nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Links234

http://www.thejournal.ie/trans-rights-ireland-gender-recognition-self-declaration-2141181-Jun2015/

Well this is fairly magnificent news, and a bit of a shock to be honest. I'm still reeling with pride over the marriage ref and now this? I could seriously get used to being proud of my country!

MOD NOTE: Just so this thread doesn't go the way of others, trans people exist. So let's not pretend you're being funny or clever or anything other than insulting when you put their gender in quotation marks to denote that it's not their real gender, call trans people "it", make moronic comparisons such as asking if you can now be called black (see above) or anything else that's just being an a$$hole to other humans.
This includes any "men will claim to be women to get into women's changing rooms" type of rubbish.

If you've a point to make, make it without insulting anyone. It shouldn't be that hard for anyone to do.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wibbs

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Nice. Let's dehumanise trans people.

They weren't. But don't let that get in the way of your thinking.

jobbridge4life wrote: »

A transgender man has already given birth.

Get back to me when a transgender woman does.

aaakev

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Nice. Let's dehumanise trans people.

Way to reach! RDM has made very good points imo and has been very respectful to transgender people in the process

Wibbs

Not respectful enough it seems. Though it's usually never enough I have found. There's always a whinge.

one day man

Wibbs wrote: »

Not respectful enough it seems. Though it's usually never enough I have found. There's always a whinge.

If you weren't a moderator ..... you'd be so banned.

[Deleted User]

I think this is spot on and not before time, but one provision of the draft bill strikes me as odd.

Why can you change back?

The legislation allows a person to self-declare a change in gender identity on the basis of a statutory declaration that "he or she has a settled and solemn intention of living in the preferred gender for the rest of his or her life".

Once a person has made that declaration and had their preferred gender recognised, they can then apply to have the recognition reversed and return to their original gender identity on the basis of a statutory declaration that "he or she has a settled and solemn intention of living in his or her original gender for the rest of his or her life".

Why? The purpose of gender recognition seems to be to allow transgender people to change what is essentially an incorrect or erroneous statement of their gender. Once they have made that change and eliminated the error, logic suggests that this settles the matter - or else the words "settled and solemn intention" have no meaning at all. So why can you change again?

[Deleted User]

I completely agree with the right to choose your gender if you do feel like you have been assigned the wrong sex but from my understanding of the proposed legislation, this system without any checks will be open to abuse especially by criminals

If I was a rapist or a sociopath like that guy who killed Elaine O'Hara and knew I was going to jail for a very long time, you better believe that I am switching to a women's prison.

I believe that trans men and women who have been living in their chosen gender or especially have had surgery should be allowed to go to whichever gender prison they have declared.

But there will be a few chancers, mark my word who will without any real desire at all to transition will self declare as a different gender and will cause mayhem.

I'm a cisgendered female and can't imagine the turmoil of going through transition but in the same fashion, I can't be absent from work without a doctors note to prove my credibility (I'm not implying that transpeople are sick I'm just making an analogy) would it really be that much hassle for there to be 1 check by a psychologist specialized in trans issues to determine the validity of a self declaration in case there is abuse?

jank

Turned into an interesting discussion. Tbh we know **** all about why people want to be a different gender or are attracted to the same sex. There is no constant scientific consensus on this and we are probably decades away from it, pseudo science aside that both sides like to push.

I have to agree with many here though that the atmosphere of blanket tolerance without question or else you are a raging, hateful bigot is slightly un-nerving.

_Redzer_

jank wrote: »

Turned into an interesting discussion. Tbh we know **** all about why people want to be a different gender or are attracted to the same sex. There is no constant scientific consensus on this and we are probably decades away from it, pseudo science aside that both sides like to push.

I have to agree with many here though that the atmosphere of blanket tolerance without question or else you are a raging, hateful bigot is slightly un-nerving.

You would say that, though.

I'm of the premise that if you're not hurting anybody, and you're happy, go for it.

Being transgender falls into that, as well does so many other things that were seen as taboo years ago, like homosexuality -pseudo science in whatever direction means jack shít because it doesn't change anything. Are you at all affected by somebody else being transgender? Nope, so then what's the issue?

jank

_Redzer_ wrote: »

You would say that, though.

I'm of the premise that if you're not hurting anybody, and you're happy, go for it.

Being transgender falls into that, as well does so many other things that were seen as taboo years ago, like homosexuality -pseudo science in whatever direction means jack shít because it doesn't change anything. Are you at all affected by somebody else being transgender? Nope, so then what's the issue?

