The point is that once you get away from objective definitions whatever it "is" is largely irrelevant.
Current thinking is that gender is a construct so that one can self identify as anything at any time. You parameterize it, you are some sort of phobic.
I, for one, choose to identify as female. Coincidentally, that means that my business is female owned. Excellent. Insofar as race is a construct with no objective reality, I may get back to my African roots which might, so I hear, make my business eligible for special consideration whilst we bid on government contracts. Call me on it why don't cha. You are a racist and I should know, being a person of color. Female and minority owned. BTW one becomes a muslim by simple declaration, swearing to make a pilgrimage eventually and some other important stuff. Doubt my sincerity? You are an Islamophobe, you bastard.
It's nice (and profitable) here on the other side of the looking glass.
First peruse this video.
I know 4 minutes plus of Zinnia Jones might be a little hard to take for a guy like ed, but fifteen seconds or so will be enough to make my point.
My point: Would you do that to yourself for a break on insurance or a Small Business Administration loan?
OK, maybe a publicity hound like ZJ isn't typical and furthermore you're already richer than her.
I don't agree with ed but to play this game for a moment:
Why can't an individual male identify as a female yet forgo all the hormones and even fashion?
Go ahead, but if you do it in bad faith for pecuniary gain it would be a good idea to shop for lawyers in advance because all of this is the sort of pop-culture legal loophole bullshit that falls flat in the real world.
Just because in this case whether one is falsifying one's gender/whatever should be a totally subjective test, that just makes proving fraud harder, not impossible.
I don't agree with ed but to play this game for a moment:
Why can't an individual male identify as a female yet forgo all the hormones and even fashion?
Go ahead, but if you do it in bad faith for pecuniary gain it would be a good idea to shop for lawyers in advance because all of this is the sort of pop-culture legal loophole bullshit that falls flat in the real world.
Please cite some case law that supports your assertion about bad faith gender identity. Thanks.
I don't agree with ed but to play this game for a moment:
Why can't an individual male identify as a female yet forgo all the hormones and even fashion?
Go ahead, but if you do it in bad faith for pecuniary gain it would be a good idea to shop for lawyers in advance because all of this is the sort of pop-culture legal loophole bullshit that falls flat in the real world.
How does one prove they are earnestly identifying as a gender and not doing so in bad faith?
Can't cite case law, but wouldn't it be enough to establish "bad faith" even if the precise flavor isn't in the statute?
Perhaps I need to clarify my question: has bad faith ever been proven in a case about gender identity, where the identity itself was shown to have been made in bad faith?
I don't agree with ed but to play this game for a moment:
Why can't an individual male identify as a female yet forgo all the hormones and even fashion?
Go ahead, but if you do it in bad faith for pecuniary gain it would be a good idea to shop for lawyers in advance because all of this is the sort of pop-culture legal loophole bullshit that falls flat in the real world.
How does one prove they are earnestly identifying as a gender and not doing so in bad faith?
You really can't, which is why Innocent until proven guilty is an important criminal law principle.
The way one proves bad faith is to present evidence, like the guy telling people he's doing it in bad faith.
Can't cite case law, but wouldn't it be enough to establish "bad faith" even if the precise flavor isn't in the statute?
Yes. Lying about, say, being a pineapple in order to avoid paying income tax when you know you are not a pineapple is fraud notwithstanding the lack of pineapple-specific fraud statutes.
Can't cite case law, but wouldn't it be enough to establish "bad faith" even if the precise flavor isn't in the statute?
Yes. Lying about, say, being a pineapple in order to avoid paying income tax when you know you are not a pineapple is fraud notwithstanding the lack of pineapple-specific fraud statutes.
If the law specifically allows people to identify as a pineapple for any reason whatsoever, then it is not fraud, it is merely taking advantage of a legal loophole.
I don't agree with ed but to play this game for a moment:
Why can't an individual male identify as a female yet forgo all the hormones and even fashion?
Go ahead, but if you do it in bad faith for pecuniary gain it would be a good idea to shop for lawyers in advance because all of this is the sort of pop-culture legal loophole bullshit that falls flat in the real world.
How does one prove they are earnestly identifying as a gender and not doing so in bad faith?
You really can't, which is why Innocent until proven guilty is an important criminal law principle.
The way one proves bad faith is to present evidence, like the guy telling people he's doing it in bad faith.
What law would be violated though? Granted this example is in Canada and I don't know how those people do things, but in USA I can't find what would make this fraud.
I don't agree with ed but to play this game for a moment:
Why can't an individual male identify as a female yet forgo all the hormones and even fashion?
Go ahead, but if you do it in bad faith for pecuniary gain it would be a good idea to shop for lawyers in advance because all of this is the sort of pop-culture legal loophole bullshit that falls flat in the real world.
How does one prove they are earnestly identifying as a gender and not doing so in bad faith?
You really can't, which is why Innocent until proven guilty is an important criminal law principle.
The way one proves bad faith is to present evidence, like the guy telling people he's doing it in bad faith.
What law would be violated though? Granted this example is in Canada and I don't know how those people do things, but in USA I can't find what would make this fraud.
It would be the same as lying about an address on a drivers license to induce an insurance company to charge a lower rate because they think you are in a lower crime area. Or lying about age, or anything else. No special law.
Just that gender identification is harder to prove because it is almost totally subjective, but repeatedly confessing that you are lying about it does help the prosecution quite a bit.
Can't cite case law, but wouldn't it be enough to establish "bad faith" even if the precise flavor isn't in the statute?
Yes. Lying about, say, being a pineapple in order to avoid paying income tax when you know you are not a pineapple is fraud notwithstanding the lack of pineapple-specific fraud statutes.
If the law specifically allows people to identify as a pineapple for any reason whatsoever, then it is not fraud, it is merely taking advantage of a legal loophole.
It would be the same as lying about an address on a drivers license to induce an insurance company to charge a lower rate because they think you are in a lower crime area. Or lying about age, or anything else. No special law.
Just that gender identification is harder to prove because it is almost totally subjective, but repeatedly confessing that you are lying about it does help the prosecution quite a bit.
Absence of press release I don't see how one proves fraud. But I also don't see a noticeable number of people doing all this paperwork to save a few bucks. This scenario is incredibly rare IMO.
"If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"
