GC: Legal “sex change“, Is there room for compromise?

submitted by peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS from self.GCdebatesQT

I feel like, for trans people who pass, it would be really difficult if we were forced to move through life if we had to be marked as trans.

Being able to have a career where I was seen just as another woman rather than a transsexual seems like it was really important. I feel like it would have been much tougher if I had to out myself to employers. I hope we reach a place where things like that wouldn’t matter so much, but I feel like that is a ways off (and current trans activism is probably making it worse).

I feel like police are a big concern too. When I was a teenager and didn’t have my identification consistent, I had some really negative interactions where I went from being treated well to being harassed simply because I had to show ID. Again, we should get to a place where that doesn’t matter, but that’s not where we are many place, and this really can make your life hard.

I’m could list more examples (with more detail), but I really feel like for passing trans people (for trans people who don’t pass it may not be as clear) to fully participate in life, this is super important. It’s also a legal fiction though and I understand that. I’m interested to hear everyone thoughts (trans people can give opinions too).

Edit: I’m happy this topic is generating interest! I will respond, but I might be a little slow.

all 41 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Is it compromise if it’s only women giving something up and receiving nothing in return?

Frankly, women need to be able to talk about ourselves as a class. Including males in any sense when saying women stops the conversation from being about adult human females and the sex based oppression women face.

The solution is not for women to disappear as a category. The solution is for transgender people and allies to fight the actual enemy here, which is homophobic men and the strict gender norms many define themselves by.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thanks for your comment!

I worry about the way things are now because it feels like trans people are able to change identification with doing anything other than saying they identify that way. This is a scary situation for everyone. I’m hoping to discuss ways to make it better where passing trans people will still be able to participate in society the way we were before to this craziness of the last decade or so. Do you think doing something like making sex no longer visible on identification (except in situations where it was important) would be more agreeable for GC?

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Is this changed sex marker something that will grant males access to female spaces? Or is it simply a cosmetic change to paperwork that still recognises sex and does not undermine sex based protections?

What is being offered in return for the things women are requested to give up or change? I’m still not seeing how women benefit and this means there is no compromise.

Everything you’re suggesting gives most protection to males who identify as women.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What is being offered in return for the things women are requested to give up or change? I’m still not seeing how women benefit and this means there is no compromise.

I feel like maybe we are looking at the way things are now differently. Currently, males are legally able to use female spaces most places simply by meeting certain requirements that are usually very minimal or they are able to based on self-ID. I'm trying to think of a way we can make it where only a very small number of trans people are able to change identification or maybe even making it where no one can, but not making it as obvious so trans people can continue to live their lives. To me, that seems like gaining something and not giving anything up compared to the way things are now, but if are comparing it to total sex segregation, then it would be like giving something up.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I see no gain there for anyone but a smaller group of men. Giving access to any males requires women give up some aspect of their public protection in that space. There’s no avoiding that fact.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

I meant add some potential compromises.

I’m like 110% against self-ID allowing someone to change identification, but is there some standard that could be agreed upon? Like going back to more gatekeeping where someone would have to undergo surgery before being able to amend things. I feel like this worked better than how things are now. Under no circumstances should anyone convicted of sex crimes be able to amend documents like that. There could other standards that might work too.

Could we take sex off a lot of identification documents or make it only visible to people who really needed it (medical people, law enforcement if a crime has been committed)? I feel like maybe GC could support that even if you weren’t okay with legal sex change.

What could being able to change some documents, like IDs and passports, but leaving birth certificates with natal sex? Amending birth certificates is weird to think about anyway since it really seems like falsifying because even if someone believed sex reassignment is actually possible it still wouldn’t change how someone was born.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Self-ID laws are very poorly written. Majority of "new wave" transgenders I see are either people who would be "emo" before, or grown up abusers of laws. Majority of them do not want to be a real women, many are not planning on transition, some are not even taking any hormonal replacement therapies. There nothing strange that oldschool transsexuals are in majority GC and quit LGBTQ+ movement.

