A group of trans activists in New Zealand organizing in under the name “Trans Dignity Collective” submitted a proposal to the Ministry of Health, proposing that references to a patient’s biological sex be omitted from medical records because the concept of biological sex is “derogatory” to trans people. Even a field for “biological sex recorded at birth” (and presumably fields for “gender identity” and “pronouns”) is “particularly bad as it implies a fixed concept that cannot be changed.” It’s almost like they understand that biological sex is a material reality one can’t simply identify in or out of. Imagine that. Continue reading
The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (“the Commission”) recently issued a proposal reviewing the “legislation in relation to the recognition of a person’s sex, change of sex or intersex status.” See Project No. 108. The Commission has recommends “leaving gender off birth certificates, as well as adding a third official option of non-binary.” Although the discussion paper expressly notes that “not all human beings can be classified by sex as either male or female,” the Commission further recommends that a sex classification be held on “a confidential state register,” and allowing a person to apply to the registrar for a “proof of sex certificate.”
Read the Commission’s full discussion paper here.
The Commission is seeking public feedback until October 19, 2018, which may be submitted here.
Ryan Kreut is a man who identifies as a woman named Lisa Kreut. He also identifies as a “transsexual dominatrix & sex worker rights activist” named Hailey Heartless (“real name, no gimmicks“). Kreut is an autogynephile who spends his time creating misogynist content that fetishizes women. Continue reading
On August 10, 2018 the New Zealand Governance and Administration Committee issued a report on the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill, recommending that the bill be passed with proposed amendments. The bill reenacts the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Act of 1995, and contains the following proposed amendments, among others: Continue reading
On August 3, 2018 three women who all have children who identify as transgender filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against Judge Joseph W. Kirby of Warren County, Ohio alleging Judge Kirby discriminated against their children by not granting their name change petitions. Continue reading
The Court of Appeals of Indiana just issued a ruling clarifying the process by which individuals may obtain a legal name or gender marker change for their identifying documents.
Both petitioners identify as transgender men, and both filed petitions to change the gender marker that appears on their identifying documents. One petitioner, L.S., also filed a petition “to change his name, to waive the publication requirement, and to seal the record pursuant to Administrative Rule 9.”
Administrative Rule 9 provides “an exception providing that a court record that would otherwise be publicly accessible may be excluded from public access upon a verified written request demonstrating that ‘[a]ccess or dissemination of the Court Record will create a significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor . . . .'” L.S. “testified that he believes that if information about his transgender status became public, he would be ‘at great risk for potential harm. . . . I mean it could be anything. I – I – I uh, violence, death, you know, it just depends on who – who gets a hold of me you know.'”
The court found that the “requirement to publish notice of intent to change one’s name” does not apply to one who applies to change one’s gender marker. The court also found that the L.S. provided sufficient evidence to qualify for exception to the requirement to publish one’s intended name change under Administrative Rule 9, and ” is entitled to have the record sealed, and is entitled to waive publication of notice of intent to change his name.”
Bradley Manning, who identifies as a transgender woman named Chelsea, is set to be released from prison next week as per the terms of Obama’s commutation of the remainder of Manning’s 35-year sentence. Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst, was convicted of whistleblowing 2010 and has been serving in an all-male (because he’s male) U.S. military prison for the past seven years.
Manning’s legal team released the following statement on behalf of Chelsea (emphasis added):
“For the first time, I can see a future for myself as Chelsea. I can imagine surviving and living as the person who I am and can finally be in the outside world. Freedom used to be something that I dreamed of but never allowed myself to fully imagine. Now, freedom is something that I will again experience with friends and loved ones after nearly seven years of bars and cement, of periods of solitary confinement, and of my health care and autonomy restricted, including through routinely forced haircuts. I am forever grateful to the people who kept me alive, President Obama, my legal team, and countless supporters.”
HAIRCUTS. Manning, whose ACLU attorneys referred to haircuts (or lack thereof) as “a medically necessary part of her treatment to follow the female grooming standards related to hair,” appears to believe that his autonomy was most restricted by his haircut.
According to ACLU staff attorney Chase Strangio, “Like far too many people in prison, particularly transgender women, Chelsea Manning has had to survive unthinkable violence throughout the seven years of her incarceration.”
One reasonably wonders if Strangio, who previously asserted that having short hair “sends the message to everyone that she is not a ‘real’ woman” was referring to “forced haircuts” in the above statement as “violence.”