• B.C. Human Rights Tribunal to consider striking gender designation from birth certificates
    279 replies, posted
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47814843]I swear no successful sane person with any achievements in life ever bitches about things like these. This is so strange that a minority can lobby such great changes that affect literally everyone in country.[/QUOTE] Why exactly would you mind if this was removed, though? The idea is that sex/gender designation is simply officially irrelevant and only a personal private matter, and that's a mantra that's being repeated through society for other reasons than transgenderism too - for instance feminism and the issues of sexist problems in work etc. Why does anybody need to know my gender just from looking into my official documents? I guess sex is an identification thing, but it's not really that important one, is it. Gender is utterly meaningless in official context, though. [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Dissolution;47814863]I haven't seen a BC certificate in a while but a few google searches show just Sex on everything I can find. That makes this entire thing completely superfluous because sex doesn't mean gender.[/QUOTE] Yeah it's a humbug then. I don't see anything wrong with the paper saying "and the baby has been born with a penis", mainly if it [I]can[/I] be changed at wish, later. [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;47814865]Why is it strange that a minority can make it's voice heard? This isn't legless people petitioning to make stairs illegal, it's not as though anyone is likely to be practically inconvenienced by this. You know, aside from data entry workers.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't their life be even easier since they have less data to put in? [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] It would sure as fuck make my inner coder happy if it could be a thing in Czech lands, because we have gender specific declension and it's hard as fuck to code something that doesn't fuck up the declension of a sentence when you throw in a female name.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;47814865]Why is it strange that a minority can make it's voice heard? This isn't legless people petitioning to make stairs illegal, it's not as though anyone is likely to be practically inconvenienced by this. You know, aside from data entry workers.[/QUOTE] We still need to know sex for medical reasons. Male and female bodies are different on much more levels than just genitals. And its just pointless. "Why not remove it" is not a proper reason, I dont see anyone being hurt. Also many people in that thread noted good reasons.eg. If a couple is adopting a child and they want a girl - they should get a girl.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47814894]We still need to know sex for medical reasons. Male and female bodies are different on much more levels than just genitals. And its just pointless. "Why not remove it" is not a proper reason, I dont see anyone being hurt. Also many people in that thread noted good reasons.eg. If a couple is adopting a child and they want a girl - they should get a girl.[/QUOTE] Birth certificates aren't the only records we have. We would still know what sex people are. While I don't see why it needs to be changed, some of the reasons people are coming up with for why it shouldn't be changed are just silly.
I've always thought that it was always natural for differences in behavior between men and women, when thinking of the human as an animal. i tried searching for transgenderism in animals, not knowing anything else to search. the only things to come up was one article saying it didn't really apply to animals and a huffington post article saying they found the world's first transgendered bird. transsexuality brought up a few articles about genetic manipulation and hormonal changes dhring gestation can cause it in nematodes and rats respectively. it would seem to be an anomaly if there wasn't some kind of behavioral differences between sexes in humans. it does, however, mean something that we do have a prevalence of gender dimorphism. maybe the extra 1.2 months of gestation (relative to apes), and with the relative weakness of the human newborn compared to an ape newborn, makes the human baby more susceptible to hormonal differences which cause the change in behavior. the changes would probably be determines by what hormones, how much, and when. some of these changes are not going to be super strong I'd imagine. it may be that different cues have had different views of understanding these differences, and accepted them as they were, and because there is acceptance there were less people having very minute differences socialized out and those with stronger dysphoria didn't feel the need to hide it. in western cultures, it could be that there are a greater number of nonbinary-dispositioned people than previously thought. however, that doesn't mean that it is common, just perhaps more common than we thought. and along with this, i don't know of any culture that has