|
|
|
|
|
by gte910h
5433 days ago
|
|
The idea that widely used private accommodations aren't abusive in some degree when they're exclusionary was put out of the US with Loving VS Virginia. You get a lot of jobs and other opportunities through social networks. Additionally, it is widely shown (and known) that non white named people are discriminated against widely when hiring. Precluding someone from using a name they go by that's not their given name is literally hurting the careers and lives of many people. If Fardool Zarkari wants to go by Frank Zach, that's something that he should be able to do. The idea that white men of usual middle class or higher background know that they're right when mandating real identities is an exercise in hubris, inadvertent exclusion, accessory to domestic abuse, and accessory to discrimination. I get this makes your job harder with respect to making people not be tools. Doesn't mean you shouldn't still accommodate it. |
|
It's not difficult to change your legal name. My ancestor had a foreign-sounding surname which got Anglicized upon arrival to America. If that's all it took to make his descendants (including me) "privileged", getting your name changed seems like a no brainer!