Most identity documents do have a “sex” field, going all the way back to your birth certificate. It is seen as a key part of ones identity.
We can argue (and have argued) as a society about whether they are conflating “sex” with “gender”. I just checked, though, and both my state-issued drivers’ license and my Federal passport list my “sex” as an identifying trait.
The article gives a pretty good analysis of why it is good that we now have an “X” designation, for those who choose to use it. It’s none of anyone’s business how people present themselves vs. what is in their pants. However, we have very invasive technology that can see very intricate details, and a human with a penis who looks female may raise suspicion when they find bulges where they “shouldnt” be.
What is happening now is a bit of overreach, though. Identity documents have been issued, both in the US and other countries, with the “X” designation, and this policy just directs officials to ignore that. What else will they be told to ignore on official documents next?
It does make sense on a birth certificate. As soon as I have a document with my current picture on it, and/or other biometric info, gender is no longer a necessity on a document IMHO.
I agree that this is a ridiculous overreach, of course.
But I’m also so weary of this “Obsession with what’s in your pants” argument everyone keeps memeing, as if, somehow sexual dimorphism is not a thing in our species and it’s 100% about genitalia.
It’s generally a valid descriptive trait that is often useful for identifying humans you otherwise know nothing much about.
I think there’s room for understanding a rationale of such things while still condemning how petty, hateful, and stupid 100% of this administration’s ideas are.
Most identity documents do have a “sex” field, going all the way back to your birth certificate. It is seen as a key part of ones identity.
We can argue (and have argued) as a society about whether they are conflating “sex” with “gender”. I just checked, though, and both my state-issued drivers’ license and my Federal passport list my “sex” as an identifying trait.
The article gives a pretty good analysis of why it is good that we now have an “X” designation, for those who choose to use it. It’s none of anyone’s business how people present themselves vs. what is in their pants. However, we have very invasive technology that can see very intricate details, and a human with a penis who looks female may raise suspicion when they find bulges where they “shouldnt” be.
What is happening now is a bit of overreach, though. Identity documents have been issued, both in the US and other countries, with the “X” designation, and this policy just directs officials to ignore that. What else will they be told to ignore on official documents next?
It does make sense on a birth certificate. As soon as I have a document with my current picture on it, and/or other biometric info, gender is no longer a necessity on a document IMHO.
I agree that this is a ridiculous overreach, of course.
But I’m also so weary of this “Obsession with what’s in your pants” argument everyone keeps memeing, as if, somehow sexual dimorphism is not a thing in our species and it’s 100% about genitalia.
It’s generally a valid descriptive trait that is often useful for identifying humans you otherwise know nothing much about.
I think there’s room for understanding a rationale of such things while still condemning how petty, hateful, and stupid 100% of this administration’s ideas are.
…i require why sex is important, and you favour the argument that sex isn’t important, i like you…
I mean, it is a key part of ones identity, so it makes sense that it appears on identification documents.
The key question is whether it is more important to document the organs you had at birth, or how you present yourself now.
A bit?
That last bit is the important part.