Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm fairly okay with the LGBT community. Sexual orientation isn't really a thing I care about. I agree that transgender people should be treated with respect. That being said, I do have one question on the topic: Why is it expected that when a transgender person changes their name that we must use it?

Now, don't get me wrong, if they legally have their name changed I'm going to call them that name. What I'm talking about is a person that just decides they want to be called "Jill" instead of "John" one day. No legal papers, no official change, just their decision. Apparently in some jurisdictions this is the law and you can open yourself up to liability if you refuse to comply. Even school districts are being told to comply with any age of child, and they are not allowed to notify parents. In some places these "unofficial, but enforceable" name changes go so far as to effect employment records (I'm sure that makes records easy to sort through).


I am definitely for equality. I expect this of all people. I don't care who you are or what your personal identity is, I shouldn't have to face legal ramifications for calling you your legal name. Until that point it isn't your name, it's an alias. Is it too much to ask for names to be changed legally?

Do you care about or respect a person?
Is doing what they have requested during a difficult time in their life going to cause you any actual harm?

If yes and no, then just do the decent thing.

Unless you're filling out their paperwork, and it's a working relationship, how someone asks to be addressed is a favor they are asking of you. It's your gift back if you wish to respect them.

If it's not legally changed to be your name then it's just a nickname. What you're describing strikes me as being akin to punishing people for calling somebody "William" when he prefers to be known as "Bill."

It also strikes me as wholly unnecessary. We already have laws against harassment, both in and out of the workplace. If somebody is deliberately calling you a name that you've repeatedly asked people not to use then that person is quickly going to cross the line from being rude to be harassing and trigger an intervention by Human Resources or the authorities.

Has there been a raft of cases regarding this? Anything prominent?

Or is this just something that has come up?

BC has this correct I think. What harm does it do to actually use a persons preferred name?

Names are only useful when they are a common reference.
The farce that was Prince changing his name to a bloody symbol and being referred to as 'the artist formerly known as Prince' highlights how a name is used to refer to an individual and remove confusion.

It doesn't get easier on a personal level. I have called a friend by his surname forever. When he married a woman with a daughter and took her name so that they could all share a surname I was touched and still consider it an excellent choice.

I still have to consciously force my lips to say the new name when I refer to him.

I expect it's more distressing when the new name represents a complete rejection of reality.

The punishment, and changes to official paperwork are what I am mostly perturbed about. If someone is honestly transitioning, and decides that their name will eventually be "Sue" I have no problems temporarily calling them that until it is official.

I do have a problem in changing their employee records and payroll information before being "official". I also don't like that people can face disciplinary action for slipping up on the name change.

I also see this as a double standard. I knew a guy once that was named Charles Daniel Raper. His father was also "Charles", so they just called him Dan, and it is what he preferred. He signed his checks "C. Dan Raper". However, our LGBT friendly employer insisted that "Charles" be on his nametag. Transitioning people got to choose the name on their nametag.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Has there been a raft of cases regarding this? Anything prominent?

Or is this just something that has come up?

BC has this correct I think. What harm does it do to actually use a persons preferred name?

I can think of lots of ways it can harm things lol. I've worked in high danger jobs, safety and as leading hand and a manager.

I'm assuming there are some cases, rumours, anecdotes or stories where people have been punished in an official capacity for misnaming or misgendering people who have not changed name on paper.

To break down: Why is it expected that when a transgender person changes their name that we must use it?
One we have covered is respect and kindness to this person.

However to look at it further: Why might the person not legally change their name (yet)?

In many cases, changing a name legally would put that person in a dangerous situation. It would mean there is a clear discrepancy between their body and their name.
Transgender people do not just pop out of the ground, walk into a clinic and step out with a new chassis.
There are years and years of steps in between for average people who do not have cash to pull on and expedite their transition.
Many people have to divide their lives into "out" (for example, home) and "stealth" (work, school and medical).

There is fear. Fear of how they may be treated at work.
Fear that basic needs like medical treatment being denied or mishandled due to prejudice on the part of the care giver. There are many many cases of this that are well documented if you scrape the surface.

