Support NeoGAF

[plagiarize]

So if there is no difference, what is the need for this? Outside of making things harder for organisations that would like to know the sex of people for statistics, maybe classroom distribution and other things.

I have told you what I think this achieves and it isn't nothing. I think it makes a difference, by letting the kid find their gender and making it harder for anyone to hold their birth sex over them should they not line up.

The parents aren't forcing the kid to be any specific gender identity, just keeping their birth sex off the record.

 

[KillLaCam]

How would they know? The parent doesn't want that information public and it has been kept off official documents. So how would the reporter find that out?

The birth certificate says sex not gender. If the baby was intersex then they could have just done that and been done with it. People have been winning that battle all year.


Gender shouldn't even be on a birth certificate a newborn wouldn't even have a gender identity.

 

[Karsticles]

everyone has a sex. And gender is a social concept.

It's just sex and gender have been treated as the same thing for the longest time.

Everything is a social construct.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I have told you what I think this achieves and it isn't nothing. I think it makes a difference, by letting the kid find their gender and making it harder for anyone to hold their birth sex over them should they not line up.

The parents aren't forcing the kid to be any specific gender identity, just keeping their birth sex off the record.

But if they raise the kid in such a way that it can find its own gender, I still don't get what a F or M on the birth certificate or other documentation matters.

 

[excelsiorlef]

The birth certificate says sex not gender. If the baby was intersex then they could have just done that and been done with it. People have been winning that battle all year.


Gender shouldn't even be on a birth certificate a newborn wouldn't even have a gender identity.

And this U means other people won't gender the child based on what their ID says.

But if they raise the kid in such a way that it can find its own gender, I still don't get what a F or M on the birth certificate or other documentation matters.

See above

 

[plagiarize]

The birth certificate says sex not gender. If the baby was intersex then they could have just done that and been done with it. People have been winning that battle all year.


Gender shouldn't even be on a birth certificate a newborn wouldn't even have a gender identity.

They didn't want the kid's sex to be officially recorded because they do not conform to male or female genders themselves and want to try and minimise any suffering their kid might face should they turn out to have the same gender identity.

So you cannot conclude anything about the kids actual sex.

 

[Platy]

Everything is a social construct.

Most things are. But they don't stop being less true or real because of that. Example : Money.

 

[ClosingADoor]

See above

What kid is walking around with their ID all day that this is an issue? Seems more like a parenting thing then something officials need to take into account.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

What would YOU do if you don't want people to assume the gender of your children ?

The vast, vast majority of people will have a gender identity that corresponds in an uncomplicated way to their biological makeup, and that vast, vast majority will not benefit from being treated like genderless blank slates to meet some nebulous, unevidenced idea that the slim minority of folks who are innately or emergently nonbinary would benefit from such.

 

[airmangataosenai]

The gender versus sex debate feels really pedantic to me.

 

[Vagabundo]

Its a little awkward with the way everything is setup. But okay.

The capital letter thing got me though. Maybe she is against Grammar Nazi's....

 

[kami_sama]

And this U means other people won't gender the child based on what their ID says.



See above

This rest on the idea that people will see the card and will not go with the parent's wishes.
Most people will only hear what the parent's will say.
So whatever they put on the card won't impact the interactions with almost every person.

 

[KingSnake]

In this case it seems to me that the parent is deciding for the child. The parent is deciding that the child is the same as they. As with many parents it just seems to be the normal "force your child to grow into something you always wanted you to be".

 

[Plum]

How has it been achieved?

No one will assume the child is a boy or a girl based on their ID card.

That's how. Under your idea they still would.

I didn't say anything about what this might do for people assuming the kid's gender, I've always specifically been talking about the legal erosion of the gender/sex difference. Since it's clear that what you think I'm saying is different to what I'm actually saying I'll ask you a simple question:

Do you think this is harmful towards educating people on the difference between sex and gender or not?

 

[excelsiorlef]

This rest on the idea that people will see the card and will not go with the parent's wishes.

People absolutely will.

 

[Turin Turambar]

'... issued a health card without a gender marker'

Call it 'sex marker'.
Problem solved!

 

[MazeHaze]

As expected, the amount of ignorance in this thread is pretty astounding.

