• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

First baby born without a gender in Canada

Nerazar

Member
Gender and sex are separate aren't they?

And we should always establish a base understanding of sex being observable and a scientific fact. You won't even be able to change your biological sex no matter how many hormones you take and how many surgeries there are. Other things to include would be the fact that humans are animals and being with biological bodies. Not everything is a social construct.

In this case, the parents want to "undetermine" the biological sex of a human baby which is not possible, because you cannot just close your eyes from facts. It would be a whole different discussion with more support if it were "just" the gender we're talking about. Non-binary gender is a well established fact by now. "Undetermined" biological sex never will be, at least not in 99%+ of cases including this one.
 

MisterR

Member
I'm not a fan of using your children as tools for activism. Adults should fight for their causes and let their children be children and decide what their own causes should be.
 

Jakten

Member
I'm not a fan of using your children as tools for activism. Adults should fight for their causes and let their children be children and decide what their own causes should be.

Uh, by allowing their child to choose for themselves isn't that exactly what they are doing here. They are literally allowing their child to choose their causes on their own instead of imposing them on them.
 
"this is ridiculous, there's no reason for it"- all of the people who refuse to empathize with a non-binary parent and making they're own shitty assumptions of that person's parenting skills.


Seriously, shit in this thread like "a penis is a man, period. I call em like I see em.". "dude with breasts and a dick" and "the mum has a beard for christ sake" make me so fucking mad. 50 years from now, you will be the equivalent of the old racist grandpa that is excused away with "he's old, he doesn't know any better."

To be fair though, this is something without precedent. And a new issue like this is bound to be grey rather than black or white. I feel being overly aggressive isn’t helping your cause, or other people in this thread.

People need to be educated, because I sure as hell don’t really know what would be best, just what I feel is appropriate as an educator and gay man. But my experience isn’t the end all, be all. Neither is anyone else here. No one is certified to know the ramifications of something like this, good or bad.
 

Audioboxer

Member
Uh, by allowing their child to choose for themselves isn't that exactly what they are doing here. They are literally allowing their child to choose their causes on their own instead of imposing them on them.

Without repeating all my previous arguments ad nauseum, naturally, sex does get chosen for you. It gets chosen in the womb, by nature. Neither the parents, doctors or children get to choose it. All the doctors/hospitals do is make an observation/potentially test and scan (x-ray internals) if it's unclear. This is not the medical field choosing for you. What you do experience is growing up and deciphering your gender association, which CAN lead to your sex being changed by medical intervention whether it be drugs or surgery. This is not widely accepted as a choice though, it's accepted as below, as a medical condition where to put it in layman's terms, is a person has been born with the "wrong" sexual organs/in the "wrong" body. Hence why it is the case some need or want high-risk hormone treatment/surgery.... That's not exactly showing sex is a social construct that people need to go to the lengths of taking testosterone/estrogen/etc and also potentially going under the knife. The whole basis of gender dysphoria existing is an acceptance that nature chooses sex for you during development, and very occasionally nature can get things wrong/cause complications. The baseline is accepting the reality around sex/biology/life and from there we can adapt to cater for and assist those in need of help when complications arise.

Outside of nature choosing all we have is very early attempts to research what may influence the development of a fetus (if we're talking human led choice/consequence ~ such as medication/hormone intake whilst a mother is pregnant). Random variation/complication in birth will forever cause there to be vast differences if not medical conditions in children. On top of that, some things a mother chooses to do/intake into her body may have a consequence(s).

eM5K7Mm.png


You can, however, have things like down syndrome where it's a variation in development but there's actually no evidence it's influenced. Just random variation. (although a possible chance increase with the age of the mother, but that's not quite the same as saying an intake of chemicals/hormones may artificially influence).

CB7FwRT.png


Sometimes nature just behaves in ways that are unexpected, with the key point being like it or not this sometimes simply gets decided for you during pregnancy. Medical advances are often able to scan for evidence of many conditions in the womb, but we haven't quite got to positions where babies "get modified" by intervention pre-birth. That is one hell of a slope ethically. Although, in some instances such as downs syndrome I think you'd find a lot of people would want it to be legal and okay to intervene. As I said though, ethically it's a minefield as many rightfully propose will it lead to a future of "designer babies", where humans are completely genetically modified? You'd have to hope not!

