Hoops

how will no gender on birth certificates affect us

I couldn't help thinking of this thread when I saw this headline

A 69-year-old man says he identifies as a 49-year-old and wants his age legally changed
https://www.msn.com/en-au/lifestyle/familyandrelationships/a-69-year-old-man-says-he-identifies-as-a-49-year-old-and-wants-his-age-legally-changed-so-he-can-meet-more-women-on-tinder/ar-BBPs61E?ocid=spartanntp

They identify as trans by choice.

1 in 5000 (if that figure is true - actually I think it is higher than that but it depends on the exact definition) is not an insignificant number so it should not be just ignored.
So this is a valid conversation/debate.

"I walked into my bank this morning and told them that I identify as a billionaire now and that I would like to make a withdrawal... They were having none of it unfortunately."

I'm with you there - I identify as a playboy millionaire. I have a robe but still working on the money, women and flash car side of things. :(

[Roughly 1 in 5000 births have one of various disorders that would have them categorised as intersex. Their underlying DNA will still be male or female, but there has been a developmental problem.]

Let me clarify that. In *most* cases the underlying DNA is still male or female. That's my understanding.

Re the birth certificate issue, my question would be, why?

What's the reason for removing sex from the birth certificate?

Roughly 1 in 5000 births have one of various disorders that would have them categorised as intersex. Their underlying DNA will still be male or female, but there has been a developmental problem.

The other 4,999 will be male or female.

We record this in every other area of life. eg: Medical studies must always record sex, because there is increasing scientific understanding that males and females have differing levels of many diseases and often respond differently to treatment. What's different about a birth certificate?

In terms of recording population data, there can be public benefit of knowing the numbers.

So, what benefits are there of removing this from birth certificates?

You are either a bloke or a shiela its pretty simple.

the less than 0.001% pf people who are born that aren't either so effect the rest of us and what we do.

I walked into my bank this morning and told them that I identify as a billionaire now and that I would like to make a withdrawal... They were having none of it unfortunately.

[Why is everyone so focused on how this issue would affect them, instead of how this issue affects Hannah Mousey (in this case)?]

How about thinking how this impacts on everyone else she competes against? If you create a non level playing field, it's unfair for everyone else. Every single other competitor.

Look I get why you might be upset at A trans woman taking a your cis daughter's spot. I don't agree with it but I get it. But turnabout is fair play -

If they transitioned before puberty would you require they prove they were cis?

Or what would be your feelings if we only let people play as their originally assigned genders but that meant that you had to let a testosterone boosted trans man play with your daughter?

So, if it's decided on testosterone levels, does that mean the birth certificate isn't used there either?

OP raised:

womens sport - doesn't seem the birth certificate is involved at junior or professional level
toilets - I've never encountered one which checks birth certificates

And what has divorce and regret got to do with any of this? Not seeing the relevance. Gaols and violence are predominantly the domain of us men but it would not be a mainstream argument by any stretch to statistically prevent men from being out after dark, running in politics, etc. "Well, I'm statistically more inclined to be corrupt or rape someone. Seems fair."

I find the dichotomies in general political beliefs so interesting. All about freedom from intervention but wait, gay people are more likely to get divorced so maybe they shouldn't be allowed to get married!

In terms of sport, we have women's professional leagues separate from the top competitions for physical reasons, not for social reasons, therefore eligibility to play in women's leagues should be done on physical factors, as it is with the olympics via hormone levels etc.

Why is everyone so focused on how this issue would affect them, instead of how this issue affects Hannah Mousey (in this case)? Just because whatever she is going through doesn’t conform to the current norms, she must be dismissed from society and can’t live the same life as “normal” people? Its not like she is having her gender reassigned, or whatever its called, just so she can win a female Brownlow.

On the topic of trans gender people in sport, those are murky waters indeed. Of course we want everyone to participate in sport, especially at junior level and of course at the senior or pro levels we want to see competitions between athletes of all sizes, shapes and abilities.

The fine line between fairness and equality, sportsmanship and cheating in sport hace been tested and abused many times.

We all hate the idea of drugs in sport, yet we all know it exists, we all want our team to win yet hate it when we see a team get flogged every week.

When it comes to sport, the rules now need to be clearer than ever and the distinction between male/femal sex, I believe, must be clarified. This is irrelevant in junior mixed or mixed adult competitions as the rules state male and/or female, however at the elite semi-pro or pro level we now have decisions to make and updates to rules to enforce.