I think this is awesome though, if the child ends up cis no problem at all, and if not they will have a much easier time maintaining their identity when dealing with the bureaucracy of life.

This isn't about how gender and sex are different things, they obviously are. The reason for putting a U under sex though, is to keep people from reading M or F and automatically gendering the child.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Do you think this is harmful towards educating people on the difference between sex and gender or not?

No

 

[HardRojo]

What about that baby's sex though? And what the fuck at the lawyer's name? Not capitalizing your name isn't making a statement, unless being stupid is the statement you want to make.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

I dunno I kind of feel like this is a "worst of all worlds" type of situation. The field should be birth-sex only (at least until adolescence where gender dysphoria can be diagnosed and treated), or just non-existent. If we're doing the whole gender v sex semantic divide then I just don't think a field dedicated to gender is particularly meaningful.

 

[ClosingADoor]

As expected, the amount of ignorance in this thread is pretty astounding.

People having a different opinion about this is not automatically ignorance though. Sometimes it is just that, a difference of opinion.

 

[plagiarize]

The vast, VAST majority of people will have a gender identity that corresponds in an uncomplicated way to their biological makeup, and that vast, vast majority will not benefit from being treated like genderless blank slates to meet some nebulous, unevidenced idea that the slim minority of folks who are innately or emergently nonbinary would benefit from such.

Babies are blank slates. Quite literally. Gender differences don't start showing up for quite a while.

And keeping someone's birth sex off record isn't treating them like they are genderless. I'm sure their parent will encourage the kid to find their gender and love them no matter what that is.

Do you act like your gender because you were raised in line with your sex or because it's inherent to you in some way? The kid will display gender and I've seen nothing to suggest this parent will do anything but raise them as best they can.

Allowing someone to develop into their gender is harmless. Trying to force kids to conform to societies ideas of how certain genders should act is not harmless.

 

[Skellig Gra]

In this case it seems to me that the parent is deciding for the child. The parent is deciding that the child is the same as they. As with many parents it just seems to be the normal "force your child to grow into something you always wanted you to be".

There is definitely a slight hint of hypocrisy to it but I'm sure they think it's in their kids best interest

 

[MazeHaze]

People having a different opinion about this is not automatically ignorance though. Sometimes it is just that, a difference of opinion.

Right, but there has been a bunch of ignorance in this thread that doesn't just fall under a different opinion umbrella.

 

[Plum]

No

I do, and there is evidence even in this very thread of otherwise reasonable people questioning the taught definitions because of this.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I do, and there is evidence even in this very thread of otherwise reasonable people questioning the taught definitions because of this.

I'm well aware you do.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Babies are blank slates. Quite literally. Gender differences don't start showing up for quite a while.

And keeping someone's birth sex off record isn't treating them like they are genderless. I'm sure their parent will encourage the kid to find their gender and love them no matter what that is.

Do you act like your gender because you were raised in line with your sex or because it's inherent to you in some way? The kid will display gender and I've seen nothing to suggest this parent will do anything but raise them as best they can.

Allowing someone to develop into their gender is harmless. Trying to force kids to conform to societies ideas of how certain genders should act is not harmless.

Babies are very much not blank slates, and my objection is to intentionally obscuring the baby's sex on the birth certificate so that the slim minority of people who interact with the kid's birth certificate don't misgender them, not raising the kid in such a way as to try avoiding imposing gender stereotypes.

 

[Griss]

'Normally gendered'

So are you just ignorant or do you write such hurtful things knowingly?

When 99.5% of a thing is one way, and the other 0.5% is the other way, normal is a perfectly appropriate word. It is not a moral judgment. Everyone deviates from the norm in some way. I grew up with various health issues that were not normal as do many others.

Definition of normal:
Conforming to the standard or the common type.

Sorry, but normally gendered is perfectly appropriate here.

 

[plagiarize]

I dunno I kind of feel like this is a "worst of all worlds" type of situation. The field should be birth-sex only (at least until adolescence where gender dysphoria can be diagnosed and treated), or just non-existent. If we're doing the whole gender v sex semantic divide then I just don't think a field dedicated to gender is particularly meaningful.

