Mostly, it's pathetic. Yeah, sure; other people have reactions to our deportment; imagining that this data exchange is dispatched by saying Well, that's YOUR problem! is infantile.

Bankers wear ties. Cops, soldiers and postal workers wear uniforms. (Waitresses, chefs, busboys etc etc etc.)

This is a person who's trying to prove things to people who needn't be bothered. These annoyances appear from sexually undercooked personalities of all stripes... They really, really want to have an extended discussion with the rest of the world in which their own precious feelings are framed as the center of the Universe, and they'll insist on having that discussion in the terms and language patterns of grade school.

But the rest of us got what we needed from grade school and have moved on. The mailman puts on a blue shirt, picks up a bin, and starts his workday.


Anybuddy remember the Jenny Jones murder?

Come, am I the only one who is gonna ask the*question* on everyone's mind? Hell you meet the kid and you wonder......but nobody asks. Amy would probably say its rude to ask so directly.

We are curious, we want to know. Is he or isnt he? Do his parents know?

Why isn't it in the article? Ok I'll ask:

Are those his eyelashes or is he wearing falsies?

> They really, really want to have an extended discussion with the rest of the world

Good, those discussions are necessary. That those discussions still make people uncomfortable and that these people get criticized is why those discussions need to happen. I say let's keep having 'extended discussions' with people of every obscure variation of sexual orientations until people get the hell over their childish obsession with bashing these people, get their collective heads out of the Stone Ages and out of their asses and start worrying about real issues.

I bet Crid's just feeling uncomfortable because he finds the kid attractive.

Well, actually, yes - look at the candid pic of him in the article, and the pictures here. In the article, he's clearly a guy in his late teens. The pics here I could easily see as a mid-teen girl, perhaps his sister.

“His freedom to express his gender should not be restricted by the DMV staff”

However, the DMV should ensure that the person is recognizable from their photograph. That has nothing to do with "gender identity" and everything to do with providing a form of ID.

LGBT is all well and good, but I am getting tired of them insisting on being special. They aren't special, they're just people like everyone else.

"Are those his eyelashes or is he wearing falsies?"

RIGHT?

If he typically dresses this way and wears makeup, then I don't see what the problem is. Employees at the DMV may have been worried that this was a prank and they were being played for fools.

I'm with a_random_guy for the most part. There is a time and place to make a stand regarding your LGBT rights but this isn't one of them. You don't get to decide that you don't have to follow the rules just because you "don't identify" with the sex on your federally issued ID. if your gender listed on the ID says male, then its not unreasonable that you look like a male on it.

That being said, the other side of the argument could be this... What if he's pulled over while in his makeup and dressed in female clothing and the cop says he doesn't look like his ID? It could cause a whole other set of issues if that cop decides to make trouble for him.

There is a time and place to make a stand regarding your LGBT rights but this isn't one of them.

Am I asserting my hetero rights if I wear mascara or am I just trying to not look like a tired rabbit?

I vote for them being false eyelashes.

If that's what he looks like, usually, that's what ought to be on his license. A picture on a license is used by officials to quickly visually make a determination about whether the person carrying it is the same person the license was issued to. It's so simple it shouldn't need saying.

A DL is usually the first legal form of ID people get - there's nothing, previous, to verify against. And yes, it does look like he could be pranking. The DMV office has seen it all, and they are bored with most of it. They very likely pegged it as a practical joke, and they don't have much of a sense of humor.

That said, if a person *knows*, going in, that he is far enough different from the median, then it behooves him to bring proof that this is what he really looks like. Bring a school yearbook or two, with a pic in it. Bring family pictures. Make it easy for people to make your life easy.

I wouldn't go so far as Crid - I suspect he wasn't really trying to make a scene. He just didn't think things through. Though, I believe that he is now being grandly rewarded (and used) for that, by people who do want special snowflake attention.

> "If that's what he looks like, usually, that's what ought to be on his license. A picture on a license is used by officials to quickly visually make a determination about whether the person carrying it is the same person the license was issued to. It's so simple it shouldn't need saying."

^ This.

Whether he 'wants attention' is completely irrelevant to whether he has a point or not ... saying he 'wants attention' is pure ad hominem - it's a non-response.

