Rethinking Birth Gender

[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...