As for any response to this saying it's cold-hearted science. I'd ask you to read my post on the last page about child upbringing if you think I lack compassion. I do not. What I do feel is there is very little productive value in trying to ignore/erase/modify our understandings of biology/nature and life. What is productive is honesty, and then from honesty moving onto how we deal with things, which outside of medical intervention does indeed have to be led by compassion and understanding. Some parents due to their ideological beliefs do walk a line of attempting to say out of compassion they will murky the waters of what is the reality around their children. I do not think that is potentially healthy parenting. Children should be brought into the world to learn to accept and have to deal with honesty and reality from day 1, and from giving them that acceptance of reality they can begin to grow and develop around it. It's not a social construct for this child to be honestly told their sex without it being framed as something they choose. There is still debating going on about this being completely to do with gender. It is not. The medical records/birth certificate and even card assign sex, not gender, and as it's said on the activist's website they want to delist gender AND sex.
 

MisterR

Member
Uh, by allowing their child to choose for themselves isn't that exactly what they are doing here. They are literally allowing their child to choose their causes on their own instead of imposing them on them.

No, by making this a huge case and getting a attention hungry lawyer with a name spelled with all capital letters, of all things. The parent is using their child as a tool for their activism. I'm all for equal rights and respect for all people, but this is a publicity stunt to advance a cause the parent is involved with.
 
Uh, by allowing their child to choose for themselves isn't that exactly what they are doing here. They are literally allowing their child to choose their causes on their own instead of imposing them on them.

They're kind of forcing their children to make a choice that a child generally doesn't make.
 
They're kind of forcing their children to make a choice that a child generally doesn't make.

Would it have impacted your life in anyway to when you were a certain age know your gender? Or did you just know?

It's not going to be any different for this kid. Mild time use at most.
 
I don't think it would affect the child much growing up with a U in some legal paperwork. If the walls in the child's nursery is going to be white or gray or the child would be dressed in simple shirt and pants for elementary school, it'll be okay.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
I don't really think they are "forcing" a choice on the child so much as not making that choice for them.

I'm not forcing my kid to be atheist I'm just not labeling him a Christian or an agnostic.

Really there isn't much "choice" to sexuality, the only choice is how much you share with the world. The parent choose to share nothing on behalf of their child I don't see anything wrong with that.

If they sit the kid down at the tender age of 3 and go OK NOW YOU MUST CHOOSE BOY/GIRL! Ok that's kind of messed up. I don't think they are trying to do anything like that.

Geez some people acting like your government census data is some sacred stone tablet that must be etched at birth with your proper biological sex or the 7th seal is broken... get a grip.
 

RinsFury

Member
"this is ridiculous, there's no reason for it"- all of the people who refuse to empathize with a non-binary parent and making they're own shitty assumptions of that person's parenting skills.


Seriously, shit in this thread like "a penis is a man, period. I call em like I see em.". "dude with breasts and a dick" and "the mum has a beard for christ sake" make me so fucking mad. 50 years from now, you will be the equivalent of the old racist grandpa that is excused away with "he's old, he doesn't know any better."

Agreed. I had to stop reading this thread for a day because the amount of toxic garbage being posted was more than I can deal with. The ignorant driveby reactions in here are asbolutely infuriating, I don't know why I thought gaf was better than this but I really did.
 

Laiza

Member
And we should always establish a base understanding of sex being observable and a scientific fact. You won't even be able to change your biological sex no matter how many hormones you take and how many surgeries there are. Other things to include would be the fact that humans are animals and being with biological bodies. Not everything is a social construct.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on.

If someone's assigned male at birth but then goes through HRT and surgery and ends up the absolute most feminine and cute individual ever, up to and including a working set of genitals, including ovaries which allow them to be fertile and bear children, would you STILL be arguing that they didn't actually change their biological sex? Just because they might still have XY chromosomes?

I think you miiiight be putting the cart before the horse here. Male and female are descriptors we use for specific phenotypes, and the fact that chromosomes are involved is something we picked up on after the fact, so if someone is 100% phenotypically female they should be considered, for all intents and purposes, female, should they not?

