NationStates Jolt Archive

For those who don't know this is a bill that would allow people, after a panel of experts have said they can, alter the gender on their birth certificate, after an operation obviously. No official would be allowed to reveal this, even a vicar, and so the person you marry may not be as you think. A vicar however would be allowed to not personally want to marry those people but cannot stop them using his/her church. It would be an offence for anyone who knows the truth to reveal it.

I E-Mailed Michael Howard's office (Conservative Leader: as this is a British Bill)

The Response: -


Thank you very much for your email to Michael Howard regarding the Gender
Recognition Bill.

The Government claims that this Bill is necessary because of a judgement of
the European Court of Human Rights and the House of Lords that existing laws
in Britain contravene the right of a person to have their private life
respected and to marry in their chosen gender. It has now passed through
the House of Lords and has received a Second Reading in the House of
Commons, and has been considered in a Standing Committee, with Conservatives
being given a free vote in both Houses.

We all recognise a range of problems which are involved in this legislation,
including matters connected with the representation of the views of
relatives and the obligations of those with pastoral responsibilities.

The detailed consideration of the Bill in Standing Committee has now
concluded and I can assure you that the various concerns expressed were
thoroughly discussed. A number of assurances were secured from the
Government and others will certainly be sought when the Bill returns to the
floor of the Commons for its Report stage.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to write to me and share your
concerns. Please let me assure you that we will look carefully and
constructively at this legislation. In so doing, Mr Howard will fully take
on board the issues which you have raised.

Yours sincerely,


[Name Deleted for the persons privacy]
Office of the Leader of the Opposition

I wonder what people thought of this, especially what the liberal view is, and especially the view of a certain Canadian Liberal :wink: . I am interested in what the full range of views, and reasons for such are.

I will state that this is a British Bill, I do not know if there is a similar one in the US etc

hmmm, I don't think people should be able to change they gender just because they feel like it. It should be for medical emergencies only.

hmmm, I don't think people should be able to change they gender just because they feel like it. It should be for medical emergencies only.

why the hell would you need to change your gender for after a medical emergency?

Don't know if I count as a liberal but I'll answer anyway.

If anyone wants to change their gender I think they should be allowed, and should be allowed to live life in gender in everyway they want to. However I'm not sure about changing the birth certificate though, simply because they weren't born into that gender.

hmmm, I don't think people should be able to change they gender just because they feel like it. It should be for medical emergencies only.

why the hell would you need to change your gender for after a medical emergency?

Maybe he means people born into two genders?

I think there obviously is a danger in allowing the very simple piece of information that tells people who we are be altered. I don't even think it is altered when you change your name. The Birth certificate is the very thing that states who we are it shouldn't be allowed to be altered for any reason.

they don't allow people to change their genders simply because they want to.
to undergo a sex change operation, one must be medically diagnosed as needing one and as far as i know, that happens when someone is mentally the opposite gender anyways. they would have been born with the mentality of the opposite gender, thus should have their mental gender recorded on their birth certificate. simply because it differs from their original physical gender doesn't mean that they suddenly changed who they are on the inside when they changed their gender on the outside...

blegh... this gets confusing.

i don't see any harm in letting gender be fluid. we are far too obsessed with maintaining gender divisions, and i don't think there's any practical reason for it. a person's decision to change gender only concerns them and their close family/friends/partner. beyond those close to them, why should anybody else care? let them change whatever they want.

i don't see any harm in letting gender be fluid. we are far too obsessed with maintaining gender divisions, and i don't think there's any practical reason for it. a person's decision to change gender only concerns them and their close family/friends/partner. beyond those close to them, why should anybody else care? let them change whatever they want.

It is not just a question of that though, it is a question of deception. The person you marry has no reason to tell you, and no one else can. That is my major gripe with this bill. Although I do have others.

i don't see any harm in letting gender be fluid. we are far too obsessed with maintaining gender divisions, and i don't think there's any practical reason for it. a person's decision to change gender only concerns them and their close family/friends/partner. beyond those close to them, why should anybody else care? let them change whatever they want.