> There is a time and place to make a stand regarding your LGBT rights but this isn't one of them

This reminds me of a Martin Luther King quote:

"I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season."

I guess that LGBT activists are now supposed to wait for a 'more convenient season' when the 'time is right' for them to have equal rights.

"Gender non-conforming." I much prefer Crid's "sexually undercooked."

Oh man, one more problem that I'm glad isn't mine. I don't mean him, I mean the poor fools who will now have to take gender identification into account to take driver's license photos.

And I hope those are false eyelashes. I've notice more than once that some little boys have marvelous long eyelashes, but this is ridiculous.

Let 'him' learn "to be careful of what you wish for".

As time goes by and 'his' DL picture confuses anyone that looks at it causing them to do their job correctly (i.e. refuse to believe 'he' is really 'he') the picture issue will resolve itself.

Our (society) job is to ensure that things are being taken care of "correctly" and not to suffer fools. (Ex. Schools w/zero tolerance policy should be watched and poor judgements made very unpopular. Police actions likewise.)

I do not need to 'school' young adults, liberals, or LGBTs. Life (and pirates) will take care of that for me.

I think they're false lashes, but my husband has lashes like a giraffe, so if you curled them and put mascara on they'd look fake.

I will say that I look pretty different without certain makeup (I have blonde lashes), so I'd be pissed off if I had to take off my mascara to get an ID done. Thing is, I just don't care or have much passion about the whole transgender/"gender non-conforming" thang. If a boy wants to dress like a girl, that's fine, but I don't want to talk about it ad nauseam. People are who they are; I just don't feel like being served up a political "lesson" every time I leave the house- especially by someone who doesn't pay his own bills yet.

There's a guy who works the cash register at one of the grocery stores on the way home. He's a drag queen; at work he wears his uniform...but he has his eyebrows plucked and penciled, and a manicure, and some eye makeup. My daughter was initially scared of him. I told her his eyes are like that because it makes him feel pretty. It hasn't come up again.

Looking at the two pictures above, I would guess they were not of the same person or a very different age. Part of that is it appears to me that the picture on the right is stretched a bit.

In the article, he's clearly a guy in his late teens. The pics here I could easily see as a mid-teen girl, perhaps his sister.

You mean the article linked in this blog? He's wearing basically the same make-up. Obviously has lipstick on, drawn-on eyebrows and other eye make-up. In both photos. The "candid" photo is just taken from further away and he's in the sunlight, so he looks a bit different. Only difference is, his hair isn't styled quite the same, but, hey, I make my hair look extra nice when it's time for my DL photo.

If that's what he looks like, usually, that's what ought to be on his license. A picture on a license is used by officials to quickly visually make a determination about whether the person carrying it is the same person the license was issued to. It's so simple it shouldn't need saying.

Yep! If he usually wears a bit of make-up and looks more feminine, that's what he should do in his DL pic.

My boyfriend looks unrecognizable in his DL pic, and it's been a big inconvenience for him. He had long hair at the time it was taken and hadn't started lifting, so he's super skinny. Now, he has short hair and is about 25 lbs heavier, a big difference on his frame. He gets trouble every time he tries to enter a bar, and last time he got pulled over, the cop did a triple-take. He hasn't taken the time to get a new picture yet.

We don't expect most people to look exactly like their driver's license photos. People color their hair, cut their hair, get glasses, switch to contacts, gain weight, lose weight, etc. Why is this kid's makeup such a big deal?

I think IP nailed it: the DMV's original reaction was probably that they were being punked. But I say, roll with it and let the subject assume responsibility. The purpose of the photo is to match the ID to the face. If that's how the guy usually goes about in public, then the photo should reflect that. If it isn't, then it's going to be his ongoing headache and he'll learn a lesson from it.

(I do personally think this "gender non-conformace" bit is just a tad too precious. But that's neither here nor there.)

The question ultimately, is on the drivers license, is there an "Other" for the sex of the applicant. If there isn't, then the DMV is just following rules. When the kid gets pulled over and doesn't look like his picture, that's HIS problem...

