Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Non Binary passport appeal on Mon

188 replies

Imnobody4 · 11/07/2021 10:30

Hadn't heard anything about this. Fingers crossed it goes the right way.

12th July an important appeal will be heard at the Supreme Court. A claimant called Mx Elan-Cane claims a non-binary identity and wants an X on their passport instead of Female. Elan-Cane argues this is a breach of their human rights. The UK government claims any such breach is justified because retaining the sex binary is important.

fairplayforwomen.com/non-binary-the-new-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/

OP posts:
ShagMeRiggins · 12/07/2021 16:28

@highame

I thought FPFW were interveners?
Not according to the third post on this thread.
highame · 12/07/2021 16:12

I thought FPFW were interveners?

ANewCreation · 12/07/2021 16:12

This is an interesting article on the development of the Yogyakarta principles and how the men and trans men who wrote it thought nothing of the impact on women

thecritic.co.uk/issues/april-2021/the-trans-rights-that-trump-all/

highame · 12/07/2021 16:06

Oooooh non binary have been trying to hijack law (in Germany) which has been said is about intersex and not non-binary. Also, there is likely to be changes to all sorts of laws but skirted over this.

toffeebutterpopcorn · 12/07/2021 16:04

So we are all supposed to go around like 1970 sci fi film extras in jumpsuits with unisex haircuts and booties?

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 12/07/2021 16:02

As an aside, are all of the intervenors going to be pro x in passports?

toffeebutterpopcorn · 12/07/2021 16:01

Human Rights Watch. They need so seriously have a think about 'rights'.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 12/07/2021 16:00

"Judge: Is this consistent with international norms?
HRW: Yes!
Judge: How can that be true?
HRW: Its not universally applied but very important people have agreed it matches international consensus. /69"

FFS.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 12/07/2021 15:59

Hunan Rights Watch who are intervening, are now leaning on the Yogyakarta principles

toffeebutterpopcorn · 12/07/2021 15:58

Surely that should be 'Persons on the Edge of Time'?

viques · 12/07/2021 15:58

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 12/07/2021 15:57

Could be inspired by the book Woman at the Edge of Time? That used per pronouns.

highame · 12/07/2021 15:57

Yogyakarta Principles now on the table. 'These are extremely distinguished people in their field'. Acknowledges not binding law but a contribution to the debate. Judges asking about this. I think this is now conflating trans with non-binary of value. Seems Yogyakara Principles 10 does not have same signatories as the first but also seems to want self-id, with no safeguards whatsoever.

Lots of hogwash, which ought to embarrass those legal eagles presenting the case, but they seem not to care

Their legal team 'are not claiming' quite often, which is a way of dancing around the lack of legality

toffeebutterpopcorn · 12/07/2021 15:51

What is is with these law firms? This is a biggy - who is paying for this?

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 12/07/2021 15:47

Eraldo d’Atri, senior associate at Clifford Chance, the London law firm representing Elan-Cane, said: “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.”
He added that access to X passports was “crucial for the protection of the human rights of this demographic who are otherwise forced to use a passport which misrepresents their identity”.
The legal team pointed out that this month Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, said that a nongender-specific option would be available on US passports.

archive version of share token Times with the unhelpful title: Fight for genderless passport taken to the Supreme Court

archive.is/a7U2B

To state the obvious, few people here have any objection to genderless passports but removing sex markers in favour of gender options is a very different matter.

Plus, beyond this single issue, there is the strategic undermining of the collection of sex class data and the existence of sex classes.

viques · 12/07/2021 15:47

And perself.

toffeebutterpopcorn · 12/07/2021 15:45

I wonder why ‘person’ and not ‘human’ or even ‘carbon based life form’. ‘Person’ sounds so much more like ‘personality’.

highame · 12/07/2021 15:44

Federal law for X markers however, this hasn't been passed it has been mooted I think. Working towards, not doing it. This is all smoke and mirrors

highame · 12/07/2021 15:40

Have now got live Supreme Court. Textbook Stonewall from Elan Kane's lot

viques · 12/07/2021 15:37

@highame

I find this case a little bizarre. Gender isn't in UK law in the way Elan Kane wants. This would mean using the court to place something into UK law that hasn't been approved by parliament. I am probably wrong but that's how I see this.

I wonder if Denton's are her/his (now that has just cause me confusion) legal's.

Elan Kane’s pronouns are per. As in person.
Lonel · 12/07/2021 15:35

The whole thing is bonkers.
Granted. But also what is the point of having a neutral passport for international travel which certifies something which is not universally accepted? Why on earth would you want to travel on a passport which might not be accepted when you present it abroad?

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 12/07/2021 15:34

@highame

Not in UK law it's not. Have you managed to get on to the proceedings? I can't get the link to work
I've been watching the tweets, not the live stream
thirdfiddle · 12/07/2021 15:29

In logic, False => anything.
As soon as the law was logically inconsistent re mixing sex and gender, it's well nigh impossible to untangle. I wish the judges luck.

The whole thing is bonkers. This gender categorisation- basically a social construct loosely based on modes of dress and stereotypes around personality and interests. Why on earth would we want that on our passports? What is the benefit? Why would we ever want to separate people by this particular form of clan allegiance? Putting X particularly underlines that as X gender doesn't even have a loose association with a sex to borrow credibility from.

highame · 12/07/2021 15:28

Not in UK law it's not. Have you managed to get on to the proceedings? I can't get the link to work

impossibletoday · 12/07/2021 15:27

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f728d27a-e28b-11eb-a821-58982b1c936d?shareToken=d5bc4a3b065be5b4bff72b2f23330e9d

First attempt at share token, hopefully it will work