It is not just a question of that though, it is a question of deception. The person you marry has no reason to tell you, and no one else can. That is my major gripe with this bill. Although I do have others.

so?

i don't see any harm in letting gender be fluid. we are far too obsessed with maintaining gender divisions, and i don't think there's any practical reason for it. a person's decision to change gender only concerns them and their close family/friends/partner. beyond those close to them, why should anybody else care? let them change whatever they want.

It is not just a question of that though, it is a question of deception. The person you marry has no reason to tell you, and no one else can. That is my major gripe with this bill. Although I do have others.

so?

1) Gender change operation renders infertile, so the person you marry you may not be able to have children with.
2) Can you genuinly say you would be happy to think on your wedding day that the person you are marrying may not be who they say they are.
3) What happens if you ind out later in the relationship, find out the person has been lying to you.
4) Why should someone not have the right to know about the person they are about to spend the rest of their life with.

Not sure if there is one here in the states or not either. I believe the game has one like this I just got. My stance is this: its none of the government what people do with their bodies if they want to do this fine. The government should only make sure the people are not physically hurt etc. and also if the government stays out of it people who are against such a thing such as myself will still be happy because no tax dollars fund this or anything and people who are trans can still be pretty happy to.

i don't see any harm in letting gender be fluid. we are far too obsessed with maintaining gender divisions, and i don't think there's any practical reason for it. a person's decision to change gender only concerns them and their close family/friends/partner. beyond those close to them, why should anybody else care? let them change whatever they want.

It is not just a question of that though, it is a question of deception. The person you marry has no reason to tell you, and no one else can. That is my major gripe with this bill. Although I do have others.

so?

1) Gender change operation renders infertile, so the person you marry you may not be able to have children with.
2) Can you genuinly say you would be happy to think on your wedding day that the person you are marrying may not be who they say they are.
3) What happens if you ind out later in the relationship, find out the person has been lying to you.
4) Why should someone not have the right to know about the person they are about to spend the rest of their life with.

1) i don't want children, so that's not a problem. it's not required that you tell your partner if you know you are infertile, so why should this be required? sure, i think that sort of deception is wrong, but it's not something the law should force people on.

2) i wouldn't want the person i am marrying to only have revealed themselves to me because they are legally required to. if they can't trust me enough to tell me for their own reasons then we shouldn't be getting married in the first place.

3) if i found out later that they hadn't told me something like that i would realize there was a critical problem with our relationship, and that they clearly don't trust me enough for us to be married. however, i would feel just as betrayed and wronged if i found out using legal channels, even if it was before the wedding; for me, the issue is whether or not they tell me on their own, not whether or not they went through a change like that.

4) i have the right to WANT to know everything about my partner, and the right to leave them if i feel i have been deceived or wronged. but they have the right to choose to keep secrets, if they really think it's best. personally i believe in trust, and i would hope that i wouldn't commit to anybody who couldn't be worthy of that trust for better reasons than just because the law tells them to.

i don't see any harm in letting gender be fluid. we are far too obsessed with maintaining gender divisions, and i don't think there's any practical reason for it. a person's decision to change gender only concerns them and their close family/friends/partner. beyond those close to them, why should anybody else care? let them change whatever they want.

It is not just a question of that though, it is a question of deception. The person you marry has no reason to tell you, and no one else can. That is my major gripe with this bill. Although I do have others.

so?

1) Gender change operation renders infertile, so the person you marry you may not be able to have children with.
2) Can you genuinly say you would be happy to think on your wedding day that the person you are marrying may not be who they say they are.
3) What happens if you ind out later in the relationship, find out the person has been lying to you.
4) Why should someone not have the right to know about the person they are about to spend the rest of their life with.

1) i don't want children, so that's not a problem. it's not required that you tell your partner if you know you are infertile, so why should this be required? sure, i think that sort of deception is wrong, but it's not something the law should force people on.

