Dutch man, 69, who 'identifies as 20 years younger' launches legal battle to change age

[dismal]

Yes, and more importantly buy things they actually want like alcohol and porn.

Who pays to watch porn these days ?

And who would even want to watch it anymore? The little modern porn I've looked at is legal barbarism.

It's my understanding that porn is still fairly popular. So I hear, anyway.

 

[WAB]

And who would even want to watch it anymore? The little modern porn I've looked at is legal barbarism.

It's my understanding that porn is still fairly popular. So I hear, anyway.

Yes, of course it is, I wasn't arguing that. Just a personal beef with me.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

He raises some good points, but then, the judge raises some interesting objections as well. The fact is that providing a false date of birth would be a piece of misinformation with a considerable number of negative effects. This is so regardless of whether providing false information regarding one's sex might also cause a considerable number of negative effects.

Is it really a "false date of birth" if he identifies as someone born on April 27, 1969?

If the birth certificate says that he was born on that date, yes, is is a false date of birth. Why?
I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you're saying it's some other form of falsity, I would agree it implies (together with known facts) a lot of other false things that are relevant in assessing his life history, and those of a number of others. Hence, my point about a lot of other complications.

Now, if he merely claims to have been born on that date but it is not in the birth certificate, sure, that's still false.

 

[dismal]

He raises some good points, but then, the judge raises some interesting objections as well. The fact is that providing a false date of birth would be a piece of misinformation with a considerable number of negative effects. This is so regardless of whether providing false information regarding one's sex might also cause a considerable number of negative effects.

Is it really a "false date of birth" if he identifies as someone born on April 27, 1969?

If the birth certificate says that he was born on that date, yes, is is a false date of birth. Why?
I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you're saying it's some other form of falsity, I would agree it implies (together with known facts) a lot of other false things that are relevant in assessing his life history, and those of a number of others. Hence, my point about a lot of other complications.

Now, if he merely claims to have been born on that date but it is not in the birth certificate, sure, that's still false.

Why would the date on his birth certificate matter if he doesn't identify as being born on that day?

You wouldn't say someone who identifies as a man is lying if their birth certificate says they are a woman would you?

 

[skepticalbip]

It's an amazing world we live in. We have gone from a world where reality was reality regardless of what people believed to a world where reality was subject to the fluidity of what people believed their gender or race was and now to the fluidity of reality itself dependent only on what people think it is.

 

[Elixir]

It's an amazing world we live in. We have gone from a world where reality was reality regardless of what people believed to a world where reality was subject to the fluidity of what people believed their gender or race was and now to the fluidity of reality itself dependent only on what people think it is.

Shhh! The illusion that reality is not reality any more, is not a reality. But don't tell anyone - people don't like you to mess with their reality!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It's an amazing world we live in. We have gone from a world where reality was reality regardless of what people believed to a world where reality was subject to the fluidity of what people believed their gender or race was and now to the fluidity of reality itself dependent only on what people think it is.

Actually, step one was reality was what our overlords told us. The last step, while terrible, is the democratization of reality.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

If the birth certificate says that he was born on that date, yes, is is a false date of birth. Why?
I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you're saying it's some other form of falsity, I would agree it implies (together with known facts) a lot of other false things that are relevant in assessing his life history, and those of a number of others. Hence, my point about a lot of other complications.

Now, if he merely claims to have been born on that date but it is not in the birth certificate, sure, that's still false.

Why would the date on his birth certificate matter if he doesn't identify as being born on that day?

I don't know whether it would matter to him. It would matter to others if they intend to ascertain what happened in the past, in different situations. But regardless, it would provide false information - i.e., the certificate would be making the false claim that he was born when he was not.

You wouldn't say someone who identifies as a man is lying if their birth certificate says they are a woman would you?

The birth certificate would not say that. It would say that the individual is female. It would be in the vast majority of cases correct. If the person claims to be a man, very probably that is sincere, so not a lie. But altering the birth certificate and saying the individual is a male would indeed provide false information.

 

[untermensche]

You wouldn't say someone who identifies as a man is lying if their birth certificate says they are a woman would you?

These men are not saying they are women or were born women.

They are saying they are going to live as a woman, there is a mismatch between their body and their gender, and want this choice recognized in law.

This clown is trying to get the government to lie about his birth date.

To see these cases as remotely similar says something about the seer.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I hereby self identify as a super genius.

 

[untermensche]

I hereby self identify as a super genius.

That's something that can be tested.

How do you test what gender somebody is?

A lot of what we call "gender" is a mental construct based on experience, not genetics.