I don't see it any differently to being able to refuse to disclose your race on numerous official forms. For the vast majority of things sex and gender are irrelevant. I have no idea why we feel it important to mention it whenever referring to someone.

 

[MazeHaze]

I do, and there is evidence even in this very thread of otherwise reasonable people questioning the taught definitions because of this.

it's pretty obvious that the reason they put a U for sex isn't because sex and gender are the same, it's to keep people from automatically gendering the child, and to keep people in the future from using the birth certificate against them in the case that the child turns out to be non-binary.

It's because the words sex and gender are so often interchanged in society that they are doing this in the first place.

 

[Forkball]

Kori: When I have a child, I will assure that the baby will have no gender.
barbara: I don't use capital letters in my name.
Kori: ... I think this is the start of something magical.

 

[WaffleTaco]

I don't really see a problem with this. The child will probably discover their gender and what they prefer within a couple of years of being born. Not sure why they aren't capitalizing the name, that is a bit odd.

 

[KingSnake]

There is definitely a slight hint of hypocrisy to it but I'm sure they think it's in their kids best interest

Most of the parents think that even when they make mistakes. I'm convinced that this is very well intended, but I can not see that there is also a certain projection of the parent's frustrations (which are to blame on the society, no doubt) onto the child.

And I'm not sure this is the solution. I hope they handle well how will the child be raised to deal with all the potential issues arising from this.

 

[bebop242]

This only makes me wonder if I could legal make my name all caps.

On topic, I have mixed emotions on this. I feel like you should start with a real gender but support them if they feel otherwise later in life.

 

[Keri]

The problem in my mind is that people will absolutely try to gender this child, throughout its early life. In preschool, on the playground, etc. Other children will want to know if the child is a boy or a girl and, even if the child and the parent try to avoid a label, the children around this child will pick a gender to treat them, based on the clothes they are wearing when they see them or any number of tiny reasons. Since the majority of people have a gender which lines up with their biological sex, this seems like the parent is just increasing the odds this child will be treated as a gender which they ultimately do not identify with and I'm not sure if that will be harmful or not. My guess is, based on the experiences of transgender individuals, that it will be harmful.

Also, it seems like it's increasing the odds the child will have to "transition," from publicly being known as one gender, to the other.

But, I guess this all depends on how long it takes for the child to identify their gender themselves. Maybe they'll know, by preschool and there won't be any confusion.

 

[Greddleok]

I don't really see a problem with this. The child will probably discover their gender and what they prefer within a couple of years of being born. Not sure why they aren't capitalizing the name, that is a bit odd.

Because they're the specialist of all snowflakes.

 

[LAM09]

Just wrong

 

[plagiarize]

When 99.5% of a thing is one way, and the other 0.5% is the other way, norma isl a perfectly appropriate word. It is not a moral judgment. Everyone deviates from the norm in some way. I grew up with various health issues that were not normal.

Definition of normal:
Conforming to the standard or the common type.

Sorry, but normally gendered is perfectly appropriate here.

So knowingly hurtful then.

Cisgender is the accepted way of describing it. There are transgender people in this thread. Using coded or hurtful phrasing and claiming that it should be okay because you aren't making a moral judgement doesn't fly for me.

You know it hurts certain people but do it anyway, right in front of them.

 

[Impeccable]

Because they're the specialist of all snowflakes.

I just find this sort of ironic because the fact people are so offended they don't use capital letters in their name is leading to this type of sentiment.

Genuinely funny to me.

 

[plagiarize]

Kori: When I have a child, I will assure that the baby will have no gender.
barbara: I don't use capital letters in my name.
Kori: ... I think this is the start of something magical.

The child will develop a gender. The child has a sex.

They just aren't disclosing their child's sex. Like how you can choose not to disclose your race on most official forms. It doesn't mean you haven't got a race, it just allows you to protect yourself from potential discrimination (at least in theory).

 

[Rentahamster]

Interested in hearing Gafs take on this.

I don't have a problem with it. Let them do what they want.

 

[KingSnake]

The problem in my mind is that people will absolutely try to gender this child, throughout its early life. In preschool, on the playground, etc. Other children will want to know if the child is a boy or a girl and, even if the child and the parent try to avoid a label, the children around this child will pick a gender to treat them, based on the clothes they are wearing when they see them or any number of tiny reasons. Since the majority of people have a gender which lines up with their biological sex, this seems like the parent is just increasing the odds this child will be treated as a gender which they ultimately do not identify with and I'm not sure if that will be harmful or not. My guess is, based on the experiences of transgender individuals, that it will be harmful.