I'm saying this because I feel like this obsession with chromosomes is an absolute source of a lot of grief I get as a nonbinary person, and indeed, a lot of transphobia stems from people who refuse to stop saying "but you're male" to transwomen and "but you're female" to transmen (but a lot less of the latter, for reasons I can't imagine *coughtransmisogynycoughcough*). The chromosomes are only there to facilitate an end result, but if we alter that end result to the point where the chromosomes are almost entirely irrelevant, what then?

It just doesn't make sense to me at this point to fixate on that. And we need to move past it so we can finally get a decent level of acceptance for transgender people of all stripes - including nonbinary folks who will forever be hounded by people who just can't let go of their freshman biology-induced hangups about sex.
 

Llyranor

Member
Not to mention that the freshman biology-induced hangups aren't even all-encompassing. There are naturally-born XY humans with a female phenotype, as in androgen insensitivity syndrome. Who decides what sex they are?
 

Audioboxer

Member
Not to mention that the freshman biology-induced hangups aren't even all-encompassing. There are naturally-born XY humans with a female phenotype, as in androgen insensitivity syndrome. Who decides what sex they are?

That would fall under a disorder of sex development, so a complication with what nature was intending to do in the womb, and something which is diagnosed. In those situations when you ask who would decide, then it comes down to what treatment and options are available after birth for the child with the complication. This doesn't take away from the fact that if you're not born with a DSD it is still nature which decided what sex you are. Referring to that as "freshman biology-induced hangups" is the kind of dismissal of the realities around biology that understandably get those in the fields of science/biology/medicine a bit frustrated. The pursuit of the truth via the scientific methods doesn't have the end-goal of ignoring/suppressing the truths you do not like/feel comfortable with. As above I find it far more reasonable to educate honestly about truths, and then from that base understanding try to move forward with compassion and whatever support may be necessary for any individuals needing it.

To diagnose someone with a DSD/gender dysphoria actually needs the truths around biological sex to be respected, so the person suffering can actually be diagnosed and treated. Hence why at a stretch I think one can argue it's actually pretty detrimental to attempt to teach your child biological sex is just something to choose at a later date, and not that it's nature which has chosen for them and move onto questions around gender identity and if they feel comfortable with what nature has provided them. To which the vast majority do lineup as nature provided, it's those that do not that need to be diagnosed quickly, efficiently, correctly and then treated with care and compassion.
 
Uh, by allowing their child to choose for themselves isn't that exactly what they are doing here. They are literally allowing their child to choose their causes on their own instead of imposing them on them.
I don't care one way or the other so isn't your way of "choosing for themselves" another way to subconsciously nudge them towards something? Can you truly decide on your own?
 

MUnited83

For you.
And we should always establish a base understanding of sex being observable and a scientific fact. You won't even be able to change your biological sex no matter how many hormones you take and how many surgeries there are. Other things to include would be the fact that humans are animals and being with biological bodies. Not everything is a social construct.

In this case, the parents want to "undetermine" the biological sex of a human baby which is not possible, because you cannot just close your eyes from facts. It would be a whole different discussion with more support if it were "just" the gender we're talking about. Non-binary gender is a well established fact by now. "Undetermined" biological sex never will be, at least not in 99%+ of cases including this one.
This is incorrect and shows that you haven't read Canadian law. Transgender people in Canada are allowed to change the sex/gender sections of their ID. The term sex still being on the cards is outdated: Canada already operates by the basis of gender.
 

Audioboxer

Member
This is incorrect and shows that you haven't read Canadian law. Transgender people in Canada are allowed to change the sex/gender sections of their ID. The term sex still being on the cards is outdated: Canada already operates by the basis of gender.

You're right about the laws for changing ID/birth certificates. Most Western countries have thankfully assigned laws and protections for transgender people. Argentina arguably being one of the best places because it doesn't seem to require as many hoops to jump through to change things.

However, it's not gender on ID/birth certificates, it is indeed sex

tef6VGK.png


JAm1VVk.png


http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/births-adoptions/births/birth-certificates
 

MUnited83

For you.
You're right about the laws for changing ID/birth certificates. Most Western countries have thankfully assigned laws and protections for transgender people. Argentina arguably being one of the best places because it doesn't seem to require as many hoops to jump through to change things.

