3 ms·

Au contraire, I believe it would be inappropriate to refer to Harry Houdini as "Erik Weisz" except when discussing his personal life, for the same reason.

klelatti 6y ago
Alex Johnson uses his "Boris" persona as part of an act. It's a calculating and deliberate effort, not to separate his personal life from politics - which would be reasonable - but to create a more attractive persona to present to the electorate. It's one which is quite different from his real persona. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to resist that effort. No idea what Harry Houdini has to do with this. I don't recall him standing for election as Harry Houdini.
- Smaug123 6y ago
  As we both already know, Harry Houdini never stood for election as Prime Minister. He constructed a stage persona in exactly the way you ascribe to Johnson; the only difference is that you personally decline to accept Johnson's. Setting aside the question of whether people should have the right to choose how others refer to them in a professional vs a private context, there's already a very simple, common, and well-known way to refuse to call him "Boris", and it's one which already carries the same connotations. As a matter of simple courtesy, don't force people to ask you what you mean (which is what you do when you refer to him as "Alex", exactly as you would if you referred to Houdini as "Erik"); presumably you find it as infuriating as everyone else when people deliberately speak in such a way as to force you to ask them to clarify. It's bad manners just as using needlessly pretentious and obscure vocabulary is.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ncallaway 6y ago
    > He constructed a stage persona in exactly the way you ascribe to Johnson; the only difference is that you personally decline to accept Johnson's. I mean, yes. If you're an entertainment personality you can have a stage persona and I accept that. If you're a politician, then I reject your desire to have a stage persona. Politicians pretending to be something they aren't is a massive problem, and treating politics exactly like another form of entertainment is a massive problem with our society and our politics. So I am doing exactly what your criticize, but I do it proudly, and I actually return the opposite criticism to you.
    - klelatti 6y ago
      Completely agree. The Harry Houdini example is actually illuminating I think: what if he had stood as Harry Houdini - would it be reasonable to stand on that persona rather than his real one? I think not. Another point on Johnson is that he deliberately conflates his personal life with politics when it suits him (pictures of his new born son on the front pages of papers) whilst using the courts to obscure others (his possible fatherhood of another child). On use of his name it's the man himself who makes the ruthless political decisions and not the stage persona which is is much more 'warm and cuddly'.
      - Smaug123 6y ago
        To me, "calling a trans person consistently by the wrong pronouns" and "referring to someone at work using a name you know is their spouse's pet name for them" would fall into the same category. I find it hard to view any of these as anything other than Dick Moves. I do have an unusually strong loathing of globally-inconsistent rules, though, which probably makes me more prone than most to generalise the rules along this axis (whereas you believe that they should not generalise past a particular point). Re Harry Houdini specifically: I think it would have been reasonable, yes. Lord Buckethead does it. In fact, I think it would be reasonable to stand as Borat, and people voting for Borat would be voting specifically for Borat, not for Sacha Baron Cohen. If elected, I would expect Sacha Baron Cohen to rule to the best of his ability as if he were Borat.
        klelatti 6y ago
        Tbh if Johnson ran the UK as "Boris" I'd probably give him a pass and call him Boris, but he doesn't. In any event Happy Xmas!
        ncallaway 6y ago
        > calling a trans person consistently by the wrong pronouns That's not a stage persona, though. I don't reject that someone can transition genders, and hold political office as their preferred gender. In the same way, I absolutely don't begrudge a politician using a preferred name if it is their actual preferred name. What I personally won't tolerate is a stage persona. They don't get to "play a character" when they run for office. > Lord Buckethead does it. I think this is the best example of a blurred line. I don't mind Lord Buckethead's persona, because I view his activities as political satire despite the fact that he's using the actual election mechanisms. If, however, he stood a 1% chance of winning and actually wanted to govern I would absolutely not accept "Lord Buckethead" as a reasonable candidate. So, as political satire, Lord Buckethead is fine as a stage persona. As a bona fide political candidate, I think it's absolutely wrong.
lotsofpulp 6y ago
Are entertainers and actors using screen names and politicians working for the country equivalent?
phyalow 6y ago
In both the subtlety of meaning and in totality of context, reference to ones birth name in this case, helps illuminate the original point of his ruthlessness as a political operator who constructed a persona grata. Highly appropriate I say.

klelatti 6y ago

Alex Johnson uses his "Boris" persona as part of an act. It's a calculating and deliberate effort, not to separate his personal life from politics - which would be reasonable - but to create a more attractive persona to present to the electorate. It's one which is quite different from his real persona. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to resist that effort. No idea what Harry Houdini has to do with this. I don't recall him standing for election as Harry Houdini.

