as much not a choice as "being black" or "being white"?!

It's not a lifestyle like "being Punk" or "living in Bangkok"- it actually is, what you are!

And the fact, that many people fight it or are scared to commit to it in public, is because of people like you, who don't understand or don't give #$@%!

 

Like another poster said: if you don't want a ladyboy or a gay or a woman or whatever to work for you, make some $4!t up, about "sorry...got another, more qualified person" or just politely decline, without any reason!

That is still discrimination, but at lest you are not so dumb to openly admit it!

19 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Yes, it does!

Let's not get into panto season.

 

No one should be discriminated on the basis of colour, faith or any other criteria is what I said and nothing you have said in point e changes that.

4 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

They are being who they are and this transgender woman has allegedly been punished for having the courage to be so. 

He's a man. He'll always be a man. He is a transgender male. Even if his knob is cut off with his danglers, he'll still be a male. The transgender that understand and accept this don't have the same problems as transgenders that insist they are a female and want everyone else to play pretend. What's wrong with saying, I'm a man and I like to behave feminiely and I'm fine with that. 

Get real. 

1 minute ago, greenchair said:

He's a man. He'll always be a man. He is a transgender male. Even if his knob is cut off with his danglers, he'll still be a male. The transgender that understand and accept this don't have the same problems as transgenders that insist they are a female and want everyone else to play pretend. What's wrong with saying, I'm a man and I like to behave feminiely and I'm fine with that. 

Get real. 

No one's pretending.

 

If a transgender woman wishes to be addressed as she, then I respect and accept that.

 

They know who they are..

4 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

They are being who they are and this transgender woman has allegedly been punished for having the courage to be so. 

They are actually being diametrically opposed to "who they are" (whatever that means).  They are men, they are not being "courageous" and they are certainly not being "punished".  They are simply suffering the consequences of their own decisions to masquerade as females.

Just now, Just Weird said:

They are actually being diametrically opposed to "who they are" (whatever that means).  They are men, they are not being "courageous" and they are certainly not being "punished".  They are simply suffering the consequences of their own decisions to masquerade as females.

Could not agree less.

It would be informative to know what kind of job it was.  Working for a trading company may mean representing their product at trade shows, or it may be a back room job.

 

Having been rejected when I applied for a job as a trade show cutie, I can certainly understand the sting of being told I was too ugly.   But hardly a case of discrimination because I'm old, bald, fat, foreign (can't speak Thai)  and cranky with the public.

 

It's another thing entirely if it was a back room job where visual aesthetics don't really matter.

 

24 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Let's not get into panto season.

 

No one should be discriminated on the basis of colour, faith or any other criteria is what I said and nothing you have said in point e changes that.

If you own the business or the company that needs employees or more employees then you are the owner of the company. You should have the right to choose who is going to work for you and your company. Due to that you are the owner of the company, no one should be able to tell you that you must employ, white, people, black people, muslims, christians or in this case transgenders. It´s your choice alone, and that is how it should be. It´s not discrimination. It´s a choice of workforce.

After that I don´t care if you have panto on or panto off and niether what kind of season it is. 

Just now, Get Real said:

If you own the business or the company that needs employees or more employees then you are the owner of the company. You should have the right to choose who is going to work for you and your company. Due to that you are the owner of the company, no one should be able to tell you that you must employ, white, people, black people, muslims, christians or in this case transgenders. It´s your choice alone, and that is how it should be. It´s not discrimination. It´s a choice of workforce.

After that I don´t care if you have panto on or panto off and nither what kind of season it is. 

No, it is discrimination to choose on the criteria you outline

Just now, Bluespunk said:

No, it is discrimination to choose on the criteria you outline

Nope, you own the company. You provide work. It´s your choice of workforce.
 

28 minutes ago, DM07 said:

No it doesn't!

You clearly have no grasp of what it means, when you say "what you are born as,  is what you are", because you completely neglect that there is not only a physical side to someone but also a psychological one!

When will you people finally understand, that "being gay" or "being transgender" is as much not a choice as "being black" or "being white"?!

It's not a lifestyle like "being Punk" or "living in Bangkok"- it actually is, what you are!

And the fact, that many people fight it or are scared to commit to it in public, is because of people like you, who don't understand or don't give #$@%!

 

Like another poster said: if you don't want a ladyboy or a gay or a woman or whatever to work for you, make some $4!t up, about "sorry...got another, more qualified person" or just politely decline, without any reason!

That is still discrimination, but at lest you are not so dumb to openly admit it!

So it´s better to lie, than to tell the truth? 

15 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Nope, you own the company. You provide work. It´s your choice of workforce.
 

Doesn't make it any less discriminatory. 

A inflammatory post has been removed.

32 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

No one's pretending.

 

If a transgender woman wishes to be addressed as she, then I respect and accept that.

 

They know who they are..

Of course they know who they are, we all know who we are, it's what they are that is the subject.

 

Katoeys want everyone to pretend, just like they do, that they are women, that they are something that they are not.  They are not women, they are men, and if they cannot fit into a normal society because of their own choice to be abnormal, and their own pretence, that is no one's fault but their own and they should learn to live with it.