[–]tuesday 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There are problems with requiring bottom surgery. For starters, the ethical ones. Is it really ethical to require bottom surgery when the outcomes are so incredibly poor, even with the best potential patients. The worst potential patients, won't even have enough penis tissue to make a "inverted sock" such as happened to Jazz. With other patients, like transmen, the "penis sausage" frequently rots from the inside and has to be amputated. And then there's the cost. As soon as it's required, only the well off trans can afford it, and so the poorer trans are automatically excluded. Do we make insurance pay for it? But we don't have a national health insurance program like they do in the UK, so who pays for it? And what if the trans can't afford insurance?

Do I really feel like typing out all the other problems? Just with requiring bottom surgery? Dear god.

As someone else said, the law doesn't do well with exceptions. Laws need to have a bright line written in them, or everybody from the traffic cop to the judge gets confused. So you either let them all in, or you keep them all out. And then of course, you'd have to have the "panty police" check everyone's genitalia configuration at the door to the ladies. OR take everyone's word for it. OR require every single person who is alive in america have a doctor certify that they really are a male or a female so they can show everybody the piece of paper, because the situation is that some people have already had their birth certificate and other documents amended even tho to look at them you know their sex is not what they claim and they still have their dick and they're still narcissist as hell, and those people need to stay out as well.

So many problems with "compromise"....... What is your purpose for this "compromise" and why does your "compromise" involve women giving up single sex spaces. What exactly is the trans going to give up? Do they promise to stop with the doxxing and harassment and getting women fired from their jobs and why does that look like typical predatory manipulation to me? "If you give me access to your spaces so I can oggle you while you're changing at the community pool and I can accidentally flash my dick at your six year old daughter then I'll stop er being mean to you". That is enraging, WTF.

How about this as a "compromise". I'm entitled to single sex spaces when I am getting undressed or otherwise vulnerable or when placing me in with the men such as sports or in a male dominated environment it is a given that most women are going to lose out and lose out badly. My "compromise" is that transpeople can fuck off.

You might as say to a woman who's rejected some man's badgering demands for sex, "oh honey why can't you compromise with him". You are suggesting that I should give up my basic human rights in order to be nice.

And this, is why this sub and you fucking enrage the absolute shit out of me. I am required to be polite to some rando who wants to encourage young women who are still very much stuck in the "be kind" mentality that they've been indoctrinated since birth to give up our rights to which we are entitled.

FUCKING POLITE MY ASS. How about, you remember to be polite when I ever so gently suggest that it would be a great compromise to suggest that it's now possible to conceive a quite healthy female fetus using only two eggs and no sperm, so no boy children need ever be conceived and we don't have to deal with sexism ever again because no males pretty much equals no sexism. You remember to be polite when I offer this suggestion as a "compromise".

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I’m sorry if I upset you. I’m certainly not asking for you to polite and I truly appreciate you sharing your thoughts. At the very least, I’m glad this topic is generating interest. Your concerns addressed in the first few paragraphs make sense to me. I’ll respond with more detail when I have time.

[–]catoborosnonbinary 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am 100% for self-ID, but believe that it should be for identity documents only. Someone should be able to change their gender marker to match at the same time that they change their name. Or just leave the gender marker out entirely like the Netherlands.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I strongly disagree. Making sex markers about self-ID makes them totally meaningless. People will feel like it grants them permission to be included those spaces too. I’d be all for getting rid of sex markers, but self-ID for them is a terrible idea.

[–]DistantGlimmer 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Could we take sex off a lot of identification documents or make it only visible to people who really needed it (medical people, law enforcement if a crime has been committed)? I feel like maybe GC could support that even if you weren’t okay with legal sex change.

I don't see a problem with this and think I support it.