Believe me, the first time I got pulled over after I shaved my beard off, they hassled me for 30 minutes over having to get a new DL picture.

The problem here, is that people aren't taking this stuff seriously. This is to identify you to The Government. Remember on a passport picture, how you have to be 3/4 turn and no smile? That's because it's serious bidness getting a passport.

the kid is the person that will be taking on the PROOF of identity, whenever he is required to produce it, if he doesn't look like the picture, regardless.

The rest of us don't care.

I don't see any "straight" or "gender-conforming" people that look like Androgynous Pat getting sent home from the DMV for being "sexually undercooked." What a crock.

Converse to Amy's example, are they denying any women to take ID photos makeup-free? Are they insisting men have a skiff of beard-stubble so they look sufficiently masculine? Get outta here. If this arbitrary standard is honored, that someone can be denied a (mandatory) government service because they don't look manly or womanly enough, then we may as well have a lot of fun working to look like June Cleaver or Clint Eastwood to go get ID'ed.

Amy had it right. The kid is wearing nothing even close to what anyone should consider "stage makeup" (read: KISS) and therefore it's none of the DMV's damned business to dictate.

They don't know if he looks like that every day, and have no way of knowing aside from following him around with a creepy little RC camera car.

I find it hilarious that the people who tell someone like this to just get over it are generally the same people who bitch about getting carded in the first place.

When I worked as a cashier at Walmart, I had this woman come through my line. There were certain clues about her appearance that indicated that this might be a man. She paid with her credit card. We were required to see ID with credit cards, but she refused to show me her ID. I decided not to make a big deal about it and allowed the credit to go through. I could only imagine that her ID showed her to be a man, and she did not want me to see that, likely for fear of what I might think or what my reaction might me, as if everyone who works at Walmart are intolerant conservatives.

Yes - I'm sure the DMVs across the country have a policy about obscured appearances? It's bullshit. If I can walk into a DMV as a religious person and have so much facial hair you cannot actually see my face or claim religious grounds for wearing a head scarf in my photograph, then a small amount of makeup is just discrimination against LGBT people. This is another example of the government attempting to tell us how to behave. There is clearly NO amount of makeup one could wear, short of something applied by a special effects artist, that could so completely obscure one's appearance that could prevent a photograph at a DMV. Period. Clear and utter BULLSHIT.

At least he's not a 240 lb linebacker in drag.

Seriously, though, I wore a full beard for years. When I shaved, my passport and DL didn't match my appearance - and I was called on it every time I traveled.

So yeah, the watchdogs do pay attention - but they can probably figure it out on their own. The DMV am dumbers.

If that's what he looks like, usually, that's what ought to be on his license.

Anyone remember this?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-06-06-license-veil_x.htm

> Good, those discussions are necessary.

Ok. You have them. Find the kid, pull him aside, and talk with him about his dork (etc.) until you're ready for death. Of course, I'll think you're both pathetically naive and narcissistic, but at least you'll have left the rest of us out of it… We got better things to talk about. The loss of your own social and emotional development will be a small cost for society to pay, and besides, it may not have been going that that well anyway.

> I wouldn't go so far as Crid - I suspect
> he wasn't really trying to make a scene.

I never said "make a scene."

How come people translate stuff on this blog?

> I bet Crid's just feeling uncomfortable
> because he finds the kid attractive.

The autumn of seventh grade, just after summer, where one can affirm psychological insight merely through taunts... Your own heart is still very much in that place, where it's terribly important to be more aware than the other kids... (Especially that queen bitch from the lunchroom, Penelope Frissonbridget.) Why, golly, you even see things that other people are feeling that they themselves don't see! About sex!

Because Freud. (Or whomever... That guy, and those books.)

The one, ONE quality we would least ascribe to your life, based on your comments, is erotic sophistication.


Don't be too embarrassed. This was what the gay marriage debate was about for most people-- One last chance to talk like a middle-schooler and pretend that Dad is taking care of the important stuff while the kids act like assholes.

So, I mean, it's not that you aren't all fucked up, just that you have a whole lot of company in a fat 'n shabby generation.

Are those his eyelashes or is he wearing falsies?

