First of all its about the deliberate conflation of gender with sex. Why are we changing birth certificates at all? They say sex. Your passport says sex too. Not gender. Sex.
Changing your birth certificate in this way is in effect a legal way of saying male is not male and female is not female and that sex is not a real thing and is not as important as gender.
This is why self-identification over gender makes sense. That would require the abolition of gender all together. Which is what feminists want.
The trouble is, that what we are getting the abolition of sex. Which is being given a legal framework via birth certificates.
But discrimination along the lines of biology and sex isn’t being abolished.
Birth certificates in recording a birth sex, keep an eye on important issues - things like whether there is an imbalance between sexes in society which might have social consequences (see China), or whether a particular sex is more likely to die at a certain age or in a certain way (health issues / discrimination).
In conflating gender with sex on birth certificates you destroy this important neutral information.
This is bad for both women and men.
If its about self-identification of gender, it would be better to merely remove sex from issued birth certificates, but let the GRO record it at time of registration and allow data about sex to be accessible via court order or FOI under certain conditions or under certain legal circumstances (eg - trans sex offenders). Thus allowing transparency and data to not be distorted. Undermining data integrity is a dangerous practise to start because it exposes all data to ideological bias and influence.
The bitter irony here, is trans cult don't want anyone else but people like them to self-identify. Gender fluidity, is viewed with a certain suspicion by some TRA. See India Willoughby’s comments on drag queens and ‘cheapening’ the struggle of transwomen. Why? Because it undermines their argument for gender being sex and the reasons behind their own identity. And its about not wanting to confront the possibility of co-morbity. They want to impose their own denial or insecurity on others.
Detransitioners are viewed as a threat to TRAs. They WANT people to be trapped by the concept of gender rather than sex. The binary nature of sex provides the framework. This is why birth certificates are important to them. Not merely for their protection but also as a political means to legitimise the TRA agenda. Hence the MRA alliance.
By destroying the concept of sex you achieve this. This is why birth certificates are important. Its about conflation which allows control of women. Its all about the creation of an illusion and legitimising it.
I read a fabulous article this morning. It raised a few questions to me, including one about birth certificates.
thefederalist.com/2018/01/09/walt-heyer-proves-sex-change-regret-real-thats-trans-lobby-hates/
The Trans Lobby Hates This Man For Proving Sex-Change Regret Is Real
The case in the article was about a man who transitioned - including having full surgery - and then transitioned.
This proved to be something of a legal problem. He spent 34 years legally as a woman under Californian law. It took him ten attempts to get his original birth certificate restored.
The legal situation in the US has implications for the UK. The US making it legally this difficult to reverse a changed birth certificate makes distortion of reality easier. This also affects international research and discussion of the subject. If it is legally, pretty much impossible to change your mind, then fluidity is not possible. This is rather an affront to the very principle of being able to self-identify!
Point being, that it means you can self-identify as long as you don't change your mind or have different ideas to us or value self identification along biological lines.
Under UK law as it stands I believe you'd have to go through a GRC in reverse. Which seems reasonable in a way, to stop people switching at will and abusing the system. This might seem harsh, but it offers protection, though it still undermines the concept of sex and gender being different by allowing birth certs to be changed. Its better than the US at least, because there does seem to be a legal framework there.
I also thought about the point in the article about how transgenderism is serving as a vehicle for social engineering and the centralization of state power and promotes a surveillance society. Precisely because sex and gender are conflated and continue to appear on birth certificates.
I think this suddenly got more important in the context of the person responsible for the GRA in this country, now also being the Home Secretary. There is something of a conflict of interest here, if the effect of the GRA is to increase state control. (Women and Equalities should not be given to someone with another department as this is a problem across the board). Its too much power in one person’s hands that could be abused. I’m not saying Amber Rudd would, but there might be a temptation if it was politically advantageous to hide the abuse of women using legislation and to control feminist analysis.