There is also uncertainty. Your entire life has been building you to be this one gender. Changing your name or even committing to being trans, it often feels like it's 90% correct. The tiny voice of years and years of every other influence is going "hey, but..."

So you are not obligated to do anything. But it helps someone going through immense amounts of inner difficulty, if you afford them that one thing.

I also see this as an absolutely abusable policy. Technically, if school children are allowed to decide what they will be called, you must do it for everyone, or you are in violation of Title 9.

That means that there will eventually be someone who "identifies as a 1990's Eddy Murfy character" and insists on being called "Prince Akeem Joffie of Zamunda". It's like a Tribe Called Quest, you have to say the whole thing. Legally speaking, they would have to accommodate them.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I'm fairly okay with the LGBT community. Sexual orientation isn't really a thing I care about. I agree that transgender people should be treated with respect. That being said, I do have one question on the topic: Why is it expected that when a transgender person changes their name that we must use it?

Now, don't get me wrong, if they legally have their name changed I'm going to call them that name. What I'm talking about is a person that just decides they want to be called "Jill" instead of "John" one day. No legal papers, no official change, just their decision. Apparently in some jurisdictions this is the law and you can open yourself up to liability if you refuse to comply. Even school districts are being told to comply with any age of child, and they are not allowed to notify parents. In some places these "unofficial, but enforceable" name changes go so far as to effect employment records (I'm sure that makes records easy to sort through).


I am definitely for equality. I expect this of all people. I don't care who you are or what your personal identity is, I shouldn't have to face legal ramifications for calling you your legal name. Until that point it isn't your name, it's an alias. Is it too much to ask for names to be changed legally?

Do you use shortened names (Ellie for Eleanor, or Jake for Jacob, or Bob for Robert)? Those aren't their legal names.

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
I'm assuming there are some cases, rumours, anecdotes or stories where people have been punished in an official capacity for misnaming or misgendering people who have not changed name on paper.

To break down: Why is it expected that when a transgender person changes their name that we must use it?
One we have covered is respect and kindness to this person.

However to look at it further: Why might the person not legally change their name (yet)?

In many cases, changing a name legally would put that person in a dangerous situation. It would mean there is a clear discrepancy between their body and their name.
Transgender people do not just pop out of the ground, walk into a clinic and step out with a new chassis.
There are years and years of steps in between for average people who do not have cash to pull on and expedite their transition.
Many people have to divide their lives into "out" (for example, home) and "stealth" (work, school and medical).

There is fear. Fear of how they may be treated at work.
Fear that basic needs like medical treatment being denied or mishandled due to prejudice on the part of the care giver. There are many many cases of this that are well documented if you scrape the surface.

There is also uncertainty. Your entire life has been building you to be this one gender. Changing your name or even committing to being trans, it often feels like it's 90% correct. The tiny voice of years and years of every other influence is going "hey, but..."

So you are not obligated to do anything. But it helps someone going through immense amounts of inner difficulty, if you afford them that one thing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally on board with you when it comes to the respect angle. I'm fine with calling someone their new name if they are intent on changing it. I will disagree about the School and Work angles though. They are being forced to change their records to a non-legal name. How is that NOT outing a person? How are they facing less discrimination by having official records changed before legally changing their name?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
I'm fairly okay with the LGBT community. Sexual orientation isn't really a thing I care about. I agree that transgender people should be treated with respect. That being said, I do have one question on the topic: Why is it expected that when a transgender person changes their name that we must use it?

Now, don't get me wrong, if they legally have their name changed I'm going to call them that name. What I'm talking about is a person that just decides they want to be called "Jill" instead of "John" one day. No legal papers, no official change, just their decision. Apparently in some jurisdictions this is the law and you can open yourself up to liability if you refuse to comply. Even school districts are being told to comply with any age of child, and they are not allowed to notify parents. In some places these "unofficial, but enforceable" name changes go so far as to effect employment records (I'm sure that makes records easy to sort through).