Probably his, men have longer and thicker eyelashes than women

However, the DMV should ensure that the person is recognizable from their photograph. That has nothing to do with "gender identity" and everything to do with providing a form of ID.

Great point, two rebuttals. The DMV allows burkas, and as the kid wears makeup in everyday life his photo reflecting that would be more accurate

This isn't a case of someone whose appearance has changed over time, this is the case of a "non-conforming" teenage boy who likes to wear girls clothing and makeup... just because.
Anyone going to get an ID knows the requirements for the photo. Those wearing headgear and burkas for religious purposes must pull it back from thier face. There is no exception to this rule that I am aware of. If one changes thier appearance dramatically since taking thier picture, the onus is on THEM to either get a new one, or deal with the occasonal questioning of your identity from those who are legally required to ask for your identification.

I guess that LGBT activists are now supposed to wait for a 'more convenient season' when the 'time is right' for them to have equal rights.

First of all, Lobster, comparing the situation of a this kid to the struggle of thousands of black American citizens for equal rights is an insult to those who actually DID, and still do, sacrifice for true equality not only in the Black communities but in the LGBT community. This isn’t even close to the same thing.

What "rights" are being violated here? He's not being denied a license. He's not being told he can't wear what he wants in public. He's not being denied any services based on his dress and manner. He's not being mistreated in any way. He was simply asked to remove his makeup for the photo. Inconvenient? Perhaps. But it's not nearly as discriminatory as it's being made out to be.

If you don’t want to follow the protocol, then you don’t get your license. But having a license isn’t a “right”, it’s a privilege that comes with conditions. If you don’t like those conditions, the way to change something is by going to the source, not making a stink at the local office and then posting about how you were “discriminated against” after the fact. That reeks of attention seeking snowflake behavior to me and I can't sympathize with it.

Makeup CAN dramatically alter ones appearance. Especially special effect makeup.
It's different for women (or even men) wearing every day makeup because you will still look like your photo with or without it. In that makeup, he doesn't look like the gender that he's "labeled as" (since that's what the LGBT community calls it), which is male. He looks female. That's bound to cause some confusion.

Even Drag Queens are not allowed to dress in drag for their DL photos but most times, they don't live thier lives in Drag. Where it gets confusing is for those who are transsexual or transgendered.

You don’t get to arbitrarily change the rules of how the gender box on the application works when it suits your cause. The bare minimum requirement for a government issued ID that you look like the Biological you and not what you "identify" as. Why make it more complicated by using vague terminology like “gender non-conforming” (which is basically another way to say that he hasn't decided what he identifies as)? Since there’s no option for this sort of thing on the licenses, yet, one must either select male or female. I have a very dear friend who identifies as female. (Generally I refer to my friend as “she” and “her” but for the purposes of this argument, I’m using the biological terminology). He lives his life as a female. He’s even legally changed his name to a female name. However, he cannot check off the ‘female’ box on the application and had to take his photo sans makeup as well because biologically, he’s still a male. He’s currently working towards saving for his operation. When that’s done, he’ll be applying for a license as female. If he's denied at that point, I'd say there's a good case for discrimination. Chase is not old enough to have a legal sex change operation without his parent’s consent, if that's indeed what he chooses later. Until that happens, for the purposes of the photo and government ID, he’s male and his photo must look male.

This isn’t a case of government discrimination against anyone in the LGBT community more than asking a Muslim woman in a burka to lower it so her face is revealed for the photo. All this does is further feed the “special snowflake’ beast that make it so hard to actually fight against real discrimination.

Amy,

Women also aren't trying to pass themselves off as men when wearing makeup. This boy is clearly trying to pass off as a girl. I don't care how "non-conforming" he claims to be, he doesn't get to change the rules of the DMV just because he feels like it. If a woman came in and had on a fake mustache or beird and what society considers to be a "masculine" haircut, and then claimed they were "non-conforming", you can bet that she'd also be asked to remove the fake facial hair as well.

What he wears outside of this photo is his business. But, as I keep reiterating, 1) having a drivers license isn't a "right" and 2) as far as the requirements for a photo ID are concerned, he must look like a "boy". I'm not saying that its right or wrong, but that's the way it is. The fight to get gay marriage legalized has gone well in a few states. So, if this is THAT important to the LGBT community, they should stop whining about it and work towards getting it changed, (preferably without the bullying tactics popular among some circles).

