Sex-changed people of Sweden are sterilized

azezil

I just received this email All Out less than an hour ago which sent a chill down my spine, it reads:

Dear Sean,

If you are a transgender person in Sweden wanting to change your legal gender, you are forced to undergo surgery that will render you permanently infertile and unable to have children in the future. That's right: in 2012, Swedish law still mandates forced sterilization in order to do something as simple as changing the gender on your driver's license.

Despite a massive push to repeal the law, including support from 90% of Swedish MPs, Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has stayed silent on the issue: allowing one small conservative party to block the change.

Right now a reform of the law is being debated in Sweden. We need a massive show of support across Sweden and Europe that finally convinces PM Reinfeldt to speak out and break the deadlock. Will you take one minute to sign our urgent letter? RFSL, the Swedish federation for LGBT rights, will publicly deliver our signatures directly to the Prime Minister and demand that he intervene right now:

www.allout.org/stop_forced_sterilization

Forced sterilization has a long and frightening history in Sweden. Beginning with programs in the 1930s that tried to eliminate certain "undesirable" traits in society by forcing individuals to be sterilized, Sweden has long grappled with the painful history of stripping from citizens what we now consider to be a basic human right. Even Prime Minister Reinfeldt has publicly called sterilization law a "dark chapter in Swedish history".

Now he has a chance to close that chapter for good. A reform of the law is ready to be presented directly to the Parliament - where 90% of MPs are in favor of banning forced sterilization - but without a push from the Prime Minister, the conservative KRISTDEMOKRATERNA party will use its seat in the government to block the change.

We know he is on our side: whether you are straight, gay, lesbian, bi or trans, will you take a moment to raise your voice and ask Prime Minister Reinfeldt to take a stand for human rights?

Our friends at RFSL, the Swedish LGBT Federation, will deliver your signatures directly to the Prime Minister's office.

www.allout.org/stop_forced_sterilization

Thank you for going All Out.

Best,
Andre, Emmy, Erika, Flavia, Guillaume, Jeremy, Joseph, Oli, Tile, Wesley and the rest of the team at All Out

Sources:

Sweden: Transgender actress mourns her "forcible sterilization" - Many countries typically seen as progressive on LGBT rights continue to mandate the practice.
www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/culture-lifestyle/111101/sweden-transgender-LGBT-gay-lesbian-bisexual-sterilization

Sweden keeps sex-change sterilization law
www.thelocal.se/38466/20120112/

Human Rights Watch's Letter to the Swedish Prime Minister
www.hrw.org/node/104368

All Out is bringing people together in every corner of the planet and of every identity - lesbian, gay, straight, bisexual, transgender and all that’s between and beyond - to build a world in which everyone can live freely and be embraced for who they are.

Our mailing address is:
Purpose Foundation
224 Centre St
New York, NY 10013

Copyright © 2011 AllOut.org, All rights reserved.

The_Minister

With respect, is it actually possible to have sex-change surgery and still be fertile?

I would have thought by it's very nature it would render one infertile.

Annasopra

The_Minister wrote: »

With respect, is it actually possible to have sex-change surgery and still be fertile?

I would have thought by it's very nature it would render one infertile.

my understanding is no, so Trans activists are saying that Swedish trans people want to be able to legally change their gender without a requirement for surgery. Read the hrw letter in the the link

baby and crumble

It's more the principle of the thing, because it harkens back to the days of eugenics, when sterilisation was rife in most western countries for 'undesirables' such as people with disabilities, mental health problems, criminals, etc. Thousands of people were sterilised in the UK alone, right up until the present day, although it's less and less common there now. It's an implicit sign that the government/ policy makers think that the 'undesirable' trans people should not be allowed 'spread their disease' as it were.

howamidifferent

From an outsiders perspective, why would one want to be known as a different gender and not be willing to take on that gender physically?

I do not want or intend to start any flame war but would welcome an honest explanation of an instance why someone would want to change gender without changing gender? What would it achieve for the person or why would they want to hold onto the body they don't feel is right for their gender?


I assumed gender reassignment was the physical change, not just a piece of paper...

Annasopra

howamidifferent wrote: »

From an outsiders perspective, why would one want to be known as a different gender and not be willing to take on that gender physically?