Also, it seems like it's increasing the odds the child will have to "transition," from publicly being known as one gender, to the other.

But, I guess this all depends on how long it takes for the child to identify their gender themselves. Maybe they'll know, by preschool and there won't be any confusion.

Practically the child will face certain issues earlier in their life in order to avoid potential similar issues later. That doesn't seem like something good for me.

 

[30yearsofhurt]

They don't see sex

--

I just don't see any reason to not designate sex and teach gender issues how you want when they're older.

Well that's because all the male chicks are killed.

 

[MazeHaze]

When 99.5% of a thing is one way, and the other 0.5% is the other way, normal is a perfectly appropriate word. It is not a moral judgment. Everyone deviates from the norm in some way. I grew up with various health issues that were not normal as do many others.

Definition of normal:
Conforming to the standard or the common type.

Sorry, but normally gendered is perfectly appropriate here.

What about the trans people in this thread? Your gonna sit here and tell them that they're "not normal"? Because of some semantic argument you want to have? Get the fuck out of here with that shit.

 

[Chopper]

The child will develop a gender. The child has a sex.

They just aren't disclosing their child's sex. Like how you can choose not to disclose your race on most official forms. It doesn't mean you haven't got a race, it just allows you to protect yourself from potential discrimination (at least in theory).

If that child becomes poorly, doctors are gonna need to know their sex.

I'm capable of understanding the parents' train of thought here, but I don't think it'll be beneficial to the child in any way. In fact, I believe the opposite.

 

[MUnited83]

Correct spelling is oppression. You learn something new every day.

... that is not what she said, at all.

 

[plagiarize]

The problem in my mind is that people will absolutely try to gender this child, throughout its early life. In preschool, on the playground, etc. Other children will want to know if the child is a boy or a girl and, even if the child and the parent try to avoid a label, the children around this child will pick a gender to treat them, based on the clothes they are wearing when they see them or any number of tiny reasons. Since the majority of people have a gender which lines up with their biological sex, this seems like the parent is just increasing the odds this child will be treated as a gender which they ultimately do not identify with and I'm not sure if that will be harmful or not. My guess is, based on the experiences of transgender individuals, that it will be harmful.

Also, it seems like it's increasing the odds the child will have to "transition," from publicly being known as one gender, to the other.

But, I guess this all depends on how long it takes for the child to identify their gender themselves. Maybe they'll know, by preschool and there won't be any confusion.

Why are people presuming the family will keep the kid's gender a secret? They just don't want public information about the kids sex. When the kid starts to exhibit their gender identity the family will support that whatever it is. At least as far as it sounds from the story.

 

[KillLaCam]

They didn't want the kid's sex to be officially recorded because they do not conform to male or female genders themselves and want to try and minimise any suffering their kid might face should they turn out to have the same gender identity.

So you cannot conclude anything about the kids actual sex.

Wouldn't intersex do the same thing if they were actually born ambiguous? That's all I'm confused about.
It seems redundant to me like "hey you're intersex, your sex is ambiguous. Hey your sex is undefined" It's pretty much the same thing if they're talking about it influencing their gender identity. It'd seem like extra work to get a lawyer and everything to say the same thing in a slightly different way.



The U thing makes perfect sense to me if they were born with a binary sex though. I 100% would understand that situation

 

[MazeHaze]

If that child becomes poorly, doctors are gonna need to know their sex.

I'm capable of understanding the parents' train of thought here, but I don't think it'll be beneficial to the child in any way. In fact, I believe the opposite.

I'm quite certain the child's pediatrician will know the sex. This is just keeping it off of official documents, for the multiple reasons already explained in this thread.

 

[plagiarize]

If that child becomes poorly, doctors are gonna need to know their sex.

I'm capable of understanding the parents' train of thought here, but I don't think it'll be beneficial to the child in any way. In fact, I believe the opposite.

I'm pretty sure that a Doctor can figure out a child's sex if it becomes medically necessary.