2) i wouldn't want the person i am marrying to only have revealed themselves to me because they are legally required to. if they can't trust me enough to tell me for their own reasons then we shouldn't be getting married in the first place.

3) if i found out later that they hadn't told me something like that i would realize there was a critical problem with our relationship, and that they clearly don't trust me enough for us to be married. however, i would feel just as betrayed and wronged if i found out using legal channels, even if it was before the wedding; for me, the issue is whether or not they tell me on their own, not whether or not they went through a change like that.

4) i have the right to WANT to know everything about my partner, and the right to leave them if i feel i have been deceived or wronged. but they have the right to choose to keep secrets, if they really think it's best. personally i believe in trust, and i would hope that i wouldn't commit to anybody who couldn't be worthy of that trust for better reasons than just because the law tells them to.

1) Many people do, and many would ruin their lives because a partner has not told them.
2)True if their isn't trust you shouldn't marry, but how would you know.

People are not even allowed to find out if they ask. It doesn't alter the fact though that this law would allow people to hide things about themselves from every other human and abuse the trust of humans. Any law that assumes people to be good and honest is flawed at the basic level.

1) Many people do, and many would ruin their lives because a partner has not told them.


like i said, people aren't required to tell their partner if they know they are infertile, so why should they have to tell them about this?



2)True if their isn't trust you shouldn't marry, but how would you know.

People are not even allowed to find out if they ask. It doesn't alter the fact though that this law would allow people to hide things about themselves from every other human and abuse the trust of humans. Any law that assumes people to be good and honest is flawed at the basic level.

if you are going to work under the assumption that your partner will deceive you if they can, then why marry them in the first place? what point is there to marriage if you decide that all people are bad and dishonest? i'm not assuming all people will be honest, far from it. but that's not how we design marriage laws; people have the right to make their own mistakes, and people get married for the wrong reasons all the time. people lie to their fiances and spouses, and that's awful but it's how it is. it's not the government's job to ensure every person has a happy marriage, that's up to the individuals.

if you are going to work under the assumption that your partner will deceive you if they can, then why marry them in the first place? what point is there to marriage if you decide that all people are bad and dishonest? i'm not assuming all people will be honest, far from it. but that's not how we design marriage laws; people have the right to make their own mistakes, and people get married for the wrong reasons all the time. people lie to their fiances and spouses, and that's awful but it's how it is. it's not the government's job to ensure every person has a happy marriage, that's up to the individuals.

Exactly!!

Now if the guy, now girl. Looks and has all the major parts of a girl. So what?, if it works then why kick it. Gender is a biological thing, should'nt be controlled by the state. If you wanna be a girl then go ahead.

This is why I want the USSR back. I don't think we had all this crap back when the good ol CCCP had nuclear missiles trained on my head. Give me my USSR back!

1) Gender change operation renders infertile, so the person you marry you may not be able to have children with.
2) Can you genuinly say you would be happy to think on your wedding day that the person you are marrying may not be who they say they are.
3) What happens if you ind out later in the relationship, find out the person has been lying to you.
4) Why should someone not have the right to know about the person they are about to spend the rest of their life with.

1) i don't want children, so that's not a problem. it's not required that you tell your partner if you know you are infertile, so why should this be required? sure, i think that sort of deception is wrong, but it's not something the law should force people on.

2) i wouldn't want the person i am marrying to only have revealed themselves to me because they are legally required to. if they can't trust me enough to tell me for their own reasons then we shouldn't be getting married in the first place.

3) if i found out later that they hadn't told me something like that i would realize there was a critical problem with our relationship, and that they clearly don't trust me enough for us to be married. however, i would feel just as betrayed and wronged if i found out using legal channels, even if it was before the wedding; for me, the issue is whether or not they tell me on their own, not whether or not they went through a change like that.