I do not want or intend to start any flame war but would welcome an honest explanation of an instance why someone would want to change gender without changing gender? What would it achieve for the person or why would they want to hold onto the body they don't feel is right for their gender?

for health reasons sometimes such as people with heart problems may not want to go through surgery. It's an interesting question though and something I think we need to discuss more here in the context of our own upcoming legislation

Annasopra

howamidifferent wrote: »

I assumed gender reassignment was the physical change, not just a piece of paper...

It's my understanding and I could be incorrect here that a lot of countries allow you to change gender legally without requiring that you have had surgery

baby and crumble

howamidifferent wrote: »

From an outsiders perspective, why would one want to be known as a different gender and not be willing to take on that gender physically?

I do not want or intend to start any flame war but would welcome an honest explanation of an instance why someone would want to change gender without changing gender? What would it achieve for the person or why would they want to hold onto the body they don't feel is right for their gender?


I assumed gender reassignment was the physical change, not just a piece of paper...

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. They are changing gender, but that doesn't mean they can't keep the ability to have children. From my understanding (which is limited, so perhaps someone more knowledgable that me can chime in here) if you are female-to-male transgender, your ovaries will still have eggs, which can be fertilised by sperm to create a baby using a surrogate. Yes? But sterilisation means removing those organs and eggs altogether, which means no eggs should you wish to have children later in life that are genetically related to you.

Captain Graphite

Like The Minister, I assumed that changing gender would have rendered you infertile anyway. But baby and crumble's explanation makes sense.

I really don't see why they would do this. Are they working off an assumption like "trans people => trans babies" or something? I'd imagine Sweden is one of the best countries for a person to be transgender, which makes it even more surprising that rules like this apply over there.

Annasopra

Captain Graphite wrote: »

Like The Minister, I assumed that changing gender would have rendered you infertile anyway. But baby and crumble's explanation makes sense.

I really don't see why they would do this. Are they working off an assumption like "trans people => trans babies" or something? I'd imagine Sweden is one of the best countries for a person to be transgender, which makes it even more surprising that rules like this apply over there.

The law dates from 1972 - there is a similar law in the Netherlands

deirdre_dub

howamidifferent wrote: »

From an outsiders perspective, why would one want to be known as a different gender and not be willing to take on that gender physically?

Gender is between the ears, not between the legs.

As a trans person, I'm already female without having any surgeries done, as my so-called "brain sex" is female (i.e. I was born with a brain with female brain structures in an otherwise male body - which is why I cannot identify as male).

So whether I need surgery depends on how "bad" my gender dysphoria is. Obviously I shouldn't get surgery unless it is absolutely necessary for my mental well-being.

Unfortunately, many trans people feel pressurised by society to get surgery in order to fit into what society thinks a woman (or, in the case of F2M, a man) should be.

And, of course, there are trans people who cannot get surgery, for various reasons (other health issues, age, cost etc). Not getting surgery does not stop such people from being the gender that they are inside.

What would it achieve for the person or why would they want to hold onto the body they don't feel is right for their gender?

Not all trans people feel that their body isn't right for their gender. It is (most of) society that believes that their body isn't right for their gender.

I assumed gender reassignment was the physical change, not just a piece of paper...

Legal gender change is just a piece of paper.

mango salsa wrote: »

It's my understanding and I could be incorrect here that a lot of countries allow you to change gender legally without requiring that you have had surgery

If the proposals for gender recognition become law, Ireland will be such a country.

Captain Graphite wrote: »

Like The Minister, I assumed that changing gender would have rendered you infertile anyway.

For trans women, gender confirmation surgery does indeed render the person infertile. For trans men, not necessarily.

And for most trans men and trans women, infertility actually starts when hormone replacement therapy starts.

LegacyUser

This may not be the best place to bring this up.

But is there any videos or something short to read on essentially a "every thing you need to know about transgender/sexual/..."?

Because I and others are confused still, and I know I shouldn't be but it seems to be the forgotten part or at least the least open part of lgbt.

deirdre_dub

curious__ wrote: »

But is there any videos or something short to read on essentially a "every thing you need to know about transgender/sexual/..."?

Something short that deals with everything you need to know about transgender people? I don't think so - there is a lot of diversity in the trans community.

Because I and others are confused still, and I know I shouldn't be but it seems to be the forgotten part or at least the least open part of lgbt.

Care to expand on what's confusing you?

I could write out my life story, but that would be just my story, which is different from many other trans people's stories, and I might also not clear up your confusion!