To add:
I define a "right" as something people are granted simply by being, as the Constituion does. One has the right to pursue getting thier drivers license, but one does not have the right to just get one without taking the tests and adhering to the standards that the government has laid out.

I am not a fan of government; anyone who knows me knows this. BUT, I also do not think I'm above it and have the right to disobey the law just because I dont like it. If I don't like a regulation, my first reaction is to either 1) go without in protest or 2) start making steps to change it. I don't go around demanding I'm treated differently because... well.. feeeeliiings.

Thanks for responding to the crustacean Crid. It was a test of my patience to read the page. I'd of just punched him/her (the crustacean). I'm getting short in words in my old age. What happened to the world?

Fir enough Sabrina, what is the regulation that forbids men wearing makeup for DMV photos?

I was not calling Crid a crustacean. Methinks I may have missed a comma.

One reason I like Amy's blog is that you can almost always discuss the core issues, on their merits, without following Amy's links. The responses of her blog visitors will make it clear that you've nonetheless distilled the matter perfectly.

I even disagree with Sabrina a little (though her speculation about a woman wearing a spirit-gum beard is spot on); it isn't about breaking laws, or any other kind of policy. It's about annoying the people at the DMV.

My California DMV employees aren't sensational people. I resent having to pay them as much as we do. I want their utility to us maximized. I don't want the DMV distracted by spiritless teenage children of divorce who're trying to fry their pink-bacon personality problems in the sizzle of annoyance from folks who have better things to worry about…

Which is all of us. The taxpayer is not your Dad, little pilgrim. If you're old enough to drive —routinely risking the lives of thousands in a single evening— you're old enough not to bother others with your weasel sexuality, whatever its deficiencies.

We don't care if you're a priapic dynamo, either…
Cover your left eye and read the fifth line.

"Make a scene" was a paraphrase of "trying to prove things to people who needn't be bothered". Sorry if I got the meaning wrong, there, Crid.

So, if the requirement is for boys to look like boys, do we require girls to have long (longer than what, half an inch? Four inches?) hair and wear makeup before they get their licenses? Are butch-looking women a problem?

Do we really want DMV employees to be tasked with making the call, about whether somebody "looks like" their gender, before they get their state-issued id? The issue seems to be eye makeup or lipstick. What about a perm? Hair gel, or mousse? Is hairspray OK? A necklace? (is it a puka shell necklace, or a pearl necklace?) One earring is OK for boys, but both ears pierced is not? Girls can have either one or both pierced? Left or right? Can it get sillier?

> a paraphrase of "trying to prove things
> to people who needn't be bothered".

flbeachmom is right. Apologies.

Being misquoted on this blog has made me paranoid.

> Do we really want DMV employees to be
> tasked with making the call, about whether
> somebody "looks like" their gender, before
> they get their state-issued id?

DMV'ers are often, um, unremarkable people. "Tasking" is not a thing that folks much worry about. But punkninny teenagers are a continuing problem, and everybody knows a few.

> having a drivers license isn't a "right"

If someone passes the test that shows they're capable of driving, and they don't appear to have criminal intent, then it absolutely is a "right" to drive - that's the entire point of having the whole system with "roads and stuff" .. so that free Americans can drive their damn cars from A to B. This isn't Saudi Arabia where they ban you from driving based on your gender identity. There is no evidence of criminal intent, so if he has proven capable of driving, he must get a license.

When they pull you over to check your license, last I checked, they don't specifically ask you to pull down your pants so they can check your genitals in any case. So of what relevance is it whether he has a penis or a vagina in his pants, as to whether he's allowed to drive?

> So of what relevance is it whether he has a penis or a vagina in his pants, as to whether he's allowed to drive

What I meant here is, as Amy says, women wear makeup all the time, and that's apparently fine. So the only reason to apply a double-standard is if you're saying makeup isn't allowed if you have a penis. And if they're banning you from driving for wearing makeup while having a penis, well FFS, as I said this isn't Saudi America --- it should be obvious that that is not right.

