Rethinking Birth Gender

[I Am Paula]

I have my birth certificate out, as I'm filling out my passport application. It seems mundane enough, most people have one, but this one is very special. By having an F in the sex designation box, the government of Ontario has basically admitted they made a terrible mistake 56 years ago, and with a quick look between my minutes old legs, attempted to seal my fate for the next eighty something years. Any trans person can see, the 'peek between the legs' is a really bad way of determining gender.

What are the options?

British Columbia has tossed around the idea of genderless birth certificates, with the idea that at the age of 4 or 5 the child can make up it's mind. However, are we to raise genderless children, specially when the old 'it's got a penis' system was most likely going to be right?
In a recent (flawed) test, four and five year old children were asked if they felt they were girls of boys. 10% answered the opposite of their birth sex. This proves nothing, if they were given the third option of vampire, that would have scored 10% as well. Kids can't make that distinction...except trans kids. They know.

What are we to do. The old system isn't working, but there are few workable options. Also, should we change the whole system for our tiny population?

My humble opinion is that we keep the system we've got. Vagina owning babies will still be considered girls, until proven otherwise. Likewise for boys. What we need is just a fast, efficient, universal system for righting the wrong once the time comes. The American system, of laws differing from state to state, with some states having very liberal thoughts on gender, and others making transition a nightmare, is archaic, and stupid. It's a little better here in Canada, but residents of Saskatchewan (sp?) still can't get a birth cert. amended.

Politicians, lawmakers, and anybody with a hand in creating policy, have got to realize...this is real...we need real solutions. The only solution I see, short of the aforementioned genderless babies, is making transition (the legal end of it) easy. Fill out some forms, bingo, you're a girl (or a boy). My province has this system, and it seems to work fine.

Back to my birth certificate. It is truly a marvel. Two things any government hates- Admitting they made a mistake, and correcting it. They have done both in my case, yet my good friend in West Virginia can't even get her drivers license!

[Angela Campbell]

I was looking at my birth certificate yesterday as I was getting ready for my upcoming cruise. I went through a lot to get it.

I had mine changed 6 months ago, but last week, when I needed it, I could not find it. Ok, so I checked on getting a new copy, and there was a 2 week delay unless I went to Atlanta in person. I tried to do an online search but that came up empty. Seems once they change it they do not enter it into the system, or send a copy to the county of birth. No they make one copy and keep it hidden in a file in only the one office.

Yes they did get me a copy, but they make it pretty difficult. Kinda like they don't want anyone to find out they changed it

[Rachel Smith]

I was born in PA and I couldn't change my gender on mine, only my name. I am going on a cruise in Jan. and got a passport as I could get an "F" on that. In essence every piece of ID I have has an "F" on it save the birth cert.

[mechamoose]

I think that a child should be able to self identify at a fairly young age. (4? 5?) At that age they are just stating it like it is, no agenda, no outside influences.

They *feel* a particular way. That isn't possible to show on a birth certificate, and it isn't something that an outside agency can identify.

I think we need to listen to our kids identification queues. Only they know who they *feel* like. We should be willing to support them from there (big wish, I know)

So, birth identification is based purely on genetic presentation. Who/how they are has nothing to do with that.

- MM

[TG-Taru]

Ah, the wording; gender or sex? improper wording in documents? Can't tell the gender at birth, and in some cases even the apparent sex isn't accurate or meaningful, just looking can still be wrong, and even genetically it isn't just binary. There's the genetics (medical, historical), physiology (id, medical) and experience (id, gender), three things actually, matching or not. To be accurate you'd need at least three boxes to choose from in the birth certificate, and at older age add another three or four, amending the "sex" indicator as appropriate, or leave it out entirely in some documents when not needed.

I'm with MM on this, changing birth id is rewriting history to feel better. I think it should be kept at least for statistical or historical research and possibly medical use, but needn't be divulged without proper reason with special consideration for TS persons. How Angela told us it was sounds pretty good to me, don't falsify originals but provide cover. I assume and hope getting a new copy wasn't made difficult intentionally.

[Aprilrain]

I would happily change the sex marker on my birth certificate if I could. I couldn't care less about vital statistics or the opinions of non-transitioners who think it's "rewriting history." This my life, I'm a woman, I was born with a birth defect that caused people to think I was a boy. Unfortunately Ohio is one of 3 or 4 states that do not allow one to change the gender marker on ones birth certificate which seems stupid since I have changed my name on it. For now, I'm stuck with the M. Eventually reason will prevail and the law will change. My drivers license, Pilot certificate and passport all say F so I'm not too worried about a document that I basically never have to use.