In a nutshell, there are different "kinds" of gender. Everyone knows about genetic and biological gender, for instance. What most people don't know is that neither genetic nor biological gender is binary, and also that there are people whose genetic gender is different from their biological gender.

When you add into the mix that there seems to be a "brain" gender - which one might call "one's innate sense of one's gender", and that the brain gender isn't binary and doesn't always correspond to genetic and biological gender, I think you might be able to see where trans people come from.

And this is currently being backed up by science. It seems to be the case that a trans woman's brain has the brain structures of a woman, and vice-versa for trans men's brains.

As for what a trans person does about their condition - that is (or should be!) up to them! There are trans people whose condition is so "mild" that they don't take hormones or have surgeries, and there are others who practically grab doctors by the scruff of the neck and beg for treatment.

Annasopra

deirdre_dub wrote: »

Something short that deals with everything you need to know about transgender people? I don't think so - there is a lot of diversity in the trans community.

sure but something a list of terms or an a to z of trans terms might be very useful

deirdre_dub

mango salsa wrote: »

sure but something a list of terms or an a to z of trans terms might be very useful

Google is your friend

LegacyUser

Sure we can all google.

But believe me a lot of people know little to nothing on anything trans*.

As we all know ignorance is bad, but as you said it is such a huge range and there is only such much time in the day so I thought maybe some people who know about it could shed more light on it.

baby and crumble

well there are a series of thread on trans issues that are written up in this thread- http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056278639 Perhaps that might a starting point.

I agree that simply googling is a bad idea, because if you just google "transgender" you'll get accurate and inaccurate information back, with no way of knowing what's the truth and what's bogus...

The_Minister

mango salsa wrote: »

my understanding is no, so Trans activists are saying that Swedish trans people want to be able to legally change their gender without a requirement for surgery. Read the hrw letter in the the link

So the Swedish position is, if you forgive the crude-phrasing, junk-based.

If you have a penis you are legally male, if you have a vagina you are legally female, and if you get a surgical alteration from one to another then you get that legally recognised.


That may not be considered ideal, but to compare it to eugenics is hysterical at best and frankly quite childish.

Shakti

curious__ wrote: »

Sure we can all google.

But believe me a lot of people know little to nothing on anything trans*.

As we all know ignorance is bad, but as you said it is such a huge range and there is only such much time in the day so I thought maybe some people who know about it could shed more light on it.

We are just people like everybody else theres no mystery,
I think a lot of trans-folk would be reluctant to inform you here on Boards.ie as in the past there has been a lot of aggression, erasure and more than a good deal of trolling of trans-folk and topics.

LegacyUser

Shakti wrote: »

We are just people like everybody else theres no mystery,
I think a lot of trans-folk would be reluctant to inform you here on Boards.ie as in the past there has been a lot of aggression, erasure and more than a good deal of trolling of trans-folk and topics.

I know you are normal (as a group in general that is) thats not what I said or meant.

I meant that there is still a lot of confusion on various if not all aspect of trans* even among gay and bi people.

Baby Crumble I will start there, thanks.

Annasopra

Shakti wrote: »

We are just people like everybody else theres no mystery,
I think a lot of trans-folk would be reluctant to inform you here on Boards.ie as in the past there has been a lot of aggression, erasure and more than a good deal of trolling of trans-folk and topics.

I'd genuinely like to know this though and i think other trans allies would do -

deirdre_dub

The_Minister wrote: »

So the Swedish position is, if you forgive the crude-phrasing, junk-based.

If you have a penis you are legally male, if you have a vagina you are legally female, and if you get a surgical alteration from one to another then you get that legally recognised.


That may not be considered ideal, but to compare it to eugenics is hysterical at best and frankly quite childish.

Why is comparing eugenics to the sterilisation of a set of people with certain characteristics hysterical?

Annasopra

deirdre_dub wrote: »

Google is your friend

Thanks I did a Google alright myself - I do think though if TENI did something like an a-z of trans terms it would be helpful for trans allies and to educate cisgendered people.

