Are you honestly comparing it to what trans people go through?
It all just boils down to caring about other people as much as yourself, and trying not to hurt them. Bringing up hurtful parts of someone’s past is hurtful, and you shouldn’t do it unless you know they are okay with it.
The reason the guy in the OP gets a bit of a pass is that the trans stuff is new, and he just might not have known how big a deal it is. He may not have realized how hurtful what he did could be. (And, of course, that’s assuming he doesn’t know her better than the OP and know that she’s okay with it.)
As for documents, I can see a reason to want to preserve history. But that does not in any way have to involve preserving the documents used here and now. The change itself is going to be recorded. It can be traced if it somehow matters. But, while they are alive, their need to not be discriminated against trumps any desire to preserve a trivial footnote.
People matter more than things. People even matter more than history.
In the same post you’re quoting Broomstick said trans people have it worse.
I guess transmen and tranwomen love to be deadnamed in Texas.
Sorry - it was in an earlier post.
Certainly not!
What I am saying, though, is a depressing number of people in this world have zero sympathy for anyone else and can’t comprehend why imposing their world view on others is inappropriate on any level, much less comprehending why it may actually put someone at risk of injury or death.
People mis-naming me is a nuisance - mis-naming a transgender person can be deadly.
These folks don’t get why referring to someone by a dead name is beyond rude
These folks don’t get that sharing medical information of someone else is also beyond rude.
And the notion that such verbal incontinence is to be either expected, excused or tolerated as “just happens” is simply appalling.
“Oh, I knew your mother. She wished to her dying day she had aborted you, and held a secret, burning hatred for you. How about those cubs, eh?”
Ha ha, casual conversation. It’s funny because if I actually said something like this, you’d be socially, if not legally, justified in punching me in the face. Even if I knew your mother, even if I knew that to be true, even if it would be “denying” my previous history with her, her wishing she had aborted you does not qualify as casual conversation! It’s an intensely private, seriously harmful matter. It’s not Orwellian to ask people to refrain from dredging up parts of your past that you’d rather forget, or which could lead to discrimination, and Orwell is rolling in his grave at the absurd misuse of the term. If this is Orwellian, then a traffic stop for a busted taillight where I pull over, get my ticket, and leave in two minutes is Kafkaesque.
While this thread has long since become a disaster zone, this does have an actual answer. Generally speaking organizers will permit you to use whatever name you want; within reason; if there are already a John Smith, they might ask you to add an identifier to avoid confusion, use your middle name for instance. And I suspect they will not be happy if you try to participate under a name like say “Mega AssCrack 69”.
However, once an event is finished then the record is not changed. Muhammad Ali’s earlier wins, including his Olympic Gold and first World Title win are recorded under Cassius Clay. The Belgian tennis player Justine Henin, played the start of her career as Henin, married and became Henin-Hardenne for most of her career, divorced and reverted to Henin. The record was not changed, it reads the name used at the time.
I think its a fair state of affairs.
Violence against all types women is also a real issue and vastly more women are victims of that, than violence because their vaginas are surgically constructed, yet far too many people refuse to allow basic safeguards insisting that we have to just deal with it and take agency.
This a big difference to aiding state sanctioned genocide and caving into the pressure of a few bigots. Here’s a better analogy should you refuse to introduce your gay co-worker’s spouse as actually their spouse rather than their “roommate” just because there might be an anti-gay bigot within hearing range? Maybe bakeries should refuse to make gay wedding cakes because they are afraid it will call attention to the couple and cause their reception to be bombed?
Want to bet? My mother saying she wished had aborted me (which incidentally is true) is the example I use all the time to illustrate what psychological child abuse is. If Jane was worried about someone mentioning her past as John, she would have relocated after the transgendered surgery. The fact that she hasn’t, nor does there seem to be any indication she sees the matter as something she wants to forgot or tried to swear anyone to secrecy seems indicative that Jane is at least comfortable (as she should be) with the fact that she had transgendered surgery. Pretending like it was some disgraceful part of Jane’s past like some crime she has to conceal rather than a wise decision she made for her own well-being does her and other transgendered people more harm than good.
The lengths to which some people will go to persuade themselves of their right to treat others badly beggars belief. Many women are treated badly? Yes and many of those women are like Jane, and none of the abuse is justified. If you want to introduce someone around, you should know them well enough to know how they want you to do it, or at least have the wit to ask. If you are a baker (and I’m trying to fight down the suspicion that if you are, you post the time date and location of gay weddings in your window for the perusal of local bigots), you make the cake, put it in a box, and give it to the customer when they come to pick it up. The amazing thing is, all of this is the default thinking and behavior of normal people when dealing with just anyone, no extraordinary measures or extra censorship required. If your position is that someone has to move away from you to protect themselves from harm (and really, wouldn’t that just deny your freedom of movement to chase them down and make them miserable somewhere else?) you’re cheerfully occupying the position of bad guy.
Yes, several: one of them was in the US (BC wasn’t reissued, parental names were deleted). As so many things, the procedure changes by location.
You know what else matters? The preference of the person you are talking about. I have one friend who freely shares all medical details with anyone who expresses interest. If a mutual friend asks me how she is doing, I’ll share. I have another friend who is intensely private, and I accidentally discovered his diagnosis when talking to his wife. When people ask me how he is doing, I tell them he’s private, and I’m not at liberty to say anything.
Same with gay people, people who’ve transitioned, and people with awkward family history. They get to decide what’s public, and I’ll err towards “private” unless I know better.
Notice that I neither lie nor “deny the facts”, I just don’t share stuff it’s not my business to share.
In cases where the trans individual doesn’t appear to be hiding their trans status one can either assume they are comfortable with people knowing this or incredibly stupid. I prefer to think my acquaintances are well-adjusted psychologically.
ZPG Zealot, I think you need to realize that you’re not a good judge of what society considers routine social behavior. You have beliefs about what is and isn’t acceptable that are outside the mainstream. This may be a result of your experiences in life and ultimately it’s your choice on how you want to live. But you should at least seek opportunities like this thread so you’re aware of what other people are thinking.
Did I say that violence against women isn’t a real issue? No, I fucking didn’t. Also, if you are asserting that proportionately cis-women experience more violence than transgendered people, I’m going to ask for a cite or dismiss your assertion as delusional.
The way that Trump and the republican party have been passing laws that directly harm trans people, I don’t find it a huge stretch. Discrimination against trans people is state sanctioned now in many places, it’s not just “a few bigots”. What do you think the so-called “bathroom bills” are except state sanctioned discrimination against trans people?
That’s not my call to make. It’s my gay co-worker’s call. If I am in doubt, I keep my mouth shut. I do not have to right to fuck up his safety. This isn’t hard.
This is in the running for the dumbest thing I’ve read on this board. “Let’s discriminate against gay people and then insult them by saying we’re doing it out of concern over their safety.” It assumes that gay people are not capable of making their own call on what is safe and what is not.
I’m sorry, but squeezing empathy from a turnip is probably a losing game.
This is very scary on multiple levels. What the heck?
You’re almost certainly right. However, as of right now there are 4,063 views of this thread, and I’m hoping that I just might convince some of them lurkers. If I was just trying to convince the people who respond, this entire message board would be a waste of time, as that almost never happens IME.
All this thread seems to confirm is that a lot more people have subconscious prejudices against trans people than I ever thought. You seem to think they should view their transformations as dirty, criminal events that should be hidden away rather like people who use to suggest light-skin minorities should “pass” for white rather than fight for their rights.