Non Binary passport appeal on Mon

Its worth being aware of the findings of this successful case against the UK government which led to the GRA 20004 and are relevant as specific to the recognition of sex,

CASE OF CHRISTINE GOODWIN v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
(Application no. 28957/95)

JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG

11 July 2002
www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2002/588.html

(extract)
THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
12. The applicant is a United Kingdom citizen born in 1937 and is a post-operative male to female transsexual.

13. The applicant had a tendency to dress as a woman from early childhood and underwent aversion therapy in 1963-64. In the mid-1960s, she was diagnosed as a transsexual. Though she married a woman and they had four children, her conviction was that her “brain sex” did not fit her body. From that time until 1984 she dressed as a man for work but as a woman in her free time. In January 1985, the applicant began treatment in earnest, attending appointments once every three months at the Gender Identity Clinic at the Charing Cross Hospital, which included regular consultations with a psychiatrist as well as on occasion a psychologist. She was prescribed hormone therapy, began attending grooming classes and voice training. Since this time, she has lived fully as a woman. In October 1986, she underwent surgery to shorten her vocal chords. In August 1987, she was accepted on the waiting list for gender re-assignment surgery. In 1990, she underwent gender re-assignment surgery at a National Health Service hospital. Her treatment and surgery was provided for and paid for by the National Health Service.

14. The applicant divorced from her former wife on a date unspecified but continued to enjoy the love and support of her children.

15. The applicant claims that between 1990 and 1992 she was sexually harassed by colleagues at work. She attempted to pursue a case of sexual harassment in the Industrial Tribunal but claimed that she was unsuccessful because she was considered in law to be a man. She did not challenge this decision by appealing to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. The applicant was subsequently dismissed from her employment for reasons connected with her health, but alleges that the real reason was that she was a transsexual." (continues)

Sex is not a value judgement, FFS. It's just a basic fact.

If my identity is a human right, can I have a pet passport?

Legitimate identity is a fundamental human right but non-gendered people are treated as though we have no rights.

As a fellow non-gendered person, I don't seem to be lacking any rights. Having to put my sex on my passport is not causing me any hardship, and I don't see why lack of gender is relevant to my sex identification. As anyone who listens to Stonewall or Mermaids should know, you can have any gender you like, or none, regardless of sex, so gender is not really relevant here. It's possible that the claimant is a little out of touch with current gender theory.

(It is of course also possible that "non-sexed people" is what is meant there, but that would be laughably stupid.)

The right to a British passport is conditional,

"When you can get or hold a British passport
You must have British nationality to apply for or hold a British passport.

Having British nationality does not guarantee you a passport. For example, you may not get a new passport (or your existing passport may be taken from you) if:

you’re suspected of a serious crime and an arrest warrant has been issued
a court order stops you having a UK passport or restricts your travel
you’re on bail and bail conditions mean you cannot leave the UK
you’ve been brought back to the UK before at the government’s expense and have not repaid what you owe
you’ve received a European Union or United Nations order which restricts your travel
A passport can also be cancelled or not renewed if it’s for a child and there’s a court order in place stopping the child from leaving the UK.

Your eligibility and entitlement to a British passport will be considered when you apply.

Passports belong to the government and can be cancelled or withdrawn at any time."
www.gov.uk/british-passport-eligibility

Legitimate identity is a fundamental human right

Is it? Really?

Statement by legal representatives,

"Clifford Chance and Blackstone Chambers, acting pro bono on behalf of Christie Elan-Cane, launched judicial review proceedings in 2017 challenging the lawfulness of the UK Government's passport policy."
www.cliffordchance.com/news/news/2021/07/clifford-chance-acts-in-judicial-review-proceedings-related-to-x.html

Elan-Cane's Live Journal,
"Christie Elan-Cane has campaigned for almost 30 years to achieve legal and social recognition as a person of non-gendered identity;
Christie has engaged with politicians of all mainstream parties and worked with various government departments to raise awareness of the issues surrounding non-gendered identity;
Christie approached Clifford Chance LLP and subsequently brought legal proceedings against the UK Home Office in order that its passport policy should be subject to judicial review after the political process was exhausted and had failed;
Christie is not seeking special treatment however does seek to be treated fairly;
Christie would not accept an ‘X’ Passport without an overall policy change on their issuance in the UK"

Quotes:
Christie Elan-Cane: "Legitimate identity is a fundamental human right but non-gendered people are treated as though we have no rights. The UK Government refuses to acknowledge our existence as its systems and bureaucracy render us socially invisible. The case for ‘X’ Passports will now be heard before the UK Supreme Court where I hope finally to get justice.”

Eraldo d’Atri, Senior Associate at Clifford Chance: "This case raises important questions regarding the right to respect for individuals' identity, specifically for those who identify as neither or not exclusively male or female. Access to X passports is crucial for the protection of the human rights of this demographic, who are otherwise forced to use a passport which misrepresents their identity. The significance of this case is further highlighted by the recent announcement in the US by the Secretary of State that a third non gender specific option on US passports would be available. Clifford Chance is proud to be working with Christie and Blackstone Chambers to argue this case before the Supreme Court."
elancane.livejournal.com/

You don’t need an X on your passport to form a Pet Shop Boys tribute band Christie, you can do it anyway. It’ll probably bring you more happiness I think.