I am definitely for equality. I expect this of all people. I don't care who you are or what your personal identity is, I shouldn't have to face legal ramifications for calling you your legal name. Until that point it isn't your name, it's an alias. Is it too much to ask for names to be changed legally?

Do you use shortened names (Ellie for Eleanor, or Jake for Jacob, or Bob for Robert)? Those aren't their legal names.

While you are technically correct, Will is accepted as a form or abbreviation of William. Jackie is NOT a shortened form of William. Also, if I walked up to "Will" and called him William, I would not face punishment from the HR department.

I think you need to give us some broader information about what you're describing, cuda.
Is this a particular state or county, or country based thing?

Edit: You probably need to update your topic post to clarify this, because it does read like "why do this generally", and you are asking about a very specific scenario which is unfamiliar to most of us.

It is allowable by law to change your name.
Last name changes after marriage already set this precedence.
It makes sense to change your name after physically changing to your gender identity.
I am unsure how a change of name can be an imposition on the OP.
It is hard enough on the individual going through these changes.
<edit> If someone requests to be called a certain name like an abbreviated form, again this is no big deal.
For some strange reason I would be more comfortable calling a female "Barb" rather than "Bob", I guess it is a "traditional" naming convention.

 =Angel= wrote:
Names are only useful when they are a common reference.
The farce that was Prince changing his name to a bloody symbol and being referred to as 'the artist formerly known as Prince' highlights how a name is used to refer to an individual and remove confusion.

It doesn't get easier on a personal level. I have called a friend by his surname forever. When he married a woman with a daughter and took her name so that they could all share a surname I was touched and still consider it an excellent choice.

I still have to consciously force my lips to say the new name when I refer to him.

I expect it's more distressing when the new name represents a complete rejection of reality.

Prince did that so that he could break out of a recording contract that he considered to be unfair. He didn't do it just for a lark, there was a specific goal he was trying to accomplish.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_(musician)#Artistry

Pseudonyms

In 1993, during negotiations regarding the release of The Gold Experience, a legal battle ensued between Warner Bros. and Prince over the artistic and financial control of his musical output. During the lawsuit, Prince appeared in public with the word "slave" written on his cheek.[205] He explained that he had changed his name to an unpronounceable symbol to emancipate himself from his contract with Warner Bros., and that he had done it out of frustration because he felt his own name now belonged to the company.[206][207]

Prince sometimes used pseudonyms to separate himself from the music he had written, produced, or recorded, and at one point stated that his ownership and achievement were strengthened by the act of giving away ideas.[92] Pseudonyms he adopted, at various times, include: Jamie Starr and The Starr Company (for the songs he wrote for The Time and many other artists from 1981 to 1984),[208][209] Joey Coco (for many unreleased Prince songs in the late 1980s, as well as songs written for Sheena Easton and Kenny Rogers),[210] Alexander Nevermind (for writing the song "Sugar Walls" (1984) by Sheena Easton),[211] and Christopher (used for his song writing credit of "Manic Monday" (1986) for the Bangles).[212]

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
I think you need to give us some broader information about what you're describing, cuda.
Is this a particular state or county, or country based thing?

90% sure it will be a country based thing. I know here in Aus you cant be legally penalised for using a persons legal given name and you couldn't get any employee details changed without a legal name change being done first.

Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

 cuda1179 wrote:
I also see this as an absolutely abusable policy. Technically, if school children are allowed to decide what they will be called, you must do it for everyone, or you are in violation of Title 9.

That means that there will eventually be someone who "identifies as a 1990's Eddy Murfy character" and insists on being called "Prince Akeem Joffie of Zamunda". It's like a Tribe Called Quest, you have to say the whole thing. Legally speaking, they would have to accommodate them.

When I was in school, the first day the teachers would do roll call to get our names. While doing roll call they would ask us what we went by. "David, do you go by Dave? Davey? What do you prefer?" They asked everybody this. A lot of kids in my class used their middle name because we had 2-3 Matts, 2-3 Jessicas, etc. So school children already go through this.

