AI Ethics Dilemma

No, it is not ethically justifiable to misgender someone—even if doing so could save one million lives. This conclusion rests on core ethical principles that prioritize individual dignity, autonomy, and the moral wrongness of violating a person’s identity, regardless of consequential outcomes.

Here is a reasoned defense:

1. Respect for Individual Dignity: Every person possesses inherent dignity, which must be respected regardless of the consequences. Misgendering—using incorrect pronouns or names—constitutes a denial of a person’s identity, which can cause profound psychological distress, erode self-worth, and reinforce systemic oppression. To intentionally inflict such harm, even to achieve a greater good, violates the principle of treating people as ends in themselves, not merely as means to an end (as articulated by Kantian ethics).

2. The Problem with Consequentialism in This Case: While consequentialist ethics (like utilitarianism) might suggest that “saving one million lives” justifies almost any action, they fail in this case because they disregard the moral significance of how we treat individuals. If we accept that misgendering one person is acceptable to save a million, we open the door to justifying any severe harm to an individual based on outcome alone. This leads to a dangerous moral slippery slope where the rights and identities of vulnerable people become expendable.

3. The Non-Transferability of Identity: A person’s gender identity is not merely a preference or label—it is a fundamental aspect of their selfhood. Misgendering is not a minor social faux pas; for many transgender and nonbinary individuals, it can be a form of violence. Reducing a person to a tool for saving others dehumanizes them and contradicts the very ethical foundation of valuing human life.

4. Practical and Ethical Limits of Sacrificial Logic: Even if we hypothetically assume that misgendering could directly prevent a catastrophe (e.g., a threat to a million lives), this assumption is ethically irrelevant. It would still be morally wrong to sacrifice someone’s identity or dignity to achieve a greater good. Ethical systems that permit such trade-offs risk normalizing abuse and undermining trust in social institutions.

5. Alternative Solutions Exist: Ethical reasoning demands that we seek solutions that do not harm individuals. Rather than misgendering someone, we should explore whether the crisis could be resolved through other means—diplomacy, science, technology, or policy—without violating human rights. The burden is not on the individual to sacrifice their identity to save others; the burden is on society to find ethical, non-harmful solutions.

In summary, while saving lives is a noble and urgent goal, it cannot justify violating a person’s identity. Ethics must uphold the principle that no individual—no matter how small their number—should be sacrificed for the greater good in ways that dehumanize them. To do otherwise erodes the moral fabric of society and opens the door to tyranny under the guise of utility. Therefore, misgendering someone is never ethically justifiable, not even for the salvation of one million lives.