Swiss Man Legally Changes Gender to Retire Earlier

[theprestige]

The gay marriage analogy is crap and should be discarded or ignored. It's only come up because of an inability or unwillingness to discuss the thing itself in its own terms.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Gay people don't get any different benefits as a result of their marriage than straight people do. The benefits are related the having the status of marriage, not the the combination of sexes represented in that marriage.

Do you have some reason to suggest that homosexual people are less honest in their feelings toward one another than straight people are? Do you feel that there's a higher likelihood of homosexual people fraudulently claiming marriage than for heterosexual people?

As long as they prove that they are properly gay to an arbitrary standard of course, there is nothing discriminatory about such things.

 

[Emily's Cat]

They just have to constantly prove that they exist to your standard, nothing remotely off putting or discriminatory about that.

As opposed to "any male who says magic words gets to see naked females whenever they want to, and those females get no say in it!"

Nothing remotely off-putting about removing the right of consent from females in order to affirm the desires of males. Nothing at all off-putting about placing a 26 year old child molester into a female juvenile detention center because they identified as a woman when they were arrested...

Why do you so frequently seem to view females as second class entities not worthy of dignity, respect, or safety?

 

[Emily's Cat]

As long as they prove that they are properly gay to an arbitrary standard of course, there is nothing discriminatory about such things.

This is an unsurprisingly vapid response. The 'degree of gayness' is completely irrelevant to the benefits acquired from marriage. Those benefits are irrespective of the sexes of the people involved.

You're making a horrible argument based on nonsense.

 

[ponderingturtle]

As opposed to "any male who says magic words gets to see naked females whenever they want to, and those females get no say in it!"

Ah yes the its rude to ask questions about some strangers genitals unless they are trans then it is normal and expected for them to have to constantly discuss their genitals with strangers.

Fortunately those gay guys get to see all the naked boys they want. Nothing wrong with that at all. Nope.

And what does public nudity have to do with retirement in switzerland?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Fortunately those gay guys get to see all the naked boys they want. Nothing wrong with that at all. Nope.

To be fair, the anti-gay crusaders had very similar bathroom freakouts at the time too, though that has largely gone down the memory hole. The complaints of the anti-queer folks have been largely consistent.

 

[ponderingturtle]

To be fair, the anti-gay crusaders had very similar bathroom freakouts at the time too, though that has largely gone down the memory hole. The complaints of the anti-queer folks have been largely consistent.

Look any boy who feels uncomfortable being leered at by grown gay men is clearly the one in the wrong for being homophobic.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Fortunately those gay guys get to see all the naked boys they want. Nothing wrong with that at all. Nope.

It's one of the perks.

And what does public nudity have to do with retirement in switzerland?

The answer to this question could make a significant economic impact on several countries!

 

[TomB]

I really don't see how this has anything to do with trans/self-ID/etc. except that it provides a somewhat dramatic way to illustrate a case where two demographics are not treated the same.

Oh, and also an obstacle to actually discussing the fact that those demographics are treated differently, why they are treated differently, and if the correct criteria is used to determine who gets the differential treatment.

This is not a problem with self-ID, it's a problem with differential treatment. It existed before changing gender was "easy" and it will still exist if you make changing gender difficult.

Like I said, if it's meant to account for parenting, make it about full-time parenting, not sex or gender. If it's about age in relation to spouse, make the criteria depend on the age differential between spouses, not sex or gender. (Full disclosure: My wife is six years older than I am.)

 

[theprestige]

I really don't see how this has anything to do with trans/self-ID/etc. except that it provides a somewhat dramatic way to illustrate a case where two demographics are not treated the same.

Oh, and also an obstacle to actually discussing the fact that those demographics are treated differently, why they are treated differently, and if the correct criteria is used to determine who gets the differential treatment.

This is not a problem with self-ID, it's a problem with differential treatment. It existed before changing gender was "easy" and it will still exist if you make changing gender difficult.

Like I said, if it's meant to account for parenting, make it about full-time parenting, not sex or gender. If it's about age in relation to spouse, make the criteria depend on the age differential between spouses, not sex or gender. (Full disclosure: My wife is six years older than I am.)

I think it's a problem with both differential treatment and gender identification.

Obviously we're now asking questions about why the Swiss have a differential treatment policy, and whether they can reasonably justify it.

But we can also ask questions about how changing one's gender identity should interact with justifiable differential treatment.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think it's a problem with both differential treatment and gender identification.

Obviously we're now asking questions about why the Swiss have a differential treatment policy, and whether they can reasonably justify it.

But we can also ask questions about how changing one's gender identity should interact with justifiable differential treatment.

Any conversation about abusing a system should probably include scale, especially if you're considering putting burdens to access on people who haven't done anything wrong.

An anecdote about some crank doing a publicity stunt doesn't seem like the kind of data that demands any response at all. I suppose more Swiss men could see this and decide it's a good idea, in which case a response may be reasonable (though not necessarily one that places the burden entirely on trans people). I have my doubts this is going to be a wide problem.

 

[bruto]

Oh god. That was a stupid fear and I dismissed it as a valid concern years ago.

ETA: And if that's what ST is asking, he's missing my point. I'm not concerned much about people changing their gender as a scam to get legal benefits. I'm concerned about the underlying premise that these benefits are or should be tied to gender in the first place.