I don't think GC is unanimous on this but I personally feel that there can be very little other compromise on this point as transwomen are male and sex is immutable. Allowing some transwomen to identify themselves as female on official ID vastly undermines this argument and makes sex terms meaningless. I suppose the closest thing I could think of to a compromise would be allowing some kind of distinction like MTF or "transsexual male". I don't really see a problem with that but know it is not going to be satisfactory for transwomen who are intent on trying to pass.

What would be ideal is if transwomen could just accept their status as transwomen rather than trying to pass as women and in return, we could make society a lot more accepting of people who are trans and GNC and de-stigmatize those things. I honestly see that as a big part of the end goal of de-emphsizing and eventually abolishing gender.

Possibly there is a compromise I'm missing though, someone like you obviously has way more experience dealing with these issues on a practical level than I do but I can't think of anything that would make me end my opposition to actually being able to change sex markers on ID and distinguishing between legal and biological sex.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't see a problem with this and think I support it.

I feel like this is something GC people should be able to support, but I understand there could be disagreement. I just have difficulty imagining what would be wrong with it and it seems like forcing it to be on their would be more like punishing trans people rather than gender critical, but I could also be missing something.

What would be ideal is if transwomen could just accept their status as transwomen rather than trying to pass as women and in return, we could make society a lot more accepting of people who are trans and GNC and de-stigmatize those things. I honestly see that as a big part of the end goal of de-emphsizing and eventually abolishing gender.

I want society to move in this direction too (even though it seems like we are going backward). I can’t be totally objective because of my own position, but it just seems like asking a lot of passing trans men and women who may have lived most of their lives being seen as our target sex to have to de-identify or out ourselves. I just want to live a quiet life and have a family. Maybe this is selfish. For trans people who don’t pass or who will have to be out because of transitioning later, it seems more natural to do that work because, in some ways, they don’t have the option not too, but it’s wrong of me to ask them for something I’m not willing to do myself. 😣

[–]DistantGlimmer 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

can’t be totally objective because of my own position, but it just seems like asking a lot of passing trans men and women who may have lived most of their lives being seen as our target sex to have to de-identify or out ourselves.

I think that's a good point and one I sympathize with . If we do manage to get rid of the self-ID laws, I will say that I think there's at least a legal argument for some sort of grandfather clause for transitioned transwomen not to totally out themselves. Perhaps in conjunction with the compromise you mentioned before where birth sex is still noted on birth certificate or somewhere so you would not be a have all the legal rights of a woman with the ability to legally access all female spaces (I suspect this would be a sticking point for many GC women). I do think the main thing we're fighting right now is self-ID, not to unnecessarily disrupt the lives of that tiny proportion of the trans population who are actually fully transitioned and passing and not violating women's boundaries. .

[–]emptiedriver 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I would rather we worked toward having trans be accepted, and putting mtF or ftM on ID documents of people who have followed through on some level of transition. I don't think we should change old documents (like birth certificates) where the person was not yet transitioned, and I don't think it should be just for self-ID and changing pronouns.

I understand that it isn't the case yet, and that it seems easier to hide, but that also means people have to move to a whole new area when they transition, and constantly worry over whether they'll be outed. Maybe society is at the right point for us to make a solid effort in real trans rights - not giving any random person who tries on lipstick access to women's showers, but making sure people who take on serious life choices can keep their jobs while doing so.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks sharing your thoughts!

I would rather we worked toward having trans be accepted, and putting mtF or ftM on ID documents of people who have followed through on some level of transition.

The only thing about this is for me is that it would out you. That wouldn’t be the concern for many trans people, but it’s the only concern that I would have. I don’t see any practical difference between that and just having natal sex listed, at least for someone who would be passing otherwise.

I understand that it isn't the case yet, and that it seems easier to hide, but that also means people have to move to a whole new area when they transition, and constantly worry over whether they'll be outed.

Those points make sense! I’m totally biased because this is how I’ve been able to have a comfortable and happy life.

Maybe society is at the right point for us to make a solid effort in real trans rights - not giving any random person who tries on lipstick access to women's showers, but making sure people who take on serious life choices can keep their jobs while doing so.