[Cheyenne Skye]

I live in Maryland and you can amend your birth certificate but not change the original. I'm with April on this. How often do you need your birth certificate any way?

[Angela Campbell]

Leave it out until it is needed. .........

When is it needed? The only time a gender marker is needed would be when some kind of discrimination is going to be used.
What reason would anyone have to need to know your gender?

[Krisi]

I don't think the government made a mistake, at birth, you were male. You went to school as a male, played sports as a male, joined the Boy Scouts as a male, possibly joined the military as a male and worked as a male. You married your wife and had children as a male. You can't change history.

At some point in your life you realized that you would be more comfortable in life as a female so you made that change. You are what you are until you change it. Now you are a female.

[Angela Campbell]

Uhhhh no ....................


i was born female. I had a penis. Maybe you should do a little research. I am not a crossdresser who went too far.

[Rianna Humble]

changing birth id is rewriting history to feel better.

Do you frequently make such pronouncements on matters where you don't have a clue? Changing the birth certificate to reflect reality rather than the misconception by a doctor or midwife at birth has nothing to do with "rewriting history to feel better". If you had any knowledge of transsexuality you would recognise that.


I don't think the government made a mistake, at birth, you were male
Just because you say so does not change the truth which is the opposite of your opinion.

[I Am Paula]

I don't think the government made a mistake, at birth, you were male. You went to school as a male, played sports as a male, joined the Boy Scouts as a male, possibly joined the military as a male and worked as a male. You married your wife and had children as a male. You can't change history.

At some point in your life you realized that you would be more comfortable in life as a female so you made that change. You are what you are until you change it. Now you are a female.

Sorry, this goes against everything we have learned about gender in the last 200 years. I was born female. Period. I had a disfiguring birth defect, and I'm spending a lot of time, money, and pain fixing it.

I agree we don't NEED a birth cert. often, but getting a passport is one of those times. My post was more about that just getting a female birth cert. proves that there is some kind of discrepancy in the law, and whether it is something that needs to be addressed or not.

[DeeDee1974]

I don't think the government made a mistake, at birth, you were male. You went to school as a male, played sports as a male, joined the Boy Scouts as a male, possibly joined the military as a male and worked as a male. You married your wife and had children as a male. You can't change history.

At some point in your life you realized that you would be more comfortable in life as a female so you made that change. You are what you are until you change it. Now you are a female.

A lot of us do these things because the world expects it from us and treats us like crap if we express our authentic selves.

If I could have started my journey at 5 instead of 35 I would have. If I had been asked at 5 if I wanted to be a boy or a girl, I would have been a girl.

Instead all the male stereotypes were rammed down my throat. So I got married to women not once, but twice. I've left a lot of pain and lived a lot of my own pain. I never did anything as a male. I did what others told me a male to do because they perceived me a certain way.

All I want from this world is to be seen as the woman I am. Period.

There's some other things that would be nice like a husband, a nice house in the burbs, but if I can just be seen as my authentic self by everyone I can live a happy life.

[mechamoose]

We need a birth certificate for the purposes of property and inheritance. Just a fact, our society needs that.

*Identity* should be a separate question. We have plenty of data to show that genetics and identity are not really connected.

As I have said for years, the block is 'roles, roles, roles'.

We, as people, have a lot of OLD assumptions. Things which go back many thousands of years.

We are *just now* entering into an age where we can reflect about that and what it means for our societies.

Be YOU. If you aren't YOU, then you are not providing a counter-example. To borrow from our gay friends, Silence = Death.

Who the *&^@ are THEY to tell you that you are wrong or twisted? Who they THEY to say that you don't have the right to be yourself they way that THEY do?

Fear? Personal injury? Loss of family?

Does that make YOU any less true?

What about those who come after us? Could your actions help THEM?

Then it should.

Just my opinion. I'm a grandpa, I will fight to the death for my spawn to grow & flourish, to be themselves without apologies.

My 3 year old grandson wanted Meridia's dress from 'Brave'. I was delighted. His dad was conflicted.

*STRONG* person, capable, innovative, full of courage. What isn't to approve about that? A skirt?



- MM

[Aprilrain]

Kristi, why does this even concern you? You are not transitioning so why do you care? Do you just enjoy being a wet blanket? And don't give me this shit about rewriting history. It's not your history it's mine and it's not like I or any of the other very tiny minority of transitioners in this world are of any historical importance anyway. Don't give me any crap about statistics either. Our numbers are so vanishingly small as to not even be a true outlier. Of course you're entitled to your opinion but I have to wonder why you would even have an opinion about something that has no absolutely no bearing on your life what-so-ever?