4) i have the right to WANT to know everything about my partner, and the right to leave them if i feel i have been deceived or wronged. but they have the right to choose to keep secrets, if they really think it's best. personally i believe in trust, and i would hope that i wouldn't commit to anybody who couldn't be worthy of that trust for better reasons than just because the law tells them to.
It's not about them choosing to keep secrets though- as far as I know you don't have to allow your spouse to read your birth certificate (though I could be totally wrong about that) But why would you want to have it changed on your birth certificate if not to keep it a secret that you were ever the opposite gender. And it doesn't seem right, to me, to legally force people who knew them before the operation to keep quiet about it.
A lot of people around here are yelling "Yeah, you should be able to have the operation if you want!!" without even bothering to read the actual question, which is- Should you be allowed to change your birth certificate and legally force your friends into silence?

no. by the way

I think changing your gender should be perfectly legal and that no government institution should stick their nose in it or spread it around, etc.

As for changing it on your birth certificate and forcing others not to tell, sorry - shouldn't be legal. A person can choose to live as the gender they feel like being, but part of who they are is that they were born technically the opposite gender. They can choose to not tell, they can ask those who know them to not tell, but they cannot legally force that kind of thing. And the birth certificate shouldn't be changed either. If I undergo an operation that changes my eye color, should I then change that on my birth certificate? No - I was born with blue eyes.

I don't think people should be able to change their Birth Certificates, because they are BIRTH certificates. I doubt anyone is born surgical altered to resemble a different gender (and I hope no-one is).

I'm somewhat undecided on the issue of sex-change as a whole. For analogy, if someone said that they were a duck that had been born in a human body, and tried to be surgically altered to look like a duck, you'd think they were crazy I expect (and if not, what does constitute insanity).

I don't think people should be able to change their Birth Certificates, because they are BIRTH certificates. I doubt anyone is born surgical altered to resemble a different gender (and I hope no-one is).

I'm somewhat undecided on the issue of sex-change as a whole. For analogy, if someone said that they were a duck that had been born in a human body, and tried to be surgically altered to look like a duck, you'd think they were crazy I expect (and if not, what does constitute insanity).

It seems to me that there's an obvious practical problem that would defeat this proposal, but never having seem a British Birth Certificate, I can't say for certain. However, here in America, I have a BC issued by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It has on the back spaces where information can be altered in three important aspects: name, sex, and date of birth (I've always wondered about that--I understand how the first two can change, but how does one go about changing one's birthday?). Of course, these are to be penned in and notarised on the back, so the original information remains on the front.

Now, I'm assuming British BCs are also printed on paper. If that is so, then to change it in an undetectable way, a new certificate would have to be issued, right? Most people would take a look at a BC and notice a splotch of White-Out.

Where does this fail practically? Well, my BC is only roughly 23 years old, and already shows signs of age (yellowing paper, etc). If a 35-year old person presents a crisp, bleach-white new BC, the discriminating person who examines it ought to realise that (gasp! :shock: ) this wasn't issued at birth! (if I were going to marry a "girl", for instance, and noticed this, I would quietly and immediately take her aside and ask her, "What the ****?!")

But that's just my opinion.

For those who don't know this is a bill that would allow people, after a panel of experts have said they can, alter the gender on their birth certificate, after an operation obviously. No official would be allowed to reveal this, even a vicar, and so the person you marry may not be as you think. A vicar however would be allowed to not personally want to marry those people but cannot stop them using his/her church. It would be an offence for anyone who knows the truth to reveal it.

I E-Mailed Michael Howard's office (Conservative Leader: as this is a British Bill)

The Response: - SNIPPED
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~continued below~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I wonder what people thought of this, especially what the liberal view is, and especially the view of a certain Canadian Liberal :wink: . I am interested in what the full range of views, and reasons for such are.

I will state that this is a British Bill, I do not know if there is a similar one in the US etc

The issues raised by transsexuality such as it's veracity as a physical and/or psychological reality or if the outgrowth of the usual neurotic tics expressed in a less usual way - while pertinent - might have to be assessed on an individual basis. So I will set it aside for the moment.

