Striking gender (sex) from brith certificates. At what point is the line drawn?

[Igottago]

I don't see why it has to go that far, it already says many provinces give people the right to make changes to their birth records even without any kind of surgery.

So if you are born a male, who has yet to develop any sense of identity or gender awareness, you are still physically a male at that time. If for whatever reason, hopefully years later as a fully informed adult who is making their own decision, you want to change it, change it.

Why does everyone to conform to the same ambiguity just because a few people here and there will experience it. Sometimes facts are just facts. These people are ignoring science as much as the loony toon religious fundamentals are when they denounce the LGBT community.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

This is incorrect as biologically it's 100% certainty at birth what gender the child is. Yes it's possible to for a person to grow up with a different gender identity but we simply can't start ignoring science. As has been said there's important stats that maintained that require gender differentiation. There are certain health risks that are gender specific from birth on and IMO this is simply going too far.

All the intersex people (hermaphrodites) would disagree...

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

Ok; I'll respond seriously:

I'm proposing we educate

• ourselves, societally, on the difference between biological sex and gender, and then learn to treat others equitably based on which of those things matters (medically, based on chromosomes and body parts; socially, legally, culturally, etc., based on self-identification),
• those whose feelings are being hurt by exposure to objective facts, to better manage their own responses and behaviours.

On the first point above, I don't have any personal, subjective experience on what it "feels like" to be in a wrong-sexed body. In fact, I couldn't even describe what it feels like to be a "man" -- I could only describe what it feels like to be "me," and what I *think* it would feel like to be a woman. But based on the number of people who go through this, I'm willing to accept that some people just "know" that they're another gender. So, it's a matter of educating me on what people like that need, and what they feel like, so I can
treat them more how they want to be treated. But don't screw up a whole objective, scientifically valid system of records (with statistical value) just to prevent people like me from accidentally calling you "Mr. Wang" instead of "Ms. Wang."

On the second point, a LOT of people have trouble dealing with various facts, and need to learn to manage their cognitive and behavioural responses better. Pretty big psychotherapy industry out there based on this. I don't ask that we change my birth records to hide the fact that my father was Charles Manson. Instead, I work (maybe with therapy?) to better manage how I think and feel when people mention my murderous father. I wouldn't ask my doctor to delete the fact that I was born with a tail from my medical records, even if I'd since had it surgically removed.

Drop the mic and leave the stage, good sir.
The show is now over

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

Ok; I'll respond seriously:

I'm proposing we educate

• ourselves, societally, on the difference between biological sex and gender, and then learn to treat others equitably based on which of those things matters (medically, based on chromosomes and body parts; socially, legally, culturally, etc., based on self-identification),
• those whose feelings are being hurt by exposure to objective facts, to better manage their own responses and behaviours.

On the first point above, I don't have any personal, subjective experience on what it "feels like" to be in a wrong-sexed body. In fact, I couldn't even describe what it feels like to be a "man" -- I could only describe what it feels like to be "me," and what I *think* it would feel like to be a woman. But based on the number of people who go through this, I'm willing to accept that some people just "know" that they're another gender. So, it's a matter of educating me on what people like that need, and what they feel like, so I can
treat them more how they want to be treated. But don't screw up a whole objective, scientifically valid system of records (with statistical value) just to prevent people like me from accidentally calling you "Mr. Wang" instead of "Ms. Wang."

On the second point, a LOT of people have trouble dealing with various facts, and need to learn to manage their cognitive and behavioural responses better. Pretty big psychotherapy industry out there based on this. I don't ask that we change my birth records to hide the fact that my father was Charles Manson. Instead, I work (maybe with therapy?) to better manage how I think and feel when people mention my murderous father. I wouldn't ask my doctor to delete the fact that I was born with a tail from my medical records, even if I'd since had it surgically removed.

While I appreciate this post, it's major flaw lies in the assumption that sex lies strictly within observable traits, eg the existence of a penis.

More data is coming out that neurological sex differences are as important in the manifestation of gender identity as the sex organs.

A good outline starts here, it's even discussed in the abstract:

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/32/7/2241.full

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Males and females, as a group, have innate differences that are biologically mapped. That isn't a popular truth, politically, but it doesn't make it any less true. And just because environment can shape behaviour, doesn't mean we should discount evidence that biology also shapes behavior (and not just along gender lines).

My children were virtually never away from the presence of each other - never introduced to varying environmental stimuli - for the first five years of their lives. You'll have to take my word for it that my wife and I didn't impose gender expectations on them. And yet even by 18 months they demonstrated dramatically different temperaments and capabilities. And I'm not talking differences only parents would notice. Their kindergarten teacher remarked that they were two of the most different kids she had ever taught. I find it impossible to believe those differences could be accounted for my subtle variations in tones of voices used by adults around them, or the color of their hats, or that the characters in some of the stories they read were modeled on traditional gender roles.