[Nigella]

Krisi has made a statement which, quite rightly has been rebuked, please leave it at that, she is not the topic of this thread. PM her if you have more to say, but keep it civil.

To the topic, in the UK the only official form of gender recognition is the birth certificate, even the UK government acknowledges mistakes were made when filling the details in. Fortunately we are able to have this corrected.

[Kathryn Martin]

I don't think the government made a mistake, at birth, you were male. You went to school as a male, played sports as a male, joined the Boy Scouts as a male, possibly joined the military as a male and worked as a male. You married your wife and had children as a male. You can't change history.

At some point in your life you realized that you would be more comfortable in life as a female so you made that change. You are what you are until you change it. Now you are a female.

In deconstructing this post,I have to say that the government did not make a mistake, but the nurse or the doctor did by determining the sex of a child with a look between the legs and a measuring tape, because apparently if your penis is very short you get categorized as female in need of surgery (see David Reimer).

You don't go to school as a male - you go to school and the world imposes a gender standard on you by assigning certain clothing and behavior to you whether you like or not. Same goes for the rest of it. For those transsexed the realization comes very early, usually when the first inklings of puberty come along. Transitioning does not make you female.

What then has this to do with the "sex" portion of your passport. Everything, because this one glance and this one exclamation "it's a boy", "it's a girl", "we need to talk" looking anxiously at the parents, sets the stage for a lifetime of "identifying" documentation. I am with Paula though. I have serious issues with sex markers being changed based on "I am whatever I say I am".

[noeleena]

Hi,

Though this wont apply to myself now some 67 years to late, our County of Germany has changed the forums for new born,s those of us who are intersexed to we can decide at a date./ time for us to say what we are with out , out side interverance from Dr,s or any one as to what we are, and we can put on our birth certs male , female or other, though its more for those of us with mismatched bodys ,

So im really really pleased Germany has made that work for us, i know that would have made so much difference for my self back then. any way its done,

...noeleena...

[TG-Taru]

The original topic:
About how to handle birth certificates (and other documents). The policies and legislation and the form and wording of documents might need discussion and changing.

As I see it, birth certificates are already genderless (even though it might be the word used), just not sexless - problem is, people think they are the same. In my opinion, for some documents gender would be good enough, if even that is needed (like membership cards). For some an indicator for (current) sex could be needed (like passports, medical insurance cards).

It was and is my opinion that the (original) birth certificate shouldn't be changed, even later on. There's already been mentions of why it might be needed. Access to original could be made restricted for a period of time perhaps. For the sake of being absolutely accurate and truthful, I'm just not convinced that the (original) birth certificate is the right place to get your gender validation, because as I see it, it never was about gender (but sex at that time, and thus not incorrect, the actual mistake was assuming your gender matched), and it's not about the current state of affairs, it's about the moment of birth. So even if the gender never matched, the sex did, up until transition. It was a fact, just not the whole story. The fact that it was remains a fact.

That was my opinion that preserving the facts matters. They needn't be shouted from the rooftops though. That original sex is one of the things tying up all the memories of associated people, at least up until figuring out the mismatching gender. The chromosomes might be something to consider in some rare cases too.

It's up for discussion and policy making in our respective areas if that particular fact is considered of possible importance or inconsequential, preferring covering it up as a courtesy, all the way to the original document.

I'd have nothing against adding a marking to the birth certificate about what the gender was found out to be, or that the old sex not be needlessly mentioned. My issue is with erasing the truth of what I think is meant, the birth sex (again, in the understanding this is not the same as birth gender). Change all other documents, of course.

Amended copy, to me, seems a good way to go for when you absolutely have to have a birth certificate.

It could be clearer on documents if they are stating sex or gender, or both, or be purposefully unclear, all depending on what kind of document it is and what, if any, the relevance is.

That was mostly it for the original topic, rest is clarification, responses, in-depth. Skip it if you like. Can be repetitive. Wouldn't have felt the need to write it if people bothered to read between the lines a tiny bit, or even read the actual lines and think about what they say, and what the writer might mean.




Do you frequently make such pronouncements on matters where you don't have a clue? Changing the birth certificate to reflect reality rather than the misconception by a doctor or midwife at birth has nothing to do with "rewriting history to feel better". If you had any knowledge of transsexuality you would recognise that.

