Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Civil Liberties,who to vote for?

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,872 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Links234 wrote: »
    http://anniesrichards.tripod.com/ais.htm
    Is the state denying Birth certificate corrections though, or are they denying a cert altercation when someone without AIS or a similar condition decides voluntarily through a psychological choice to change their gender.


  • Options
    #33
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Links234 wrote: »
    http://anniesrichards.tripod.com/ais.htm

    From that link:
    The fact that a "woman" has AIS and is genetically a "male" is often not discovered until puberty

    so if you are genetically male, your birth cert should state this, if it doesn't it can be ammended because you were wrongly sexes at birth. If it does state male you should not be allowed alter it the other way, regardless of how you look, feel or think IMO


  • Options
    #34
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    aDeener wrote: »
    it makes no difference to me, if a person wants to be a man woman or dog but i can't see the logic in having the "birth" cert changed?? you were born either a man or woman, that cant be changed

    Because if the Birth cert remains unchanged, they are still treated under law as a man. Now that may not make much difference in those not affecteds minds, but most certainly does to individuals unfortunate enough to have to go through the whole business.
    lamintations wrote:
    A genetic mistake it may be, but the sex on your birth cert is a statement of fact

    Secondly, you can be born a man, a woman, or some combination of the two. Its an inevitability of the way humans reproduce. Whats written on the Birth cert is the doctors best guess, based on evidence, at the time the cert is written.
    lamintations wrote:
    Unless the 'fact' was wrong, but the fact is based on physical traits

    The child has two sets of sex organs. The parents are asked which way they want to go. 15 years later their little boy is acting more and more like a girl/little girl is acting more like a boy. They therefore made a mistake, but the birth cert can't be changed?

    Going on exterior characteristics ignores differences in the brain which only emerge later. These days its considered best to wait and see which way the child is going before intervention.
    Iwasfrozen wrote:
    The fact was not wrong at the time of the birth.

    Its impossible to know one way or the other in many cases. You're looking for a black/white situation which does not exist 100% of the time.


  • Options
    #35
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Laminations wrote: »
    I'm agreeing with you on this. The fact can be wrong when someone with an XY pairing is classed as female (and vice versa)- in the case of misregistration I think birth certs should be ammended.
    I doubt any doctor would be so stupid as to classify a baby's sex wrong. Not in this country anyway.
    Laminations wrote: »
    Why do you think birth certs should not catalogue biological sex regardless of a later emergence of a psychological identity?
    Because the birth certificate is a statement of fact at the time of ones birth. If one was a male at birth but decides to become a female later on then that still does not change the fact they were a male at birth.

    Death certificates are similar again this is a statement of fact at the time of ones death. The person in the first paragraph would be recorded as female in their death certificate but male in their birth.

    No one can change the past. Transexuals must accept that.


  • Options
    #36
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Overheal wrote: »
    Is the state denying Birth certificate corrections though, or are they denying a cert altercation when someone without AIS or a similar condition decides voluntarily through a psychological choice to change their gender.

    I agree but would argue against describing it as a 'choice'


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Nodin wrote: »
    Its impossible to know one way or the other in many cases. You're looking for a black/white situation which does not exist 100% of the time.
    We aren't discussing people with genetic disorders though. We are discussing people who have later on in their life decided they would like to "play for the other team" and have had sex reassignment surgery to change their gender.

    Nothing wrong with this but it doesn't change the fact they were a certain gender upon birth.


  • Options
    #38
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Nodin wrote: »
    The child has two sets of sex organs. The parents are asked which way they want to go. 15 years later their little boy is acting more and more like a girl/little girl is acting more like a boy. They therefore made a mistake, but the birth cert can't be changed?

    Going on exterior characteristics ignores differences in the brain which only emerge later. These days its considered best to wait and see which way the child is going before intervention.



    Its impossible to know one way or the other in many cases. You're looking for a black/white situation which does not exist 100% of the time.

    I agree in the case of dual organ babies that the parents 'choice' should not determine the sex of the child but neither should later emerging gender roles or psychological identity. When I said physical traits I meant biological, and by this I mean genetic :)
    The sex on ones birth cert shold not be altered to reflect ones 'thinking' later in life


  • Options
    #39
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,872 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Laminations wrote: »
    I agree but would argue against describing it as a 'choice'
    I'd consider it a "choice" when not governed by genetics and X or Y chromosome combination. Whether they are naturally more inclined to act immaculate or effeminate is a psychological matter where it goes against their genetic status as a male or female.


  • Options
    #40
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #41
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    We aren't discussing people with genetic disorders though. We are discussing people who have later on in their life decided they would like to "play for the other team" and have had sex reassignment surgery to change their gender.

    Nothing wrong with this but it doesn't change the fact they were a certain gender upon birth.