I recommend Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature for a well-substantiated corrective to popular notions about the origins of behaviour.

But those are all external behaviours. You really saying here Billy wears a dress. How does that external behaviour translate into feeling you are in the wrong body. There are plenty of feminin men and masculine females who identify with their gender so something else is there beyond just liking non gender traditional things.

Also if you had two boys or two girls you would see them as very different as well. I have a dainty one and one that smashes as well as any boy.

I guess what i dont understand is that I dont feel male. I am male. Me being male is no different then me being tall or having blue eyes. All traits which physically define me but you could change any of them and I wouldn't think that those traits weren't me.

[DoubleF]

Edit: Nvm..

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

While I appreciate this post, it's major flaw lies in the assumption that sex lies strictly within observable traits, eg the existence of a penis.

More data is coming out that neurological sex differences are as important in the manifestation of gender identity as the sex organs.

A good outline starts here, it's even discussed in the abstract:

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/32/7/2241.full

Thanks for the link. I read the abstract and skimmed the rest.

I don't agree that my thinking has the major flaw you suggest. I'd argue that I'm suggesting that we reduce assumptions by clearly defining "sex" based on things that are known to be binary. Genes, except in rare abnormalities, are binary in one small area (you've either got an XX or an XY) -- but it's an area that has a huge impact on development (including neurological). We're fortunate that a person's genes are typically pretty clearly identified by the observable traits between their legs; I'm not suggesting that the observable trait itself is the only difference between the sexes, but it's a pretty reliable indicator of the genes.

[troutman]

“The Gethenians do not see one another as men or women. This is almost impossible for our imaginations to accept. After all, what is the first question we ask about a newborn baby? ....there is no division of humanity into strong and weak halves, protected/ protective. One is respected and judged only as a human being. You cannot cast a Gethnian in the role of Man or Woman, while adopting towards 'him' a corresponding role dependant on your expetations of the interactions between persons of the same or oppositve sex. It is an appalling experience for a Terran ”
― Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness

[jwslam]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Put three check marks on the certificate

Male, female, opt out

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Statistically, for medical purposes, gender is critical. I'm not certain it needs to start at birth, but it must start somewhere.
Making the process simple to change, as desired, is not enough?

So maybe the undeniable boxes are penis or vagina or other (which now includes the 1 in 100,000+ cases)

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

Anyone who speaks in the English language and perceives they can do a completely genderless upbringing is kidding themselves. Gender is built into the language. There are no proper neutrals that are commonly used. Without going deep into my interest in sociology, the below are examples of a non-gender neutral language. Once you learn to see it, it can get annoying.

I don't think anyone can make that claim. However, just because differences in the use of language (and in the color of walls and toys) can have some influence on a child, that doesn't meant all differences are environmental. Degrees of things matter. Most parents in Canada today place far less emphasis on their kids meeting gender roles than parents did 30 or 50 or 100 years ago. And yet I don't think the behaviour of young boys and girls, as a group, has changed as dramatically, and I don't believe social and environmental gender neutrality, no matter how rigorously applied, could make a group of 100 young boys indistinguishable from 100 young girls in their behavior.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

Just change the check box to "Has a penis" , and "Doesn't has a penis"

I thought that is all it meant. Maybe we go to penis, vagina, both, neither, other?

The indication obviously has nothing to do with gender.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has agreed to review complaints filed by the Trans Alliance Society and a handful of transgender and intersex individuals, who argue that doctors should stop assigning the sex of a baby based on a quick inspection of the baby’s genitals at birth when there’s a possibility they may identify under a different gender, or no gender, years later.

“Birth certificates (may) give false information about people and characterize them in a way that is actually wrong, that assumes to be right, and causes people … actual harm,” said Morgane Oger, a transgender woman in Vancouver and chair of the society.

“It’s considered true and infallible when it isn’t.”

It's good to know there's people who want to let imagination trump reality and treat the baby's genitals as irrelevant.

I guess that means we no longer have to worry about what direction we're wiping just because the baby has a vagina. Biology is apparently no longer relevant.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

There is obviously something that occurs for some people that even when pushed within gender-specific boxes they feel the need to break out, so it stands to reason that without the environmental stimuli there would be a higher incidence of variance from the mean binaries.

I agree with everything that you said, but is it desirable to encourage a higher incidence of variance (if, as you imply, gender is at least somewhat dependent on nurture) considering the fact that transgendered people are so much more likely to suffer from depression and commit suicide?