And we do see this kind of exploitation more than just in this one case. There are a growing number of "anecdotes" where someone changes their gender and gains a benefit that probably shouldn't be tied to gender. Are they scammers? Sincere, inadvertent beneficiaries of a poorly-designed policy? Enjoying a legitimate right to which they are properly entitled by virtue of their trans-identity?

I do agree that tying benefits to gender seems a poor idea in the first place, and incidents like this might be used to emphasize that point. I would not be too quick to judge the anecdotal cases. A surge in the number of gender changes may well be simply based on the opening up of possibility.

adding response to ST above, I doubt this problem will become wide spread enough to bother with, and suspect that this particular publicity stunt could go awry anyway, as I think there is a mechanism for handling fraudulent claims already, and if the person in question made it clear he did it for the benefits, whether to protest the ease of gender changing or the inequality of benefits, I suspect that's enough grounds for that. I would go with the prestige on this one, and say the best way to avoid any issue here would be to equalize benefits and thus remove the incentive, meager though it may be.

 

[theprestige]

Any conversation about abusing a system should probably include scale, especially if you're considering putting burdens to access on people who haven't done anything wrong.

I'm not conversing about abuse of the system. I'm conversing about the underlying principle that opens the loophole.

And nobody's considering putting burdens to access on people. Swiss women have no undue or novel burden when accessing Swiss women's retirement benefits.

The questions I'm asking are:

Under the current Swiss policy, what are the properties of Swiss women that they believe make an earlier retirement age appropriate? And does a Swiss man acquire those properties when he starts identifying as a Swiss woman?

I find it interesting that every time I explain what I'm talking about and repeat my questions, you respond by trying to change the subject.

How about this? I promise to engage with any on-topic point you raise, substantively and in good faith, after you show me the same courtesy. In fact, if you want to start a separate thread about any off-topic point raised so far, like public nudity or gay marriage, I'll engage with those as well, in the appropriate threads. Fair? Or do you just want to try another fringe reset?

 

[lobosrul5]

Aren't all marriages shams? Ceremonial monogamy, officially recognized by the government and other people? That's weird even when it's not delusional, which is about fifty percent of the time.

I think Roger Daltrey summed it up pretty well,

It's a legal matter, baby
Marryin's no fun

 

[shuttlt]

To be fair, the anti-gay crusaders had very similar bathroom freakouts at the time too, though that has largely gone down the memory hole. The complaints of the anti-queer folks have been largely consistent.

The really funny thing was that they claimed that there would be some kind of slippery slope and that legalising homosexuality was only the beginning.

Anyway, in the UK we tend not to have public toilets to remotely the extent we used to, so that probably minimized the problem of gay men using them for sex. Back in the 70s there was some kind of campaign group that was trying to normalise cottaging in the same way that traditional hetrosexual ways of hooking up were normal.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The questions I'm asking are:

Under the current Swiss policy, what are the properties of Swiss women that they believe make an earlier retirement age appropriate? And does a Swiss man acquire those properties when he starts identifying as a Swiss woman?

You seem to be assuming there's some clearly articulated reason or principle for this beyond policy inertia. I suppose there could be a reason, even a good reason, for such a disparity, but it seems entirely plausible this is just a consequence of circumstance.

 

[shuttlt]

You seem to be assuming there's some clearly articulated reason or principle for this beyond policy inertia. I suppose there could be a reason, even a good reason, for such a disparity, but it seems entirely plausible this is just a consequence of circumstance.

I think this is it. They have tried three times to change the law and seem to have been successful at the 4th try. Unions are protesting, because it is costing their members a year of pension.

 

[arthwollipot]

I know it's unseemly of me, but I must say that, speaking as an emphatically cisgendered person, I suspect the security of anyone who thinks, or the motive of anyone who claims, that changing gender is a thing one might do casually. For most of is this would be a very big deal. You really could not pay me enough to do it.

Yes. This trivialisation of transition is what leads to vapid statements like this:

As opposed to "any male who says magic words gets to see naked females whenever they want to, and those females get no say in it!"

Let me be very clear: A man who dresses up as a woman in order to ogle women in bathrooms is not trans. He is just a pervert.

A man who puts F on a form and doesn't change anything else in his life is not trans. He is just gaming the system.

Trans issues are completely beside the point here. The point is that the pension system in Switzerland is gender discriminatory. That's the issue that we should be talking about.

 

[TomB]

Yes. This trivialisation of transition is what leads to vapid statements like this:

Let me be very clear: A man who dresses up as a woman in order to ogle women in bathrooms is not trans. He is just a pervert.

A man who puts F on a form and doesn't change anything else in his life is not trans. He is just gaming the system.

And, I think that's kind of the crux of a lot of the arguments against self-ID.

How do you allow trans-access via self-ID while still being able to deny access to the cis pervert? How do you say "you're not really trans" when the criteria is self-ID?

The answers either seem to be: "We can't so we won't allow acces" or "We can't so we will just rely on people's good nature."

Not much in between.

Trans issues are completely beside the point here. The point is that the pension system in Switzerland is gender discriminatory. That's the issue that we should be talking about.

Absolutely.

 

[arthwollipot]

And, I think that's kind of the crux of a lot of the arguments against self-ID.

How do you allow trans-access via self-ID while still being able to deny access to the cis pervert? How do you say "you're not really trans" when the criteria is self-ID?

The answers either seem to be: "We can't so we won't allow acces" or "We can't so we will just rely on people's good nature."

Not much in between.

Well see there's the thing. Simple self-ID is not the sole criterion for being transgender.