I for one would not want a daughter of mine to work hard and sacrifice so much to make her team, only to be told sorry you are out because a male who now gender identifies as a woman has taken your spot. That right there is the issue for me, let's decide what the rules are going to be clearly and if we decide there will be a mixed gender competition allowance, fine then everyone at least knows the rules beforehand.

The problem we face today is that we confuse sex for gender, they are not the same and therefore sporting competitions need to address the fact that they are not the same, or clearly make policy accordingly to include trans gender people.

Like I said, murky waters...

Liz Cambage plays against Leilani Mitchell.

People are different sizes. Hormones affect weight gain, muscle mass etc.

Gonads in sport are less relevant than hormones - hence the problem with people testosterone boosters(for both sexes) and steroids.

Would you rather a situation where a trans man has to play in women's leagues because of the gender assigned to them at birth. Now the problem would be that they have an unfair advantage because the testosterone increases muscle mass.

Or are they not allowed to do something as normal as play sports.

The fundamental issue is that it's not a level playing field. Is this AFL Women's? Or AFL for biological women and those biological men who now identify as women and are on hormone treatment?

1 + 1 does not equal 3. Hannah Mouncey is not a "women" in the same way that biological women are. It's something roughly like letting an under 16 player play under 14s. Height is a clear advantage in AFL, and here's someone who grew to the top 0.3% of height for a women (or whatever) while they were a man. If Mouncey wins the female brownlow, is that really fair for the runner up? No. It's not.

Great thread.

When Harry Became Sally by Ryan T Anderson is a good book on this topic.

In terms of women's sport it's a minefield. The AFLW rules are based on testosterone levels.

This ignores that Mouncey grew to 188cm and 100kg before the transition. So, still gaining from male physical advantages- even if hormone levels have now been reduced to below male levels.

I wouldn't want my daughter playing footy against "her". Does that make me a "bigot" or some other buzzword? Welcome to 2018. Thanks Safe Schools. Thanks far left activists who are wielding increasing influence on our society.

So between Manu, FFT and ringlord, they’ve just sprouted a whole bunch of nonsense with no facts or statistics to back it up, while complaining that everyone who is a leftie doesnt know how to hold a conversation....

Actually it I read that article. It said lesbians was double the rate of gay men. Not that gay people in general were double the rate of hetero divorces.

“would you also like to know that divorce rates between same sex couples are double”

No they aren’t.

Whereas no one has ever regretted entering into a hetero marriage, having children, or other "traditional" family-oriented activities. So yeah great point there. Someone regretting doing something is great proof that no one should ever do that thing or even be allowed to do it.

"A board room quota for women is such rubbish. It should just be whoever is best for the job!"
"Good thinking. What if we took gender off birth certificates and let everything be decided on merit."
"No, that would be insane! Are you crazy?"


But sex/gender isn’t decided on merit is it, and the fact many of the make sex still feel the femakebsex is somewhat inferior and ncaoable of holding such places around a board room table, then regardless of what’s written on your birth certificate, it’s what they see in front of them that they form opinions n before they actually look at the worth of that person.

As for a birth certificate, it only states if the child is born male or female, it dies not state or even insist that said child should remain that sex it’s whole life, BUT it should be included on any birth certificate. Dictating that it’s no longer to be placed to meet the needs of a minority of parents who are yet to even know what or how that child relates to its own gender is actually restricting that child from its birth right IMO. And also then restricting other parents who are in the majority , of theirs.

I am fairly sure you are wrong about the 40% and would like to know where that figure comes from.

I have a lot of empathy for all minority groups and understand many of the hardships they have encountered through bigotry and racism, however at the risk of being shouted down here I don't think anyone (very few by appearances) is able to comprehend the importance of the difference between sex & gender yet, at least it appears so in this thread.

The birth certificate should in fact show what a baby's sex is, as long as it is identifyable, which I would suggest is in 99.9999999% of cases, otherwise it may be listed as unknown or something.

Since we mostly agree on gender identification being recognaised as a mental rather than biological issue (obviously much more complex that that of course), the gender of a baby should not even be mentioned on such a document.

Humans, generally speaking, are born with either male or female sex organs, so identification at birth can only be from their sex, not gender!

No idea where the original post's information has come from, nor the validity of it, just trying to clear up something many appear to be missing here...