Read carefully and don't jump to conclusions. In the words of the Mythbusters, you are "rejecting (my) reality and substituting your own", what you decided I said and meant, and judged based on your assumptions. You are clearly meaning a different thing than me, and have a different concept of what a birth certificate means. You are talking about misconception of gender. But they never recorded that, probably never even thought about it, and couldn't have known. It was the body's physical sex, and it was was it was. Reality, history. It doesn't change in the reality THEN whatever you (re)write down or according to how it was changed since. This doesn't mean you're wrong about the gender, that's just not what a birth certificate is about. If you do not wish to flat-out lie about the body's past, there is no reason to change it (or original at least), other than "I don't like it" (and would feel better, not reminded of the past reality). It was already reflecting the reality of that time, assuming no IS or otherwise very unclear body condition. Try not to go misunderstanding on your own and assuming the worst.

Subject was identification documents, birth certificates in particular. Many of you are mixing up identification, which is by examination and observation, and identity (which is who and what you are, whether anyone else can tell or not - they certainly can't from a baby) and taking offense. For an ID document of this sort it doesn't matter what you are between the ears, what matters is you look like what's described. They record what can be seen or otherwise verified, the reality of the body. You grow taller, gain weight, possibly hair and eye color changes - you don't change what the papers say you were at birth. Go full time, have SRS, get all the other documents to say how it is NOW, but change the birth certificate? And the original, not just a copy for stealth and to, yes, "feel better"? Changing everything BUT the birth certificate after the fact reflects reality. -Birth certificate is about back then, not about now, and about body-sex not gender(identity), and strictly speaking changing it is lying about the body as it was, and genetically still is. Would it matter? I'm just saying it might.


For those transsexed the realization comes very early, usually when the first inklings of puberty come along. Transitioning does not make you female.

Mostly yes, there are a few late bloomers. You are what you are, whether you do something to your body or not. Changing that letter on the birth certificate doesn't make you one either, and not changing it doesn't make it untrue.


What then has this to do with the "sex" portion of your passport. Everything, because this one glance and this one exclamation "it's a boy", "it's a girl", "we need to talk" looking anxiously at the parents, sets the stage for a lifetime of "identifying" documentation. I am with Paula though. I have serious issues with sex markers being changed based on "I am whatever I say I am".

We were originally and specifically talking about birth certificates, and how you might not get that changed - passport and other documents yes. It's not the documentations fault, which enables customs officials to look at you and say "yes, it's you", that all sorts of assumptions are made for you and things expected of you. The documentation does indeed need to be accurate to it's purpose. It's policies and society's ways that need changing, realize birth sex might not equal gender and let kids find themselves. If you weren't born yesterday, you shouldn't need a birth certificate, and if you just have to have it, in my opinion, an amended copy should do. It's just that one document telling the tale of what was, the ones telling what is can be corrected.


My argument: Birth certificate is identification, not certificate of (inner) identity, and records just the apparent sex (or should) at the time, no mention of gender (bad choice of word if so, can be confused with gender-identity), historical fact of bodily state, then. If corrected later, it still was what it was. This doesn't invalidate the mismatching gender that later becomes apparent. As unpleasant as it is to have a reminder left, the reality of birth sex still doesn't change. This is all assuming that what really is meant on the birth certificate is the "sex". If they really were presumptuous and ignorant enough to confidently mark down "gender" (meaning identity), then yes, I would agree to changing that, no problem, if they got that wrong. Also if it was IS or misdiagnosis of "sex", by all means, change it to reflect reality. For garden variety TS, as insensitive as it is, the marked "sex" for the purpose of identifying the human specimen in question at that time was right (remember, assuming it doesn't really mean "gender"). Yes, it wasn't right about YOU, but it was right about your BODY APPEARANCE, then. That's real, insensitive-to-your-feeligns history.

There should be no record made about birth "gender", as it's just about impossible to tell at the time, only the physical "sex". Not all languages make the difference and even in English it get's mixed up. As identification marker for physical examination, rule out half the population - ask a midwife later, and that's what they remember, that's history, that's what the body was born like - fact, not opinion, and reality at the time of birth, which is all it's about (or should be). As already said and also pointed out by others, just a look can get it wrong even just talking about the body. Turns out it doesn't match the person or even the actual brain, other organs or genetics inside (though IS are largely overlooked in identification - happy to see Germany mentioned recognizing them). Then it becomes more complicated, and you need to differentiate gender (you, identity, and possibly identification by outward presentation) and sex (the body and genetics, identification). After going full time changing some and after SRS changing all current documentation to match the corrected sex makes sense. That's history from that point on, but it doesn't change previous history (which included the correct gender, but -note this - also the old, factual if incorrect sex). That said, providing amended copies of earlier documents for the sake of having a smoother life is good, I think (that, now, was an opinion).