completely abandoned the binary distinctions in all ways, and i believe it is still a majority in most if not all cultures. a lot of these differences are totally cultural, as humans love to assign meaning to shit abritrarily and so it got to the point where blue is masculine and pink is feminine (although that is a somewhat recent change). but , these distinctions between male and female always show up in every culture as the great majority. along with this, there are instinctual differences especially concerning reproduction. not even talking about pregnancy, but when people are aroused. men and women act differently when they're horny. i personally think that who you are as a person in regards to gender identity is up to you, and what you choose is what you are, but i still believe there are biological behavioral differences between men and women [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] i hope this makes sense i'm very tired
[QUOTE=thisispain;47814272]In my own little world I consider male and female to be socially constructed categories. I know of the hypotheses that genetics are influential in how we identify but as far as I'm aware we're still very far away from understanding why and how people identify; I'm open to reading things if you've got something. And gender identity being a choice or not is mostly irrelevant to what I was saying, lots of things are societal but not choices.[/QUOTE] Considering the fact that apparently about 99% of the population feel that their gender corresponds to their physical sex, I think it's likely that gender isn't just random. Either way, what you're saying is that gender develops during the childhood or early life, and basically that viewpoint enables "pray the gay away". If you develop a gender during early life, why shouldn't you be able to change it later on? And how about sexuality? Time and again we've seen this fail totally. And then why does it turn out that most transgender people still end up in the male or female camp? And why should they wish away their physical parts if gender is a social construct? Shouldn't we expect to see more and more (or less and less depending on which way we're going) people become LGBT if society's attitude toward upbringing is constantly changing? Shouldn't we see less gay people (openly or not) in Kenya than in, let's say, Denmark? I just checked out Wikipedia on gender systems in different countries (they overlap with some of those you posted on the last page), and even though (some of them) they accept multiple genders on a spectrum, most of them still define these on a scale from male to female. If the gender binary is completely arbitrary, and not a consequence of genetics, why would they even have a concept of these roles?
So, How do we identify this person? He/She has a name and we think he/she isn't lying.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47814843]I swear no successful sane person with any achievements in life ever bitches about things like these. This is so strange that a minority can lobby such great changes that affect literally everyone in country.[/QUOTE] I joke that when the .3 percent start dictating policy for the 99.7 percent, it's become an aristocracy. [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47814894]We still need to know sex for medical reasons. Male and female bodies are different on much more levels than just genitals. And its just pointless. "Why not remove it" is not a proper reason, I dont see anyone being hurt. Also many people in that thread noted good reasons.eg. If a couple is adopting a child and they want a girl - they should get a girl.[/QUOTE] For example, Prostate's. Men can't get cervical cancer, women can't get prostate cancer. Even if one gets a sex reassignment surgery.
Sex != Gender The debate should've ended there really.
[QUOTE=Bruhmis;47813781]I'm really starting to hate this movement because of things like this. people who don't feel that they're the gender they were born as are in an abnormal situation. why isn't it enough for society to accommodate their decisions? why should society completely invert itself just to pre-emptively cater to an unreasonable minority? it seems to me like this attitude has great potential to halt or even reverse some of the progress we've made with gender equality in the last few years.[/QUOTE] Hold on. It isn't the Trans community that's fucking ballistic here. At a level they just wish to be accepted for who they are. It's fucking SJW's and trucutes(?) who only play at gender dysphoria because they wish for snowflake points. Fuck. I don't want this to happen, a child may come out transgender or homosexual later in life, but a lot of people in Canada truely do not give a fuck and actually support it. To do this, though, is something stupid, because Doctor's will have to keep checking genitals to see who's what and have to set the dosage or change the administration of it because it's a boy and not a girl like they thought. Because Babies, for all they're worth, look insanely fucking similar. Sexual Dimorphism only comes into play during 8 (I believe) and then on.