Also, that is a ridiculous slippery slope fallacy.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I'm fairly okay with the LGBT community. Sexual orientation isn't really a thing I care about. I agree that transgender people should be treated with respect. That being said, I do have one question on the topic: Why is it expected that when a transgender person changes their name that we must use it?

Now, don't get me wrong, if they legally have their name changed I'm going to call them that name. What I'm talking about is a person that just decides they want to be called "Jill" instead of "John" one day. No legal papers, no official change, just their decision. Apparently in some jurisdictions this is the law and you can open yourself up to liability if you refuse to comply. Even school districts are being told to comply with any age of child, and they are not allowed to notify parents. In some places these "unofficial, but enforceable" name changes go so far as to effect employment records (I'm sure that makes records easy to sort through).


I am definitely for equality. I expect this of all people. I don't care who you are or what your personal identity is, I shouldn't have to face legal ramifications for calling you your legal name. Until that point it isn't your name, it's an alias. Is it too much to ask for names to be changed legally?

If you're old like me this isn't an issue. I won't remember your name in the first place.

While common courtesy should say use their name if you remember it, I may be incorrect but I've heard of no law requiring you to call someone by their name. I doubt thats constitutional AT ALL under the First Amendment.
"Hey Jill"
"My name is Jack"
"Hey Dick Bag"

I really don't see the big deal. I have a stister/brother in law currently going through this, though she's still "unofficial" as she's only 16 and can't have the operation yet.

The kindness goes both ways. I'll agree to call you whatever you want to be called, but don't persecute me if I slip up and call you something else. It's an accident, not malice.

OP, I really don't see how this is that big of a deal. If you are indeed "punished by HR", you could always tell them it was an accident. Unless it repeatedly happened, I don't see this being a big deal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 =Angel= wrote:
Names are only useful when they are a common reference.
The farce that was Prince changing his name to a bloody symbol and being referred to as 'the artist formerly known as Prince' highlights how a name is used to refer to an individual and remove confusion.

It doesn't get easier on a personal level. I have called a friend by his surname forever. When he married a woman with a daughter and took her name so that they could all share a surname I was touched and still consider it an excellent choice.

I still have to consciously force my lips to say the new name when I refer to him.

I expect it's more distressing when the new name represents a complete rejection of reality.

Prince did that so that he could break out of a recording contract that he considered to be unfair. He didn't do it just for a lark, there was a specific goal he was trying to accomplish.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_(musician)#Artistry

Pseudonyms

In 1993, during negotiations regarding the release of The Gold Experience, a legal battle ensued between Warner Bros. and Prince over the artistic and financial control of his musical output. During the lawsuit, Prince appeared in public with the word "slave" written on his cheek.[205] He explained that he had changed his name to an unpronounceable symbol to emancipate himself from his contract with Warner Bros., and that he had done it out of frustration because he felt his own name now belonged to the company.[206][207]

Prince sometimes used pseudonyms to separate himself from the music he had written, produced, or recorded, and at one point stated that his ownership and achievement were strengthened by the act of giving away ideas.[92] Pseudonyms he adopted, at various times, include: Jamie Starr and The Starr Company (for the songs he wrote for The Time and many other artists from 1981 to 1984),[208][209] Joey Coco (for many unreleased Prince songs in the late 1980s, as well as songs written for Sheena Easton and Kenny Rogers),[210] Alexander Nevermind (for writing the song "Sugar Walls" (1984) by Sheena Easton),[211] and Christopher (used for his song writing credit of "Manic Monday" (1986) for the Bangles).[212]

Thank you. Learned this recently (within the last month or so) and it bothers me when people give Prince crap for it. It was actually a smart move for a musician strangled by a contract (look at Ke$ha's recent problems with her contract).

 d-usa wrote:
Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

I'm interesting in seeing more info on this too. It sounds like school boards literally letting the inmates run the asylum. I understand that schools want to help students be themselves and all that but letting kids arbitrarily change their names would be crazy. Our kids decided years ago when they were in preschool that they liked to change their names to "Bunny" and "Queen Ester" when they played pretend but I wouldn't want the school system to start officially referring to our son as Bunny. At some point you would need parents to sign off on it, I would think, and hopefully that would work as a bulwark against abuse and silliness of the policy.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
[

When I was in school, the first day the teachers would do roll call to get our names. While doing roll call they would ask us what we went by. "David, do you go by Dave? Davey? What do you prefer?" They asked everybody this. A lot of kids in my class used their middle name because we had 2-3 Matts, 2-3 Jessicas, etc. So school children already go through this.