Krisi's post too, try replacing every "male" with "male-bodied and viewed as one", and change the last sentence to "Now you are female-bodied or living as one" and second last to "you are identified as what you appear to be until you change it". It's not denying who or what you are, or what gender you were born as, but stating what your bodily sex and appearance was and as an extension, what you were assumed to be. This is how I assume it was meant. It speaks of how you are seen, not actually denying what you are.


Just because you say so does not change the truth which is the opposite of your opinion.

There's "my / your truth" or "accepted truth", also called opinion or belief, and full factual truth. We may not have or understand all the facts to make our truth or understand others'. I'm assuming the government's and Krisi's truth there was about the male sex, the body that could be seen and examined, and yours was the opposite female gender residing in said body. It was imprecisely said, so you can't say for sure what was meant. Different meanings, different interpretations, both true as they were (probably, I assume) meant.


Small insignificant group for study you say? What about studies specifically about transitioners? Tracking down relatives? Potential medical treatments where it matters (not that I'd know of any currently)? Genetic predisposition to certain things decided in the sex chromosomes? Keeping track of transpeople rights and conditions, developments and trends? Hide your existence as one that needed to transition from the government and healthcare system? You don't care? Doesn't mean nobody ever won't. Doesn't matter? Maybe not. Your decision? Maybe. Your personal history is part of the world's history, important in that scope or not. Everybody has opinions, for different reasons. Discuss, come to an agreement as a society. Individuals can agree to disagree, preferably with proper reasons.

[PretzelGirl]

Taru, maybe we all use different wording, but to me sex is what you have and gender is who you are. At the time of birth, no one can say who you are. I hope I wasn't having sex at the time of birth. To look at someone and make a determination about them becomes ambiguous. I am intersexed by definition. There are plenty out there like me except my ambiguity probably is less than most. Where do you draw the line? One doctor may decide male and another female. What does it matter anyway? I don't know one instance where the sex on my birth certificate really mattered other than definitions when I went to school. Those are getting thrown out the window already as many can self identify and some restrooms are becoming unisex.

[GabbiSophia]

I have two young children now and have thought about this ever day since the day it was posted. I find myself still gendering them as they appear. This not only helps me understand them but really the are so young what does it matter? If they ever show a different gender then i will address it then. I have found trying to leave them gender less really hard. I believe i have not made a mistake in doing this because so far they do not know their gender. I would say though that maybe they should leave of the gender on the birth certificate and fill in later.

[Rianna Humble]

Taru,

Your attempt to redefine your arguments and to introduce irrelevancies such as postfacto alteration of the original certificate of birth do not make your arguments any closer to reality. Your gross oversimplification and your lengthy diatribe do not cater for the reality of our Intersex members and are at best insulting to both the TS and the IS members.

Your earlier statement that the government does not make mistakes that is so ridiculous as to be dangerously laughable. As far as it was applied by you to birth certification it is objectively untrue since the government does not make the determination.

In far too many jurisdictions the marker called "Gender" on your Birth Certificate determines many things including where you will be incarcerated if you should fall foul of the local laws. It can also determine access to certain types of medical procedure. Having the wrong mark on your birth certificate can prove fatal in those circumstances and have nothing to do with"wanting to feel better"

[Kaitlyn Michele]

Taru that's a lot of words to say something so twisted up to seem reasonable...

your note is way to simplistic and convoluted to really make any sensible point that has value..blah blah...

[LeaP]

Taru ... that's a lot of words to say something so twisted up to seem reasonable...
...

It reduces to pleading the preservation of the BC as a historical record - presumably an accurate (if limited) record. Presumably Taru isn't pleading for inaccurate history.... because mistakes on BCs ARE routinely corrected, everywhere, all the time. Then too, pretending there is a gender vs sex USAGE differentiation with BCs is more than a little ingenuous. The truth is that it is used to reinforce their conflation.

You can't argue that it preserves a record of phenotype, because it is manifestly incomplete and inadequate for the purpose. Rianna's point on intersex is exactly right, but in fact, the concern isn't remotely limited to intersex people. Identification? Actually, sex as recorded on the BC is a pretty crude cut across the population. Moreover, for this purpose it presumes sex/gender conformity! In practice, of course, no one references sex as recorded on the birth certificate for identification purposes!

An argument is made for demographics and statistics usage. Birth certificates are used for such purposes (aggregations of information from them, anyway). From the standpoint of general population statistics or even significant subsets, the numbers of trans people are completely irrelevant. We would be lost in the statistical noise along with the myriad other errors that exist in the data.