[QUOTE=Keyblockor1;47815036]Hold on. It isn't the Trans community that's fucking ballistic here. At a level they just wish to be accepted for who they are. It's fucking SJW's and trucutes(?) who only play at gender dysphoria because they wish for snowflake points. Fuck. I don't want this to happen, a child may come out transgender or homosexual later in life, but a lot of people in Canada truely do not give a fuck and actually support it. To do this, though, is something stupid, because Doctor's will have to keep checking genitals to see who's what and have to set the dosage or change the administration of it because it's a boy and not a girl like they thought. Because Babies, for all they're worth, look insanely fucking similar. Sexual Dimorphism only comes into play during 8 (I believe) and then on.[/QUOTE] To tell proper dosage for a baby you need to know far more than just check if a dong is or isn't in place. You need to know weight, exact age, if there were so far any complications etc. Stop making it sound like that if sex wouldn't be in the documents, it would suddenly make sexes extremely hard to tell apart, that's absolute nonsense.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47814843] This is so strange that a minority can lobby such great changes that affect literally everyone in country.[/QUOTE] Amount of people negatively affected by a change like this:
It really all depends on what a birth certificate is/does/represents. If it represents "gender/gender identity" then this change is a good thing. If it represents "physical sex" then this change is unneeded, as long as birth certificates include a 3rd option for those born intersex and it's possible for trans people to change at a later date post surgery. Now to go onto some points posted here. "Determining birth certificates by chromosomes". This really wouldn't work and wouldn't do it's job being a certificate of sex, based on the fact physical sex is a lot more complicated than just chromosomes based on the definition of sex. The scientific definition of physical sex, which is based on attributes of "egg producer and baby carrier" or "sperm producer". It would also require every new born to be given a chromosome test. Physical sex should include all attributes of sex and should also be done in such a way that for example woman with mostly XY chromosomes who get pregnant and give birth naturally don't get classed as biologically male as that goes against what "male" is. Things that should be included: Chromosomes (determines fertility/sex organ development). Sex organs (testicles and ovaries and uterus). Genitalia (the "tool" used to transfer genetic material from the male to the female), Sex hormones(responsible for secondary sex characteristics and for breast development and milk production as well as being primarily responsible for the differences in looks between males and females). For example a woman with mostly XY chromosomes would still be female unlike if just using chromosomes to determine sex, this would also mean trans men and women who have had HRT and SRS would also move from one sex to the other. Not fully as we lack the medical/scientific knowledge to change chromosomes and sex organs but enough to constitute a "sex change". "What is gender identity/what causes it" Gender identity is an innate sense of ones gender which can not be changed, which is at the very least partly biological in nature. The biological aspect is caused by the brains gender/sex which is determined in the womb by which ever hormone is absorbed. Trans peoples brains are the opposite of their birth sex, the cause of this miss match is known to have 2 causes, one being a gene in the fetus, the other is an imbalance of hormones in the womb itself. "Dysmorphia" Trans people have dysphoria not dysmorphia, they are very different. Dysmorphia being a delusion seeing your body as something it isn't, for example someone with an easting disorder who sees themselves as obese when in fact they are dangerously underweight. Dysphoria is seeing your body how it actually is (no delusion) but being uncomfortable with it/wanting to change it. There is also a completely different way to treat each of them. Dysphoria is treated by modifying the body to how they want it to be. Dysmprohia is treated by changing their behaviour and how they see themselves.
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;47815900]I don't think it's possible for someone to be born with XY chromosomes and still be able to give birth[/QUOTE] It is, all long as they have some XX chromones they can, 100% XY woman can't give birth but 95% XY 5% XX women can give birth (with some medical help) and the more XX chromones the more developed the sex organs are to the point even someone with 80% XY 20% XX can give birth naturally 2 times and not even know. [url]http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/india-genetically-male-woman-gives-birth-despite-underdeveloped-uterus-1487125[/url] [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190741/[/url]
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;47815692]Amount of people negatively affected by a change like this:[/QUOTE] everyone. health records matter
As a trans person in good ole murica, I live with the fact that I'm not going to be able to change the marking on my birth certificate without a large amount of dosh and a trip to Thailand. It's shit, but the idea of striking sex markings from a birth certificate entirely is kinda not a good idea.