Who said I have an issue? I am of the Thomas Jefferson mould, if it does me no harm nor picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg what do I care.

In return one should be able to speak freely and debate this without the modern day progressive cavalry engaging in hysterics in order mute any differing views.

aaakev

jank wrote: »

Who said I have an issue? I am of the Thomas Jefferson mould, if it does me no harm nor picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg what do I care.

In return one should be able to speak freely and debate this without the modern day progressive cavalry engaging in hysterics in order mute any differing views.

Well said. I am of the same opinion but have a slight issue with one very small part if the proposal, the birth certificate. An I stress small! But it's been suggested here that I'm a biggot because of it when that couldn't be further from the truth

Kev W

aaakev wrote: »

Well said. I am of the same opinion but have a slight issue with one very small part if the proposal, the birth certificate. An I stress small! But it's been suggested here that I'm a biggot because of it when that couldn't be further from the truth

can you quote or link to the accusation of bigotry?

aaakev

Kev W wrote: »

can you quote or link to the accusation of bigotry?

No accusation, it was implied by a few posters early in the thread about people who questioned it

DeadHand

Kev W wrote: »

can you quote or link to any of the the implications?

Well, in just the last few pages there was this hysterical gem...

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Nice. Let's dehumanise trans people.

This in response to a perfectly reasonable, intelligent post that was doing nothing of the sort.

Kev W

DeadHand wrote: »

Well, in just the last few pages there was this hysterical gem...

This in response to a perfectly reasonable, intelligent post that was doing nothing of the sort.

Sorry, maybe I was being unclear. You said that:

"it's been suggested here that I'm a biggot because of it"

The post you linked to did unfairly suggest that someone other than you was dehumanising trans people and unfairly so but I was actually hoping you could point out a specific case of someone suggesting that you yourself are a bigot, which is what you claim.

RollieFingers

Why do you all care so much? What trans people do has absolutely no affect on your life and they are harming nobody else through their actions, live and let live I say!

Adamocovic

Kev W wrote: »

Sorry, maybe I was being unclear. You said that:

"it's been suggested here that I'm a biggot because of it"

The post you linked to did unfairly suggest that someone other than you was dehumanising trans people and unfairly so but I was actually hoping you could point out a specific case of someone suggesting that you yourself are a bigot, which is what you claim.

I think he's refering to in general that most people who have a question about it is being regarded as someone who doesn't agree with the entiriety of what has been brought in and intolerant to the opinions of people who are.

People can agree with the overall and raise questions about smaller parts of it. So far the only thing people seem to be emphasising on his the Birth Cert.

Personally I don't mind considering there will be two birth certs but some people have questions regarding it.

It does seem however that when people raise a question they are met with "why do you care it has nothing to do with you" or thought to be completely against it. Just how I have seen it from lurking the last few pages.

This is a good thing, and its great for trans people but if people have certain questions regarding the total law they should be allowed voice them, provided its done civil and politely. (which bar some posts seems to be the case)

ThinkProgress

@kev W - There were plenty of insinuations thrown around this thread the moment anybody dared to deviate from the script.

Stop being so pedantic and obtuse, it makes you look rather foolish.

And I have no doubt that the OP knew the hornets nest they were opening when they posted this on AH forum.

Many on both sides are expecting and indeed hoping for a reaction. (Including IMO the OP who's a mod ffs)

This whole thread is a joke really. Never a hope in hell of a mature discussion!

DeadHand

Kev W wrote: »

someone suggesting that you yourself are a bigot, which is what you claim.

I never said anyone called me a bigot or implied it out of lack for a of a coherent argument (wouldn't be the first time). I've been mostly staying out of it. Posters have been demonised for going against the herd on this thread, after a cursory glance I just pointed out the latest and most dramatic instance.

I think unfairly suggesting a person is trying to dehumanise a sexual minority is a fairly clear bigot implication, don't you?

Your pedantry is rather boring and adding nothing to the quality of discourse here.

Kev W

aaakev wrote: »

Well said. I am of the same opinion but have a slight issue with one very small part if the proposal, the birth certificate. An I stress small! But it's been suggested here that I'm a biggot because of it when that couldn't be further from the truth

DeadHand wrote: »

I never said anyone called me a bigot or implied it out of lack for a of a coherent argument (wouldn't be the first time).

Has anyone called you a liar?

let me be the first.

kunst nugget

The thread has pretty much eaten itself and seems to be nothing more than people whinging about other people whinging.