We can only hope!

[–]emptiedriver 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don’t see any practical difference between that and just having natal sex listed

To me it seems like it would just clarify all levels at one time - like if you are in an accident and taken to the hospital, there won't be confusion about what's being dealt with. And in most social situations, if someone passes there won't be a need to see the ID to confirm a social exchange..

We can only hope!

I don't think hope is a great strategy. There needs to be a counter movement within the trans community that pushes for gatekeeping and protected rights rather than access to women's arenas. People who support that often don't say a lot because they don't want to out themselves, but there are ways to speak up without revealing personal histories, and for some it may turn out to be time to share. Maybe trans med types are also just a minority, but I think they are the minority most people think of when they think of "trans" so they have a powerful voice to say more about trans activists, TWAW, transing kids, and all the other issues that feminists don't seem to have a right to say much about... Well, that's my rant about that :)

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To me it seems like it would just clarify all levels at one time - like if you are in an accident and taken to the hospital, there won't be confusion about what's being dealt with.

I feel like it's the same because if someone saw my identification and it said male, I feel like they would be like this person is trans, which would be the same thing they would think if it said mtF. Both would out you as trans (unless they thought it was a mistake). I do sometimes think about medical emergencies where I might be unconscious, so I keep information on my watch and phone that I think medical personnel would be able to access.

And in most social situations, if someone passes there won't be a need to see the ID to confirm a social exchange..

Completely agree. I feel like employment, housing, and other times in life where you have to show identification is where this matters.

I don't think hope is a great strategy. There needs to be a counter movement within the trans community that pushes for gatekeeping and protected rights rather than access to women's arenas. People who support that often don't say a lot because they don't want to out themselves, but there are ways to speak up without revealing personal histories, and for some it may turn out to be time to share.

Yes. We can do more than hope. I look for ways I can advocate even if it's in a small way.

[–]worried19 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I don't personally have an issue with legal sex changes, provided there's criteria that needs to be met.

I feel like it should be allowed, but not just on a person's say so. I believe some amount of medical transition should be required first. If someone has not at least been on hormones, they still have an unaltered body of their natal sex. Thus there is no material difference between them and others of their sex.

I'm also strongly against children being able to have legal sex changes. I'm still livid over the story last year of that couple in Connecticut who transitioned their four year old male child and had him declared legally female, altering his birth certificate. The child is in fucking preschool, and they've declared that he is no longer male.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I may actually believe in more gatekeeping. I feel like someone needs to be professionally diagnosed and receive enough therapy to rule out other possibilities before hormones. Even then, I’m not sure if hormones should be enough to allow someone to change their identification. Still thinking about it I guess...

I'm also strongly against children being able to have legal sex changes.

Completely agree.

I'm still livid over the story last year of that couple in Connecticut who transitioned their four year old male child and had him declared legally female, altering his birth certificate. The child is in fucking preschool, and they've declared that he is no longer male.

That’s infuriating and heartbreaking. All children should be given time to grow up before making any life altering decisions are made. Transition isn’t an ideal outcome for anyone, especially a child. It should be the last resort if we can’t be helped any other way.

[–]worried19 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't think I would require surgery just because the surgery itself is so brutal and often has such poor results. It makes total sense that a trans person would not want to put themselves through that, no matter how committed they are. I do agree with professional diagnosis. And not just a doctor who is going to immediately affirm what the person is saying, but actually spend time with them doing real therapy.

It should be the last resort if we can’t be helped any other way.

Apparently it's now evil to believe this, which is the main reason I'm GC. The current movement has lost all common sense.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think I would require surgery just because the surgery itself is so brutal and often has such poor results. It makes total sense that a trans person would not want to put themselves through that, no matter how committed they are.

