X on the passport, why not?

[quencher]

Why are transgender people not arguing for “X” instead of male and female identification in their passport. The government seems to backing the male and female only i identification in passport and driving license and all other things that need sex/gender to be identified.
I know some of trans people want the x and have been campaigning for it. However, a lot more trans campaigners seem to be more focused on the blurred line which will affect women the most. This seem to be their aim and not their own space for acceptance.

Why don’t they fight to be accepted for who they are and not what they want people to think they are? I am black, so I am. You are white, and so you are? And this is one those characteristics that can be very ambiguous at its best. (Not just with black and white but other races too). Anyone in between can be mixed race, biracial, dual heritage or whatever name they think best describes them. I have no intention of becoming white, no would I get get way with it. Even Rachael delozal new she was white.

I just don’t get it, all I see is men exerting their power and dominance because they can. They are being selfish for doing so and inconsiderate. We are not the people being inconsiderate because we love trans people for who they are. It’s something they should be proud off. Being yourself takes courage, self worth and strength and fuck you to anyone who is negative about it. Hiding behind women will not eradicate their issues nor will it make them feel better because you know who your are. No amount of word changes and it’s definitions will make you become what you are not. You know it and I know it, so will the scientist or any human being with intelligence. I could bleach my skin, wear wigs and weaves till kingdom come, but I will never be white. I know that and lying to myself will not make me feel any better. I can use those to assimilate, the same way you would use hormones, but it can never change who you are nor will it do the same to me. They are all aesthetics not set in stone.

It’s tackling the people who disagree with who I am is what is important. Making sure that people growing up and coming behind me are accepted. Trans people should do the same and not hide.

Also, It will not make their space safer if you try to blend in with women. We as women, our space is not safe. we are not the threats to trans people’s lives, Men are. They always have been and it will not stop by hiding behind us. As a black woman, we have always had threats against us, the assumption that we are less than. We have never taken to street to say we are all white now to be considered the same. Of cause we’re all females because we share the same or biology by definition. but we also, know that there are women of all different races and all should be accepted for who they are with all our differences and quarks. However, that is not sex. People who don’t identify with their sex should be accepted for who they are.

Looks does not change character and belief. Being woman will not eradicate violence by virtue of becoming one because of social conditioning. We know that and you know that too. Saying I am a white woman will not eradicate racism when I am black. Nor will be for those who want to be trans and are ok with being trans.

By eradicating the trans space and joining the two sexes, becoming male or female with no other space left leaves those who would like to remain as trans in an wanted position that will be frowned upon. I can easily see those who will refuse to identify as either male or female being targeted for holding the trans community back.
I guess the X would be a good start to keep that space. And why not.

I have I got the x concept wrong? I hope not!

(And please! no comeback with men face violence too because the majority of violence men face is by men.)

(Purposely not using the word tolerance because it offers space for those who hold negative views about other people but are ok to be in the same space as long as they are not breaking the law)

Autogynephilia.

Which is not a flippant, one word answer.

What is the point of asserting you are actually a woman unless you have a huge, compelling motivation.

And I don’t think anyone, anywhere is under any illusion about how sex motivates men (NAMALT).

I suppose it hinges on why we have male/female on passports in the first place. I don't know, but I assume it helped with ID in the olden days. Maybe it's not needed now we have biometrics, in which case we could just dispense with it altogether rather than adding X (because how long would it be before we heard 'wah wah wah you're oppressing me, I'm not an X, I demand a Z on my passport!' etc.)

Passports are there to help you travel though, so we'd need all the countries to accept passports without sex markers (or with an X marker) or they'd be useless.

On your wider point, if I understand correctly - why can't trans people just be proud to be trans rather than insisting they are the opposite sex? I agree. I think this is something Miranda Yardley has written about - that it's actually transphobic to deny one's transness and insist you simply are the opposite sex.

I just don’t get it, all I see is men exerting their power and dominance because they can.

I don't think there's much else to 'get' really! Once you understand that, the whole convoluted mess becomes clear.

Trans activists dont want to be trans, they want to be women. They wont settle for anything less. Its why they dont want a third gender neutral toilet/changing room/hospital ward.
When they claim they are being eradicated its to cover the fact that they are the ones eradicating the class of women by destroying the definition.

IDK if you've come across Rod Fleming on YouTube, but he talks about autogynephilia;

AGP and narcissistic rage;

Those that don't want X, don't want it because it outs them as being trans rather than born male/female.
It's a circle that can't be squared IMO.

It would be so much easier if the TRAs were proud to be trans and accepted it's different to being "cis" but they aren't.

It's privilege in itself to be able to feel you can hide your difference, as you say quencher you saying you are white won't change the way a racist treats you. Similarly that trans man in the hostel recently wasn't protected from being raped because they felt male

DJBaggySmalls

Those two videos were absolutely fascinating. They should be required viewing for every MP.

Although the journalist, Rod Fleming, doesn’t think much of feminists.

He is of the opinion that hormones dictate certain types of behaviour and therefore gender is not entirely constructed.