The argument for research and statistical uses for (or about) trans people is more interesting. As a practical matter, the data sucks for that, too. Too many variations of local, regional, and national rules are involved. The data is useless for the purpose.

I would say a better field of opportunity lies in the intersection of medical, insurance, pharmaceutical, social media, retail, financial data and more from an analytics perspective. (I'm responsible for business intelligence and analytics at one of the U.S.' largest financial services firms.) We are already substantially along that path anyway. Please don't launch into a privacy discussion in response. That is really a separate discussion. The real point is that from a statistics perspective, you are much better off – meaning you get vastly better precision – from modeling the mash up then you do from any particular data source. Why? Because the precision of your results rises with the intersecting points of your model, and conversely, the importance of any one error dwindles into insignificance as the number of intersecting data points rises in compensation.

Birth certificates are best understood as an antiquated approach to population statistics and identity. One, however, that continues to compound the issues transsexuals already face, however well intended the system may have been and how ever well-suited it may have been in its time.

[Frances]

Taru,
Try to legally change your name and sex, and then come back and tell us when it's needed or not. Better yet, do it in several different U.S. states, Canadian provinces, in the UK, etc.
Since BC's are legal assignments, there are plenty of legal reasons where their modification may be warranted or necessary. It's not just a phisophical matter for trans people. The hypothetical is the domain of the non-transitioner.

[TG-Taru]

Frances,
That was my mistake, speaking only of how things should be, generally, not in a specific location, and assuming they were pretty close - no utopia, but not too unreasonable. I wasn't really thinking or remembering there can be worse places. I hope you can see and understand that largely I wasn't talking about or claiming to know how it is in practical reality at the moment, but in a few places I seem to have done just that, insisting in the wrong place. For that, I'm sorry.

Of course I realize it's different in different areas, but might have few vague ideas and know few specifics. I'm in Europe, and in my country, it's common to not need or even have a BC your entire life. It's a little beside the point though that I didn't realize how widely it is used elsewhere. I was asking if a modified copy wouldn't do, and from what little I've seen, a certified copy will do fine.

I checked my british and american dictionaries, and if I pick some definitions from the american one for "assignment" being appointed duty and obligation, and listen to what some of you seem to be saying... It's just too unthinkable for me to have considered. In Iran or some such maybe.

I also wasn't trying to deny you need, or get, all the modified documents you need. My only beef about it was, does it really have to be the original BC, and modified how exactly. Anything else and any sort of BC copy I was fine with. It should be enough to cover all necessities.



Sue,
you said it yourself too. I was saying the same thing, gender is who you are, and it can't be seen at birth. And sex is something you might have and hopefully enjoy. But, it isn't the only meaning of the word, there are lots of words with several meanings, isn't language wonderful? "Sex" also means the body's reproductive type, which is usually male or female. That is why "sex" is a better word for what is marked on a birth certificate - it can't reasonably be "gender", after all. Nowadays intersexed start to get noticed to exist as well, and not arbitrarily assigned one or the other at birth anymore.

Dictionary tells me "gender" is formal English for male or female, and "sex" is according to the function in producing young, charasteristic of being male or female, and only third on the list as an activity you have. So "sex" is a good word for describing the type of body, and "gender" is more suited to identity. That's how many use them, me included, to really say what we mean, as long as all parties can agree this is what we mean with them.



GabbiSophia,
I don't think you need to stress too much about not gendering them yourself. You are already aware. The bigger pressure and examples comes from outside, but you can point out to the kids they don't need to be like the others. Let them decide for themselves when appropriate. Most likely that's fine. Just only not going "no! this is not for..." or "that's not how ... are" is alot.



LeaP, Kaitlyn, Rianna...

Actually, LeaP, thank you, pretty well done for comprehension. Still, mostly talking about different things. I was responsible for some at least where you and the others got my intention wrong. You make sense in return, and helped me notice where I was off.

"It reduces to pleading the preservation of the BC as a historical record - presumably an accurate..."
It really does boil down to pretty much this. It's the principle of the thing, if we start changing this, then that, and a whole world of little things that are mostly insignificant, but just maybe not totally, where will it end?