Where does it lead? One side of the argument says there is no point accounting for what is a really small minority. If it's that small, surely the disruptive cases would be few?


Slightly related, I can imagine an argument:

"A board room quota for women is such rubbish. It should just be whoever is best for the job!"
"Good thinking. What if we took gender off birth certificates and let everything be decided on merit."
"No, that would be insane! Are you crazy?"

Why is it important information? As PeterJohn has said, it's rarely required for administrative reasons. I couldn't even tell you where my birth certificate is or when I was last asked for it.

For use of toilets? Because they check birth certificates at the toilet door, right? The toilet argument is largely a function of how toilets are currently laid out and little else IMO.

For sport? Rare occasions (Semenya, etc - a small minority as said) obviously provide a talking point that will defy easy or convenient solution, but I doubt people are suddenly going to enter their sons in girls basketball just because of something omitted from their birth certificate. That problem could well exist regardless.

I'm not saying there's no discussion to be had, because it's certainly intriguing, but the idea that it gets people so riled up amazes me. It seems there's a huge awkward reaction to a pace of change. I can appreciate that - in my lifetime (I'm 41) we've gone from homophobic sleights being common in the schoolyard to me having to look up "cis" and having no idea what the latest LGITYBYD acronym is (I don't think I could even get close to guessing).

I suspect there will be a future society without gendered pronouns. They're pretty needless really. Fast forward 100 years. Assume every public toilet has been renovated. Ignore sport for a second. Should we even need a LGBTetc label? For what reasons would gender be important to know in a formal or administrative sense?

It worries me people think like this about things that will never affect them.

"n case anyone else is curious like I was about the youtube link - if you are far-right and only like hearing far right views then you will feel warm and cozy listening to 10 minutes of Ben Shapiro (former editor of Breitbart News).
If you want to see an actual debate then look elsewhere."

Yeah, Ben Shapiro was never affiliated with Breitbart news. You're thinking Milo Yiannopolous. But thanks for playing.

---

Anyway, not gonna wade into the debate further than to say that taking away gender from birth certificates is the left gone completely mad, whether or not it has lasting implications on the life of the child. It is placating a small minority of people who have a misplaced belief about their own identity at the detriment of logic and reason. Assigned sex is a biological and immutable truth and if we're going to start denying reality to suit fringe groups we're in for trouble as a society. It troubles me that we have government agencies and agencies in charge of maintaining and collating important information buying into the ravings of people who essentially have a form of body dysphoria disorder. People can say it's just a meaningless form, but as we've seen time and time again, when you give an inch to leftist loonies, they take a mile, and that meaningless form will not be enough. They will keep chipping and chipping away as they always do. I think a foot needs to be put down on this idiocy just for the merit of it.

Do junior clubs sight a birth certificate as part of the enrolment process?

Do junior clubs sight a birth certificate as part of the enrolment process?

What this really protects is the 1 in every 2000 children born in Australia each year who are intersex. You often can make a best guess but can't clearly define what gender most of those kids will be until hormones start to work.

Ok, well let’s for argument sake say gender can’t be stated, how do you do a census.....?
How do you collect data, how do you find family history in years yo come, how do you have a balanced educational class room, how do you validate your child’s gender “should” that be YOUR preference, or does everyone have to bow to the transgender theory now?

Sorry but children need to be children first and foremost and yes that dies include recognising their natural born gender, should they wish to change that when they are able to understand what that entails then they should be free to do so, but not even a parent has the right to deny a child it’s DNA.

It’s absolutely getting ridiculous now

good question. it's not like parents aren't allowed to make their own record of the gender at birth. height and weight and hair colour aren't recorded on birth certificates either. neither is race. because who cares.

"Best debate I've seen on the topic is here"

In case anyone else is curious like I was about the youtube link - if you are far-right and only like hearing far right views then you will feel warm and cozy listening to 10 minutes of Ben Shapiro (former editor of Breitbart News).
If you want to see an actual debate then look elsewhere.

All for respecting a minority’s wishes but by not permitting anyone to have the gender that they are born into stipulated on their birth certificate, whilst it may accommodate those parents( because a new born baby can’t tell you what “sex” it feels it is, it effectively restricts those who wish to have their child’s gender on their birth certificate.

As for allowing trans gender players in sport, why can a trans gender make who identifies as a female not simply play n a male team, regardless of how they think and dress, physically they are still a man, with the same strength as a man, putting them in a women’s team sport is wrong on many levels.

