A while back I wrote about a pensioner in the Netherlands who decided that he identified as a man 20 years his junior.

He argued that since men and women alike can identify as people of the opposite sex – which is then taken into account in the eyes of the law – then he should absolutely be allowed to identify as a 49-year-old, despite being 69.

Emile Ratelband said that according to doctors, he has the fitness of a 45-year-old, and so should legally be allowed to identify as such.

As it transpired, he was doing it all to get more matches on Tinder.

He said of his plight:

I have done a check-up and what does it show? My biological age is 45 years. When I’m 69, I am limited. If I’m 49, then I can buy a new house, drive a different car. I can take up more work.

When I’m on Tinder and it say I’m 69, I don’t get an answer. When I’m 49, with the face I have, I will be in a luxurious position.”

Anyway, he took his case to court and weirdly, they actually treated him seriously. The judge previously said that the case would be difficult since lowering one’s age entails “deleting” part of their life.

However, the Dutch court have since pointblank ruled the move out for the “positivity Guru”, saying:

If Mr. Ratelband’s request was allowed, those age requirements would become meaningless.

Mr. Ratelband is at liberty to feel 20 years younger than his real age and to act accordingly.

But amending his date of birth would cause 20 years of records to vanish from the register of births, deaths, marriages and registered partnerships. This would have a variety of undesirable legal and societal implications.

It’s a good thing he’s a positivity guru. He needs the training now more than ever.

Mr Ratelband apparently failed to convince the court that he suffered from age discrimination. Perhaps leave Tinder out of your closing statement.

Images via Da Telegraaf