What I find more compelling is the question that a law would be passed which would not only legalize an untruth but would compel others to comply with that lie.

At what point does an individual's expectation of, and therefore a right to, privacy end? The argument is, at it's heart, exactly that. The individual censuring all talk they find inconvenient or distressful versus the freedom to speak factually on the part of the larger community.

For arguments sake say I grew up with Bill and we attended the same schools through till college. Our families have been friends for all those years and are to this day.

We are now in our mid twenties and at Christmas time I stop by at the pub to say hello. While there I ask about my old friend Bill whom I haven't seen in years. A deafening silence fills the room. Bill has taken on a sexual reassignment and it cannot be discussed.

Will it be impossible to talk about Bill because the pronoun "he" is no longer applicable? Bill will have been "disappeared" by the law. It be an unspeakable secret.

What of Bill's husband? Will he be like the cuckolded unfortunate who is the last to know his status because even the best intentioned person will be legally liable should they say a word?

How many steps removed are they then from having to move from lying by omission to lying by comission? Will siblings, friends, neighbors, teachers, doctors, ministers, etc. be made to attest to entire biographies that never really happened?

I feel it is a huge mistake to set this precedent. At least people in the witness protection program still have the reality of once having existed and friends and family can still show their pictures and speak of them.

:shock:

For those who don't know this is a bill that would allow people, after a panel of experts have said they can, alter the gender on their birth certificate, after an operation obviously. No official would be allowed to reveal this, even a vicar, and so the person you marry may not be as you think. A vicar however would be allowed to not personally want to marry those people but cannot stop them using his/her church. It would be an offence for anyone who knows the truth to reveal it.

I E-Mailed Michael Howard's office (Conservative Leader: as this is a British Bill)

The Response: -


Thank you very much for your email to Michael Howard regarding the Gender
Recognition Bill.

The Government claims that this Bill is necessary because of a judgement of
the European Court of Human Rights and the House of Lords that existing laws
in Britain contravene the right of a person to have their private life
respected and to marry in their chosen gender. It has now passed through
the House of Lords and has received a Second Reading in the House of
Commons, and has been considered in a Standing Committee, with Conservatives
being given a free vote in both Houses.

We all recognise a range of problems which are involved in this legislation,
including matters connected with the representation of the views of
relatives and the obligations of those with pastoral responsibilities.

The detailed consideration of the Bill in Standing Committee has now
concluded and I can assure you that the various concerns expressed were
thoroughly discussed. A number of assurances were secured from the
Government and others will certainly be sought when the Bill returns to the
floor of the Commons for its Report stage.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to write to me and share your
concerns. Please let me assure you that we will look carefully and
constructively at this legislation. In so doing, Mr Howard will fully take
on board the issues which you have raised.

Yours sincerely,


[Name Deleted for the persons privacy]
Office of the Leader of the Opposition

I wonder what people thought of this, especially what the liberal view is, and especially the view of a certain Canadian Liberal :wink: . I am interested in what the full range of views, and reasons for such are.

I will state that this is a British Bill, I do not know if there is a similar one in the US etc


Argh...for the love of mike :roll:

Go ahead and scream that I am a hate spreader and do all the things that "tolerance" groups do just because I think that this is wrong.

Whelp, as a differently gendered person, allow me to provide a different perspective.

Your average transsexual has a lot on his or her back. Dealing with friends and family. Work. Relationships. Life in general. Yeah, I know, everybody's got it tough. Transsexuals have it tougher than most though.

A transsexual doesn't want to stick out. They aren't here to grab out attention. Hell, most transsexuals I know are extreme introverts. They just want to fit in and be left alone to live the life they feel they must live to be happy.