Shakti

mango salsa wrote: »

I'd genuinely like to know this though and i think other trans allies would do -

Well considering the title of this thread ie.'Sex-changed' there can be no doubt there needs to be education. A to Z maybe but I dont think people like yourself here need it and the ones that do (like the swedish "christian democrats") couldn't give a f***.
You might find these interesting though http://tranarchism.com/trans-basics/
http://binarysubverter.wordpress.com/2010/11/24/trans-101/

Annasopra

Curious_ asked a question that was both genuine and polite. The answers have been hostile and dismissive. I'm actually both annoyed and disappointed with how the questions were answered.

jaffacakesyum

mango salsa wrote: »

Curious_ asked a question that was both genuine and polite. The answers have been hostile and dismissive. I'm actually both annoyed and disappointed with how the questions were answered.

It's one of the reasons why I've lost the drive to learn about trans issues (which I know I will get flamed for saying but whatever); Because of the hostility to genuine interest in discussion. And you get called transphobic at the drop of a hat. It's gets tiresome.

Shakti

IMO the questions asked were way too broad and off topic,
If someone has a specific trans related question why not start a new thread about it,
What really gets tiresome is you cant have a trans related discussion without someone bringing up genitals or chromosomes or neurons or surgery when the real issues are discrimination, violence, employment, housing, erasure, suicide, representation etc.

jaffacakesyum

Shakti wrote: »

IMO the questions asked were way too broad and off topic,
If someone has a specific trans related question why not start a new thread about it,
What really gets tiresome is you cant have a trans related discussion without someone bringing up genitals or chromosomes or neurons or surgery when the real issues are discrimination, violence, employment, housing, erasure, suicide, representation etc.

I'm going to take the bait here...

Why can't people have discussions about the highlighted parts as well as the latter issues which you mentioned (which are very important to recognise and discuss too)?

Coming from a medical background, I am very interested in that sort of thing.

I wouldn't be offended if someone came on here asking if there were any studies into some sort of differences in neuroanatomy between gay and straight people - I'd be the first to be interested in reading the studies myself.

Likewise, if someone had a genuine question about lesbianism/bisexuality, and I could answer the question, I would.

Anyway I'll leave it at that. Just wanted to get that out there.

deirdre_dub

mango salsa wrote: »

Curious_ asked a question that was both genuine and polite. The answers have been hostile and dismissive. I'm actually both annoyed and disappointed with how the questions were answered.

curious_ asked one question - about videos and resources containing an introduction to trans issues - and I answered that question as best I could. There isn't such a resource - there are many, many such resources, which is why google is your friend. However, I took the precaution of going into my own personal story, and I've not only received no feedback on whether exposing my personal story was of any use, I'm now actually being accused of hostility.

curious_ has mentioned that he/she is still confused about trans issues. I've asked for clarification about that confusion (there are tons of ways people can be confused), and I've received no response.

I don't owe curious_, or any of you, anything. If you truly want to know about trans issues, if you are truly an ally, then you are going to have to do the legwork yourself. I'm not obliged to spoonfeed anyone. If you come across a resource that furthers your confusion, I'm here. If there is a specific question you have, I'm here. The only specific question that I've been asked by curious_ is about a resource. I've answered that question. In case you missed it, the answer is "no - there isn't such a resource - there are many of them, and I cannot recommend one above another, as I still don't know what your confusion is".

I've got far more important things to do than to spoonfeed people, and it seems to me that that is what I'm being asked to do. In any case, it is utterly impossible for me to spoonfeed someone who doesn't feedback to me what their confusion is. If that makes me a Bad Person, so fscking be it.

deirdre_dub

curious__ wrote: »

As we all know ignorance is bad, but as you said it is such a huge range and there is only such much time in the day so I thought maybe some people who know about it could shed more light on it.

Yes, I only have so much time in the day. Your help would be appreciated to ensure that my time is utilised to the best possible effect. As I already said, I can tell you about my story (and I did), but it's only my story, and also, I have no idea if that exercise was a good use of my time unless you feedback to me.

baby and crumble wrote: »

I agree that simply googling is a bad idea, because if you just google "transgender" you'll get accurate and inaccurate information back, with no way of knowing what's the truth and what's bogus...

There is a basic tactic I hope everyone who uses google knows about to discern truth from bogus, and that is to look at the home page of the web site providing the information to see what they are about. Using that tactic, I think the first link on the google search is probably a safe bet.

deirdre_dub

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Why can't people have discussions about the highlighted parts as well as the latter issues which you mentioned (which are very important to recognise and discuss too)?

Yay! A specific question!!!