[QUOTE=Richoxen;47814310]Uh, yeah? That's why they're transgender.[/QUOTE] unless if you're in the camp that assumes that non-binary or genderfluid people are "special snowflakes" (or whatever arbitrary and hurtful stuff you put up) you don't need to assume that every trans person needs dysphoria to be trans. this is such an extremely basic concept to grasp
No, don't remove sex from birth certificates. That's ridiculous. Gender? Don't include it, not necessary, imo, bit I don't think it ever was, so that's a non-issue. But sex on birth certificates? If there's a penis, put down "male." If there's a vulva, put down "female." That's just a biological statement that's important to have recorded. Can sex be changed? Sure, albeit a bit complicated. But change that on your ID. This is your birth certificate, identifying how you were at birth. Same with your name. Why are people still trying to debate beyond this? [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Ownederd;47816447]unless if you're in the camp that assumes that non-binary or genderfluid people are "special snowflakes" (or whatever arbitrary and hurtful stuff you put up) you don't need to assume that every trans person needs dysphoria to be trans. this is such an extremely basic concept to grasp[/QUOTE] Why are you bringing up that "camp" concept, it's entirely unrelated And dysphoria as in saying "hm, my body doesn't 100% match how I feel my gender is." I'm fairly sure that's a structural concept of any non-cisgendered identity.
[QUOTE=bitches;47813921]Okay, but how is that useful?[/QUOTE] I got a better question. Why not? Can a person be so nitpicky as to get all up in arms if someone assigns a gender to him/her, like how its been done throughout the ages? [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;47813931]Why do you care? This won't negatively affect you in the slightest while opening up the possibilities for alternative expressions of gender.[/QUOTE] Yes because a newborn will throw a tantrum over the sex attributed to him/her :downs: [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;47814006]That's very obvious not what I was saying but thanks, usually there are more steps to take when reducing arguments to absurdity. By not stressing gender on a birth-certificate we normalize alternate gender expression as something healthy and positive in society. The pressure to be boy or girl will be less if it's not backed by a chief authority.[/QUOTE] ...pressure? You make it sound like a "do or die" situation holy shit haha...
Change denomination from "gender" to "sex at birth" (assuming it even uses the word gender which I don't think it does), make it easily legally changeable later on. Everyone's happy. Why is this even a debate ?
I feel like this is a giant none issue, because they want to remove Gender designation from birth certificates but I have yet to see any with gender on them, they talk about removing something that isn't there, and that really confuses me.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;47816624]Change denomination from "gender" to "sex at birth" (assuming it even uses the word gender which I don't think it does), make it easily legally changeable later on. Everyone's happy. Why is this even a debate ?[/QUOTE] Because life these days just can't get easier in the most simple things :v:
[QUOTE=duckmaster;47816652]I feel like this is a giant none issue, because they want to remove Gender designation from birth certificates but I have yet to see any with gender on them, they talk about removing something that isn't there, and that really confuses me.[/QUOTE] This is what these people like to do. Turn non-issues in issues.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;47816624]Change denomination from "gender" to "sex at birth" (assuming it even uses the word gender which I don't think it does), make it easily legally changeable later on. Everyone's happy. Why is this even a debate ?[/QUOTE] It's sex, not gender. So the sex on a birth certificate is accurate even for a trans person.
The gender thing doesn't really matter in the end and isn't really important information anyways on a birth certificate. The sex one however is important when it comes to medicine. MtF people still get problems like prostate cancer for instance.
