>

How do you justify totally detaching culture from biological gender? Our culture is a reaction to biological gender, and not a baseless fabrication.
/u/BenderZoidberg (OP) has awarded 12 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >


In my opinion, your biological sex is something different from what gender you identify with.

No kidding? So?
I don't get why you think it shouldn't be on legal documents like, say, your DL. What does that have to do with anything? What does it matter?
Medical places will ask both -- biological sex and gender, because that DOES matter for them often. The fuck does it matter to the DMV? >


Medical places will ask both -- biological sex and gender, because that DOES matter for them often. The fuck does it matter to the DMV?

What does any identifying information matter to the dmv? Perhaps it's because the purpose of a form of identification is to have traits that can identify an individual? >


What does any identifying information matter to the dmv? Perhaps it's because the purpose of a form of identification is to have traits that can identify an individual?

Right, so if someone is identifying as male and their dl says female doesn't that hamper that? >


There are situations where your biological sex is what matters (sports, restrooms, medical services, imprisonment...), 

Can you explain the logic here? For example, a restroom.
In what way do you interact with a toilet that your chromosomes are suddenly of vital importance? >


Can you explain the logic here? For example, a restroom.
In what way do you interact with a toilet that your chromosomes are suddenly of vital importance?

In what way do you interact with a toilet that your gender identity is suddenly of vital importance? >

I think this requires two different contexts: a medical and legal context. Medical professionals should always be aware of your biological sex because that can determine the right course of treatment, however I see no issue with legal documents having an alternative gender as long as one ensures it's consistent. At the end of the day, it's up to what works best for the individual. I see no reason why one shouldn't be able to choose their own identity AS LONG as it doesn't hinder their own health, the wellbeing of other people or cause legal issues. As long as it makes them happy. >

I agree with you, but I think it's difficult to foresee how a person changing their gender could impact any lives in the future. Will they eventually compete in a sports event under their chosen gender, or apply to the military and have different physical tests that they'd have before choosing their new gender? Are these situations fair for other people who compete in that sport or apply for the same position? Most people probably won't take part in any of these situations and could change their gender at will without it impacting other people, but obviously those cases would eventually happen, and then it's just a matter of preference and choosing the lesser evil. I personally have no problem whether the government database lists someone as male or female, I'm thinking about the impact that data could have in some situations when changed at will.
Giving you a delta just for pointing out that it's fine as long as it doesn't impact other people. It may seem obvious, but I think that's just a basic argument in any discussion about this topic. Δ >

I think this is why the debate is so tricky. It really varies on a case by case basis and each institution needs their own policies. Sport is definitely in need of an update in this area. I guess the point I wanted to make was that there are instances where there isn't a need to separate biological and self-identified gender; however that's not to say there aren't situations where that distinction is important. For example it likely wouldn't matter if a student identified as female when applying to a mix sex school, but it's a big deal if they're applying to an all-girls school. >

To be clear, since this is different from a lot of what I see on here:
1) You are saying that biological sex can be altered (eg through hormonal and surgical transition)
2) You are saying that people should be able to change their legally-documented sex if they've taken these steps to transition
I just want to make sure I'm understanding that much correctly. If so, I also want to touch on this:

If someone who is biologically a male wants to dress and act as a woman, I'm 100% fine with that, but that doesn't make him legally a female

Are you referring here to a cis man who cross dresses (eg drag) or are you talking about a trans woman who hasn't transitioned surgically/hormonally yet? Because it seems cruel to withhold correct pronouns just because someone hasn't gone through all the lengths it takes to get bottom surgery. >

I don't think pronouns should be determined by their biological gender as I consider them part of the cultural side of things. That should be respected, whether you are trans, drag or anything else. But if a person wants to take part in a sports match, or has to be imprisoned, I think the biological gender is the one that should matter and they shouldn't be able to change it at will, and that should always figure on official documents.
EDIT: spelling