However, it's not gender on ID/birth certificates, it is indeed sex

tef6VGK.png


JAm1VVk.png


http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/births-adoptions/births/birth-certificates
Like I said, despite saying "sex" it really means "gender". Which is why transgender people are allowed to modify it.
 

Platy

Member
That would fall under a disorder of sex development, so a complication with what nature was intending to do in the womb, and something which is diagnosed. In those situations when you ask who would decide, then it comes down to what treatment and options are available after birth for the child with the complication.

I always find funny that for androgen insensitive syndrome is "but it is a rare so it doesn't count" but being trans is super occuring and totally basic behavior, even if it would fall "under a disorder of sex development, so a complication with what nature was intending to do in the womb, and something which is diagnosed. In those situations when you ask who would decide, then it comes down to what treatment and options are available after birth for the child with the complication." =P
 
No, by making this a huge case and getting a attention hungry lawyer with a name spelled with all capital letters, of all things. The parent is using their child as a tool for their activism. I'm all for equal rights and respect for all people, but this is a publicity stunt to advance a cause the parent is involved with.

Or maybe the mother just thinks this is the best thing for the child
 

Audioboxer

Member
Like I said, despite saying "sex" it really means "gender". Which is why transgender people are allowed to modify it.

No, it doesn't, it means biological sex hence why when gender doesn't align it can be requested to be changed. Unless you subscribe to gender/sex being the same thing? The language used may be interchangeable (which often leads to confusion/misuse of terminology) but they aren't the same thing. Doctors cannot ask a new born baby what gender they associate with to see if it aligns with their biological sex. They go with biological sex so I really don't know how anyone can make an argument what is on a birth certificate is the gender. Using the correct definition of gender within the confines of this topic.

That would be guesswork. Guesswork that may have a massively high chance to be right, but guesswork nonetheless.

I always find funny that for androgen insensitive syndrome is "but it is a rare so it doesn't count" but being trans is super occuring and totally basic behavior, even if it would fall "under a disorder of sex development, so a complication with what nature was intending to do in the womb, and something which is diagnosed. In those situations when you ask who would decide, then it comes down to what treatment and options are available after birth for the child with the complication." =P

Doesn't count for what? The poster asked who decides what sex they are for complications around determining sex at birth and I answered. DSD's are more to do with explicit biological sex complications around organs/genitalia,

LvW6JWU.png


whereas gender dysphoria is its own diagnosis

gn6s31E.png


That isn't to say there isn't overlap in the conditions or someone cannot be diagnosed with both, but that they are different. DSDs can lead to having both male and female characteristics/organs/etc. Ultrasound scans or hormone level checks can be inconclusive or mixed, so treatment may be different for this condition than others. That isn't necessarily the same as a baby who has no DSDs and at a later date as a child/adult is diagnosed with gender dysphoria because the biological sex that was correctly determined isn't in line with the gender you associate as.
 

MUnited83

For you.
No, it doesn't, it means biological sex hence why when gender doesn't align it can be requested to be changed. Unless you subscribe to gender/sex being the same thing? The language used may be interchangeable (which often leads to confusion/misuse of terminology) but they aren't the same thing. Doctors cannot ask a new born baby what gender they associate with to see if it aligns with their biological sex. They go with biological sex so I really don't know how anyone can make an argument what is on a birth certificate is the gender. Using the correct definition of gender within the confines of this topic.

That would be guesswork. Guesswork that may have a massively high chance to be right, but guesswork nonetheless.



Doesn't count for what? The poster asked who decides what sex they are for complications around determining sex at birth and I answered. DSD's are more to do with explicit biological sex complications around organs/genitalia,

LvW6JWU.png


whereas gender dysphoria is its own diagnosis

gn6s31E.png


That isn't to say there isn't overlap in the conditions or someone cannot be diagnosed with both, but that they are different. DSDs can lead to having both male and female characteristics/organs/etc. Ultrasound scans or hormone level checks can be inconclusive or mixed, so treatment may be different for this condition than others. That isn't necessarily the same as a baby who has no DSDs and at a later date as a child/adult is diagnosed with gender dysphoria because the biological sex that was correctly determined isn't in line with the gender you associate as.

Again, that's not how it works. Transgender people, under Canadian law, can modify the sex section of their ID and other documents. Ergo, no, it doesn't actually require the sex section to be by biology. If it actually meant by biology, then transgender people wouldn't be able to change it.
 

