Actually, it’s looking like it’s going to end up being documented that he knew because even though her gender marker had already been changed, Nikki had additional surgery (because transitioning is almost always a matter of multiple procedures) after they were married.
ignoring that his knowledge is probably irrelevant, what makes you think that someone’s knowledge of an act ought to be presumed when that act is another person undergoing a medical procedure that is protected by numerous federal and state privacy laws?
That wouldn’t really have made any difference, though. The legal problem isn’t that the husband might have been unaware of his wife’s past, but that Texas considers a person’s legal sex to be whatever it says on their birth certificate and does not recognize same-sex marriage. So regardless of what the husband knew, if the wife is a MtF transsexual then the marriage was never valid.
Or at least it was never valid in Texas. It’s not clear to me from the article where this couple married.
As for the OP, if they were married in Texas then Ms. Araguz must have been willing to claim she was legally female, and also must have possessed some official form of ID that backed up this claim. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to get a marriage license. Now, either her husband knew that she’d been born male or he didn’t. If he did know, a disclosure law would make no difference because she’d already told him. If he didn’t know then I think it’s unlikely she’d have obeyed a disclosure law anyway, because this situation could only come about if she were both willing and able to hide the fact that she was transsexual from both her husband and the state of Texas.
Since the marriage would be invalid in Texas regardless of what the husband knew, the only point to having a disclosure law there would be to make it easier for the state to prevent [what it considered] same-sex marriages. If they were married in a state where Ms. Araguz was considered legally female then a disclosure law makes somewhat more sense, but I don’t see how would be in the interest of the state to compel her to disclose the fact that she was once legally male. There are all kinds of things one might like to know about one’s spouse, but the state doesn’t generally get involved as long as the marriage would be valid either way.
declaring “I am a female” is not, absolutely not, analogous to stating “I have not undergone gender reassignment surgery”
For the simple fact that people that do go through these surgeries genuinely (not doubting their bona fides) believe they are of that gender, now. So they don’t feel like they’re lying.
I think this is how I wound up with the idea that to truly enforce this would wind up requiring testing.
I found this site, which mentions that Texas (and some other states) don’t recognize gender reassignment surgery as changing legal sex “for the purpose of marriage.” http://www.powervisa.com/spouse-visa-transgender-marriage.html
Perhaps that wording is intentional. Maybe it changes it for other purposes. I’m trying to think what those would be. Obviously it would be nice to have your driver’s license reflect your appearance, and maybe that is allowed. There would also be affirmative action and what prison you went to if that became relevant. So perhaps Nikki Araguz was legally a woman in Texas for purposes other than marriage?
Also, from the same site, apparently New Jersey already requires disclosure for this type of marriage to be valid.
I don’t see what this has to do with anything I said.
The state of Texas doesn’t care how Ms. Araguz thinks of herself or what kind of surgery she’s had. For the purposes of marriage in that state then a MtF transsexual does not qualify as a legal female. If she were willing to present herself as legally female for the purposes of obtaining a marriage license, would she then reveal to the state that she actually wasn’t legally female so they could check to see if she’d complied with this hypothetical gender reassignment disclosure law? I think not, especially since doing so would be admitting that she couldn’t legally marry Mr. Araquz in Texas anyway!
If she didn’t admit it, she’d be committing a fraud against the state. Either way, the marriage wasn’t a marriage and she’s got no legal claims on his money. Maybe that’s not fair and not right, but it’s the law.
I would make some comment about kicking Texas out of the union, but seriously there’s like 3 states in the country that wouldn’t pull this kind of crap so fuck 'em all and I hope that family feels proud of themselves because they’re scum.
Relationships should be based on openness, honesty, and trust. There’s no way tommy didn’t know about his wife’s history and even if she had somehow hid it from him, it just speaks to the societal bigotry that would have made such hiding necessary. Goddamn.
In states where same sex marriage is legal, it becomes completely moot. I wouldn’t expect Texas to get there any time soon, though.
Because I’m taking it outside of the context of a void marriage a-la Texas. I’m taking it back into what the OP is asking - namely whether that kind of information should be disclosed on your marriage registration. Saying “I am a male” (when you’re biologically, originally, female) she can believe it (again, not doubting the bona fides of that statement) and still perpetrate a fraud against the spouse-to-be; not so easy when you say “I have never had gender surgery” some people may feel like lying isn’t a good thing (especially since, presumably the consequence of this would be to render the marriage void in the future). A State may not care, but a prospective spouse probably does.
and the victim of this can just pound sand, right? :dubious:
because he’s bigoted? lulz.
Relationships should be based on openness, honesty and trust. Unless of course I decide to be un-open, dishonest and mistrustful, in which case I get to say it was someone else’s fault, and if she had somehow hid it from him, it speaks to her willingness to tell lies in order to marry a bigot. Goddamn.
Nikki may have contradicted herself under oath regarding whether she informed Thomas before they married, or even until this past April. From an earlier article:
(Ellis is Capt. Araguz’s parent’s attorney.)
Other than a strong indication regarding the veracity of her claim, I wonder if this would actually have any bearing on the legal outcome.
Don’t you have to show your birth certificate at the time of applying for a Marriage License? Would make the matter infructous, since it would make it clear that dude was born a lady or the opposite in the OP’s case.
I don’t think so.
The link that Harriet posted mentioned someone in North Carolina who received an amended birth certificate, listing her as a woman and with her chosen name. That might at least confuse matters in cases where someone is from a state that allows this. I don’t know if the birth certificate is labeled as amended.
Now I’m wondering if someone who transitions would be allowed to marry in one of these prohibitive states if they apply as their original sex and are marrying someone in what would be a homosexual marriage (if you’re counting the new sex of the transitioning/-ed partner)? Say a MTF woman wants to marry a bio-woman?
Oddly enough, I think they still count that as a legal, hetero mariage. I know that if someone transitions while married, the marriage does not become invalid.
My good friend’s mom had a situation like this. She (the mom) is a lesbian and fell in love with a man transitioning to be a woman. Because my state doesn’t allow same-sex marriage, they got married before the final surgery (and before he became a she) so they could still be married after the surgery.
My friend had a hard time with it all because it all happened very fast. His is not an easy situation to be in. He felt a lot of anger, confusion, frustration, etc. But he came to accept it in time. I hope these people aren’t acting out of that hurt and confusion. I fear they will end up doing something they’ll regret later, or at least feel bad about. Maybe they’ll enjoy the money, but it’ll come at the cost of knowing that they really hurt the person who gave their late son some joy in his too-short life.
Personally, I’d like to see both parties do a full disclosure statement before marriage on a lot of things.
Do you have any children from prior relationships?
Financial state?
Health issues?
Criminal past?
Transgendered probably wouldn’t make my list because its uncommon, but it probably should.
I have no problem with two people marrying each other with their eyes open. But too often “he never told me he had kids” or “I didn’t know she had debt” or “he didn’t tell me he had addiction issues” hits the fan.
Perhaps the state doesn’t have a role in making sure you know that your husband to be has a criminal history, declared bankruptcy two years ago, and has been married three times before. But I dislike marriage fraud. I don’t expect it to do a lot of good…Troo Wuv tends to override common sense. In cases like this, where its the parents of one of the spouses claiming the marriage was fraudulent, it can protect BOTH married parties.
Well then, why on earth did you quote a fairly long post of mine in its entirety if you weren’t actually replying to me?
Not in Texas. You are required to present some form of official government-issued ID, but it could be a driver’s license, a passport, etc., rather than a birth certificate. Out-of-state ID is fine.