It’s literally the correct thing to say.
That is to say, it’s a common phrase that doesn’t mean what the words say.
It may be a red herring to your point, but it is in fact the topic of this thread, which makes it relevant to the discussion here.
It does not say either of those things in the article about the proposed Pennsylvania law.
Trump says that ‘There are only two sexes- male and female. The sex on your birth certificate is your legal sex and cannot be changed’ in the linked USA Today article. (It let me read it once for free. Now, I need to either disable my ad blocker or sign in to read it again. This is why I am not giving exact quotes from that article)
Can the law be changed? Oh certainly it can. Will it actually be changed? That is at best another big debate. Personally, I see the country and its government embracing hatred for a long time to come.
Again, Trump said exactly that in the linked article.
I disagee. Besides, if we really wanted to make it useful for identification purposes why just include sex?
Again, the laws I mentioned depend on ‘sex on your birth certificate’ to impose their bigotry. Remove sex from birth certificates and those laws cannot work.
How? If a birth certificate says “male” and the person has it legally changed to “female” a comparison would reveal they are a trans woman. If we use some other method than assigning legal se at birth, it may noty reveal any change at all.
That is exactly what the PA law proposes. If there is no legal sex on the birth certificate, there is no way for the government to know your legal assigned at birth sex.
Again, the specific wording of some transphobic laws depend on the sex on a student’s birth certificate. If there is no sex on a student’s birth certificate, those laws cannot function.
You have again, said the proposed law is a bad idea and we should not support it. You have not told us what specific actions we should take instead.
Why?
Okay, finally something we agree on.
No I most definitely am not saying that.
I am saying that taking sex off birth certificates would keep certain transphobic laws from doing what they were intended to do. A polio vaccine will not solve all your health problems. It will prevent you from getting polio. Every kid should get the vaccine. We can work on all the other health threats in other steps. It’s the same with taking sex off birth certificates.
No, not in this thread.
That would be Trump.
It’s a red herring in the sense that it doesn’t actually address any of the issues that trans people are facing, not in that it isn’t relevant to this thread.
The fact that it’s a red herring is, of course, quite relevant to this thread.
Trump can say whatever he wants, but he is incorrect. In some states, including California, your birth certificate can say “intersex”, for example.
Last I heard, Trump is not the emperor of Pennsylvania. And if he was then debating the decisions of the yet-to-be-flailed miscreants of Pennsylvania is rather moot. Given that you are debating it, I’d take it that you’re currently operating on the assumption that it is its own state with its own law.
And history has a lot to say about ‘useful for identification purposes’.
It absolutely does address issues, though. Not the root issue, but it will allow trans people to overcome hurdles they’re currently facing.
I disagree both with your use of the term “red herring” and your claim that it doesn’t addres actual issues. I have quoted Trump several times and the (I cannot remember the state and thus cannot find it by searching. Iowa? Idaho? Ohio?) laws that require a sex on your birth certificate to function,
That is true at present. How long will it be that way? The current President is certainly trying to change that. I see Florida and quite a few other states following his bigotted lead.
I never said that he was. I did say he is President of the United States.
Trump said that ‘There are only two sexes- male and female. The sex on your birth certificate is your legal sex and cannot be changed.’ I have said that. several times in this thread.
I have also mentioned transphobic laws that depend on the sex on a student’s birth certificate. Without a sex on a birth certificate, those laws do not work.
Where have I said anything like that?
Trump wants to pass some transphobic federal laws… These would, again, restrict the sex on a birth certificate to male or female. There would be no way to change that legal sex.
Transphobic laws already in place, again, require a sex on a student’s birth certificate to work.
Leave the sex off birth certificates and you foil them both.
Thank you.
Earlier, I asked whether you thought we shouldn’t record someone’s “gender history” - if the moment they transitioned we should destroy all past documentation that shows they ever had a different gender. You said no, of course not. I find that difficult to reconcile with the quote above.