"punkninny teenagers" made me smile

> having a drivers license isn't a "right"

You have a right to be treated under the law the same as everyone else. If the law requires no makeup at all, than nobody should be wearing makeup.

The crux of the issue is how he appears on an everyday basis. If he only put on makeup as a prank for the DMV, then yes, require him to remove it. But if he wears makeup everyday, then his photo, as the rules state, should match that.

I'm racking my brains to figure out the criminal scheme that is facilitated by having a drivers license that doesn't look like you. As others here have noticed, it seems like it would just be a pain in the ass.

I think those that think he shouldn't wear makeup in his drivers license photo are those who think he shouldn't wear makeup at all...

> You have a right to be treated under the law the same as everyone else

You have it backwards: The purpose of the law is to ensure everyone is treated equally. If the law isn't doing that, the law should change. Otherwise what else is the law for? By this logic, it would be OK to ban women from driving, as they do in some other countries, simply because "well it's the law you know".

> made me smile

And "making a scene" is growing on me. This incident is essentially an adolescent bringing noisy family conflict to a public setting, for the benefit of neither.


There was this little girl in my life. Crazy flirt, cosmic smile, playful and athletic. Then she was gone, and then she came back six years later. Then she was gone, and then she came back another six years later, as we entered college. (Our setting for childhood was like that: long story. [She's missed the last six cycles, but I hope to speak to hear again before dying.])

In the first iterations, hers was a happy family. By the last there'd been a divorce, and it was (apparently) typically seedy and middle-aged stupid. At one point Dad invited her out to dress-up dinner, hoping the gorgeous, seemingly grown young creature could talk about the transition in a comfortable way. Instead, she shouted in the restaurant:, "I can't believe my father is asking me to sit here and make nice with his mistress!"

I'm not saying he didn't deserve the humiliation. And when hearing the story as her teenage friend myself, I thought it was cute.

And maybe there was no lasting harm to the other diners, but I doubt they felt their weekend had been meaningfully improved for knowing things about the family they didn't need to know.

> The purpose of the law is to ensure
> everyone is treated equally.

Seriously, how old are you? What's your working life like? Tell us about your formative experiences.

The purpose of the law is to ensure everyone is treated equally. ~ Posted by: lobster at June 23, 2014 3:46 PM

The law has sanctioned many an unequal treatment ... and will sanction many more before.

==============================

"In a fight between you and the world, bet on the world." -- Franz Kafka.

If you deviate sufficiently from the behavioral norm, it is not incumbent upon the world to accommodate your quirks and peculiarities. You're going to need to make the adjustments.

If you're old enough to drive, you're old enough to face that fact.

'cause you may consider yourself "driver non-conforming" and prefer driving on the left side of the road, but that truck coming at you prefers the status quo.

Sometimes the rules don't get bent to fit your vision of how precious you are.

Besides, no one likes their driver's license photo.

The "before" is a superfluous leftover from a deleted train of thought.

Sometimes I wish this forum had an edit feature.

>> The purpose of the law is to ensure
>> everyone is treated equally

> The law has sanctioned many an unequal
> treatment ... and will sanction many
> more before.

M'kay, thanks, it wasn't just me being struck by that statement.

I get what Lobster's trying to say, but the way he said it connotes and unfounded faith in and subservience to "the law" and its cousin "the government."

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were put into place as a means of ensuring the government (and the mob - remember Jefferson's tyranny of the majority) could not trample the basic rights of the members of a minority in society.

They were not put into place so every minority sect or subculture could force society to bend to its will under the guise of "equal rights."

We're meant to be citizens, not subjects.

I once had my DL suspended for points. After I paid up and did my time I had a court order allowing me to get a new DL. I didn't have any state ID for the period. I went to one BMV and they wouldn't accept the court order as sufficient identification to give me a new DL. I went to a different BMV about 50 miles away and they had no problem accepting the court order as proof.

Sooner or later you need to learn that your own uniqueness doesn't mean squat to others. If you are lucky, that lesson is learned from those that truly mean you no harm. If you are unlucky, that lesson can be truly combined with the "life is not fair" lesson.