This may sound weird coming from a transsexual, but I worry about safety concerns from transwomen who still have a penis. It’s not a worry I have with transmen so maybe that could be treated differently. Sadly, I no longer believe that just because someone identifies as trans there won’t be potential safety concerns from them if they still have a penis. I hope that doesn’t make me transphobic, but that just how I feel about it and I unfortunately have life experience that taught me this. If someone is worried about complications, zero depth surgeries exist now or they could just have it removed.

[–]worried19 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's good to get your take on it. Truth be told, even thinking about these surgeries makes me uncomfortable. I can't imagine having one and would never want anyone to feel forced to have one. However, I suppose in cases of severe genital dysphoria, they make the most sense.

In terms of safety, I just don't know. Obviously penises can be weaponized. But I feel like bodily integrity and the ability to experience sexual pleasure is also important. If removing the penis renders the person in question without any pleasure for the rest of their life, or worse yet, puts them in pain, I would be hesitant to say they should have it unless they truly feel they can't live without it. But I also believe certain spaces are not appropriate for intact natal males.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I think it’s important. I don’t pass but if nothing else it’s a signal of commitment. A cop that arrests me knows I’m trans and not just a crossdresser. An application I fill out won’t just get thrown in the trash for having my name and an M listed conflicting. It’s less important for people like me but still matters.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Thanks for sharing your concerns! I’m not really sure where I am for trans people in your situation other than to say that I think you deserve to be safe, have equal access to employment and housing, and not be harassed. Would there be like not-a-man type categories that would help the same way (not that they exist sadly)?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It might help as a legal designator though that kind of legal henge creates loopholes for people in progress to be discriminated against. Ultimately wouldnt it also be pretty insulting and othering?

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Ultimately wouldnt it also be pretty insulting and othering?

I’m not sure. I don’t think it would have to be insulting. In all honestly, being visibly trans seems like it would be somewhat othering by itself. Do you think the label really affects it? It’s not like you’d need to introduce yourself that way. It would just be something descriptive on identification.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sure. Being visibly trans means I am pretty much a freak to everyone I meet but shouldn’t that be something that is minimized rather than encouraged by making me carry paperwork emphasizing the part of my history I hate the most and least want to be reminded of?

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I’m sorry. That sounds really difficult.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks. It sucks but I’d still take it over not transitioning. Dysphoria was worse.

[–]luckystar 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

(I'm GC leaning but not 100%) Personally, I've always been okay with what some people term as "transsexuals" -- people with diagnosed gender dysphoria who make a medical transition (to the extent that is safe and possible), being considered as the equivalent of a member of their birth sex, with just a few exceptions. The exceptions would be :

(1) Medical situations : in which case biological sex is important to know, though I'd denote it something like "Gender ID: Woman / Bio sex: Male, with notations for stuff like "on HRT" just like you'd include any other medication a person is on.

(2) Sports : My ideal fix here is to change the way we divide sports from "men's and women's" to having classes, a bit like how boxers have weight classes, and the lines for the classes would be decided for each sport on an individual basis by experts on that sport. I think we'd end up with a system where in practice, they are still effectively men's and women's leagues, but it would still allow for, say, a trans woman who due to puberty blockers/HRT combo never went through male puberty. In the interim, I think "no AMAB & no AFAB that are on T (trans men) in women's sports leagues / open men's sports leagues up to all" is the only fair choice, at least at the competitive level where money/scholarships/prestige are on the line, and in sports where physical safety is a concern. It may be unfair that some trans people would be excluded from participating in the sports league they identify with, but that's just life-- I don't think being a professional athlete is a human right. And it wouldn't be "excluding trans people from playing sports" as trans women would be allowed to play in the league of their biological sex, & in the case of trans men they could compete with the men.

