Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49 • Hacker News Board

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#11

Post by nkkollaw » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:08 PM UTC

schappim wrote: post #4

For a second I thought I was reading The Onion. I do however like the philosophical nature of the question: If people can change their gender based on they feel, why can’t they change their age?

You're right.

The answer to that is that people should not be able to change their gender--unless something gets invented that can change your chromosomes--but if they can then age and race should be allowed, too.

If anything, because by changing gender you can get all sort of advantages if you become a woman:

- tax cuts if you start a company - retire earlier - you win at sport competitions - about 1000 other things

If I feel like [insert minority], why can't I change my race and get the same benefits?

If we have to be abandon common sense, we should be coherent.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#12

Post by tdb7893 » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:09 PM UTC

schappim wrote: post #4

For a second I thought I was reading The Onion. I do however like the philosophical nature of the question: If people can change their gender based on they feel, why can’t they change their age?

"Gender" is a social construct but while "old" or "young" is a social construct "69 years old" isn't really.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#13

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:09 PM UTC

schappim wrote: post #4

For a second I thought I was reading The Onion. I do however like the philosophical nature of the question: If people can change their gender based on they feel, why can’t they change their age?

> If people can change their gender based on they feel, why can’t they change their age?

One of these is subjective. The other is not.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#14

Post by Spooky23 » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:09 PM UTC

nkkollaw wrote: post #5

I don't see why one can change sex, but not change age, race, etc.

It's an issue of fact vs expression/perception. There was a moment in time when you started breathing outside of your mother's womb. There is usually a witness and time is a one-way metric.

Gender expression is a different, more complex matter. There has always been "grey" areas from an anatomy perspective and I think there is consensus that other factors affect this as well. Race, depending on context, is even more complex. Is it about nationality? Geography? Skin color? Religion?

Most things about people don't fit in neat boxes. Age is not one of those things.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#15

Post by thinkingemote » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:10 PM UTC

schappim wrote: post #4

For a second I thought I was reading The Onion. I do however like the philosophical nature of the question: If people can change their gender based on they feel, why can’t they change their age?

Indeed. Imagine someone exposed to fiberglass or coal dust whose health may be equivalent as a person twenty years older than them. Might not a stronger case be made that a person could be 69 rather than 49?

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#16

Post by nkkollaw » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:12 PM UTC

djohnston wrote: post #10

nkkollaw wrote: post #5

I don't see why one can change sex, but not change age, race, etc.

i think the important difference with age is that there are hard legal implications that go along with it, that SHOULDN'T exist over the dimensions of sex and race. The one that flies out at me is retirement or senior benefits. There may be some options only available to people of color, or women, but not as widespread as the implications of age. If this passed, could I become 65 and start withdrawing my 401k penalty…

> i think the important difference with age is that there are hard legal implications that go along with it, that SHOULDN'T exist over the dimensions of sex and race

There are many incentives for women. Think about tax cuts for starting a company, etc. etc. Do you want to remove those incentives?

> If this passed, could I become 65 and start withdrawing my 401k penalty-free?

Well, women (at least in Italy or Europe I guess) can retire earlier than men. So, can a 60-year old become a woman and retire, while as a man he would have to work until he's 65?

You haven't thought this through.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#17

Post by nkkollaw » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:12 PM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #9

nkkollaw wrote: post #5

I don't see why one can change sex, but not change age, race, etc.

Because words have meaning and none of those things are arbitrary.

Why, is gender arbitrary? There are albino blacks, blonde latinos, etc.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#18

Post by thinkingemote » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:13 PM UTC

djohnston wrote: post #10

nkkollaw wrote: post #5

I don't see why one can change sex, but not change age, race, etc.

i think the important difference with age is that there are hard legal implications that go along with it, that SHOULDN'T exist over the dimensions of sex and race. The one that flies out at me is retirement or senior benefits. There may be some options only available to people of color, or women, but not as widespread as the implications of age. If this passed, could I become 65 and start withdrawing my 401k penalty…

What material benefits does a pensioner have by identifying as a younger person? They would lose entitlement to pensions and benefits and social security in most European countries.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#19

Post by excalibur » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:14 PM UTC

> Time is a constant.

Verifiably false, but pedantic.

Re: Man, 69, loses legal battle against temporal reality in effort to become 49

#20

Post by notatcomputer68 » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:15 PM UTC

nkkollaw wrote: post #16

djohnston wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think the important difference with age is that there are hard legal implications that go along with it, that SHOULDN'T exist over the dimensions of sex and race. The one that flies out at me is retirement or senior benefits. There may be some options only available to people of color, or women, but not as widespread as the implications of age. If this passed, could I become 65 and start withdrawing my 401k penalty…

> i think the important difference with age is that there are hard legal implications that go along with it, that SHOULDN'T exist over the dimensions of sex and race There are many incentives for women. Think about tax cuts for starting a company, etc. etc. Do you want to remove those incentives? > If this passed, could I become 65 and start withdrawing my 401k penalty-free? Well, women (at least in Italy or Europe I…

I'd seriously consider putting on a believable show for 5 years earlier retirement...