.

There is a HUGE jump between calling "David" Dave or using a legal middle name and changing a name outright. Also, when "Davey's" records are looked at in the office it will still state "David Wilson Carson", not Jackie Anne Carson. This is the policy in some school districts and in some professional aspects.


As I stated in a previous post, my biggest gripe is about officially changing records BEFORE a legal name change. Hypothetically, if a woman came to me and said, "Cuda, I plan on getting married in a year, but I want to use my fiancé's last name now", I'd have the same reaction.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
[

When I was in school, the first day the teachers would do roll call to get our names. While doing roll call they would ask us what we went by. "David, do you go by Dave? Davey? What do you prefer?" They asked everybody this. A lot of kids in my class used their middle name because we had 2-3 Matts, 2-3 Jessicas, etc. So school children already go through this.

.

There is a HUGE jump between calling "David" Dave or using a legal middle name and changing a name outright. Also, when "Davey's" records are looked at in the office it will still state "David Wilson Carson", not Jackie Anne Carson. This is the policy in some school districts and in some professional aspects.


As I stated in a previous post, my biggest gripe is about officially changing records BEFORE a legal name change. Hypothetically, if a woman came to me and said, "Cuda, I plan on getting married in a year, but I want to use my fiancé's last name now", I'd have the same reaction.

Do you have any source of this actually happening?

Prestor Jon wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

I'm interesting in seeing more info on this too. It sounds like school boards literally letting the inmates run the asylum. I understand that schools want to help students be themselves and all that but letting kids arbitrarily change their names would be crazy. Our kids decided years ago when they were in preschool that they liked to change their names to "Bunny" and "Queen Ester" when they played pretend but I wouldn't want the school system to start officially referring to our son as Bunny. At some point you would need parents to sign off on it, I would think, and hopefully that would work as a bulwark against abuse and silliness of the policy.

It actually gets worse. Not only do the parents not get a say in the matter, the schools are legally forbidden to tell them about it. The parents could be sending "John" to school every morning, only to have "J-shank" be his official in-school name. When parent teacher conferences come about, teachers must talk about "John's" progress and never mention the term "J-shank".

 cuda1179 wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

I'm interesting in seeing more info on this too. It sounds like school boards literally letting the inmates run the asylum. I understand that schools want to help students be themselves and all that but letting kids arbitrarily change their names would be crazy. Our kids decided years ago when they were in preschool that they liked to change their names to "Bunny" and "Queen Ester" when they played pretend but I wouldn't want the school system to start officially referring to our son as Bunny. At some point you would need parents to sign off on it, I would think, and hopefully that would work as a bulwark against abuse and silliness of the policy.

It actually gets worse. Not only do the parents not get a say in the matter, the schools are legally forbidden to tell them about it. The parents could be sending "John" to school every morning, only to have "J-shank" be his official in-school name. When parent teacher conferences come about, teachers must talk about "John's" progress and never mention the term "J-shank".

What state/school district is using this policy? That sounds crazy.

 cuda1179 wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

I'm interesting in seeing more info on this too. It sounds like school boards literally letting the inmates run the asylum. I understand that schools want to help students be themselves and all that but letting kids arbitrarily change their names would be crazy. Our kids decided years ago when they were in preschool that they liked to change their names to "Bunny" and "Queen Ester" when they played pretend but I wouldn't want the school system to start officially referring to our son as Bunny. At some point you would need parents to sign off on it, I would think, and hopefully that would work as a bulwark against abuse and silliness of the policy.

