234
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Kansas will no longer change transgender people’s birth certificates to reflect their gender identities, the state health department said Friday, citing a new law that prevents the state from legally recognizing those identities.

The decision from the state Department of Health and Environment makes Kansas one of a handful of states that won’t change transgender people’s birth certificates. It already was among the few states that don’t change the gender marker on transgender people’s driver’s licenses.

Those decisions reverse policies that Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s administration set when she took office in 2019. They came in response to court filings by conservative Republican state Attorney General Kris Kobach to enforce the new state law. Enacted by the GOP-controlled Legislature over Kelly’s veto, it took effect July 1 and defines male and female based only on the sex assigned to a person at birth.

all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] die444die@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago
[-] snooggums@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

As a Kansasn, fuck Kansas.

Instead of male and female on a birth certificate it should say “penis” or “vagina”

No confusion right?

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Check-boxes. For the rare cases were you have to check both.

Check all that apply, sure why not.

[-] ma11ie@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago

Transphobes gonna be transphobic

[-] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

One never even looked at my birth certificate. Sometimes, I feel like we can just let one go, and this is it. Who honestly cares what a birth certificate says?

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Can we just have Sex and Gender. Gender for social shit, sex for like, your healthcare providers.

Your gender identity means nothing to a male-specific affliction.

[-] MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

In Afghanistan when someone wanted to get a visa to travel to the US or Europe they would be asked for their birth certificate as proof of citizenship. The problem is, their wasn't a system in the country that regulated or even made birth certificates. But the Americans said it was required. So, what do you do? You make one. Now guys are making them everywhere, selling them to whoever wants one. Bam, American democracy established.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Don’t let them know your sex to begin with and they can’t list you at all.

[-] Snekeyes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Wow Kansas, you sure showed their genitals who's the boss.

Just do it, jump Kansas.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

What actual purpose does having sex on the birth certificate actually serve?

[-] theKalash@feddit.ch 13 points 1 year ago

A lot of laws are tied to people's sex.

Mandatory military service, retierment age or paternity leave to name a few.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Are there?

  • I think all the sex-based US military laws have been reversed.

  • Retirement age shouldn't be related to sex.

  • Paternity leave usually doesn't relate to sex unless you're talking about maternity leave, and that's only for the person who gave birth and isn't really related to what it says on a document.

[-] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

I think all the sex-based US military laws have been reversed.

Girls still do not have to register for the US draft. Boys, however, do.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the clarification. According to this 2-year-old article, Congress is "working" on making the draft universal.

[-] theKalash@feddit.ch 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sorry, I just used examples that first came to my head, but I'm not from the US. I assumed you would have some as well.

And yes, a lot of them should be looked at and changed.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

I'm also not from the US, but I can't think of any laws/regulations that should be sex-based. Sex is often used as placeholder where a more specific term or definition would be more accurate. Sometimes, it should simply be replaced with the term gender, such as in discrimination and balanced hiring laws. Other times, such as in maternity leave, the option might be limited to AFAB, but there's a more specific and accurate definition like, "a person who gave birth".

[-] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 4 points 1 year ago

It provides some padding to whoever is on the bottom

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is a useful form of a means of identification, but in that sense, insisting on identifying as birth sex over ones, represented gender identity, this forced representation makes no sense in that regard. Unless, of course, hate, bigotry, and cruelty are the point.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Is it actually a useful means of identification, though? What does anyone gain from knowing that Paul Blart is a boy?

Sex is useful for doctors and stuff, but does anyone else need to know it so badly that it should be a vital document?

[-] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Someone changing their gender does not change their sex, the thing recorded on a birth certificate. Remember when the activists argued sex and gender were separate things? Seems we have looped back to them being one thing, but with neither tied to biology.

[-] Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The issue is that listed sex on a birth certificate has actual effects that limit the options available to trans people. Like if you otherwise pass as your gender but say your passport lists your birth sex you are immediately recognizable as trans to immigrations officials in airports or border officials will treat your documents as suspicious which means chances are way better of you being detained, harassed and abused by security personnel.

If it's on a driver's licence then that immediately opens you up to bigoted behaviour by anyone you need to hand that document over to. Cops can decide that maybe they want to find something worth arresting you for since they already have you pulled over, that apartment you were applying for to rent? Well you're noticeably trans on your documentation so maybe they just put you to the bottom of the stack.

A lot of trans folk look at being able to pass as their window of hope to walk the world more safely. If you have a full on beard, deep voice, male sounding name but an F in the sex category on your passport travelling becomes an absolute misery.

[-] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You're actually making an argument that government officials and authority figures need more training or different officers that can actually handle this shit.

[-] Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

In an ideal world people would be disqualified from these positions if they were bigots. But good luck getting any trans friendly protections on the books. People over the past decade have become way more comfortable in harassing trans people in public in a general sense. Enforcement is also spotty. Airline security particularly is given a lot of benefit of the doubt and not an amazing amount of oversight. Systemic persecution of Muslims has been an issue for decades and surprise - people still get hassled. Police, police unions and the courts of law they serve are also often very good at covering for each other.

In reality these issues apply on a worldwide scale. If you are traveling by air and have even a layover in a country where it is not safe to be openly trans you are in danger every time someone asks to see your documents.

Also every border guard or police officer in every country is a patchwork. All it takes is one particularly bad one and you could end up with PTSD, injured or dead. There is good reason why police officers in uniform are generally not welcome at Prides. It is a known trigger that causes folk who have experienced this kind of violence to have involuntary flashbacks or panic attacks.

It is ultimately safer to give someone the tools to be safer than to trust every official in every country you might ever want to risk visiting to be a good official. Even if you are going to one that is supposed to be safe.

[-] WigglyTortoise@discuss.tchncs.de -2 points 1 year ago

And for that reason I think it's important to only list gender on passports and other identification. But your birth certificate has nothing to do with that.

[-] Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Depends on the country how often those documents are actually used. In some places (like Canada or the UK for instance) your birth certificate needs to match those other documents or else you are SOL getting your passport and driver's license updated. Otherwise as a document it can also play a role in applying for government services or schooling in a lot of places which means you can get misgendered during times where you are already under duress or opens you up to being forcefully outed to post secondary administrators and teachers.

Medical records are usually better served with more accurate information because if you've transitioned your reactions to medication are more closely linked to your horomones meaning the dosages you receive by any trans health untrained doctor may be off and it is actually safer in most emergencies to have their first instinct be to treat someone as their listed gender and not their birth sex.

From a beaurcratic standpoint listing the sex of someone on their birth certificate isn't exactly useful past a point either. The main purpose of the things is to establish a time or location of the person's birth for determining nationality. That's why you can change your name regardless of what you were called at birth, so it remains a reflection of your current state... Also census data logs everything at your registration so later changes don't impact anything significant. The other reason birth certificates exist is for enthusiasts to track genealogy.

There isn't exactly a compelling reason to disallow people some autonomy over how they are recorded for posterity sake... aside from a lack of empathy.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

In Kansas statute they are the same thing.

But the conseratives are being bigoted assholes so it doesn't actually matter that the law is outdated and doesn't treat them.separatelt.

[-] Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago

Most sex of trans people is intersex though (either after HRT or SRS). This whole discussion is stupid from people not knowing the tiniest thing about biology.

And even then the worst part is that these documents equal gender and sex. Sex cannot be easily determined anyway without the help of at least an endocrinologist and it's irrelevant for most everyday cases. Not even your doctor cares unless you are pregnant.

It's just to hurt people for no real reason.

[-] oldbaldgrumpy@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

This should have never been an option to begin with.

this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
234 points (95.0% liked)

News

23310 readers
3698 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS