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

Irish state now will now accept a trans persons own declaration of their gender

1…34689…21

Comments

  • #152
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Cuban Pete wrote: »
    The argument you're being presented with is (more or less) that it's not a change in circumstance but rectifying a mistake that was made. Nobody becomes transgender, which is what your (and others') argument sounds like.

    No. My argument is that it is a document of historical fact and that it records your sex, not your gender. Many people on these threads have made a huge deal out of distinguishing between sex and gender.


  • #153
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    No. My argument is that it is a document of historical fact and that it records your sex, not your gender.

    And nothing changes with that document. That historical fact remains an historical fact.


  • #154
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Un Croissant wrote: »
    I have a few change of name deeds that need to be presented anytime I need to show a birth cert or change an I.d. The amount of **** I get for having deed polls is unbelievable. Smart remarks about an identity crisis and general confusion over a simple process.

    It's no one else's business, I don't have to explain, just photocopy the cúnting thing and listen to my instructions.

    That's just for a simple name change. If I had to do it for my gender.. !

    and that's an issue of people being arseholes and not minding their own business. It's not an issue of people attempting to get new documents of historical fact issued with makey uppy bits in them


  • #155
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Daith wrote: »
    And nothing changes with that document. That historical fact remains an historical fact.

    Are you going to address the fact that the birth cert records sex, not gender, or just keep ducking it cause it doesnt suit you?


  • #156
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Are you going to address the fact that the birth cert records sex, not gender, or just keep ducking it cause it doesnt suit you?

    It's not actually relevant no.

    Plenty of people get birth certs changed to correct information. Don't see why you are having a massive problem with this one tbh.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    aaakev
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,064 ✭✭✭aaakev


    Daith wrote: »
    And I think the problem is that you think your sex organs determine what gender or sex you are. For most if not all Trans ppl that isn't the case.

    i feel like im being drawn into a row here so im going to duck out because i think we are on the same side! im all for what was in the OP, i fully agree that all people should have the same rights be they gay, straight, transgender. what people do in their lives does not affect me one single bit and as long as they are making themselves happy and not hurting anyone i think its great!

    i wouldnt say im against someone getting issued a new birth cert what i was trying to say was it makes no sense to me and that is all!


  • #158
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Daith wrote: »
    It's not actually relevant no.

    Plenty of people get birth certs changed to correct information. Don't see why you are having a massive problem with this one tbh.

    so no then, you arent going to address it, youre just going to ignore a fundamental point cause it doesnt suit you. Well i can see there's little point in attempt to have this discussion


  • #159
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    aaakev wrote: »
    i wouldnt say im against someone getting issued a new birth cert what i was trying to say was it makes no sense to me and that is all!

    Me too but ultimately changes to birth certs have happened to reflect correct information. I don't actually see the massive problem here


  • #160
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    so no then, you arent going to address it, youre just going to ignore a fundamental point cause it doesnt suit you. Well i can see there's little point in attempt to have this discussion

    I said it wasn't relevant. You keep ignoring the fact that no historical document is being changed.


  • #161
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    No. My argument is that it is a document of historical fact and that it records your sex, not your gender. Many people on these threads have made a huge deal out of distinguishing between sex and gender.

    Im not sure what is so hard to understand about this - genuinely?

    Your sex is what is recorded on the birthcert, but for identification purposes sex and gender seem to be conflated together (as far as officially producing identity documentation goes). People cannot identify their own gender at birth so best effort is made by the attending doctor and they record the sex on the birthcert.

    Later the person realises they are transgender. They transition. Now their sex matches their gender. So they change the birth cert to reflect this. Otherwise they will produce it and people will be recording that they are male when they are female.

    The old birth cert is not destroyed, the historical fact remains.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Changing your birth cert is like redacting factual history and for what purpose?


  • #163
    Lollipops23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,420 ✭✭✭Lollipops23


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Good stuff



    Grand so



    As it should be



    obviously



    Ah hold on now. There's recognising somebody's decisions and rights and then there is just trying to change fact. If you are now a man/woman I am very happy for you and you should be afforded all such rights and be recognised as such but your birth cert is a document detailing those facts at the time of your birth. This is preposterous

    I'd be in agreement with this post- transitioning should absolutely be made easier for those who want to. New passports/driving licence/Garda Age card etc should be easy to get with your correct gender on them.

    But your sex at birth (not gender, as only you can define that) is not really up for debate-either you were XX or XY. What happens down the line is entirely up to you and is nobody else's business.

    But your birth cert is not for editing. It is a historical document of the facts surrounding your birth. My dad doesn't work at the same job he did in 1987, should my BC be reissued to reflect the fact?

    I would be in favour of issuance of a legal certificate that you are NOW male or female. Any authority that deals with genders (passport office/drivers licence/marriage certificate office etc) should be fully educated on both the facts and the sensitivity required. Zero tolerance for BS from any staff member who gives a trans person sh*t when they're getting admin taken care of.


  • #164
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    jank wrote: »
    Changing your birth cert is like redacting factual history and for what purpose?

    Who knows because no one is changing their original birth cert!


  • #165
    farmchoice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,026 ✭✭✭farmchoice


    MrWalsh wrote: »
    Car insurance. Presumably if you declare you are female to avoid higher car insurance and then you have an accident and try to claim you will be exposed as falsifying your details and not be able to claim?

    as someone in the car insurance industry can i just clarify this one.

    following a ruling in the European courts a few years ago you can no longer positively or negatively discriminate on the basis of gender when it comes to the cost of insurance.

    woman no longer get preferential rates, to get around this the discount that went to woman is now usually applied to insured and spouse or insured and partner policies.

    interestingly insurance companies have been allowing this discount to same sex couples for a number of years now.


  • #166
    Kev W
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    jank wrote: »
    Changing your birth cert is like redacting factual history and for what purpose?

    the complete answer to your question is contained in the post preceding it.


  • #167
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    Lollipops23 wrote: »
    But your birth cert is not for editing. It is a historical document of the facts surrounding your birth. My dad doesn't work at the same job he did in 1987, should my BC be reissued to reflect the fact?

    If you found out your Dad was not in fact your Dad would you want your birth cert reissued? Or would you want to carry a separate piece of paper to say who your Dad is?


  • #168
    Kev W
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    *post deleted for being a dumb joke*


  • #169
    Adamocovic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,292 ✭✭✭Adamocovic


    Seems the only thing people are confused about is the birth cert. I don't know enough but in Ireland can we change the name on our birth cert? Also if yes does it keep the old name there with a note saying it was changed like in the US etc.

    I honestly don't know. I can understand why people would be confused about changing the birthcert. It's just a piece of historical paper detailing you from the moment you were born, I can understand why going back and changing it wouldn't make sense to a lot of people. Not saying they shouldn't be allowed, just saying I can completely understand why people find it confusing, I do a bit too.

    Out of interest is this a major point for trans people? I wouldn't really know and am just curious if this is something that they desperately want (changing the birth cert).


  • #170
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    All of these people in favour of a new "gender identity certificate" type document have clearly never had to deal with the HSE, a government dept, Revenue, social welfare etc...

    All the above places have strict rules re which documentation is acceptable and it would be a major job to change all of that.

    Not to mention it would obviously be an area of discrimination because we would have some people being treated differently by the state than others.

    Its just not workable.


  • #171
    Kev W
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    "WHY DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE PAST?"

    We don't, we just want to-

    "-CHANGE THE PAST, I KNOW BUT WHY?"

    Actually that's inaccurate, it's just-

    "WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY?"


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,248 ✭✭✭Daith


    Adamocovic wrote: »
    I honestly don't know. I can understand why people would be confused about changing the birthcert.

    I think the confusion stems from the fact that people think the original birth cert is being changed. It's not. It still exists and will continue to exist.

    Now if you'll excuse me I've off to put on a dress so I can house share in a girls only place.


  • #173
    Sam Kade
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,309 ✭✭✭✭Sam Kade


    Brendan O Carroll must be delighted.


  • #174
    Adamocovic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,292 ✭✭✭Adamocovic


    MrWalsh wrote: »
    All of these people in favour of a new "gender identity certificate" type document have clearly never had to deal with the HSE, a government dept, Revenue, social welfare etc...

    All the above places have strict rules re which documentation is acceptable and it would be a major job to change all of that.

    Not to mention it would obviously be an area of discrimination because we would have some people being treated differently by the state than others.

    Its just not workable.

    Surely the government could just give the approval of a gender identity certificate document , if they make the documentation acceptable it wouldnt be a major job would it?




    I don't know if I would call it discrimination. People are just highlighting that sex refers to your biological organs at birth, gender obviously is different.

    Could the government release an updated birthcert including both gender and sex, when someone applies?

    Edit: Just saw there will be two birth certificates apologies


  • #175
    Cuban Pete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 156 ✭✭Cuban Pete


    Daith wrote: »
    I think the confusion stems from the fact that people think the original birth cert is being changed. It's not. It still exists and will continue to exist.

    Now if you'll excuse me I've off to put on a dress so I can house share in a girls only place.

    It's funny how in all these discussions, no one talks about trans men. I wonder why that is...


  • #176
    andrew
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 3,373 Mod ✭✭✭✭andrew


    People on this thread seem to have a remarkable amount of concern for the accuracy, or otherwise, of the 'historical' documents which identify others. I think Genealogy will manage to survive this massive overhaul :rolleyes:. The only people this actually effects are Trans people, and it'll make them happier, so what's the issue?


  • #177
    Kev W
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Cuban Pete wrote: »
    It's funny how in all these discussions, no one talks about trans men. I wonder why that is...

    I think people still have a hard time believing they exist, the way society was slow to recognise that lesbians existed for a long time even after recognising the existence of gay men.


  • #178
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    Adamocovic wrote: »
    Surely the government could just give the approval of a gender identity certificate document , if they make the documentation acceptable it wouldnt be a major job would it?

    If they did I think they should be issued to all citizens and required for everyone.

    But yes, it would be a major job. I have done work with the HSE (as just one example) and the length of time it takes to even get a one word change on a form approved is horrendous.


  • #179
    Adamocovic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,292 ✭✭✭Adamocovic


    Daith wrote: »
    I think the confusion stems from the fact that people think the original birth cert is being changed. It's not. It still exists and will continue to exist.

    Now if you'll excuse me I've off to put on a dress so I can house share in a girls only place.

    Fair enough, didnt know it still exists. So will trans people have two birth certificates? Would they not just reisssue the original stating their sex at birth and then also their gender? I don't really mind as it doesnt affect me just wondering why have two certs when they could just merge it into one.


  • #180
    Knasher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,370 ✭✭✭Knasher


    Adamocovic wrote: »
    Fair enough, didnt know it still exists. So will trans people have two birth certificates? Would they not just reisssue the original stating their sex at birth and then also their gender? I don't really mind as it doesnt affect me just wondering why have two certs when they could just merge it into one.
    There aren't many times when you have to give somebody a copy of your birth cert. But when you do, you might not also want to announce to them that you are transgendered. Which is what having the special cert that states both would do.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    Adamocovic wrote: »
    Fair enough, didnt know it still exists. So will trans people have two birth certificates? Would they not just reisssue the original stating their sex at birth and then also their gender? I don't really mind as it doesnt affect me just wondering why have two certs when they could just merge it into one.

    The original birth cert will just be on file, hidden away for the historical accuracy everyone loves, the person won't be required to keep this one for things like social welfare.

    The person will receive the new updated birth cert and can be used for anything that requires a birth cert. I'm not sure how they link the 2 though. In the end the person just gets a new piece of paper that means they dont have to explain the situation every time but the records still note that they were the opposite gender at birth.


Advertisement