'Yep, I'm Gay': Understanding Agential Identity

Dembroff, Robin; Saint-Croix, Catharine

doi:10.3998/ergo.12405314.0006.020

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In sum, to be able to be taken as a woman/man many trans women and men need GAH. [34] (p.585). So, for many trans people, GAH is essential to the transition which they desire and which enables them to live authentically, because this transition involves their being socially perceived and treated in certain ways and GAH is key to this happening.…”

Section: IIImentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrity and rights to gender-affirming healthcare

Rowland

2021

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender-affirming healthcare (GAH) interventions are medical or surgical interventions that aim to allow trans and non-binary people to better affirm their gender identity. It has been argued that rights to GAH must be grounded in either a right to be cured of or mitigate an illness—gender dysphoria—or in harm prevention, given the high rates of depression and suicide among trans and non-binary people. However, these grounds of a right to GAH conflict with the prevalent view among theorists, institutions and activists that trans and non-binary people do not have a mental illness and that one can be trans and entitled to GAH without being depressed or suicidal. This paper challenges the orthodoxy that a right to GAH must be grounded in either of these ways and instead argues for a right to GAH grounded in a right to live and act with integrity. The standard view, which this paper explains, is that our rights to live and act with integrity ground a right to religious accommodation in many cases such as a right to not be denied social security due to one’s refusal to work a job on a holy day. This paper argues that if our rights to live and act with integrity can ground prima facie rights to religious accommodation, our rights to live and act with integrity ground prima facie rights to GAH.

show abstract

Section: IIImentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrity and rights to gender-affirming healthcare

Rowland

2021

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Insisting on denying someone's selfhood in interaction in this and other ways denies full entry into participatory sense-making, as it is a forced regulation of autonomy. This kind of harm, as a denial of selfhood and agential identity (Barnes, 2019;Dembroff and Saint-Croix, 2019), limits an agent's ability to participate in the co-creation of meaning (De Jaegher et al, 2016) in a social interaction, among causing or perpetuating other harms.…”

Section: Interpersonal Affordances Between Agents and Selvesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Being Perceived and Being “Seen”: Interpersonal Affordances, Agency, and Selfhood

Brancazio

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are interpersonal affordances a distinct type of affordance, and if so, what is it that differentiates them from other kinds of affordances? In this paper, I show that a hard distinction between interpersonal affordances and other affordances is warranted and ethically important. The enactivist theory of participatory sense-making demonstrates that there is a difference in coupling between agent-environment and agent-agent interactions, and these differences in coupling provide a basis for distinguishing between the perception of environmental and interpersonal affordances. Building further on this foundation for understanding interpersonal affordances, I argue that in line with some enactivist work on social cognition, interpersonal affordances ought to be considered as those that are afforded by agents and are recognized as such. Given this distinction, I also make the point that because our social conventions establish persons as more than mere agents, the direct perception of interpersonal affordances may also involve seeing others as embodied selves. Distinguishing between types of affordances thus also matters ethically: there can be harms done when an agent is not perceived as an agent, and there can be harms done when an agent is not perceived as a self.

show abstract

“…More generally, reflecting upon the need for cultural code-switching in AIS allows us to enrich our understanding of these phenomena beyond the context of human-AI interaction. Cultural code-switching influences not only first-personal identity-particularly what Dembroff and Saint-Croix (2019) have called agential identities-but also broader systems of social coordination within and between groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Est-ce que vous compute? Code-switching, cultural identity, and AI

Falbo¹,

LaCroix²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cultural code-switching concerns how we adjust our overall behaviours, manners of speaking, and appearance in response to a perceived change in our social environment. We defend the need to investigate cultural code-switching capacities in artificial intelligence systems. We explore a series of ethical and epistemic issues that arise when bringing cultural code-switching to bear on artificial intelligence. Building upon Dotson's (2014) analysis of testimonial smothering, we discuss how emerging technologies in AI can give rise to epistemic oppression, and specifically, a form of self-silencing that we call cultural smothering. By leaving the socio-dynamic features of cultural code-switching unaddressed, AI systems risk negatively impacting alreadymarginalised social groups by widening opportunity gaps and further entrenching social inequalities.

show abstract

'Yep, I'm Gay': Understanding Agential Identity

Cited by 14 publications

References 2 publications

Integrity and rights to gender-affirming healthcare

Integrity and rights to gender-affirming healthcare

Being Perceived and Being “Seen”: Interpersonal Affordances, Agency, and Selfhood

Est-ce que vous compute? Code-switching, cultural identity, and AI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About