You would have to be able to "read" another person's mind to know what gender they are.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PObBA2wH5l0[/youtube]

There are people who are getting their birth certificate amended based on transgender status. Is that any more of a case of trying to get the government to lie on a birth certificate? If a birth certificate says "male" and a person gets it changed to "female", how really is that different from changing "1949" to "1969"?

 

[untermensche]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PObBA2wH5l0[/youtube]

There are people who are getting their birth certificate amended based on transgender status. Is that any more of a case of trying to get the government to lie on a birth certificate? If a birth certificate says "male" and a person gets it changed to "female", how really is that different from changing "1949" to "1969"?

That is too far.

It is one thing to get the government to recognize your living circumstance and protect you from discrimination that effects your ability to survive.

Another to try to change the past.

A person is born once.

But they are not born with knowledge of their gender.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

A birth certificate indicates "at time of birth this person had a penis" or "at time of birth this person had a vagina". How is changing that not changing the past?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

A birth certificate indicates "at time of birth this person had a penis" or "at time of birth this person had a vagina". How is changing that not changing the past?

Do you also think when you throw out a dictionary no one knows words?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

A birth certificate indicates "at time of birth this person had a penis" or "at time of birth this person had a vagina". How is changing that not changing the past?

I'm not sure. An alternative interpretation is that the birth certificate says it's either male or female, and looking at whether the newborn's genitalia is the usual way - and almost always accurate - of ascertaining whether the newborn is male or female. Whether they're male or female depends on internal sexual organs and the gametes they might eventually produce - though that's not the meaning of the terms 'female' or 'male', either.

But leaving that aside, in the cases of transgender people, I think a significant difference between changing that and changing the date of birth is that the person who has their birth certificate changed doe not know that the statement they're introducing in their birth certificate is false - in fact, they would argue that it is true, even if they are mistaken about it. So, they're not claiming that they did not have a penis or a vagina.

At any rate, the fact that some birth certificates have been altered and assert now falsehoods is not a good reason to allow others to also alter their birth certificates and assert other falsehoods.

 

[dismal]

You wouldn't say someone who identifies as a man is lying if their birth certificate says they are a woman would you?

These men are not saying they are women or were born women.

They are saying they are going to live as a woman, there is a mismatch between their body and their gender, and want this choice recognized in law.

This clown is trying to get the government to lie about his birth date.

To see these cases as remotely similar says something about the seer.

They are not similar, they are identical. Unless you're some transageophobic asshole.

A person is what they identify as being, not what some narrow-minded bigot wants to call them. Unless they don't identify as being a person, of course.

 

[ruby sparks]

In all seriousness, this case does throw up the interesting issue of what parts of one's identity it is reasonable to expect others to accept, including in formal terms (legally) and what parts it isn't reasonable to expect others to accept, and why or why not. Where is the line or what are the criteria?

It seems unreasonable to allow date of birth to be permitted to be subjectively established. Ditto place of birth, presumably. Ditto (as someone joked) one's level of intelligence, height, weight, etc.

Are there examples, other than those already mentioned regarding sex or gender, which are permissible?

Are those which are permissible limited to what we might call the purely psychological realm, where subjectivity can be deemed to hold sway?

Which raises the issue of how much anyone has the right to expect others to respect one's subjectivity.

I suspect that issues of sex and gender are not in fact identical to issues of age, height, location etc. But as to precisely why I am not sure. Is it mainly to do with pragmatism and consequences and not principle?

 

[untermensche]

You wouldn't say someone who identifies as a man is lying if their birth certificate says they are a woman would you?

These men are not saying they are women or were born women.

They are saying they are going to live as a woman, there is a mismatch between their body and their gender, and want this choice recognized in law.

This clown is trying to get the government to lie about his birth date.

To see these cases as remotely similar says something about the seer.

They are not similar, they are identical. Unless you're some transageophobic asshole.

A person is what they identify as being, not what some narrow-minded bigot wants to call them. Unless they don't identify as being a person, of course.

There is no similarity between a gender identification and a date of birth.

This clown has no point or argument.

He merely shows himself to be an ass.

And the bigots that support his nonsense show what they are too.

Ignorant bigots somehow think we can't see their ignorant bigotry.

 

[dismal]

They are not similar, they are identical. Unless you're some transageophobic asshole.

A person is what they identify as being, not what some narrow-minded bigot wants to call them. Unless they don't identify as being a person, of course.

There is no similarity between a gender identification and a date of birth.

This clown has no point or argument.

He merely shows himself to be an ass.

And the bigots that support his nonsense show what they are too.

Ignorant bigots somehow think we can't see their ignorant bigotry.

You're the transageophobic bigot. You've self identified. Is there a mod that can dish out a ban here? I didn't think bigotry was tolerated here.