I was once only one of two white emloyees. During the break the guys asked me the typical questions including where did I live and how did get to work. I said I drove down 'abc' road to 'def' road and so on. DEAD SILENCE. One of the guys broke the silence and said "Bob, we don't even go through that neighborhood. Cops only go in there in multiple cars." They got out a map and helped me live another day.

Having come from a rural environment I just did not know that certain parts of a city can be dangerous for someone just driving down the street.

'Sweetness' needs someone to explain to him that his universe has just expanded to include some that hunt, some that prey, and some that emphasize. Doesn't matter what he looks like the above is true.

Also, staying in DMV/BMV one minute longer than necessary is not to be tolerated.

1. The eyelashes could be real. The potential for length is genetic and long eyelashes are dominant over short eyelashes. JIC you didn't already know that.

2. Most people I know complain that their Driver's License picture doesn't really look like them.

3. A woman can change her hair style and color from that on her license without losing it.

I am so glad this cute kid's predicament is worth 50-plus comments.
Sure puts those other issues in their place.

This is just another case illustrating that government is an impersonal solution to personal problems. If you think you can rewrite DMV policy to suit everybody, I suggest you start training to do that by writing out a procedure to put your shoes on.

> I am so glad this cute kid's predicament is
> worth 50-plus comments.
> Sure puts those other issues in their place.

Raddy knows exactly what we're supposed to be paying attention to!

And we can tell... He thinks this isn't it!

We should be paying attention to other stuff!

But I think this is a big one. As noted above: The gay marriage debate was all about the need of so many in our richly-empowered social machinery to regress to high school and call someone a bigoted jerk, or maybe even "mean."

And that's intense!

Because feelings!

So, yeah, I like seeing a few of these on here, and am comforted by those who agree that the rest of us weren't put on the planet to soothe the weenies who feel cheated in trivial ways.

I like Kim Kardashian! That's right, I said it!

I like her because she has a big, round ass. Feminine! Nice!

And I like her because except for Twitter, she consumes zero of my personal intellectual resources. For all we know, the people who watch her closely really need that in their lives.... But the fact that they want it is good enough for me. Free country. They can have it.

We needn't presume they'd be doing successful neurosurgery on stray puppies if they weren't watching Kim. That way leads to madness... Like Australia's legal requirement to vote... No less authoritarian than being forbidden to vote, if you ask me.

Sigh. Nothing about this young man's appearance or features are obscured. It's pure lunacy to imagine that he's trying to buck against existing rules, because there is no rule that he's broken. The only thing he's guilty of is not looking the way that the DMV clerk believes he SHOULD look. The only problem is the one the clerk has. This is not a liberal versus conservative issue, this is the simple injection of one clerk's personal bias into a governmental transaction.

What are they going to do, start pinching people who have port-wine birthmarks, to make sure they're not just going heavy on the rouge that day? How about telling farmers to go home and change because they don't look "nice" enough? Oh, I know. We can send home people with hairy face moles, because, you know. They might just decide to pluck them tomorrow and that would make identification damn near impossible.

See, Raddy, Lobster and his/her fellow Lobsterians are not kidding:

> The only thing he's guilty of is not
> looking the way that the DMV clerk believes
> he SHOULD look. The only problem is the
> one the clerk has.

Does this not describe about, oh, 40% of the wretchedness of the Obama voters? Is their endlessly tumescent (if unfunded) adoration of policy and regulation not most often an enshrinement of their own self-righteousness and youthful resentments?

Right? I mean, the capitalization of "SHOULD" up there is a nice touch… Right?

Perhaps you're right to be annoyed by this topic, but it's only one drop in the flood.

> Sigh.





(!)

(!!)

What are they going to do, start pinching people who have port-wine birthmarks, to make sure they're not just going heavy on the rouge that day? How about telling farmers to go home and change because they don't look "nice" enough? Oh, I know. We can send home people with hairy face moles, because, you know. They might just decide to pluck them tomorrow and that would make identification damn near impossible. ~ Posted by: Misanthropaedia at June 23, 2014 11:54 PM

Nah, It will go the other way.