    ID also be careful phrasing it that people voluntarily 'decide' on their gender. There is no decision as such.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Laminations wrote: »
    ID also be careful phrasing it that people voluntarily 'decide' on their gender. There is no decision as such.
    I wouldn't. Taking sex reassignment surgery and hormonal treatment is a choice. Nobody is forcing them onto the operating table.


  • Options
    #43
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Laminations wrote: »
    The fact can be wrong when someone with an XY pairing is classed as female (and vice versa)- in the case of misregistration I think birth certs should be ammended.

    Woah, you think a woman, born and raised as a woman, identifying as a woman all her life should, at the moment it is discovered she has AIS, have her birth certificate changed.. I don't know how to respond to such a thing.

    Oh and I would personally deem that the case of someone identifying as a sex other than that recorded on their birth certificate is a case of misregistration, and hence should be ammended.


  • Options
    #44
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Overheal wrote: »
    I'd consider it a "choice" when not governed by genetics and X or Y chromosome combination. Whether they are naturally more inclined to act immaculate or effeminate is a psychological matter where it goes against their genetic status as a male or female.

    Just because something involves psychology does not mean it involves choice. I can't choose to be genetically male, I don't choose to be a man or 'act' like one and I don't choose to be heterosexual. Sex is genetic/biological (it's purely nature) gender and orientation is psychological (nature/nurture) but there is still little to no choice in the latter, the only choice is in expression


  • Options
    #45
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I wouldn't. Taking sex reassignment surgery and hormonal treatment is a choice. Nobody is forcing them onto the operating table.

    That is a choice which comes after the fact. Identifying as the gender in the first place is not a choice.


  • Options
    #46
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Laminations wrote: »
    gender and orientation is psychological (nature/nurture) but there is still little to no choice in the latter, the only choice is in expression

    Agreed on the sentiments, not on the statement,
    The Royal College of Psychiatrists wrote:
    Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Sexual orientation is therefore not a choice.


  • Options
    #47
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    Woah, you think a woman, born and raised as a woman, identifying as a woman all her life should, at the moment it is discovered she has AIS, have her birth certificate changed.. I don't know how to respond to such a thing.

    Oh and I would personally deem that the case of someone identifying as a sex other than that recorded on their birth certificate is a case of misregistration, and hence should be ammended.

    A birth cert shouldn't represent how your are or think now, it should catalogue how you were at birth. I can change my name by deed poll to Captain bananas but I can't change my birth cert


  • Options
    #48
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,872 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Laminations wrote: »
    Just because something involves psychology does not mean it involves choice. I can't choose to be genetically male, I don't choose to be a man or 'act' like one and I don't choose to be heterosexual. Sex is genetic/biological (it's purely nature) gender and orientation is psychological (nature/nurture) but there is still little to no choice in the latter, the only choice is in expression
    Well whatever the case what Im saying refers to orientation. Im not debating the choice/predetermination issue.


  • Options
    #49
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    Agreed on the sentiments, not on the statement,

    I agree with you. Orientation is psychological but determined by nature not nurture. I differentiated it as psychological as opposed to genetic as unlike sex there is as yet no marker of sexual orientation


  • Options
    #50
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    That is a choice which comes after the fact. Identifying as the gender in the first place is not a choice.

    Completely agree. Identifying as a gender should not alter your catalogued sex at birth however.


  • Options
    #51
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    We aren't discussing people with genetic disorders though. We are discussing people who have later on in their life decided they would like to "play for the other team" and have had sex reassignment surgery to change their gender.

    Earlier I stated....
    Going on exterior characteristics ignores differences in the brain which only emerge later. These days its considered best to wait and see which way the child is going before intervention.

    I should have made the point more strongly....
    . The present findings of somatostatin neuronal sex differences in the BSTc and its sex reversal in the transsexual brain clearly support the paradigm that in transsexuals sexual differentiation of the brain and genitals may go into opposite directions and point to a neurobiological basis of gender identity disorder.
    http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I wouldn't. Taking sex reassignment surgery and hormonal treatment is a choice.

    A brain of one gender trapped in the body of another would strike me as leaving one with as little choice as to constitute none at all.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Nodin wrote: »
    A brain of one gender trapped in the body of another would strike me as leaving one with as little choice as to constitute none at all.

    but the sex listed on a birth cert is based on the body and genetics 'at birth' rather than being a prediction of future brain development and identity


  • Options
    #53
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Overheal wrote: »
    I've re-read the entire thread under the emphasis of Bigotry and found not one example, either.

    I don't think anybody is being intolerant here (:confused:) just stating that trying to alter your birth certificate to say you were born a woman etc. after a gender change is dishonest.

    I think it is intolerant.

    A birth cert is required for many formal applications and can have a huge impact on a person's life. (Eg. someone applying for citizenship has to provide a birth cert.) If someone's birth cert. says "male" and they have had their gender changed to reflect what they feel this will and does lead to raised eyebrows, discomfiture and discrimination both direct and indirect.