Well, that would be a bad thing. That is relevant information for the government to have in some scenarios.
You don’t have any action open to you other than opposing that law and ones like it.
Because it is relevant information for the government to have, and I don’t think we should stop tracking it.
It would allow trans people to overcome one hurdle, until the federal government replaces it with a hurdle that doesn’t depend on birth certificate. In the meantime, it stops the government from keeping important information and makes liberals look cuckoo for coco puffs.
For the fifteen minutes it takes them to adjust the law to target something other than the birth certificate, or to interpret the law as meaning that no birth certificate from the state in question is considered valid.
No, we shouldn’t destroy existng documents. However, if we do not include sex on birth certificates we don’t need to destroy any documents.
Such as? I can see why a medical professional providing care to a trans person would need to know the sex on their birth certificate.
Answered multiple times upthread. I’m not gonna go in circles with you. Read my prior posts if you want to know the answer.
Then debating what PA is doing is irrelevant.
Then they’ll change to laws that do work. You’re unlikely to find something like that one cool trick where if you close one eye, stick a pickle in one ear, and say, “Babaganoush”, three times then a million dollars will appear in front of you.
I disapprove of Islamic Fundamentalism, would never vote for it, and would be willing to pass (if there was such a thing as) a global law saying that all children must be granted exposure to all the styles of life in the world and adults must always be free to migrate to other places with beliefs that match their own. But, that’s not the world that we live in. If a cis-woman said that they expected to be able to have their local notary write “This is a man” on a piece of paper, then move to Iran, and expect that they’re going to be fine walking around in a bikini, then that person is going to have a problem.
If you’re transgender, your only safe course - in the real live world, not the one that we’d prefer - is to avoid places that are liable to pass and meaningfully enforce transphobic laws. Legal fictions in other places aren’t dependable courses of action for protecting you.
Again, you have given your opinion. I have given my opinion. I am still searching for an article or thread on the state that passed the transphobic mandatory reporting laws. Those laws explicitly and repeatedly reference the sex on a student’s birth certificate. They cannot be reinterpreted. New transphobic laws with different wording can, and likely will, be quickly passed. Without that birth certificate sex, I am not sure what wording or methods they would use.
I was hoping for a link. But, I went back and found one of your posts.
We have had quite a few debates on whether trans atheletes have an advantage over cis atheletes. Definite proof of an advantage has not been posted in those threads.
I see any federal grants that aid trans people going away very soon. Those states which defy Trump and continue to offer grants to help trans people will find a way. I am genuinely curious what will happen when somebody AFAB applies for a grant meant for cis women. The federal law will say that ‘the sex on your birth certificate is your legal sex and cannot be changed’.
I can see the need to know a prisoner’s assigned at birth sex before. Their medical needs would be slightly different. Some states at least had laws saying that trans prisoners must continue to be given care for their stage of transition. A prisoner on HRT must continue to be provided HRT and so forth. Things have, of course, changed since Trump started his second term.
Which, of course, will be determined by checking their birth certificate and not during their intake strip and cavity searchs.
I strongly disagree. When federal desgregation in public school laws were passed, they had to be enforced by armed national guard in at least one state. Trump will control federal law for the next four years. State governments can either pass state laws complying with it, or pass laws defying it within the law.
Additionally, as I have said repeatedly in this thread, at least one state has passed transphobic laws that depend on the sex on a student’s birth certificate to function. Removing the sex from birth certificates protects trans students who move to states with such laws, or in the event that such laws are passed in what used to be a blue state.
Probably, I already admitted that upthread. I suspect it will take them a while though.
Unfortunately, a place “liable to pass and meaningfully enforce transphobic laws” is the United States for at least the next four years. Transphobic federal laws are coming. While not all states will pass transphobic laws some will. To avoid federal laws, you can either move to another counrty or find a blue state that tries to counter them by doing things like taking the sex off birth certificates.