Chromosomes - I haven't been tested, but I likely have XY chromosomes. That means that my genetic gender is male. So?

First of all, it is possible (though unlikely) that I actually have XX chromosomes. Your genetic gender doesn't always determine your biological gender, let alone your gender identity. Google "Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome" for one way in which that happens.

Second, genetic gender, and biological gender, isn't the most important type of gender you have. The most important type of gender you have is your gender identity, as your gender identity determines the gender you are capable of living as.

Neurons - this seems to be where the meat of the problem is. Men and women have slightly different brain structures. Apparently, if you were to look at my brain, you would see the brain structures of a woman. And the theory goes is that the reason why I cannot identify as male is because my brain is a female brain, and because the brain is the seat of the identity.

Hmm - I seem to recall having said this earlier on in this very thread! curious_ mentioned that there are only so many hours in the day - is my time being wasted? I hope not.

Surgery - there is a theory that the drive for surgery comes from the fact that the brain has a "body map". This is something in the brain which says that "you have two legs at the end of your torso, two arms coming out either side etc etc etc". Obviously, there is a difference between the body map of men and women when it comes to between the legs. So, if my brain is a "woman's" brain, it could conceiveably have a "female body map", which is why I feel I shouldn't have a penis.

But nothing in life is black-and-white. Some people's gender identity is neither 100% male and 100% female - presumably, such people maybe have brain structures between those of a male and female. And similarly, some people maybe have a largely female brain structure, but a body map that can accept male anatomy.

Now, will someone please feedback to me whether my time was used well by publishing the above?

baby and crumble

I think the problem arises when there are legitimate looking and sounding websites who perhaps are well-meaning, but are coming at the information from a particular angle. It can actually be quite difficult to discern 'facts' from 'fiction' (If there even are facts, which I don't believe there is. There are, in my opinion, peoples experiences of the world, and that's all there is. But I digress).

Therefore, rather than believe what all those websites say (which can be contradictory yet with just as legitimate references and back-ups) people come to this board genuinely looking for information from the people who have experienced the issue at hand- that is, being transgendered. Also, most of theses theories around TG, and any and all LGBT 'issues' tend to be just that. Theories. There will be theories you like, and theories you don't like. If it hasn't been proven without a shadow of a doubt, it has not been proven. it remains a theory.

Also, using LMGTFY is generally considered a hostile tactic online, insinuating that the person asking the question is merely being lazy. I don't think that is the case here.

deirdre_dub

baby and crumble wrote: »

Therefore, rather than believe what all those websites say (which can be contradictory yet with just as legitimate references and back-ups) people come to this board genuinely looking for information from the people who have experienced the issue at hand- that is, being transgendered.

Yes and, as I've said, those experiences are also going to be contradictory. My experience is my experience, and is going to be contradicted by others.

Also, using LMGTFY is generally considered a hostile tactic online, insinuating that the person asking the question is merely being lazy. I don't think that is the case here.

What am I supposed to do? I've answered all the questions that I've been asked. The only thing that I haven't addressed is curious_'s confusion. I genuinely have no idea what that confusion is, and I'm not a fscking mind-reader. It appears to me that what I'm being asked to do is a complete brain-dump on everything I know about being trans, which is not only something that would take a heck of a lot of my time, it is also something that might not even address curious_ confusion. What would help enormously is if confusion_ would care to inform me as to what his/her confusion is, which he/she hasn't done. Hence, frankly, I think an accusation of laziness is warranted!

baby and crumble

Ok, firstly NO-ONE asked YOU to do anything. confusion_ asked if there was a resource. There isn't. Fine. What happened then was an exchange of people saying things like, "that'd be a good idea" and "here is a link to something useful" and "maybe TENI could do something?" Not, at any point, did anyone here say "Can a poster here tell me everything I want to know about trans issues?"

It's hard to know what it is you want to find out about when you know nothing at all. And frankly, it's really intimidating looking at all the trans stuff online. It's full of jargon that people who are not in it find it difficult to understand. Which is why the idea of a 'basics' document or link would be incredibly useful, indeed as a starting point for debate/ discussion.

Shakti

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

I'm going to take the bait here...

Why can't people have discussions about the highlighted parts as well as the latter issues which you mentioned (which are very important to recognise and discuss too)?

Coming from a medical background, I am very interested in that sort of thing.

