Talk:LlGetGender

This function should not be implement. While this request may be new, this function (in other incarnations) has been suggested before (llDetectedSex). The debate over this proposed functionality is based on the argument that it would facilitate scripted discrimination. Considering that it is easy enough to ask the user what sex they are, it seems to me not worth the dev time and the political fallout. -- Strife Onizuka 09:48, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

I think you are wrong, the payment status is much more discriminating and is pushed by the Lindens. I want to sell female body parts only to females and not to man. And I want to sell tem notrans. Same with cloths and hair. I want to close my Land for Male. It is my Land I pay tears for it and the rule is : Landowners make the rules. If this policy is changed I aske the Lindens to pay my tears Anylyn Hax 13:04, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

Just because there is one form of discrimination supported doesn't mean that we should accept any others. The only reason we have payment info visible is to facilitate discrimination against griefers. I don't consider it a good thing but it does seem to be a necessary evil. The type of sexual discrimination you describe is not necessary nor is it probably legal. Banning male AVs is one thing, but banning male users is another. I think it would be a violation of the Community Standards, Terms Of Service or federal law. To allow this would be a step backwards both socially and morally. In the last century women have gained a more equal footing with men through legislation mandating equality, this goes against the core of that legislation; with the loss of theses protections, women have more to loose then men (after all 84% of congressmen are men). -- Strife Onizuka 14:59, 1 June 2007 (PDT)