The point is that just because you have something to hide doesn't mean you've done anything wrong. You might end up sharing that information in certain situations, but carefully. The framing those who promulgate that phrasing want to push is that not wanting to share information with the government makes you suspicious, because your only possible reason could be wrongdoing. This notion is hostile to liberty and security.

I completely agree with you about "identity theft" but I also keep the keys to my house private, although anybody who would burglarize me if I didn't would clearly be in the wrong and legally liable for my things.

Notwithstanding any legal or ethical judgement, being burglarized would cause me significant inconvenience and at the very least some sentimental losses, even if I were ultimately compensated years later with interest. Therefore, I keep my keys private to protect myself.

The point is to break the incorrect notion that "having something to hide" means "wanting to hide wrongdoing."

There are also a ton of bewildered Boomers out there who believe they have done nothing wrong and are completely bewildered their children have gone no contact. I’d say if your kids won’t talk to you’ve seriously fucked up, and at least for some of them it’s over conversations they could have taken to their grave but instead their “truth” was more important than meeting their grandkids.

I told my father something about myself years ago and he tried to make the case that I hadn’t brought it up because I was ashamed.

I wasn’t ashamed. But if you share certain things about yourself, being gay being one of the most obvious examples, some people want to define you by it, or talk about it to the exclusion of all other things. I’d much rather talk about trees, for that matter tax law.

One of my mentees had a bit of a persecution complex about several things, orientation one of them. When late in our relationship I finally mentioned that my kid had come out, she was shocked I hadn’t brought it up before (which in retrospect I think she may have been recalculating her opinions of me on the fly, like the Key & Peele skit, “Oh I see, I’m just an asshole.”)

Without a pause I answered that it’s because it’s not the most interesting thing about them, which just made the eyebrows go up even higher. But I think it finally sunk in.

> you're focused on their words instead of their meaning.

If I were focused on that meaning, I'd call talking about whether they're doing right or wrong things completely unresponsive. We're talking about privacy and protection, not their personal assessments of the merit of their private lives.

Instead, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and remind them that the people who are dangerous to them may not share their standards or ethics.

"close enough for government work"