I wouldn't be offended if someone came on here asking if there were any studies into some sort of differences in neuroanatomy between gay and straight people - I'd be the first to be interested in reading the studies myself.

Likewise, if someone had a genuine question about lesbianism/bisexuality, and I could answer the question, I would.

Anyway I'll leave it at that. Just wanted to get that out there.

Bait? wasn't meant as such,
Medical scientific studies and theories are frequently used to erase the existence of trans folk and their history whether that was the initial intent of the researchers I doubt it but narrow minds will appropriate and distort anything that comes with a lab coat to justify their prejudice.
I do know why they do it though its 'protectionism' the thing is that they or their 'world view' doesn't exist and they see trans-folk their needs and issues however un/consciously as a threat to their binary myth. Gender was never binary, sex allocation has never been about just man/woman full stop, transsexual life has existed as long as any other and you don't need to be 'Tiresias' to figure it out either.
But if someone wants to talk about why its so hard compared to cis-people for transfolk to get employment, healthcare, housing, equal treatment or why its okay in law to excuse rape and murder as 'trans panic' nobody wants to know and if you push them they nefariously use "studies" and "surveys" to marginalise, reduce, trivialise our healthcare and providers following on to and erasure.
With respect I get the curiosity thing thats fine and I'm not annoyed or hostile just trying to be honest.

*chromosomes? see bone marrow transplants.

Pacifist Pigeon

Is the determination of one's sex a biological/physical issue, or is it is a mental/conscious issue, i.e., how one identifies themselves regardless of their genitalia?

I know that Sweden has a history of eugenics but is this really to do with eugenics or "forced" sterilisation? It seems to me that the letter the OP alludes is written from a very biased perspective and, in hindsight, is very disingenuous.

Let's face the facts. There is no sex-change operation, to my understanding, in existence in which the individual's fertility isn't totally compromised. As it stands, if an individual wishes to change their physical sex they are also consenting to their own sterilisation.

The matter alluded to in the OP, seems to be to do with how Sweden defines someone's sex, i.e., should one's gender be defined by what physical genitalia they have, or should it be defined by how they consciously define their own gender; is it an issue of the mind, or an issue of the body.

I'd take a very liberal position on this, however, I do find that whatever organisation sent the OP that newsletter is trying to promote their agenda by blowing the situation out of proportion. I mean they're actually trying to make Sweden's policy regarding the definition of sex/gender look like eugenics and forced sterilisation. It's quite a disgusting political ploy actually, considering that many people genuinely suffered because of Sweden's eugenics policy during the early 20th century. Comparing them is like comparing the practice of cremating dead people to the Holocaust.

Shakti

Its not either/or, life or gender or sex allocation should not be reduced in this way. Where does it say trans-folk must have an operation to be binary? Sweden is seeking to erase the trans life experience by making infertility a criteria* in those seeking healthcare which is not a forward thinking basis for the providing healthcare now or in the future.

*only some surgeries have an impact on the reproductive prospects of the person trans or otherwise.

Pacifist Pigeon

Shakti wrote: »

Its not either/or, life or gender or sex allocation should not be reduced in this way. Where does it say trans-folk must have an operation to be binary? Sweden is seeking to erase the trans life experience by making infertility a criteria* in those seeking healthcare which is not a forward thinking basis for the providing healthcare now or in the future.

*only some surgeries have an impact on the reproductive prospects of the person trans or otherwise.

Is infertility really a criteria? If so, where is this written in official Swedish legislation?

If a man, say, had an operation to make his genitalia look like that of a woman's and no sexual organs were removed (i.e., testis remained intact), then, according to legislation that based the determination of one's sex/gender totally on physical factors, the individual would still be a man.

An individual who undergoes a total sex-change (i.e., the removal of testis/ovaries, which would results in "infertility") can still have their sperm/eggs frozen and used in the future if that individual wishes to have offspring.

Annasopra

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Is infertility really a criteria?

yes! that's the point!


www.thelocal.se/38466/20120112/

www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/120116/rights-activists-push-sweden-drop-compulsory-sterilization-trans

www.lgbt-ep.eu/press-releases/swedish-government-upholds-forced-sterilisation-for-transgender-people/

Annasopra

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Right, so where is it written in law? All I've seen on this thread so far are links to news articles that don't seem to directly quote legislation. It's very easy to twist facts and purport them for what they're technically not.