Now this is where I depart from some radfems but I think I'm somewhat aligned with the general public, in that I don't think post op trans women should be excluded from women's spaces aside from the 2 issues listed above (bathrooms, change rooms, women's reading groups, etc). To me the primary issue is penis = rape = pregnancy. This is why I will never accept bepenised people in say, women's prisons. I understand that a male born person without a penis technically could still harass women in other ways, I just think that the HRT+surgery combo greatly reduces sexual desire and completely eradicates the ability to impregnate, to the point where I feel safe around post op trans women. I do think that we need third spaces for pre-op trans women that are far into their transition (think Blaire White) to protect their safety, but women's spaces are not the right spaces. My logic is that trans women are not the only male people at risk in male spaces, so are gay men, cross dressing men, etc. and nobody is going to put gay men in women's spaces now are they? There needs to be an LGBT specific wing or something like that.

Now this does add ethical concerns as other users posted: there is now an incentive for bottom surgery beyond personal preference, and also it means that bottom dysphoric trans women who cannot afford bottom surgery or cannot undertake bottom surgery for health reasons are being "discriminated" against. And of course, bottom surgery can have pretty bad outcomes. This is what they might call a "perverse incentive" in economics -- a common example is insurance, where there is an incentive to burn your house down to get the insurance payout. Now the penis is the house and the insurance payout is being considered a "real woman" or getting access to women's spaces. However I propose we fix this by creating more 3rd spaces for bepenised trans women and other at risk male people, as described above. The other thing is that again, the surgery is SO drastic and GREATLY reduces sexual desire and eliminates the ability to impregnate. I do think many trans women are simply men with fetishes, I basically do not view any trans "woman" who talks about "girl dick" as valid -- having a penis is not any part of the female experience, if you like having a penis, you're a man, full stop. This becomes a risk calculation then: Are there men with fetishes that would go as far as to chop their penis off, despite not having bottom dysphoria, just to access women's spaces? My impression from observing a very large number of trans women is that this is highly unlikely. The problem I have is this "self ID" thing, which means that any man with a fetish who watched a bit too much anime hentai porn can throw on a wig and skirt and then jerk it in the ladies' since he "identifies as a woman". Now there are cases of fetishy men getting bottom surgery-- the pro gamer "Remilia" comes to mind as someone who openly admits s/he went through transition in order to chase a fetish, and ultimately s/he regretted it majorly & committed suicide. So is requiring bottom surgery going to lead to more men with fetishes chopping their bits off, realizing they can no longer enjoy their fetish as much/no longer have as much of a sex drive, and then offing themselves? Well, hopefully not. I think there needs to be PSA and pre surgery psychotherapy. I also think as a society we need to open up to the reality that there are men with a cross dressing fetish and that they do NOT belong under the "trans umbrella", nor should they be given any legal protections intended for transsexuals.

Anyway, I'm rambling a bit here. So for your situations: I think a trans woman should be allowed to be considered a woman in the office, however how often does this come up? Do you have corporate team building activities divided into men and women or something? In general neither bio sex nor gender ID should be that big of a deal in the workplace. I don't agree with firing people for misgendering but I do think it should be general etiquette to use the preferred pronouns with people. I do think we have to be careful about the corporate quota issue, stupidpol had an interesting thread about a trans woman who as a man fired women for being pregnant: https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/i8ychu/goldman_sachs_recruiting_in_2020/ So I guess in terms of highlighting employees, I'd prefer we kept it to bio women. I think we could honor trans women specifically for being trans women, but if they don't want that then just don't bring it up? Things like quotas or which employees a company chooses to highlight are inherently biased anyways, I don't think it'd be too hard to have an unwritten rule to not select a trans woman as "woman employee of the month" or whatever... It's a tricky situation since I definitely think companies will prefer trans women to bio women as long as they can qualify as "women" for AA purposes without that whole pesky childbirth thing which is why companies discriminate against women in the first place. I'll have to think more on how to remedy this.

