3 ms·

It is about respecting the individuals wishes. Consider a more general case than gender, as the gender debate has been so poisoned by right wing attempts to tu

It is about respecting the individuals wishes. Consider a more general case than gender, as the gender debate has been so poisoned by right wing attempts to turn it into a wedge issue it is difficult to discuss without a bigger discussion of sex, gender, society and biology. Let's say someone's legal name is Robert. They deeply dislike the name Robert and prefer to be called Bob. Should they legally be allowed to change their name to Bob? Is the authority of the label Robert on their birth certificate greater than the authority of an individual to name themselves? Taking this out of the realm of law and into the more murky area of social dynamics. Lets say Bob asks people in their workplace to call them Bob, but everyone in their workplace calls Bob, Robert instead. In doing so they are not being respectful of an individual. While all groups are made of individuals, the question here is should the individual be able to determine the name they are called or should a collective group decide it for them? I would take Bob's side and say that his coworkers are being shitty. There are some interesting cases here. Fighter pilots don't get to choose their call signs. Instead they are given by the other pilots and often refers to something they messed up. The authority of the call sign comes from group consensus not individual wishes.

nvm0n2 3y ago
Changing your name is a pretty involved legal process exactly because identity is so widely used by other people, so it generates a lot of work to alter it. And governments in some parts of the world regulate what names you can use, and may refuse to let you change your name if they have reasons for it. I don't personally care much what people want to be called, and would of course be happy to call Robert Bob if that is what he wanted. But that's because I'm a reasonable person and that's a reasonable request. If Robert changed his mind every week about what he wanted to be called, people would stop respecting his wishes because he'd be placing an unreasonable burden on them by doing so. If he decided his new name was 56 characters long and impossible to spell, or some unpronounceable symbol, again, people might reject his wish because it would place an unreasonable burden on them. Perhaps more apropos for Hacker News, many websites don't let you change your username because it's a primary key, or because that's how other users identify you, or for whatever other reasons. They may also ban things like emoji in name fields, or even in some incompetent cases not work if your name is Null. Are these violations of my human rights? Well, no, not really. So whilst I don't wish to get into trans issues here, the claim that identity is a purely personal choice is clearly backwards. Your identity is how other people identify you, by definition, so it requires their consent to have a specific identity. You can ask them nicely but it's ultimately their choice.
- EthanHeilman 3y ago
  > the claim that identity is a purely personal choice is clearly backwards. Your identity is how other people identify you, by definition, so it requires their consent to have a specific identity. You can ask them nicely but it's ultimately their choice. Individualism doesn't make sense without groups. The last human on earth doesn't need individualism, individualism is only a helpful idea when both and group and an individual have a claim to something and the group can force its will on the individual. Individualism is not about who is able makes the choice, as you point out with identity the group has always has ability to call Bob, Robert. Rather the question is should the large group do such a thing. Why doesn't the larger group not simply enforce it's will on the smaller individual? Individualism , which is core to notions of gay rights and trans rights, answers that question with the statement that there is inherent value in respecting the choices of an individual especially when it comes to that individual's identity and self-expression.

nvm0n2 3y ago

Changing your name is a pretty involved legal process exactly because identity is so widely used by other people, so it generates a lot of work to alter it. And governments in some parts of the world regulate what names you can use, and may refuse to let you change your name if they have reasons for it. I don't personally care much what people want to be called, and would of course be happy to call Robert Bob if that is what he wanted. But that's because I'm a reasonable person and that's a reasonable request. If Robert changed his mind every week about what he wanted to be called, people would stop respecting his wishes because he'd be placing an unreasonable burden on them by doing so. If he decided his new name was 56 characters long and impossible to spell, or some unpronounceable symbol, again, people might reject his wish because it would place an unreasonable burden on them. Perhaps more apropos for Hacker News, many websites don't let you change your username because it's a primary key, or because that's how other users identify you, or for whatever other reasons. They may also ban things like emoji in name fields, or even in some incompetent cases not work if your name is Null. Are these violations of my human rights? Well, no, not really. So whilst I don't wish to get into trans issues here, the claim that identity is a purely personal choice is clearly backwards. Your identity is how other people identify you, by definition, so it requires their consent to have a specific identity. You can ask them nicely but it's ultimately their choice.

EthanHeilman 3y ago
> the claim that identity is a purely personal choice is clearly backwards. Your identity is how other people identify you, by definition, so it requires their consent to have a specific identity. You can ask them nicely but it's ultimately their choice. Individualism doesn't make sense without groups. The last human on earth doesn't need individualism, individualism is only a helpful idea when both and group and an individual have a claim to something and the group can force its will on the individual. Individualism is not about who is able makes the choice, as you point out with identity the group has always has ability to call Bob, Robert. Rather the question is should the large group do such a thing. Why doesn't the larger group not simply enforce it's will on the smaller individual? Individualism , which is core to notions of gay rights and trans rights, answers that question with the statement that there is inherent value in respecting the choices of an individual especially when it comes to that individual's identity and self-expression.