It actually gets worse. Not only do the parents not get a say in the matter, the schools are legally forbidden to tell them about it. The parents could be sending "John" to school every morning, only to have "J-shank" be his official in-school name. When parent teacher conferences come about, teachers must talk about "John's" progress and never mention the term "J-shank".

And who does this hurt?

Spurious examples aside, if calling someone a name helps their confidence, and doesn't disrupt anyone's day, why does it matter?

Now saying a teacher cannot tell a parent that they're child is trans, that's another matter, and not the point you originally presented.

 cuda1179 wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

I'm interesting in seeing more info on this too. It sounds like school boards literally letting the inmates run the asylum. I understand that schools want to help students be themselves and all that but letting kids arbitrarily change their names would be crazy. Our kids decided years ago when they were in preschool that they liked to change their names to "Bunny" and "Queen Ester" when they played pretend but I wouldn't want the school system to start officially referring to our son as Bunny. At some point you would need parents to sign off on it, I would think, and hopefully that would work as a bulwark against abuse and silliness of the policy.

It actually gets worse. Not only do the parents not get a say in the matter, the schools are legally forbidden to tell them about it. The parents could be sending "John" to school every morning, only to have "J-shank" be his official in-school name. When parent teacher conferences come about, teachers must talk about "John's" progress and never mention the term "J-shank".

3rd time: Got any source?

You have all this insider knowledge, so it should be able to give us a link to the policy, or at the very least the district where this is legally happening right now.

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Do we have a source on these prevalent school policies?

I'm interesting in seeing more info on this too. It sounds like school boards literally letting the inmates run the asylum. I understand that schools want to help students be themselves and all that but letting kids arbitrarily change their names would be crazy. Our kids decided years ago when they were in preschool that they liked to change their names to "Bunny" and "Queen Ester" when they played pretend but I wouldn't want the school system to start officially referring to our son as Bunny. At some point you would need parents to sign off on it, I would think, and hopefully that would work as a bulwark against abuse and silliness of the policy.

It actually gets worse. Not only do the parents not get a say in the matter, the schools are legally forbidden to tell them about it. The parents could be sending "John" to school every morning, only to have "J-shank" be his official in-school name. When parent teacher conferences come about, teachers must talk about "John's" progress and never mention the term "J-shank".

And who does this hurt?

Spurious examples aside, if calling someone a name helps their confidence, and doesn't disrupt anyone's day, why does it matter?

Now saying a teacher cannot tell a parent that they're child is trans, that's another matter, and not the point you originally presented.

This really just feels like Cuda is using this as a reason to justify "I don't want to call you by whatever name you want". I really can't see any of these so called consequences happening. This really feels like a Simpson's "Think about the children!!" moment

 jreilly89 wrote:

This really just feels like Cuda is using this as a reason to justify "I don't want to call you by whatever name you want". I really can't see any of these so called consequences happening. This really feels like a Simpson's "Think about the children!!" moment

I agree.

We got a nice little rant in the opening post, examples of this happening in schools and jobs, tails about kids deciding all kind of names and teachers being prohibited from telling their parents, people getting in trouble with HR at school. What we don't get is any proof of any of this, no name of companies, no names of school districts, no policies, not even a link to examiner.com or other shady "news" sources.

Considering that there is no actual news to discuss, I think we are probably better off following the MOD advice after the other recent trans-issues threads got locked and just leave the topic alone.

Frankly if no decent sources are posted the thread should be locked and the OP warned.

It really depends on the district and the principal- my wife had someone who was identifying as the opposite sex in her class, and made a call home- to discover that the parents absolutely did not want their kid called that, whatever the kid was saying.

I've also had several students who would behave well if they were granted a ridiculous nickname- one of my students wanted to go by 'King' this year, and had better behavior as long as I called him that.

Honestly, if they behaved and did their work I would call them whatever they wanted, as long as it didn't have any drug references, or negative connotations. I drew the line at someone who wanted to be called Stoned.