    While, ideally we should be working towards changing the attitude of society, the practical and HUMANE solution is to simply allow the change of gender on the birth cert to avoid unnecessary and unfair treatment.

    I don't think the real issue with those who object is honesty or dishonesty. Those who are getting hung up on semantics are, in my view, doing so simply as a veil to cover their intolerance, because they know, full well, the real world implications of the issue for the person affected. And they also know that should they voice their protest as such, they would be seen for the intolerant person they really are.


  • Options
    #54
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    These people have testes and an XY chromosome pair. So according to the dictionary they are defined as male.

    Just for everybody running to their old oxford dictionary, the modern medical definition in laymans terms can be found here.


  • Options
    #55
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Laminations wrote: »
    but the sex listed on a birth cert is based on the body and genetics 'at birth' rather than being a prediction of future brain development and identity

    They don't do in-depth testing of brain chemistry at birth. The "future development" in this case is a direct consequence of the brains state at birth. Therefore, given the absence of full information at the time of signing the cert, such a declaration should not be carved in stone.


  • Options
    #56
    Eliot Rosewater
    Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    The problem is that the birth cert is interpreted as being a true reflection of the characteristics of someone now. When one applies for a passport one uses one's birth cert as evidence relating to one's state now.

    You can be idealistic saying the birth cert represents a person at the time of birth, but in reality they are taken to represent the person today.

    So unless another cert is brought in to replace the uses of the birth cert, I think we should deal with this reality and allow them to be amended.


  • Options
    #57
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    my personal opinion having not read this entire thread but seeing a link to it from ah is as follows

    anyone should be able to marry anyone they want in any public place and have the same legal rights as anyone else who is married

    any person or couple should be able to adopt a child if they are deemed to be good aprental material and weather or not htey are both male or both female or a single male or single female should not make a difference

    the above applies to transgendered people aswell HOWEVER i dont think they should be able to change their birth cert (a historical record) or be able to change anything historical. im undecided on how they should be legally allowed to fill out forms(ie which gender to tick) but my gut says they should have to tick the gender they were born as physically.


  • Options
    #58
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Nodin wrote: »
    They don't do in-depth testing of brain chemistry at birth. The "future development" in this case is a direct consequence of the brains state at birth. Therefore, given the absence of full information at the time of signing the cert, such a declaration should not be carved in stone.

    The brain at any stage, underpinned by biology, determines gender. Genetics and physiology determines sex. Gender and sex are not synonymous.

    And Memnoch, as for this being a protest of intolerance, I'd sooner argue for the removal of requirement to officially reveal your sex or gender or orientation when applying for almost anything than argue for the revisionist doctoring of genetic facts. I'd prefer if you made an argument rather than second guessed peoples motivations


  • Options
    #59
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Eliot Rosewater wrote: »
    So unless another cert is brought in to replace the uses of the birth cert, I think we should deal with this reality and allow them to be amended.

    i completely think that transgendered should be able to have whatever operations they wish to make themselves be happy with themselves but i dont think that it actually changes their sex and therefore im not convinced they should be allowed have a passport that says female if they were born male and vice versa.

    i also think that it shouldnt be impossible for people to find out that a person has had a sex change if they really want to ie if your thinking about getting into a relationship with someone, its not going to be foremost on your mind obviously but lets say something has happened to make you suspicious i think you have a right to know if your partner or potential partner was born a man or a woman and i think changing birth certs and passports makes that too difficult


  • Options
    #60
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Eliot Rosewater wrote: »
    The problem is that the birth cert is interpreted as being a true reflection of the characteristics of someone now. When one applies for a passport one uses one's birth cert as evidence relating to one's state now.

    You can be idealistic saying the birth cert represents a person at the time of birth, but in reality they are taken to represent the person today.

    So unless another cert is brought in to replace the uses of the birth cert, I think we should deal with this reality and allow them to be amended.

    I've already suggested a 'change of circumstance' cert which allows one to alter sex on official documents so one is not anchored to the transient state they were in at birth for the rest of their lives. If you live as a woman but were born physiologically male then you should be allowed to alter sex on new documents, as sex is usually mistaken for gender anyway


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    my personal opinion having not read this entire thread but seeing a link to it from ah is as follows

    anyone should be able to marry anyone they want in any public place and have the same legal rights as anyone else who is married

    any person or couple should be able to adopt a child if they are deemed to be good aprental material and weather or not htey are both male or both female or a single male or single female should not make a difference

    the above applies to transgendered people aswell HOWEVER i dont think they should be able to change their birth cert (a historical record) or be able to change anything historical. im undecided on how they should be legally allowed to fill out forms(ie which gender to tick) but my gut says they should have to tick the gender they were born as physically.

    Agreed on all points except the part about ticking gender on forms. Are you confusing gender and sex?


Advertisement