This is a big hoo hah about nothing, to me it sounds like that someone went though the list of things transgender people want/are and use Occam's razor as a hatchet. [I]"Transgender people don't want to be designated a gender they do not feel they are part of, ergo having their gender printed on their birth certificate is discrimination against them."[/I] This is utterly unhelpful to anyone, any trans gendered person can easily change over whenever they feel but the equipment and underlying gubbins is still that of what they were born as. It's time for a good old fashioned car analogy. Lets say that generic-brand car company has built a smallish 4 door hatchback nothing special type car, it's painted grey and has a petrol engine. The owner of the car is free to modify it as they please, they have it re-painted blue, give it a more sporty suspension, install a rear spoiler and tune up the engine so it sounds like a diesel car. It now looks like a different car and the owner was going to do this to any car he would've bought, assuming the car he bought wasn't exactly like that in the first place, because he wanted a car like that. This is fine, his car, do what he wants with it, but in that case should the manufacturer leave some aspects of the car's certifications after manufacture blank lest owners decide they want their car to be different? No, absolutely not, say the car needed to go in for repairs/tune up/MoT etc... and the engineers of course pull up all the info they have on the car, without a clear list of what was changed to what the only way to properly determine what current state the car is in is to open it up and have a look, possibly removing the engine block to have a good look underneath and taking the car apart extensively. Now yes, humans are not cars but there are distinct parallels that can be drawn here, for starters what gender a person is genetically is important when it comes to things like medicine and you might argue "I can just tell the doctors! Why do I need some label to tell them?" Ok so what if you're in a car crash or some other accident and rendered unconscious? (Here's hoping you never are) what then? Records as official as a birth certificate need to be utterly factual and it cannot be influenced in any way by anything that isn't the cold hard fact. That baby was born with a penis, had black skin and is child to Samuel Stuart and Martha Stuart, in Someplaceia at so-and-so city General hospital overseen by Doctor Whoeverheis. Baby grows up and decides it wants to live in Australia and be a woman? Fine! Off you go you little rascall! Have fun, do whatever.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;47813853]A child very much CAN know their gender. You know how? Look down. If it's an innie, you're a girl! If it's an outie, you're a boy! [/QUOTE] this is a really shitty post [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] blatantly ignoring medical advances and knowledge to propel the the idea that gender and sex are actually the same thing regardless of what you think birth certificates need to state physical states (sex, eye colour, allergies and what not depending on what your country defines on birth certificates) at [I]the time of birth[/I]. not gender, or future hair colour. MtF and FtM trans-surgery are mostly aesthetic. plenty of elements from the previous considered sex before transition still remain and that can be really important when it comes to surgery and medical treatments
Alright so when did the word "gender" stop being as synonym for "sex" because academia pretty much say they are the exact same word: "Division based upon genetalia". When did we start using it for "Gender-rolls"?
I remember a few years ago where sex != gender was a huge talking point in the forums, and now all of a sudden it's "we need to seperate sex and genitalia"? What the fuck make up your minds [editline]27th May 2015[/editline] This article is fucking dumb because it even interchanges sex and gender, which makes this a whole lot more confusing. All US birth certificates list sex: male or sex: female, just fyi.
[QUOTE=Keyblockor1;47815036]Hold on. It isn't the Trans community that's fucking ballistic here. At a level they just wish to be accepted for who they are. [B] It's fucking SJW's and trucutes(?) who only play at gender dysphoria because they wish for snowflake points.[/B] Fuck. I don't want this to happen, a child may come out transgender or homosexual later in life, but a lot of people in Canada truely do not give a fuck and actually support it. To do this, though, is something stupid, because Doctor's will have to keep checking genitals to see who's what and have to set the dosage or change the administration of it because it's a boy and not a girl like they thought. Because Babies, for all they're worth, look insanely fucking similar. Sexual Dimorphism only comes into play during 8 (I believe) and then on.[/QUOTE] So what you're saying is it isn't even .3% of the population dictating things for the 99.7%, but a minority within the .3%? Truly, they are the .1%
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;47816624]Change denomination from "gender" to "sex at birth" (assuming it even uses the word gender which I don't think it does), make it easily legally changeable later on. Everyone's happy. Why is this even a debate ?[/QUOTE] Make it easier to change sure, but it's not necessary to change it to "Sex at birth". Doing so is extremely unnecessary as when you have a 99.7 percent rate of it being also the persons sex until they're dead, you're changing shit to change shit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.