Audioboxer

Member
Again, that's not how it works. Transgender people, under Canadian law, can modify the sex section of their ID and other documents. Ergo, no, it doesn't actually require the sex section to be by biology. If it actually meant by biology, then transgender people wouldn't be able to change it.

In Canada

W32u8tN.png


https://www.ontario.ca/page/changin...your-birth-registration-and-birth-certificate

Note the section

a letter signed by a practicing physician or psychologist (including a psychological associate) authorized to practise in Canada that includes the statements necessary to support your request (see application cover sheet for instructions). In some cases, alternatives to the required letter may be acceptable

In the UK

yFOqJet.png


Note the section

you've been diagnosed with gender dysphoria (discomfort with your birth gender) - this is also called gender identity disorder or transsexualism
https://www.gov.uk/apply-gender-recognition-certificate/overview

In the US, it seems to vary state by state, but commonly

Text: (d) Upon receipt of a certified copy of an order of a court of competent jurisdiction indicating that the sex of an individual born in this state has been changed by surgical procedure and that such individual's name has been changed, the certificate of birth of such individual shall be amended accordingly.

https://www.lambdalegal.org/know-yo...s-changing-birth-certificate-sex-designations

Point being, many places in the world require evidence that there is a diagnosis or some sort of medical overview. Which is what brings gender dysphoria into the frame as the diagnosis that determines biological sex is not aligning with gender so for the well-being of the patient part of treatment is a request for sex to be changed to align with gender.

I do not quite understand what you mean by "If it actually meant by biology, then transgender people wouldn't be able to change it.". A diagnosis of gender dysphoria is that sex doesn't align with gender. Why wouldn't someone be able to change their sex as an outcome of this? While not everyone undergoes treatment (outside of therapy), many people do start taking hormones and undergo surgery in order to change sex in the body. You cannot, on the one hand, say sex is the same as gender/a social construct then turn around and say yes, as a treatment for gender dysphoria some people will go on hormones or undergo surgery to change their sex to fit their gender. I'm of the frame of mind as many in the medical fields are that a diagnosis of gender dysphoria should be enough to enable a certificate to be changed and someone shouldn't be required to undergo what can be risky drug taking/physical surgery. Argentina as someone posted earlier in the topic seems to take it a step further and say no diagnosis is required at all, and I wouldn't be opposed to that, I don't think. While I think it's important to have a condition diagnosed (especially so as people do not go around self-diagnosing if they aren't from medical backgrounds), I accept not everyone can face going to doctors/hospitals/etc.
 

Jobbs

Banned
I don't think it would affect the child much growing up with a U in some legal paperwork. If the walls in the child's nursery is going to be white or gray or the child would be dressed in simple shirt and pants for elementary school, it'll be okay.

If every other kid at kindergarten was he or she and I was "them" it'd probably have caused long lasting issues. No one wants to be an outsider.
 

.JayZii

Banned
Would it have impacted your life in anyway to when you were a certain age know your gender? Or did you just know?

It's not going to be any different for this kid. Mild time use at most.
It's a little broad to say that it won't impact the kid in any way. Do we really know, since gendering of children is so entrenched in society at large, and kids have to interact with other kids/media/etc? Unless they're living in a bubble. Are there any studies or data of children who were raised without being told their gender and how that affected them?
If every other kid at kindergarten was he or she and I was "them" it'd probably have caused long lasting issues. No one wants to be an outsider.
I agree. I feel like once the child has to interact with others like that, they'd come home as a "he" or a "she" pretty quickly.
 

MUnited83

For you.
In Canada

W32u8tN.png


https://www.ontario.ca/page/changin...your-birth-registration-and-birth-certificate

Note the section



In the UK

yFOqJet.png


Note the section


https://www.gov.uk/apply-gender-recognition-certificate/overview

In the US, it seems to vary state by state, but commonly



https://www.lambdalegal.org/know-yo...s-changing-birth-certificate-sex-designations

Point being, many places in the world require evidence that there is a diagnosis or some sort of medical overview. Which is what brings gender dysphoria into the frame as the diagnosis that determines biological sex is not aligning with gender so for the well-being of the patient part of treatment is a request for sex to be changed to align with gender.

