New York Plans to Make Gender Personal Choice

Thanks to Gordon:

In a move going well beyond the current efforts of homosexuals in Canada to self-servingly fabricate the parental information section of birth records, an even more serious line is apparently about to be crossed Stateside, in which public records are to be falsified as a matter of policy. Like most terrible ideas proposed as policy, this one is cloaked in the garb of fairness and compassion. But how can it ever [be] a good idea for governments to deliberately lie in matters of public record? Immediate fallout:  New York City brilliantly outflanks state ban on gay marriage

New York Plans to Make Gender Personal Choice

The New York Times
November 7, 2006
By DAMIEN CAVE

Separating anatomy from what it means to be a man or a woman, New York City is moving forward with a plan to let people alter the sex on their birth certificate even if they have not had sex-change surgery….

But some psychiatrists said that eliminating identification difficulties for some transgender people also opened the door to unwelcome advances from imposters.

“I’ve already heard of a ‘transgendered’ man who claimed at work to be ‘a woman in a man’s body but a lesbian’ and who had to be expelled from the ladies’ restroom because he was propositioning women there,” Dr. Paul McHugh, a member of the President’s Council of Bioethics and chairman of the psychiatry department at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an e-mail message on the subject. “He saw this as a great injustice in that his behavior was justified in his mind by the idea that the categories he claimed for himself were all ‘official’ and had legal rights attached to them.”….

Full Story

__________________
The article contains quite a few statements that cause concern.  Here are some:

While it may be a radical notion elsewhere, New York City has often tolerated such blurring of the lines of gender identity….

This one gives me a lot of problems:

“Somebody with a bard may have had breast-implant surgery. It’s the permanence of the transition that matters most.”

The problem with that is off course that permanence is whatever its beholder wishes it to be.  We know of a good number of lesbians of convenience who changed their “gender” at will, and back….  How will we know whether we transgress against their pleasure or feelings when or if we call them at any given time Mr., Ms, Miss, Mrs., Sir or Madam?

How about this one?

In New York, the proposed change comes after four years of discussion among health officials, an eight-member panel of transgender experts and vital records offices nationwide.

It is obvious that those transgender experts don’t care a whit about what they ram down the throats of the heterosexual majority that glared by its absence during those four years of discussions.

There are so many fallacies in the reasoning offered by the “transgender” or “transsexual” (whatever those terms may mean) advocates mentioned or quoted in that article, that what is needed is not merely an assessment of “transgendered” individuals vs. people going by traditional norms but a comparison of the mores of sheep and people, the “bestiality” of beasts vs. that of humans.

–Walter

This entry was posted on November 8, 2006 at 11:31 am and is filed under Men's Issues, Gay issues, Family. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print