Recognition For Australians Who Identify As Neither Sex

[isanbirder]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22731013

While it is obviously good for these people to be allowed to identify themselves as what they are, it does not seem to clear away the problems arising, Filling in almost any kind of form is an obvious example.

[Swiss1960]

not only the forms, but many more implications like

- marriage: what kind of relationship will somebody who identifies him/herself as "other" have with somebody who is either male or female? not same-sex obviously, so would they be allowed to have a "regular" marriage?

- prison: which prison would these people be put in when the situation arises?

- travel: how will other countries deal with that situation?

While I recognize the issues that intersex / transgender people have with their gender identity, such a "bureaucratic" court decision is probably not the most clever idea for these people. I think it would be more clever to allow these people to chose the gender they want to be identified with without the current needs for SRS.

[isanbirder]

I agree, Swiss1960, but that was not what the plaintiff in the case wanted.

[Scott]

I am not sure this is a gay issue. Thoughts?

[isanbirder]

I am not sure this is a gay issue. Thoughts?

I thought this forum covered LGBT issues, and this is certainly T. If not, we shouldn't have had the ladyboy thread here!

[Scott]

There have been people who object to Ladyboy threads being in the gay forum, by the way. A former moderator was rather vocal in that regard.

This topic is sort of new territory and as I said "I am not sure" it belongs in the gay forum.

Actually, I am not sure where it belongs, so for now, I guess we can discuss it here.

[onthemoon]

not only the forms, but many more implications like

- marriage: what kind of relationship will somebody who identifies him/herself as "other" have with somebody who is either male or female? not same-sex obviously, so would they be allowed to have a "regular" marriage?

- prison: which prison would these people be put in when the situation arises?

- travel: how will other countries deal with that situation?

While I recognize the issues that intersex / transgender people have with their gender identity, such a "bureaucratic" court decision is probably not the most clever idea for these people. I think it would be more clever to allow these people to chose the gender they want to be identified with without the current needs for SRS.

Travel: Australians have had the option to use X instead of F or M as their gender in the passport for a while now, see here.

Remember that nobody is forced to use this new option. Some people would like to have it and have fought for it, and now they can. It will still be their decision whether they take it, the state won't nanny them. I fail to see how this is an unclever or bureaucratic move by the court.

[onthemoon]

There have been people who object to Ladyboy threads being in the gay forum, by the way. A former moderator was rather vocal in that regard.

This topic is sort of new territory and as I said "I am not sure" it belongs in the gay forum.

Actually, I am not sure where it belongs, so for now, I guess we can discuss it here.

It depends on how the gay forum defines itself. If we limit it to only gay male issues, the other letters in LGBT are excluded. Do we want that?

In my personal opinion, it is perfectly OK if this is the LGBT forum. But maybe that should be discussed in a separate thread...

[LeCharivari]

(edit)..... I think it would be more clever to allow these people to chose the gender they want to be identified with without the current needs for SRS.

"These people" (if they are Australians) are ALREADY allowed to “choose the gender they want to be identified with” and which is shown in their passport as “Male” (M), “Female” (F) or “Unspecified” (X) with NO need for GRS, as many times as they want, and its one of the few countries that allows its citizens to do so; British citizens can also change the gender shown in their passport (to M or F) without GRS.

Some countries do require GRS, but most don’t recognize any sex change even after full GRS.

The requirement for passports to show gender, along with name, nationality and date of birth, is actually an ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) one and not up to individual countries, but it does allow for “M”, “F” and “X” with “X” being “unspecified” as well as “indeterminate”, “intersex”, or “transgender”. As far as I know the only countries to include “X” are Australia and Nepal, with India and Pakistan doing so for those who have had full GRS.

[LeCharivari]

I am not sure this is a gay issue. Thoughts?

I thought this forum covered LGBT issues, and this is certainly T. If not, we shouldn't have had the ladyboy thread here!

Those gays who try to distance themselves from “ladyboys”, not only here but far more importantly in the real world, make me ashamed to be gay. What are they afraid of? That somehow their being associated with ladyboys will make them look less of a “real man”?

We’re supposed to be supporting equality, diversity and acceptance of sexual minorities, with those who draw the line at unquestioning support for some gay issues being condemned by some as “anti-gay”, but at the same time some gays seem to think that including ladyboys is unacceptable in a “Gay” forum and resent them in gay bars opining that ladyboys are either not gay at all or somehow too gay. Where’s the cut-off line (no pun intended)? If a ladyboy is still originally equipped and wants to stay that way are they a fem gay (a “G”), so eligible to post and be posted about here, while the relatively few who choose to have full GRS are no longer “G” but have changed to being “T” so no longer eligible?

The idea that everyone can be pigeonholed and should be is out of date: first it was LGB (Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual), next LGBT (LGB and Transexual), then LBGTQ (LGBT and Questioning) and LGBTQQ (LGBTQ and Queer), then LGBTI (LGBT and Intersex), with a few local variations such as LGBTIH (LGBTI and Hijra) and LGBT2S (LGBT and Two-Spirit) just to add to the confusion. Where does it stop?

Nobody has a monopoly on knowing either what being gay means or what it means to be gay, whoever they are, and we should all respect that.

It’s not LGBTQQIH2S Pride or LGBTQQIH2S Marriage but Gay Pride and Gay Marriage, and this isn’t the LGBTQQIH2S (but not too much of the T please) Forum but the Gay Forum.

[isanbirder]

I don't think the answer should be restricted to passports; indeed, passports are the easy part.

What about all those forms one fills in during one's life which offer a simple M/F? Many of them are computerised now, and the computer simply is not geared to accept an X.. What, as they say, does X do now?

[onthemoon]

I don't think the answer should be restricted to passports; indeed, passports are the easy part.

What about all those forms one fills in during one's life which offer a simple M/F? Many of them are computerised now, and the computer simply is not geared to accept an X.. What, as they say, does X do now?

Right. I think the X-people have to change the world one country at a time, and it is a long way to go.

First steps have been made. Congratulations are in order.