poetical Bayberry - Part one (not sure if there will be an second one)

---

imagine following scenario:

its an usual Sunday afternoon, you just sat down on your couch after drinking a mug of "Flat Withe" coffee and carelessly watch the TV m,an talking about wars in country that you have no connection with.

suddenly the doorbell rings

you hesitate to go to the wooden door protecting your apartment from the rest of the complex, but finally convince yourself to grab your key and open it:

in the plain lighting emitted by the lights in the stairwell you see a man with an rusty ax standing before you.

you know this mans face, in fact the whole country knows, this face belongs to the killer that escaped from custody last weekend.

the man nods, then he asks about your friend, he need s to know where he is he says, proceed that it is necessary knowledge to kill him

you, once again hesitate: you know very well about your friends current destination, he is in the bathroom washing of the pasta of his hands that you had for lunch.

What should you do? (feel free to post your approach in the replies)

this scenario was first described by Emmanuel Kant in one of his philosophical writings.

he insisted that trapped in this scenario, you are not allowed to lie to the Murder, because lying is wrong.

this tough fascinated me since i read it in an book i found in my city's library and it shows something contradictory in our binary based social system.

the other day i talked with an familiar, who seemed to have no understanding for Trans people whatsoever.

After having to find out than some of my close friends have a negative image of queer people (which i do not share), I tried to talk with him about the issues he had and while explanimng to him why more than 2 genders were a rational necessity (stuff like the De la Chapelle syndrome), he asked me an interesting question:

if a person I am relationship with is a transgender, does this make me gay?

"it depends, but if this person is male and you feel gay, it would be possible, why not"

he gave ma an confused look, and immediately restated his question:

but if the person changed gender while being together with me already?

" i don´t see the difference in that" ,I replied, "I mean its up top your choice anyways"

the conversation concluded this way for the rest of my way home from school, and after it finished , i had understood two things:

1. my dear discussion partner did not like what he called "gay" , not because it bothered him, but simply because it was something he didn´t understand
2. what seemed absolutely possible in my eyes, changing your gender or sexuality, was an impossible thing in his eyes

this lays the foundation of what i like to thing about as "binary thinking" and it is exactly what makes Kant´s question so interesting:

either you lie (what is bad), or you betray a friend (whats also bad)