As for ID cards, I personally see no point to including gender on them in the first place. I've lived in different countries and many countries have irrelevant info on ID cards, here are some examples: race/ethnic group, religion, parents names, marital status/name of spouse, place of birth, height and weight, and more. All of those pieces of information are totally extraneous and more about the government trying to enforce certain norms or keep track of people in an invasive way. Gender is one of the most common markers but I see no reason why it should be on say, a driver's license. All you really need is the name and address of the license holder, as well as which kinds of vehicles they are licensed for, and maybe organ donor status. If you're in a car crash and in a coma, EMTs aren't going to use the gender marker on your ID to figure out which sex you are, they're going to look at your body. There's really no reason to include gender on ID.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you so much for the detailed and well-thought-out response! I'm sorry it has taken me so long to reply.

Both of your exceptions make sense to me. Usually it isn't too difficult to inform doctors about your medical history, even if it is a little awkward. I feel like sports is just something you give up when you transition. Sex segregation in sports just seems like common sense so they can remain fair.

I strongly agree about surgery being important for safety. I don't believe that just because someone identifies as trans (especially now) there won’t be potential safety concerns from them if they still have a penis. Your discussion of perverse incentives is interesting. I guess my hope would be that people who would regret it would be kept from getting it through screening.

For work situations, I'm thinking of identification being important for not outing someone who passes. What you said about highlighting employees is interesting to think about though. For my adult life, I've always just considered myself a woman and that's how I've been perceived in my career. I feel like now since I've become more gender critical, if I were awarded or honor in some category that was only for women, I'd feel like I need to decline that otherwise I'd be taking something that isn't meant for me. I'm not aware of ever having been part of a hiring quota and the area I work in is female dominated so it isn't likely there would have been one, but I wouldn't really feel right about that either.

I definitely think companies will prefer trans women to bio women as long as they can qualify as "women" for AA purposes without that whole pesky childbirth

I worry about this too, especially in tech and other male dominated industries. This type of discrimination still happens entirely too much (although any amount would be) and it would be a nightmare companies to just be able to hire transwomen to meet requirements. This is where I almost feel like legal sex change should only be for people who actually pass so like they would be facing the same discrimination (even if it was misplaced), but there is no way to make that work that I can think of.

As for ID cards, I personally see no point to including gender on them in the first place.

I'm glad!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

And it wouldn't be "excluding trans people from playing sports" as trans women would be allowed to play in the league of their biological sex, & in the case of trans men they could compete with the men.

To be clear this is banning trans women from sports. Trans women on hormone cannot on any level compete with men and it’s unsafe regardless. I’m notable just for banning trans people from sports but I dislike pretending it isn’t a ban.

I’m a big proponent of third spaces and the big issue with bottom surgery as a barrier is accessibility as you noted. As long as bottom surgery is affordable and accessible I don’t have an issue there, Espescially since surgeons generally require at least 2 letters and a term full time before doing bottom surgery.

since I definitely think companies will prefer trans women to bio women as long as they can qualify as "women" for AA purposes

I 100 percent disagree. Trans women feel lucky to get jobs at all and face huge amounts of discrimination. I lost my career when I transitioned. Women certainly suffer discrimination but trans women aren’t better off certainly.

And I don’t have an objection to just removing sex/gender from id’s. I’ll never carry another piece that says I’m a man, but I don’t have any complaint about just leaving it off.

[–]luckystar 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Interesting, I didn't consider that trans women cannot compete with men. Then it becomes more like the issue of disabled people, they cannot participate in the regular Olympics due to a health condition. Does that mean we should have a separate trans Olympics? I suspect there would be too few competitors...

The second point about companies and AA is an interesting one. I think it might ultimately come down to the corporate culture and the society in general in that area, I live in California so being trans is generally viewed quite positively here albeit in a token-y way (think of when somebody posts they are trans on a non trans related sub-Reddit and get tons of gold rewards and upvotes "You're so beautiful sis" "Live your best life")

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Interesting, I didn't consider that trans women cannot compete with men. Then it becomes more like the issue of disabled people, they cannot participate in the regular Olympics due to a health condition. Does that mean we should have a separate trans Olympics? I suspect there would be too few competitors...

Yeah. That’s my point. If trans women can’t be with women in sport, you’d just have to say no trans women in sports. I don’t see anything else that would work.