Obviously, it ain't that simple. The last thing they need is someone dragging up their personal histories. These people are just like everybody else, they eat, sleep, go to work, pay their taxes, and want someone to love them for who they are. Don't work that way. Unfortunately, people have this crazy need to classify and define as normal and abnormal. Right and wrong. Morality has nothing to do with any of it, it's about a tiny percentage of the population just trying to make their lives just a little bit better.

Imagine that you're a post-operative transsexual. You were terribly unhappy as the person you used to be. After agonizing over it for years you decide to become the man or woman that you know you are inside. You spend a lot of money, jeopardize your relationships with your friends and family, and finally you are whole. You've become the person you feel you were meant to be.

Now, it's time to rebuild your life as the new you. You want to get on with things and be accepted for who you are now, not the person you were.

Why should you tell anyone that you used to be the opposite sex? It's a dangerous world to be different in. Believe me, I know from personal experience just how dangerous it is.

As a transsexual, you don't want to go around telling everyone about your history. Honesty is all well and good, but is it worth being ostricized, humiliated, degraded, insulted, harassed, injured, and even killed for?

Anyone remember Brandon Teena?

Naturally, you have an obligation to come clean with someone that you're going to be in a serious romantic relationship with, but it really isn't anyone else's business. Ain't worth the risk, y'know?

So, you've built your new life. You have a new name, a new job, new friends. You're accepted as your new sex. Doesn't matter whether or not you have a romantic partner at this time, that's an issue that really has nothing to do with this. That's about being honest in a relationship. What you tell your spouse is between the two of you.

Now, somebody digs up some old document, birth certificate, driver's license, etc. and it's got your old sex on it.

Everything comes crashing down. Suddenly, everyone who knows you thinks you're one of those freaks. Best case: Most of 'em accept you, but things'll still be weird.

Worst case? You're dead in a ditch, beaten, raped, and mutilated.

Now, given the rise in sex crimes and hate crimes in America and that they are definitely occuring in other parts of the world, I'm sure that some of you have either been victims or know someone who has. Well, I've been both. I have known horrors that I would not wish on my worst enemy.

If it means a lie about whether it was an M or an F marked on a piece of paper when a person was born will save that person the kind of suffering that I've seen and felt, I think I'll go with a little dishonesty.

Transsexuals don't want to be martyrs, they just want to fit in. They have a right to their anonymity same as you and me.

1) Gender change operation renders infertile, so the person you marry you may not be able to have children with.

So should there be a law that forces people to verify their fertility before marriage?

2) Can you genuinly say you would be happy to think on your wedding day that the person you are marrying may not be who they say they are.

No, I wouldn't be happy - but I would also plan to marry someone trustworthy, and no laws can force people to be trustworthy.

3) What happens if you ind out later in the relationship, find out the person has been lying to you.

Then you forgive and get over it or you end the relationship and move-on.

4) Why should someone not have the right to know about the person they are about to spend the rest of their life with.

A right to know what?

Jack Chick's view on this (http://www.chick.com/bc/2004/construct.asp)

Whelp, as a differently gendered person, allow me to provide a different perspective.

Your average transsexual has a lot on his or her back. Dealing with friends and family. Work. Relationships. Life in general. Yeah, I know, everybody's got it tough. Transsexuals have it tougher than most though.

A transsexual doesn't want to stick out. They aren't here to grab out attention. Hell, most transsexuals I know are extreme introverts. They just want to fit in and be left alone to live the life they feel they must live to be happy.

Obviously, it ain't that simple. The last thing they need is someone dragging up their personal histories. These people are just like everybody else, they eat, sleep, go to work, pay their taxes, and want someone to love them for who they are. Don't work that way. Unfortunately, people have this crazy need to classify and define as normal and abnormal. Right and wrong. Morality has nothing to do with any of it, it's about a tiny percentage of the population just trying to make their lives just a little bit better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SNIP~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No pun intended above.

As far as you having the ability to present yourself as you choose that is your affair. I have no qualms with that, everybody does it to some extent. What I do take issue with is compelling under force of law, silence initially - but ultimately lying on the behalf of of this "tiny" group.