Because the DMV will no longer allowed to hurt special snowflakes' feelings, it will have to start allowing people to have their state ID pictures taken in ICP make-up ("That's who I am, man.), wearing big fake beards ('cause they feel Hasidic), with fake face tattoos, wearing blonde wigs ("It's not fair! Deep down inside I'm blonde."), in full cross-dressing make up, or even having their friends stand in for them ("I'm shy.")

Men who feel like they're women or are "gender non-conforming" will be encouraged to mark "F" on their applications. Wiggas will get to mark "African-American" on theirs.

Pretty soon it won't be a state ID anymore, it will be a Second Life character profile.

I guess two can play at reductio ad absurdum.

Those asking about the eyelashes. They are real.

Many men naturally have long eyelashes while relatively few women do. For what ever reason this common male trait has become a desirable female one.

It high school I used to trim my eyelashes with small scissors. They would scrape the far end of the swim goggles, get powered chlorine on them, which then got into my eyes. I know tons of men who have naturally thick long eyelashes. But without mascara or eyeliner no one ever notices.

Thanks Amy. I can't believe this is even a thing. It kills me.

> I tear up a little at hearing this.

oh

BLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEECCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Jesus Fucking Christ on a STICK.

You pouting little darlings, all wounded and chin-ducked and big-eyed, you sincerely want to run a society this way.

You want to go back to seventh grade, and you want to fix those problems! Goddamit, this time, you're going to do it right!

And your loss of whatever adult strength and sensibility you've gained in the last forty years will be a small price to pay for the satisfaction of taking your tall-person courage back in the time machine to that unforgettably tragic moment during the Bay City Roller years when the popular new(!) girl in school said you look fat in those pants...

Or whatever it was.

Except there's no time machine. You're just bring childish.

Well, Amy, next time you want to feign sophisticated resentment about things like college administrative interference in student sex encounters, remember that YOU HAVE NO STANDING. You know EXACTLY how people are supposed to be responding to each other, and you'll execute irresistible authority to make it happen.

This is so weird... So fucking weird... Day after day we get these mutually-repellent expressions of belief... Whiplash, flailing examples of collapsed libertarian principle, and nobody even notices.

I honestly don't get your comment Crid.

I read Amy's comment as a mix of jealousy and sorrow. I had something she wanted and then I destroyed it. Of course it is not like I could have given it to her, but the emotion is still there. She didn't say anything about stopping me.

And trust me, if she had my eyelashes and swam like I did she would have trimmed them too. That dried up chlorine would burn and burn.

Oh.

Well...

Still!

To many people are expecting government and its taxpayers to be The Loving, Accepting, Provident, Daddy Figure of Their Dreams.

Ain't worth it.

As much as it pains me to acknowledge blatant trolls, I can't help but find humor at this moment.

Somehow, saying someone should have the liberty to wear light makeup in an ID photo translates to "collapsed libertarian principle."

The self-contradiction in that idea is queerer than the boy in mascara.

That's been the pattern all these years... You fail to answer my arguments. But that's not the weird part.

Now, broadcasters of various description —from the most modest farmland shacks to the largest television networks on the planet— have transmitted my work through what used to be called "the ether"; An ever-expanding bubble of electromagnetic radiation with the product of my career careens ever-deeper into the cosmos, growing fainter but never extinguished, and impossible to squelch.

But you, Amy Alkon, have done (and PAID) more to record and publish my words than any other human being.

The weird part is that you don't even give evidence of having read them.

Of course. The argument that "the government is not your dad!" somehow means that the government should teach you how to be a man and should control whether or not you wear makeup.

Never change, dear.

Oh, blow me, "Dear." Take your dentures out first. "How to be a man" means precisely not to annoy workaday passersby, and no 16-year-old deserves the presumption of righteousness.

Threadwin:

> Besides, no one likes their driver's
> license photo.

> Posted by: Conan the Grammarian at
> June 23, 2014 5:26 PM

☑

That's been the pattern all these years... You fail to answer my arguments. But that's not the weird part. - crid

No the weird part is you get all pissy that others treat you the way you treat them. Its like your a 13yr old girl

I thought they were commentary, not argument...

Wonder if this guy gets his license picture IRL?

71 comments. Man, this is important!