Smaug123 6y ago
As we both already know, Harry Houdini never stood for election as Prime Minister. He constructed a stage persona in exactly the way you ascribe to Johnson; the only difference is that you personally decline to accept Johnson's. Setting aside the question of whether people should have the right to choose how others refer to them in a professional vs a private context, there's already a very simple, common, and well-known way to refuse to call him "Boris", and it's one which already carries the same connotations. As a matter of simple courtesy, don't force people to ask you what you mean (which is what you do when you refer to him as "Alex", exactly as you would if you referred to Houdini as "Erik"); presumably you find it as infuriating as everyone else when people deliberately speak in such a way as to force you to ask them to clarify. It's bad manners just as using needlessly pretentious and obscure vocabulary is.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ncallaway 6y ago
  > He constructed a stage persona in exactly the way you ascribe to Johnson; the only difference is that you personally decline to accept Johnson's. I mean, yes. If you're an entertainment personality you can have a stage persona and I accept that. If you're a politician, then I reject your desire to have a stage persona. Politicians pretending to be something they aren't is a massive problem, and treating politics exactly like another form of entertainment is a massive problem with our society and our politics. So I am doing exactly what your criticize, but I do it proudly, and I actually return the opposite criticism to you.
  - klelatti 6y ago
    Completely agree. The Harry Houdini example is actually illuminating I think: what if he had stood as Harry Houdini - would it be reasonable to stand on that persona rather than his real one? I think not. Another point on Johnson is that he deliberately conflates his personal life with politics when it suits him (pictures of his new born son on the front pages of papers) whilst using the courts to obscure others (his possible fatherhood of another child). On use of his name it's the man himself who makes the ruthless political decisions and not the stage persona which is is much more 'warm and cuddly'.
    - Smaug123 6y ago
      To me, "calling a trans person consistently by the wrong pronouns" and "referring to someone at work using a name you know is their spouse's pet name for them" would fall into the same category. I find it hard to view any of these as anything other than Dick Moves. I do have an unusually strong loathing of globally-inconsistent rules, though, which probably makes me more prone than most to generalise the rules along this axis (whereas you believe that they should not generalise past a particular point). Re Harry Houdini specifically: I think it would have been reasonable, yes. Lord Buckethead does it. In fact, I think it would be reasonable to stand as Borat, and people voting for Borat would be voting specifically for Borat, not for Sacha Baron Cohen. If elected, I would expect Sacha Baron Cohen to rule to the best of his ability as if he were Borat.
      - klelatti 6y ago
        Tbh if Johnson ran the UK as "Boris" I'd probably give him a pass and call him Boris, but he doesn't. In any event Happy Xmas!
      - ncallaway 6y ago
        > calling a trans person consistently by the wrong pronouns That's not a stage persona, though. I don't reject that someone can transition genders, and hold political office as their preferred gender. In the same way, I absolutely don't begrudge a politician using a preferred name if it is their actual preferred name. What I personally won't tolerate is a stage persona. They don't get to "play a character" when they run for office. > Lord Buckethead does it. I think this is the best example of a blurred line. I don't mind Lord Buckethead's persona, because I view his activities as political satire despite the fact that he's using the actual election mechanisms. If, however, he stood a 1% chance of winning and actually wanted to govern I would absolutely not accept "Lord Buckethead" as a reasonable candidate. So, as political satire, Lord Buckethead is fine as a stage persona. As a bona fide political candidate, I think it's absolutely wrong.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

Are entertainers and actors using screen names and politicians working for the country equivalent?

phyalow 6y ago

In both the subtlety of meaning and in totality of context, reference to ones birth name in this case, helps illuminate the original point of his ruthlessness as a political operator who constructed a persona grata. Highly appropriate I say.