It is not a healthful precedent and will bring with it a severe backlash of resentment from parties that might otherwise be indifferent. With it will also follow demands for other exceptions to reality for other special interest groups as equal treatment under the law, etcetera and so on.

Straight up? Not a good idea.

:shock:

Whelp, as a differently gendered person, allow me to provide a different perspective.

Your average transsexual has a lot on his or her back. Dealing with friends and family. Work. Relationships. Life in general. Yeah, I know, everybody's got it tough. Transsexuals have it tougher than most though.

A transsexual doesn't want to stick out. They aren't here to grab out attention. Hell, most transsexuals I know are extreme introverts. They just want to fit in and be left alone to live the life they feel they must live to be happy.

Obviously, it ain't that simple. The last thing they need is someone dragging up their personal histories. These people are just like everybody else, they eat, sleep, go to work, pay their taxes, and want someone to love them for who they are. Don't work that way. Unfortunately, people have this crazy need to classify and define as normal and abnormal. Right and wrong. Morality has nothing to do with any of it, it's about a tiny percentage of the population just trying to make their lives just a little bit better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SNIP~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No pun intended above.

As far as you having the ability to present yourself as you choose that is your affair. I have no qualms with that, everybody does it to some extent. What I do take issue with is compelling under force of law, silence initially - but ultimately lying on the behalf of of this "tiny" group.

It is not a healthful precedent and will bring with it a severe backlash of resentment from parties that might otherwise be indifferent. With it will also follow demands for other exceptions to reality for other special interest groups as equal treatment under the law, etcetera and so on.

Straight up? Not a good idea.

:shock:
agreed, ES, as a friend and supporter of gays and transexuals, allow me to provide our perspective.
let's pretend that we have been friends for a long time, then you decide it's time to undergo surgery to change genders. Sometime later, you enter into a relationship with someone who didn't know you before (I'm going to call this person him, or he, generically). Now, from your response, it seems as though you'd be responsible enough to tell him about your situation before things went too far, but for arguments sake- and because I'm sure you know there are plenty of people out there who aren't that responsible- let's pretend that you don't tell him, because you are afraid of what his reaction might be. Now you two have been together for quite some time, and I have befriended him, and I know he wants to have children, or I know that he is against sex-change operations (but you for whatever reason don't think this is a reason to dump his butt), or I know for some other reason that he either needs to know, or you need to leave him. I should not be legally held responsible for your decision, a decision that I had no say in. It's one thing to be responsible for your own actions, but I should not be held accountable for your actions. The only way I'd say this would be acceptable is if everyone who knew you were having the operation had to sign a waiver before you were allowed to get the operation, or else you had to sign a waiver saying we couldn't be held responsible for it. And personally, I don't think you should have to get my permission before making such a personal decision.

Gender dysphoria victims are at unusually high risk for self mutilation and suicide.

Changing their appearance is not something they "want" to do. It's a matter of life and death, at times.

bumping for longer debate

Gender dysphoria victims are at unusually high risk for self mutilation and suicide.

Changing their appearance is not something they "want" to do. It's a matter of life and death, at times.
What's your point? The question is whether they should change their BIRTH CERTIFICATE, not just their gender. And, you know, whether their friends and other people should be forced into silence.

Gender dysphoria victims are at unusually high risk for self mutilation and suicide.

Changing their appearance is not something they "want" to do. It's a matter of life and death, at times.
What's your point? The question is whether they should change their BIRTH CERTIFICATE, not just their gender. And, you know, whether their friends and other people should be forced into silence.

I am very close to someone who is in this position. A Law such as this would make their life much more liveable. It simply says that the first record was a mistake, because in hindsight it was.

What does it hurt you to allow this person to live? If you throw roadblocks in their way, you could kill them.

Why stop at being men and women? What about androgynes or transgenders? Would be way cool to be an actual hermaphrodite, but I doubt current human biology allows that - where are those mad scientists and their genetical tinkering when you need it?