I’m in the Midwest. I went from a “professional” career to an unskilled low wage position in an unrelated field after extended unemployment at the first place that would hire me. It’s not okay here.

[–]yishengqingwa666 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

No.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fair enough. Thanks!

[–]divingrightintowork 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So what was your process of legal sex change, and how would you feel of that was the standard? How does one judge 'passing' ? there will be people who do the same things as you who won't be able to pass. What about them?

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So, when I transitioned you had to have surgery in order to change sex on documents. Prior to surgery, all I was able to do was change my name. My surgeon had to provide a letter for a judge that stated that basically my sex had been irreversibly reassigned and then I had to go before a judge who issued an order that I could take to vital records and they’d changed my birth certificate. It may not have been perfect, but I feel like someone who might be a danger maybe wouldn’t be willing to go through all of that. Also, if there is gatekeeping at other parts of process too that would help stop people who would be a danger from going through it.

Those last two questions are like ones I don’t have good answers to, which makes me think that maybe the better thing would be taking sex off of as much ID as possible, so we wouldn’t feel like we had to change it. If we’re able to fully participate in life without worrying about issues because of a sex marker, we wouldn’t have any reason to worry about it still saying our natal sex (to me at least). I’m sure there are trans people who would want that for some sort of validation, but to me that isn’t really a good reason.

[–]divingrightintowork 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From what I understand people "like you," are approximately 1 in 10k, give take. I'm not sure how much we really should change the entire system for a few fairly extreme edge cases - that's especially assuming all cops / state entities don't know what to do with people who appear to be a different sex than their ID states (sounds like updated pictures should be an easy enough solution though, no?) -

though this guy claims transitioning helped his career, and he's in texas - https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/20c/How-the-transgender-movt-destroyed-a-family/index.html

Though I'd like to talk to someone / hear the case of why we do have our sex marker on IDs - but there will always be edge cases (passing trans people, women who look like men, men who look like women, etc.) - I don't think an imperfect line is a good argument to get rid of lines - there is a whole idiom with it - "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater," and there won't be a perfect solution to this (also like uncomfortable interactions with cops are normal - I've had a lot - as have many other friends).

[–]zephyranthes 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I sympathize to an extent, but this is the life you chose. I view passing non-creepy trans people as body modification enthusiasts. You may be a good person, you may be beautiful, but you're still the sex you are. Some people naturally look like the opposite sex or less like the platonic ideal of their own sex, some invest effort into temporary changes in appearance, others' changes are more permanent, and everyone changes with the passage of time. A man who has cosmetic surgery to look like a cat isn't a cat, a man who has cosmetic surgery to look like a woman isn't a woman, and a man who naturally looks like a woman isn't a woman either. Everyone can be judged or discriminated or even harassed because of their appearance and fashion choices.

What is "trans", anyway? Is an elegant crossdresser enough of a woman? A failed crossdresser? A victim of plastic quackery who nearly died but will never pass? What if you pass with a wig but don't pass without one? What if you pass at 20 but not at 40?

Mental distress is a separate issue; even then, no other type of mental distress is accommodated to the extent that the gender movement wants to have "gender dysphoria" accommodated.

I believe in democratic solutions and democratic societies. I believe that laws should reflect society and that laws should be internally consistent and complementary. If you feel unsafe going about your life dressed in a certain way, the police should help. If they don't, you appeal to the society to reform and retrain the police. You should NOT expect to carve out a legally enforced exceptional right to pee with the women because that very same society is incapable of legally enforcing your existing right to safely pee with the men.

Pronouns and names wouldn't be an issue if not for the current state of affairs. To refer to a male by female pronouns will be understood by the public as supporting genderism. To refer to a male by a traditionally female name (even if it's his legal name) can disguise the fact that he's male and can be interpreted as supporting genderism. I'd rather be "rude", especially because the "victim" is most likely a creep. (I feel bad about names, but it's the lesser of two evils right now.)