I expressed my concerns about modifiable birth certificates and passports as gateway documents to both being counted and human rights at some length in the 2018 consultation.

The US knows that it has a problem with girls and women in some communities who aren't registered and are denied education, social security numbers and many basic rights. I can not anticipate any scenario in which the alleged introduction of greater lack of accurate records would help them. And it certainly doesn't help girls and women in other countries, nor can it bolster child protection.

theconversation.com/a-birth-certificate-is-a-human-right-why-arent-they-free-and-easier-to-get-146834

www.unicef.org/stories/what-birth-registration-and-why-does-it-matter

catholicmoraltheology.com/a-birth-certificate-is-a-human-right/

Girls and women who travel on passports which deny their sex will, in many situations, be exposed to risk and/or denied the protections acorded by having an accurate female sex marker especially in places where they do not speak the language.

I am very concerned about passports and the vulnerability of girls to child marriage - I am apprehensive that this would be facilitated by being able to NB the passport rather than retain the sex class marker.

Good point. This is just the kind of thing that isn't immediately obvious when thinking about putting an X on a passport - which on the surface seems like a relatively minor change.

I worry about all the unforeseen consequences further down the road which we can't predict yet, but we come to regret.

Not to put too fine a point on it, it's highly implausible DWP would accept a declared rather than actual chronological age for the 2 child limit for various benefits.

I am very concerned about passports and the vulnerability of girls to child marriage - I am apprehensive that this would be facilitated by being able to NB the passport rather than retain the sex class marker.

We also would not want 15 year old children securing a note from their doctor that they are more mature than their DOB suggests and should be considered to have been born four years previous than as recorded.

@NecessaryScene actually, apart from this aspect - we cannot. We have to send in references and supporting documentation for everything else.

there's no way my GP would sign off on my passport if I said I was 75 rather than 25. Pension would be nice and all that.

Recent thread (from page 2 onwards) discussed the serious potential Safeguarding/ Child protection implications of various loopholes which enable registered sexual offenders to hide their convictions, including passports:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4208155-The-Times-Law-section-Thursday-1st-April-Trans-judge-wants-a-more-diverse-judiciary?pg=2

I feel very pissed off at the idea that some people might be allowed to, basically, lie on their passport. Why can’t we all do that?

Well, presumably we all could? Are they demanding this be limited in any way? Surely they're demanding no "gatekeeping", as ever?

If they're going to stop asking for sex, I shall certainly stop giving my sex...

Gender and gender identity are conflated along with sex.

He didn’t say gender though he said gender identity. Also that the term sex is old fashioned.

Did he just say that it is gender identity recorded on a passport though recorded under the “old fashioned term” sex? Or did I misinterpret what he was saying?

The majority of passports are based on original birth certificates that record sex as observed at birth.
An unknown number of people have secured a form from a doctor to state that they will be living in a 'gender [identity]' as if they were the opposite sex. The passport authority asks for 'gender' eg female/male on the online renewal form however it records the data as sex on the passport. It is not however asking for gender identity as if it were there would be upwards of fifty options available as demonstrated by BBC, www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9179703/BBC-programme-tells-9-year-olds-100-genders.html or Facebook, www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/10930654/Facebooks-71-gender-options-come-to-UK-users.html

The majority of people in the UK understand sex and gender to be synonymous. Sex is a relevant and provable fact, along with place and date of birth.

[quote Oceanos]@BreatheAndFocus the fact is that this is now confusing other organisations. Filling in a student record the other day and the questions were

"What is the gender (as in on your passport)

And then

"How do you identify?"

It's not gender on my passports, it's sex.[/quote]
That’s a good example of the idiocy. There seem to be at least two separate things going on - some people thinking ‘gender’ is the modern word for Sex, and others purposely using ‘gender’ to try to override Sex.

Quite apart from the whole gender ideology side, I feel very pissed off at the idea that some people might be allowed to, basically, lie on their passport. Why can’t we all do that? What’s the point of official documents if they can’t be relied upon to be factual? Shall we throw all caution to the wind and allow people to write in whatever age they want, their spirit animal in place of Sex, and their zodiac sign for Place of Birth.

It’s not f**king hard. If you’re asked for your sex, you write it in. It’s just that - a factual answer. It doesn’t demand anything of you.Being of a particular sex doesn’t demand you dress/act in certain ways, and if someone thinks it does then they need to get out more and mix with people in the real world.

.

Sorry that was in reply to Signal box

Yes that is what I thought he said, that on the application it asked for gender identity but it was then recorded on the passport in the old fashioned terminology of sex.

Yes, somebody has taken the term widely shared literally. And thinks it means one person telling tons of others.

It doesn't. It means we, and almost everybody else, all share the same opinion.