Right ok - so you are saying that international human rights experts are just twisting a few facts!

Pacifist Pigeon

mango salsa wrote: »

Right ok - so you are saying that international human rights experts are just twisting a few facts!

If a human rights "expert" is following an agenda, then it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to suggest that he/she could potentially twist some facts in order to bring about a goal. Sometimes the ends justify the means, and all that jazz...

Annasopra

I really don't get what your point is at all

Pacifist Pigeon

mango salsa wrote: »

I really don't get what your point is at all

Neither do I.

Shakti

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

If a man, say, had an operation to make his genitalia look like that of a woman's and no sexual organs were removed (i.e., testis remained intact), then, according to legislation that based the determination of one's sex/gender totally on physical factors, the individual would still be a man.

I dont want you to feel attacked or anything because I know how sensitive cis-people are but I don't see any point continuing a discussion with you oh and thanks for corroborating my earlier post, you have a nice binary fantasy life now y'hear,

Captain Graphite

Shakti wrote: »

I dont want you to feel attacked or anything because I know how sensitive cis-people are but I don't see any point continuing a discussion with you oh and thanks for corroborating my earlier post, you have a nice binary fantasy life now y'hear,

I find it ironic that you can criticise someone else as not being worthy of having a discussion with when you're willing to make such ridiculous (dare I say cis-phobic?) generalisations as this that add absolutely nothing of value. If someone came along and said "oh trans people are so sensitive", they'd (rightly) be called on it.

And thank you for showing us exactly what jaffacakesyum was talking about earlier when she referred to "hostility to genuine interest in discussion."

Pacifist Pigeon

Shakti wrote: »

I dont want you to feel attacked or anything because I know how sensitive cis-people are but I don't see any point continuing a discussion with you oh and thanks for corroborating my earlier post, you have a nice binary fantasy life now y'hear,

Erm, did you actually read the post you quoted? I didn't actually express my own opinion on how gender should or shouldn't be defined. Personally, I've nothing against people having the right to define their own gender how ever they see fit. The post you quoted is based on my analysis on how one's gender would be defined in a legal system where one's gender was defined only by their biological/physical sex (i.e., genitalia). I didn't say whether I believed it to be right or wrong. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way transphobic - so don't make it look like I am. And what do you mean by "binary fantasy"?

Shakti

Captain Graphite wrote: »

I find it ironic

Yay because it was meant to be

If someone came along and said "oh trans people are so sensitive", they'd (rightly) be called on it.

happens all the time most times nobody says a damn thing

And thank you for showing us exactly what jaffacakesyum was talking about earlier when she referred to "hostility to genuine interest in discussion."

Dont thank me please it was my pleasure

Captain Graphite

Shakti wrote: »

happens all the time most times nobody says a damn thing

Another ridiculous and unfounded comment.

I don't always agree with everything the mods here say but they do a great job in stamping out transphobic comments and attitudes. Short of adding a clause stating that no-one is allowed disagree with a trans poster on anything, what more do you expect them to do?

Shakti

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Erm, did you actually read the post you quoted? I didn't actually express my own opinion on how gender should or shouldn't be defined. Personally, I've nothing against people having the right to define their own gender how ever they see fit. The post you quoted is based on my analysis on how one's gender would be defined in a legal system where one's gender was defined only by their biological/physical sex (i.e., genitalia). I didn't say whether I believed it to be right or wrong. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way transphobic - so don't make it look like I am. And what do you mean by "binary fantasy"?

Legal definition of a woman or man fail!

Binary fantasy as in gender and sex allocation are not binary never were aren't now and likely never will be even despite cis efforts towards erasure.

Shakti

Captain Graphite wrote: »

Another ridiculous and unfounded comment.

I don't always agree with everything the mods here say but they do a great job in stamping out transphobic comments and attitudes. Short of adding a clause stating that no-one is allowed disagree with a trans poster on anything, what more do you expect them to do?

Well we agree on one thing If it wasn't for the mods here it would be open season on trans-folk.

baby and crumble

Can I PLEASE remind people to stay on topic?

I am not going to start infracting people willy nilly on this thread, because by now probably everyone would have a couple of points.

If people have a problem with SPECIFIC posts please report them and we will attempt to deal with it as we see best fit, ok? And then if you have a problem with a mod action/inaction then PM us or start a thread in the feedback forum.