Best debate I've seen on the topic is here

https://youtu.be/gkONHNXGfaM

I am a 5 foot 10 caucasian male.

If i identify myself as a 6 foot 4 chinese woman, does that mean i am in fact a 6 foot 4 in reality?

There was a reason we put genders into a class. It was to separate them. The same went for noting our ages. Governments changing the rules will have serious side effects. It will take years to evolve but it will mean the end of womens sports, as if there is no gender then they will compete together. At juniors it means (girls) making lower division teams like U14 division 11. Sure we will get some talented (females) who will compete highly, but very rarely at elite level. But this takes a generation to evolve. Same if we change the rules on birthdates. It will evolve and come full circle until rules are put back in place.

"A conspiracy to break up the traditional family unit is in swing big time, most sheeple going along accordingly."

So?
Why wouldn't they go along with it? Just because something is traditional doesn't mean it is logical or ideal.
It doesn't take a conspiracy for people to start thinking outside the box more freely. And if some people do start thinking that way then why should others even care? Last time I checked the "traditional family unit" was still an acceptable option for people.

Did FFT really just compare university research to right wing conspiracytheory pushing sites like Breitbart?

When you choose a username such as “food for thought” you obviously want to give the impression that you are going to say profound things that make people think. After reading several of his posts, I would say its half true - I am thinking but not much beyond I think FFT is dumb as dogshit.

Transgenderism is a mental illness

"Telethon instute and Harvard I'll take the latter. "

You haven't seen how ridiculously left wing universities have got recently have you? I don't see how you can discredit one thing that is far right but be completely down with something that is far left. When most of these people come from a background of feminist gender theory I think I'd take Brietbart over that any day.

I think there will be a lot on un-intended consequences.

Identifying a gender on a birth certificate is used by a lot of government departments for a lot of different reasons. What is the process to now determine gender for those departments? Did you just assume my gender?

As far as basketball is concerned, gender is used to separate boys and girls for many reasons, including OHS. A parent producing a birth certificate is generally not used to make that distinction, a both certificate is typically the way to settle the argument if necessary.

Netball could be in a bit of trouble. From what I understand, they discriminate against boys from playing with the girls once they turn 12.

Identify as what ever gender you want, identify as what ever sexuality you want, I'm not fussed, you be you and do what makes you happy.

But when it comes to things like sport you're an XX or an XY

Well "I want my sex back" is from Russia Today a notoriously right-wing, propagandist enterprise. (Think Breitbart). Verses peer reviewed reports on trans/non-binary mental health from places like Telethon instute and Harvard I'll take the latter. I'm not saying there sent some kids who g ok back or live as non binary instead. But the instances are small and the suicide rate incredibly high if treatment is denied

We're supposed to be in a country of free speech...

So when Hanna Mouncey was refused entry into AFLW, people came out publicly to dissaprove the decision, but what's to be said about all of the AFLW players who didn't want Moncey to be allowed to play but were too scared to publically say how they felt?

Democracy? Dictatorship? Or do we live in a democratic dictatorship?

It's funny how these people think they are a member of a different group because their beliefs or feelings don't align with the stereotyped idea of what a person of that gender should be. They are so wrapped up in the concept of group identity that their first thought is to say they are of a different group. They should instead see themselves as a single person who doesn't conform to the steoertyes of that gender. Can't that just make them a 'different kind of boy' or 'different kind of girl'?

If this was a genuine condition, then why do so many backflip on their gender choice later in life? For that simple fact alone, it screams of a psychological disorder. Like a personality disorder.

"So if we have the WNBL - should it not also be the MNBL ? - By just calling it the NBL we are saying the mens league is the National League - but it is not as both genders are equal."

I would say it means the NBL is open to all basketballers where the WNBL is open to only female basketballers.

“What I did wasn't a strawman. He literally compared the two. ”

No I did not. I compared the RESPONSE to the two, as in, “it seems like minorities are running the show” would have been the response during the Civil Rights movement as it is today when a minority is seeking a level of respect or recognition.

“I said there's a reason why there are men's and womens spaces, and explained why”

FFT, you basically said you find it hypocritical that we strongly oppose domestic violence, but happily allow a physically bigger “male” play in a female sports comp. I pointed out that is a ludicrous comparison. Where is the strawman there?

If you dont even know what your own argument is, you shouldn’t be saying others are misrepresenting it.