ThinkProgress

Kev W wrote: »

Has anyone called you a liar?

let me be the first.

Has anyone called you a troll?

Let ME be the first!

Roger_007

This self-declaration proposal is going to be very useful to political parties who are now obliged to field 30% female candidates. If they haven't got the minimum number they can just get some of the candidates of other genders to declare themselves female?

P.S. Should there not be a quota for each gender?

andrew

Roger_007 wrote: »

This self-declaration proposal is going to be very useful to political parties who are now obliged to field 30% female candidates. If they haven't got the minimum number they can just get some of the candidates of other genders to declare themselves female?

P.S. Should there not be a quota for each gender?

Yeah, some politician is going to go through all the hassle of changing their gender officially, and publically mis-use the law, just so that their party can better meet a gender quota.

Between this and someone else mentioning 'what if criminals change their gender to get into female prisons'....jesus wept

jank

andrew wrote: »

Yeah, some politician is going to go through all the hassle of changing their gender officially, and publically mis-use the law, just so that their party can better meet a gender quota.

Between this and someone else mentioning 'what if criminals change their gender to get into female prisons'....jesus wept

*Cough*

Student changes name by deed poll to avoid £220 Ryanair admin fee

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jun/05/student-changes-name-by-deed-poll-to-avoid-220-ryanair-admin-fee

Never under-estimate the ingenuity of humans to find holes in the system.

Memnoch

jank wrote: »

*Cough*

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jun/05/student-changes-name-by-deed-poll-to-avoid-220-ryanair-admin-fee

Never under-estimate the ingenuity of humans to find holes in the system.

Therefore any and all public systems that have any potential to be abused by unscrupulous and dishonest individuals should be abolished or abandoned? You know, rather than trying to construct a society that is fair, equal and provides the greatest opportunity and benefit to its citizens and prosecutes and sanctions those who would misuse or abuse these processes?

oppenheimer1

Memnoch wrote: »

Therefore any and all public systems that have any potential to be abused by unscrupulous and dishonest individuals should be abolished or abandoned? You know, rather than trying to construct a society that is fair, equal and provides the greatest opportunity and benefit to its citizens and prosecutes and sanctions those who would misuse or abuse these processes?

That's just a stupid argument, almost all state institutions and services have procedures to eliminate fraud or abuse. No one here is saying that allowing someone to change is a bad thing but they are questioning why no safeguards are being put in place. A system with no safeguards is open for abuse and if the opportunity exists and a real material gain is to be had, then I can be sure someone will exploit it.

RDM_83 again

andrew wrote: »

Between this and someone else mentioning 'what if criminals change their gender to get into female prisons'....jesus wept

I knew this point would be ridiculed when i posted it which is why I added this

----I'd like to hear a counter argument to this that
doesn't involve mud slinging and ridicule because
as I am reading this legislation it allows for self
determination and also allows for one revision
back to a previous gender (so you could revert
back legally after your term is finished)---

Now give me an actual reason why this wouldn't and couldn't happen under this legislation, you dont have to actually change anything apart from how you refer to yourself as the state can't argue that women do X,Y,Z because that would be grossly discriminatory.
If I was facing a term and new I would be in Cork where they still slop out I would do it.

frostyjacks

This seems a bit like an April fool's joke tbh. With the smoking ban and the gay marriage thing, it's like we're falling over ourselves to be the most hip nation on earth, without actually checking to see if what we're legislating for makes any sense.

Adamocovic

frostyjacks wrote: »

This seems a bit like an April fool's joke tbh. With the smoking ban and the gay marriage thing, it's like we're falling over ourselves to be the most hip nation on earth, without actually checking to see if what we're legislating for makes any sense.

It's hip to be square..

I'm sorry I couldn't resist, but I'd honestly consider smoking ban, same sex marriage and this latest installment more so about trying to improve the quality of life for all irish citizens rather than being hip or cool.

jobbridge4life

Adamocovic wrote: »

It's hip to be square..

I'm sorry I couldn't resist, but I'd honestly consider smoking ban, same sex marriage and this latest installment more so about trying to improve the quality of life for all irish citizens rather than being hip or cool.

Not at all at all. Sure tis all about impressin them 'mericans from over beyond with their MTV dancing and their hip-hop president and their wicked ways. Won't be long now till they are offering happy gay marriage meals, and offering drive thru abortions in the McDonalds and all them transgenderederedered staff taking the jobs away from all the good Catholics.