"mistakes on BCs ARE routinely corrected" ... "You can't argue that it preserves a record of phenotype"
I bet we are talking about two different things again. You what you see as reality around you perhaps, me an ideal or what I'd bloody well expect, what makes sense. I did go too far in maintaining that BCs ARE (at least taken as) what they SHOULD be, treating that single marker as nothing more than past phenotype anyway, to use your word. I guess this is a major reason for butting heads, sorry. Of course it doesn't reflect this or that current reality. As I was speaking of SHOULD be, not how it actually is over there, "my" BC isn't as unsuitable - you can see my first post about that, and it needn't even be exactly that. Most of my ramblings are either of trying to think up the best but still accurate way to make a BC, what it's purpose would be or commentary of what I see wrong with how it is, and how it should be instead. It's not concrete, if you feel it lacking, I invite you to improve on how we would like it. You could stop using them. Over here we only get them sometimes as mementos or get an equivalent when needed abroad.
Mistake? In other words, what you think is actually recorded on the BC. Or is "corrected" an accurate term. If BCs made sense, there wouldn't be anything to correct (or, at least, not by removing that bit, PAST phenotype), it'd be accurate. If so, I'd have issues with removing/replacing it, is what I mean by not altering it. Adding to it, to not be misleading and reflect what's changed, would be fine, and the copies mentioned many times could leave that bit out. Maybe I made another mistake assuming your "correcting" to mean erasing one marker, putting in another and claiming it aaaalways was like that - I don't recall you actually saying that. For all I care, actually, shift birth sex to the margin or footnote, as long as it stays there somewhere, and put the correction in the vacated place.

OK, so apparently you think BCs try to enforce and suggest gender=sex. Sneaky b*tards. If they are, as you say, seriously suggesting more than they rightly should, the whole format and usage is faulty.

"pretending there is a gender vs sex USAGE differentiation with BCs ... The truth is that it is used to reinforce their conflation."
As said, not pretending, expecting. Again, sorry for that assumption. That may be what they do, unwittingly, I hope. You almost make it sound like a conspiracy. I'm saying they shouldn't conflate, I'm saying if they aren't differentiating, it's just stupid and makes no sense, because only one of those things they can see or examine. The other they should leave open or not mention and not pretend it has anything to do with the other.

" Identification? Actually, sex as recorded on the BC.."
You got stuck on the BC. BC has (sorry, should have) no place being used as such outside the maternity ward. I said, change all other, current documents, one of those would be the proper document to use.

"argument is made for demographics and statistics usage. ...I would say a better field of opportunity lies in ..."
For anything a bit complicated you are certainly right. I'm guessing for simple total numbers BC would be easier and more reliable, assuming there are databases and not just pieces of paper on shelves.

"Birth certificates are best understood as an antiquated approach..."
Oh agreed agreed. They do seem to be finding use as proof traveling children are being transported by their real parents. Of course, it needn't be a BC used for that either.



Rianna...
Again you are putting words in my mouth.

You say I say "postfacto alteration of the original certificate of birth". I specifically say every other type of id plus amend copies to use, not the original (-I actually clarified that above too, to: no removing, adding yes). You are fixated on the original, which need not matter in the individuals life. If, in practical reality in your area, it DOES, then, sorry - my mistake for only talking about how it should be, and assuming it was. This is the only bit I applied the "feel better" to, insisting on changing it for no practical gain. I use many words in hope that some hit the mark where the few seem to keep missing.

You are twisting it so it's like I said "government is all-knowing, government is god, government is everything"... I was only referring to other posters mentioning it, not my words to begin with. It's totally meaningless to quibble over who makes the determination. I was referring to "the government" mentioned by another poster.

If everyone and their uncle demand a birth certificate in particular, that's something to change. That particular document should have little legitimate use it's specifically needed for. Meantime, I already suggested ways it could be handled, for one the amended copies made default. The desired effect, no problem.

Let me have my [-]unaltered[/-] not falsified but updated original locked in an archive that only ever gives information about it as a nameless bit of mass data for research or statistics. Then I'll happily shut up. If you don't, I'll sigh and shut up, at least speaking about this further to you. You take your copies with your desired letter on them and do what you like, I've no problem with that. Nobody ever needs to see the original again if it REALLY isn't needed, and really, those situations could be handled by other means. It would have no practical impact on your life, you's already have what you needed.

[Kaitlyn Michele]

OK

Got it...

thanks for the info...

[DebbieL]

Gender ambiguity occurs in roughly 1 in 100 males. And that's just the obvious gender differences.
Since the early 50s, doctors would try to "correct the problem" by assigning a gender.

When my mom died, my father sent records she had kept in a sealed envelope. When I opened it, there were pictures of me at various ages, but there was also that hospital "Birth Certificate" that had the footprints on it. What was interesting was the name was "Ballard Boy?" - yes, there was a question mark.

My father had to explain before I found out that other boys had them, that I didn't have testes like most boys - mine were "up inside like ovaries".

When I was in my late thirties, my girlfriend was curious that instead of the straight seam down my scrotum, I had a zig-zag all the way down. I did some research and found at that this was probably because I was manually sown together by a doctor - probably a day or two after my birth.