I do not quite understand what you mean by "If it actually meant by biology, then transgender people wouldn't be able to change it.". A diagnosis of gender dysphoria is that sex doesn't align with gender. Why wouldn't someone be able to change their sex as an outcome of this? While not everyone undergoes treatment (outside of therapy), many people do start taking hormones and undergo surgery in order to change sex in the body. You cannot, on the one hand, say sex is the same as gender/a social construct then turn around and say yes, as a treatment for gender dysphoria some people will go on hormones or undergo surgery to change their sex to fit their gender. I'm of the frame of mind as many in the medical fields are that a diagnosis of gender dysphoria should be enough to enable a certificate to be changed and someone shouldn't be required to undergo what can be risky drug taking/physical surgery. Argentina as someone posted earlier in the topic seems to take it a step further and say no diagnosis is required at all, and I wouldn't be opposed to that, I don't think. While I think it's important to have a condition diagnosed (especially so as people do not go around self-diagnosing if they aren't from medical backgrounds), I accept not everyone can face going to doctors/hospitals/etc.

I think you're missing the whole point of what I posted, which was in response to someone else that argued that the "sex" part of the documents was about the biological sex( as in XX/XY and so on) and that couldn't be changed. The law literally doesn't agree with what that person wrote, the sex portion of the documents can indeed be changed no matter your sex assigned at birth. British Columbia, specifically, even allows with without the requirement of a sex change operation.
 

Audioboxer

Member
I think you're missing the whole point of what I posted, which was in response to someone else that argued that the "sex" part of the documents was about the biological sex( as in XX/XY and so on) and that couldn't be changed. The law literally doesn't agree with what that person wrote, the sex portion of the documents can indeed be changed no matter your sex assigned at birth. British Columbia, specifically, even allows with without the requirement of a sex change operation.

I do agree with that first part, that much is clear given what I've been arguing, but no I do not agree with the second part. It would indeed be an affront to civility and humanity not to allow sex to be changed. We have more than enough evidence, both in the medical field and socially, via psychologists/psychiatrists and so on as to why there needs to be an ability to do so. On your final point, I would indeed agree it should be able to be changed without an operation/hormone medication. As I said, these treatments come with risks and while many will attempt full conversion or part conversion, others will not even when faced with the debilitating condition because of the risks. Therapy can help with what is going on in the mind, but any attempt to biologically change your body, even with modern medicine and the best doctors, will still carry risks. I mean, look at is this way, you're probably in the 1~2% who would be diagnosed with gender dysphoria so for a doctor to be sitting saying the procedures are relatively safe, say 97%+ positive of working without serious consequences, looking at a very small risk isn't going to make you think "well, it sure won't happen to me!". You're someone that's been born into a very small %. Obviously 97%+ as a figure has been pulled out of my ass, as taking hormones and going under the knife will have various potential risks all of varying degrees of likelihood. Sterilisation for example I think is something that is a potential in many situations, which is a huge consequence to undergo. Something like that can lead to debates around why we do have to be careful of the ages we start putting drugs into children and putting them under the knife, even with the reality that waiting till they are older can raise other complications due to puberty.

If the US overall does indeed require a surgical procedure then I think that is really unfair (someone can confirm). As I said above I can see merit in requesting a medical practitioner to have diagnosed or overseen your case. Especially in the modern era where people do go online and self-diagnose themselves due to what they read on the internet. Therefore, many things in life require evidence of a diagnosis, but as I did also go on to say I understand not everyone finds it easy to go to doctors/hospitals. I wouldn't be opposed to the way Argentina does it, but I can see why a Government asks for a diagnosis/backing from someone in the medical fields before acting on legal documentation.
 

Monocle

Member
Ehhhhhh, why not start out raising the kid as cisgender and allow them to develop along their own lines as they discover their interests and preferences in clothing, toys, and play?

I see no need to strive for some unorthodox degree of gender neutrality before the child even has the capacity to embrace or reject male/female templates.
 
I'm starting to make a list of all Neogaf members without capital letter in their name.

Better safe than sorry.

I always make my username uncapitalized because I like seeing the evennness. No tall letters sticking out :p

Would never do that to real name though.
 
Top Bottom