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

#41

Post by dijit » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

froindt wrote: post #24

nkkollaw wrote: post #16

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 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…

> Well, women (at least in Italy or Europe I guess) can retire earlier than men. I'm from the US and haven't heard of this before. Is there a widespread rationale for this? As a whole, women live longer, so equating "retired years" doesn't seem plausible. In the US, you get (easy) access to 401k and IRA at 59.5 years old, and social security can't be claimed until 62. Gender doesn't matter.

I think this wikipedia article is some proof that there is widespread adoption at least.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age

As for the UK: the Womens retirement age used to be 60, but it has been steadily rising for some time, until at one point it was brought to parity for eligibility for state pensions. (a move that was marred with protest by those wishing for "equality"? somehow)

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/oct/10/thousan...

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

#42

Post by tboyd47 » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:29 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #14

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…

Really? The idea of age being a publicly known and verifiable fact is completely specific to highly developed Western cultures. Many places in the world attach no importance to date/time of birth and do not record it.

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

#43

Post by happytoexplain » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:29 PM UTC

nkkollaw wrote: post #17

EpicEng wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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

It's my (extremely outside) understanding that the concepts of physical/genetic/choose-something-objective gender are not what people mean in these conversations - nor are they referring to the subjective identity of what kinds of people one feels sexually attracted to. They are referring to a third thing, also subjective, best described as "what gender you feel like", which is very much like how old or young you feel, except much more closely related to one's identity (I "feel" young, which is great, but I also "feel" male, which is more than great - it's critically important to my self identity). So, both of these things (age and gender) have subjective and objectives measures - the difference is that "years old", which term the law uses, is patently objective both legally and linguistically, whereas on the other hand "male/female/etc", which terms the law also uses, is less objective linguistically (as described above), and therefore there is at least one basis on which you could argue for a legal change of gender - a basis that does not exist for a change-of-age argument.

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

#44

Post by war1025 » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:29 PM UTC

nkkollaw wrote: post #17

EpicEng wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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

Because it's socially popular for it to be, so the goalposts will be moved wherever they need to be for it to be true.

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

#45

Post by noonespecial » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:29 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?

It's the difference between are and were. Age is an indication that you existed at some point in the past. It's a compacted record of reality. You cant change that arbitrarily even if you "feel younger".

Changing gender simply is a desire to change what you are currently. The whole notion of transitioning is to change from what you were to something that you feel more comfortable being.

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

#46

Post by EpicEng » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:31 PM UTC

outside1234 wrote: post #36

tdb7893 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

People are male or female by genetics and have a personal perception of themselves as something other than that gender. I can totally see how someone might be 69, but still running triathlons, and want to identify with an effective age that is 49. I fail to see how these two cases are different.

Age is determined by trips around the Sun and sex is determined by genetics. Gender, by definition, is not determined by sex. You are conflating sex and gender, but they are not the same thing. You can feel like a man, but be biologically a woman. You can feel like 40 at 70, but you're still 70.

gen·der

/ˈjendər/Submit

noun

1.

the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

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

#47

Post by ashleyn » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:31 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #14

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…

It's probably more accurate to describe transitioning as redefining what it means to be a woman, not simply asking people to deny one's physiology or to "play along with a delusion". Before, it was simply being born a certain way. Today, it's shifting to mean acting a certain way combined with medical intervention. If we could redefine marriage to accomidate gay couples, I don't see why we can't redefine womanhood to accomidate transgender people, although it's fair to debate if that's necessarily the best option so long as good-faith is maintained and we recognise transgender people's struggles as legitimate.

Intellectual coherency on transgender issues will be rare because so much of it is agenda-driven on many sides, even conflicting within the same side. In a way it's starting to resemble the ferocious debate on climate change. Classifying it one way or the other has grave implications for the loser(s) and it becomes easier to "stretch" your claim when the spectre of that is raised. It's still important to keep in mind that the phenomena underlying the debate is objectively demonstrable: sex-based differentiation in the brain has been observed in ordinary men versus men who transition to women. It's also important to keep in mind that a simple philosophical argument highlights the inconsistency in saying that a man who wants a certain body is diseased for wanting the same things that would cause distress if they were absent in a woman.

It remains unseen if redefining womanhood will be a sustainable solution for trans' individuals integration and equality, but the fact that it is considered is reassuring that we have the right priorities as a culture oriented toward the individual, toward secularism, and toward liberty. However, we must be willing to admit what is working and what isn't working. Aspects of transition, such as hormone therapy, clearly work. Other aspects of transition, such as ignoring sex differentiation to the disadvantage of others in sports, may not be working so well. Honesty combined with good-faith and individual, secular values will be important here.

(Disclaimer: I am transgender and I consider myself to be more in a third-category best described as "different from most men")

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

#48

Post by the_gastropod » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:31 PM UTC

outside1234 wrote: post #36

tdb7893 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

People are male or female by genetics and have a personal perception of themselves as something other than that gender. I can totally see how someone might be 69, but still running triathlons, and want to identify with an effective age that is 49. I fail to see how these two cases are different.

> People are male or female by genetics

Some (most) people. As with most things, the whole truth is not that simple.

Regardless, "sex" and "gender" are also not the same (though they're usually closely related). There's nothing about having a Y chromosome that makes one have short fingernails, short hair, unable to wear dresses or high heels or paint one's fingernails.

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

#49

Post by happytoexplain » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:32 PM UTC

war1025 wrote: post #44

nkkollaw wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Because it's socially popular for it to be, so the goalposts will be moved wherever they need to be for it to be true.

This is pretty dismissive and simplistic. You should read my sibling post to yours and give your opinion.

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

#50

Post by tdb7893 » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 9:32 PM UTC

ArchTypical wrote: post #26

tdb7893 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

69 years old (more or less on earth or in space) is no different than Male or Female (more or less). The difference is in relative subjective granularity.

Many people refer to sex as what someone is biologically and gender as what society considers them (edit: just FYI I'm not an expert and this is probably an oversimplification). While sex is more constant there isn't any reason gender has to be (and there are practical reasons why it shouldn't be but that's out of scope of this comment). This means that while biologically someone might have two XX chromosomes and be 60 years old it's not necessary that society considers them an old woman.