There are even rare cases of males who have a uterus and periods, with the blood draining into the colon or rectum.
Often, since men aren't old enough to recognize bleeding until they are in their late 50s, they may not recognize blood in the stool.

Doctors have been trying to find better ways of determining gender, and when in doubt assign to male. It's easier to turn a man into a woman later than it is to turn a girl into a man later in life.

Far more common, in 1 in 10 males, is the physiological markings that indicate that the male did not have enough testosterone during the first 8 weeks - when the brain and bones are developed. Often, a longer index finger indicates a more feminine bone structure, and usually a more feminine brain. They have a smaller limbic system, more white matter, and smaller hypothalamus. Even by 2 it's obvious that they not only don't fight much, they don't even try to defend themselves. They behave more like girls, wanting to color, play with dolls, and make up stories.

I even have a theory as to why transgender males are more common since the 50s. For centuries, alpha males were the leaders, the most desirable, and the most likely to reproduce. However, when war transitioned from swords, axes, and clubs to rifles, huge populations of alpha males were killed by men whose ability to hold back, wait, be patient, carefully aim, and take their shot, men who did not rush into shooting the first moment they thought they might be able to hit something.

The Napoleonic wars, the Civil war, World Wars I and II each killed huge populations of alpha males - those who eagerly took the first wave, or volunteered to be in the trenches and went over the wall, were usually bunched up and mowed down with machine guns. Some of the most feared soldiers were the Scotch, the Irish, and the "Colored" groups, because they would aim for the legs, which mean those who were shot were unable to move, stuck in no-man's land, and the snipers would pick off everyone who tried to rescue or help any of the injured.

To make matters worse, millions of men who survived word war I died of Spanish flu, Scarlet Fever, or Polio - which ravaged millions of people but seemed to be very hard on alpha males who couldn't deal with being helpless and therefore didn't take the time to heal. If 70% of the alpha male population was killed off, and those who had rear duty, or who were 4F because they were too feminine to fight, to meet the criteria to enlist, would have reproduced, expanding the transgender population.

With Vietnam and a huge prison population and gang wars, the alpha male population is shrinking even more, while transgender males who focus their interest into non-violent non-alpha careers, medicine, science, technology - the same skills that once made transgender males respected as wizards and warlocks.

Perhaps now that so much of our urban population is so densely packed together, the skills of the wizard, the arbitrator, the negotiator, the advocate, the healer, are far more valued and needed than the hunter, the fighter, and the strong alpha male.

In rural areas, the farms, the ranches, the alpha males are still needed to a lesser degree than before. A farmer can now plow and harvest huge crops with a hand-full of highly skilled workers who drive tractors and combines. Even the irrigation is automated on most farms. Ranches still need men who can rope and brand the cows, but trucks huge trailers and good rail service have made long cattle drives through multiple states much less necessary.

However, Alpha males are very used to having the perks of power. Suddenly, they are seeing omega males, feminine males, what they consider the bottom of the pecking order, the sissies, the nerds, the book-worms. For the last 40 years, these have become the dominant and highest paid, while the alpha male, the blue collar worker, the fighter, has become far less popular, less successful, and in the wake of feminism, less desirable.

Maybe we are supposed to be more transgendered as a culture, even globally. In a recent survey of transgenders, there were over 9 million english speaking respondents. That's the equivalent of 3% of the total population - 1 in 30 people, who is transgendered. Furthermore, if most of those respondents were men, that could be 7% of the male population, 1 in 15 or 1 in 14. And each of those people has friends, family, coworkers, schoolmates.

How does the medical community respond to this? How does society respond to this?

[TG-Taru]

After all this talking, it really struck me,
"gender" as a lone word is really horribly imprecise and can be interpreted in too many ways, or mix them together. It needs further defining or context if used. "sex" too has several meanings, but each of them is more precise.

[Starling]

The crux of the matter is how you feel, and not what to call it. Being transsexual is not an idea, but a fact. It would be nice to have definitive knowledge of the cause or causes, but I believe it is irrelevant to your life as a transsexual person, once you have found yourself to be so, and how you decide to deal with it.

:) Lallie

[DebbieL]

Certainly, trying to define someone's gender by looking between their legs is probably the least reliable way. I was freakishly small as a baby and had no testes, but I still got the label because I had a teeny weeny peeny.

It might be best for doctors not to try to make the decision at birth, but rather tell the parents that either the male or female personality will emerge and dominate, and then the appropriate corrections can be made. I just wish that doctors could explain it that way to the general public.