Looking behind the sails of a ship.

---

Content / Trigger warning: Some themes of aggression that some readers may find distressing.

Let’s get philosophical.

If you had a ship, and made updates to it, tearing out the starboard, and recarpeting the hull, at what point do you consider the vessel to no longer be its original?

Over time, every plank has been replaced. New flags installed, a slick layer of new paint, and old riggings swapped out for new. Fresh sails billow, and even crew members have been turned over. At what point is it so far removed and reorganised that it is a new ship?

For those of you who haven’t come across this debate yet, it is commonly referred to as the Ship of Thesus. The paradox in it is that despite all the changes being relatively minor, there comes a point where the vessel no longer resembles the original.

So, the question becomes: Is it still the same ship?

In all fairness, this philosophical debate does not always go so far as to question the crew, or the paintwork, yet I would argue there is some premise to the inclusion of these details. It adds to the scene. In either case, what becomes apparent is that it seems to be the enduring identity that maintains originality. The ship is a ship, and therefore no matter what updates are made, it remains to be the same ship.

How I see it is that if the deck were stripped, and the wood carpentered into a rocking horse or wooden dish collection, you would not argue that the wood is still a ship. Its identity has changed to now being part of a horse. And yet, the ship remains to be a ship, because the new planks nailed in align with its identity of being a ship. It doesn’t matter whether the planks are original or not, it embodies the original identity. We could therefore argue that hundreds of updates later, the ship is still its original.

If we look at the museums and artefacts, I would imagine a lot of ships are described as an original, in spite of the retailoring it has almost certainly been subject to. This, I also imagine, is true of many objects throughout the course of history. Even outside of history, we can see it – we see it in fantasy.

J.R.R. Tolkien rather famously wrote a novel about a hobbit on an adventure with twelve dwarves, one of which being Thorin Oakenshield. Apologies in advance for any of those who are yet to read the book, or watch the movies (maybe skip to the next paragraph to avoid a minor spoiler), but we see in the appendices of the Lord of the Rings, and adapted in the film The Hobbit: an unexpected journey, that Thorin uses a broken branch as a shield amidst battle. Yes, we can argue that it remains to be a branch throughout. Yet, the very nature of the object is trumped by its identity. In that moment it is not simply a branch – it is both a symbol and tangible armour of defence.

Taking creative liberty, I would posit that J.R.R. Tolkien was potentially inspired by the repurposing of objects on and off the many battlefields of planet Earth. How many baseball clubs have been used to harm someone instead of hitting a ball? Golf clubs, ceramic pots, flip flops, or Colonel Mustards personal favourite: the candlestick. The list is endless. In each example though, we see that whilst the exterior may be designed for one purpose, its identity changes. Who am I to tell you ‘It’s just a baseball bat’ when you have been clubbed round the head with it?

I guess we could look at this from many angles, applying it even to self-growth and wellness.

At what point are you considered a new person, that is, if you ever are? Our skin replenishes, and old skin comes off. Our hair falls out, the oxygen in our lungs renews. Our bones grow and break. We puncture our bodies with ink or jewellery. Skin grafts, where we take skin from a healthy area, and place it onto a damaged site to help with healing. Would you argue that skin on your face, which used to be your leg, is still your leg? I doubt it.

We can move away from the physical identity of people and still see this same pattern.

Counselling and therapies can help people grow from a previous version of themselves. It would be unfair to tell a recovered addict that they are the same person they were whilst abusing. Maybe they still look the same, but inherent changes have been made. They have made them.

Look at Robert Downey Jr. We now know him best for his roles in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. In the 90’s however, newspaper headlines were often dashed with reports of his drug addictions, rehab stints, and prison sentences. He is not the same man as he was, and I think it would be both a discredit, and disservice to him, and the hard work he put into recovering, to say otherwise.

If we go back to the question I posited to you at the start of this article, is he the same ship? He tore out the hull, and refashioned it into a piece of art. He shredded the sails and made confetti. No, I don’t think he is the same ship, even if his hard exterior says otherwise.

So, if we can accept his change in identity from addict to world class movie star, and can accept a candlestick can be a murder weapon, can we not also accept a man who wants to be a woman, is one?

Look at the ship again. They want to use the floorboards to create a rocking horse. So why are we putting boundaries in their way? When we look at people who have changed their being, in any scenario, we accept it. Think about it. A recovered alcoholic can still walk down the alcohol isle in the shop. Some choose not to, whilst others enjoy the achievement they have from being able to walk past unbothered. People in relationships choose to become parents. Or choose not to. The power to change their identity to parents is entirely their own.

People who have previously cheated have since worked on themselves and make a choice to not to do that again. We wouldn’t call them a cheater if they haven’t cheated in 50 years, would we? Even with the knowledge of their history, we still choose to enter into relationships with them; trusting them when they say, ‘they have changed.’ We believe them. They stripped back the varnish and strengthened the woodwork. Why should we not believe them? Drivers who speed get a ticket and a chance to drive again. They go to the courses on ‘safe driving’ and yes some come speeding out, but others consider the danger, they put themselves and others in. They change their identity from someone who speeds, to someone who doesn’t. So why are we disputing what someone chooses to be?

If we can accept an addict has changed to become recovered, a person changes their identity from single, to taken, to parent, and convict changes their identity from felon to President, do we really have the grounds to say you cannot be who you want to be?

We have given every other person that power.

It seems silly now that we can accept these high-risk identity developments, but not the simple case of wanting to go by ‘she,’ or ‘he’.

So yes, the ship with many many updates can still be an original ship. If it wants to be heaved onto the sand, and made into a climbing frame, it is no longer an original ship. It is a place for expressionism, for love, and for acceptance.

These traits are what we identify this business with. It is a space for openness and personal development – however that looks for you.

From being ‘bad’ at math's to becoming a ‘genius’. From not knowing how to sleep, to working with your Wellness Coach and discovering methods that work for you, allowing you to enjoy a full 8 hours. Whatever it is, we do not judge the change in identity you want to undertake. No matter how big or small, we believe in supporting change. In supporting you.

In a time of fear, anxiety, and mass prejudice, I think we can all start to be a little more accepting of what ships people do, or do not, want to be.