We absolutely need to create a society where anyone who feels that they are the wrong gender is comfortable sharing that fact with the world and being themselves, but I don't know that reducing environmental stimuli and thereby causing more people to feel that they are the wrong gender is the answer. Or would eliminating environmental stimuli result in transgendered people being no more likely to suffer from depression, so it actually is the answer?

I don't know the answers to my own questions. This topic is confusing.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

It's good to know there's people who want to let imagination trump reality and treat the baby's genitals as irrelevant.

I guess that means we no longer have to worry about what direction we're wiping just because the baby has a vagina. Biology is apparently no longer relevant.

Yeah this seems a bit much to me.

No one is taking away transgender rights. It's just simple biology and the decision takes place BEFORE the baby actually grows up. We have a system in place which allows that decision to be changed should a fully grown adult with decision making abilities choose to do so.

Whats the end game for these organizations? I'm really curious.

Originally Posted by gargamel

I don't know the answers to my own questions. This topic is confusing.

It's cause there is no solution. Humans are a product of their environment. Every species is a product of it's environment. There is no way we can act as a gender neutral society. The only thing we can do is educate and practice acceptance.

That is much easier than some how trying to eliminate gender from the world.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by polak

Whats the end game for these organizations?

There is no end game. Social advocacy is no longer about simply tolerating differences, or reducing harm to the downtrodden. It's about signalling. People who promote their identity as progressives (though they're the last people who will ever recognize progress) need to prove their dedication to the cause by relentlessly calling for recognition, for apology, and for redress. Practical considerations like implementing policy aren't important.

In five years I expect some new sub-set of humanity will be picked up as a banner for the zealots to wave. For the ideologues, the important thing isn't measurable and tangible change (which, again, will not be acknowledged even if it happens), but to burnish their reputation for righteousness. It helps if you think of it as a modern, secular religion.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Matata

I've really tried to empathize with transgenders, but I don't get it at all. I'm happy to live and let live, but having your dick chopped up and stuffed inside you, followed by ingesting an expensive chemical cocktail of drugs everyday just so you can be 'you', I will never wrap my head around.

Really? You honestly can't wrap your head around it? Have you ever watched any specials or documentaries on it?

It's really easy to wrap your head around, like stupidly easy.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Bmuzyka

This whole gender issue seems to get out of hand. We have a genuine mental illness, and its only current treatment is body modification. I really don't think its healthy to push this on kids.

We have these stories of parents making these huge deals because their son or daughter says they are the opposite gender at 5 or 6, and wanting schools and facilities to bend over backwards. I would argue that this behavior of the parents is in the same line of making sure every kid is a winner and don't ever let kids experience defeat because we don't want to scar their egos.

I am not trying to be hateful, I just don't know where it ends, or even what the proper solution is.

I pretty much agree.

At what point in time are parents of young girls going to have a problem with this School board decision in Edmonton?

I think these kids are only 7 right now, but in 4 or 5 years when they get to junior high is this (boy?/girl?) going to be using the girls locker room in gym class.

Is a 7 year old even capable of identifying as a different gender.

When somebody makes these claims at such a young age who much does the parent realistically have to do with this, because even if they know something is off I'm not sure a kid that young could really express themselves well enough to explain the problem.

I know its a complicated thing and you don't want to hurt this kids feelings. But a some point in time a line will need to drawn, and I foresee this issue coming back when he/she gets to locker room age in gym class.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by polak

No one is taking away transgender rights. It's just simple biology and the decision takes place BEFORE the baby actually grows up. We have a system in place which allows that decision to be changed should a fully grown adult with decision making abilities choose to do so.

I think I agree with this, insofar as the problem is definitely NOT with sex/gender assignment at birth. That is to say, I don't believe that changing the system to allow for opting out of gender assignment at birth is going to solve anything.

Originally Posted by polak

It's cause there is no solution. Humans are a product of their environment. Every species is a product of it's environment. There is no way we can act as a gender neutral society. The only thing we can do is educate and practice acceptance.

That is much easier than some how trying to eliminate gender from the world.

This is where I believe the really interesting and fruitful discussion is to be found: The elimination of gender is not in any way practical, or likely even possible. However, there are probably things that we can do to adjust our interpretations of gender roles and behaviours in a healthy way that makes confusion about gender identity less traumatic. I agree with Cube Inmate above that we should be "clearly defining 'sex' based on things that are known to be binary." Would it be practical to at birth designate sex based on chromosomes and to go from there?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Really? You honestly can't wrap your head around it? Have you ever watched any specials or documentaries on it?

It's really easy to wrap your head around, like stupidly easy.

I can emphasize with the pain they feel. I can't wrap my head around.

Can you explain to me what it means to feel male and how that differs from how it feels to be female.

Or the concept of looking in a mirror and your the wrong gender how does a non transgendered person know they are the right gender.

For that matter what is gender without resorting to societal norms like pink and dresses.