As it’s not really measurable, you can’t tell what is learned and what isn’t, and you will always find exceptions, it doesn’t really bother me one way or the other. (Although I do believe gender is largely socially constructed, I’ve always been slightly on the fence as to exactly how much. Whether it’s 90% or 100%).

But he absolutely nailed autogynephilia. AGP is one of those things that people don’t know about, but soon as you do, by God, does everything slot into place.

It’s almost beyond comprehension that governments are legislating for a fetish.

And he estimates that AGP individuals make up 60% of transwomen.

I have long thought they outnumber your homosexual transsexual.

Thanks Mn for replying.

@PencilsInSpace thanks re-biometrics. I guess the x on the passport was an example of where sex is being used as form of identification. What has also been in a debate recently was gender being the identifier on driving licenses while sex for birth certificate. The passport is secondary to a birth certificate as is the driving license. I would assume it would be best to stick with what you are born as in your birth certificate and for other ids, x can represents the unknown or those who see themselves differently.

Even if, biometrics were to extend to birth certificates in the future, which it will (I can’t see it not happening), and also, unless the world is less sexist, keeping the sex as it is important for the sake of female representation in both science and society. If not, we will be the group which will be ignored for ever more. Men are the default group at the moment and that will continue and there will be no way of fighting it when you have the same patriarchal force (ie from those who are men and those men who identify as women) fighting you from both sides to try and hold the status quo.

Trans activists dont want to be trans, they want to be women. They wont settle for anything less. I guess this is what I getting wrong. I thought most would be happy to be trans and I was ok for them to have their space and be happy. I still do for them to be in that space. Naive of me to think there can be a medium. I have always advocated for this middle ground because I thought it was because of abuse, hatred and lack of acceptance by people.

Those that don't want X, don't want it because it outs them as being trans rather than born male/female.
It's a circle that can't be squared IMO. I now understand this bit too. I would love to know the reasoning behind it. What the aim is and why?

As it’s not really measurable, you can’t tell what is learned and what isn’t, and you will always find exceptions, it doesn’t really bother me one way or the other. (Although I do believe gender is largely socially constructed, I’ve always been slightly on the fence as to exactly how much. Whether it’s 90% or 100%). This ^
I think to deny such a thing exist is nuts. By accepting blue or pink brains it takes the responsibility away from society. Leaving science as a means of which life is dictated by and ruled, and social behaviour being ignored because we should be able to assume you are born that way. If that’s the case, what’s the point in having criminal laws and social norms to monitor human behaviour and social constructs

Yes, thanks for those videos DJBaggySmalls. One thing that strikes me from the second video is that we are now in a society that is so trans positive that the AGP trans are no longer repressing their fetish for 20-30 years, but rather they are transitioning as teenagers/early 20s. Hence, the very aggressive, narcissistic traits that are all too common in transactivists.

The comments below the video were very thought-provoking for me and I'm still thinking through all the conflicting science about brain sex. I would love a definitive answer about innate v socialisation of gender but science seems to have studies that support any school of thought!

Rod Fleming says there is no difference in the brains of children but hormones at puberty cause innate differences between male and females brains and behaviour, and he is quick to jump to the conclusion that therefore woman should not be fighter pilots.

Whereas, from what I understand, Cordelia Fine says any brain differences between the sexes is caused by learned behaviour from the way boys and girls are treated and socialised differently. Therefore, a woman is just as likely to excel as a fighter pilot as any man if society gives girls this message and the same opportunities and boys.

I'm not sure science can ever accurately pin this down. Brains of pre-socialised babies can be examined but these will be lacking in the effects of adult hormones. Similarly, adult brains cannot be examined without excluding the effects of socialisation.

And I don't think it really matters at the end of the day. If gender was abolished and everyone was genuinely free to follow their interests there might be 50% female fighter pilots if socialisation theory is correct; their might only be 10% if innate brain gender theory is correct. But as long as there is no male/female hierarchy in play, who cares?

Pretty much the same conclusion you reached Datun! I was a bit perturbed at how quickly Rod Fleming jumped to blaming feminsists, and you certainly don't want to read his article on prostitution rodfleming.com/prostitution-woman-choose/.

And actually, even if gender was abolished and gender innate theory is wrong, as a society we are never going to have 50% female fighter pilots purely down to female biology. Pregnancy, childbirth and natural term breastfeeding are incompatible with our capitalistic working v family society.

So feminists can never prove men wrong over this innateness!

I love the endless 'donate' buttons in a blog about prostitution

But coming back to the point of the thread, sex is a protected characteristic. Sex is a biological classification system. No woman has male genitals.
If there is going to be a legal challenge, it will probably need to be while we are still covered by Human Rights legislation. It will be a test case and that makes me very nervous.

There is no society that permits women to have equality or agency. We are no longer permitted to define ourselves, and we will soon lose the right to free association.
Men will support trans rights, right up until the point where they realise they can no longer ask their intended sexual partner if they have a penis or not, and they've just created the kind of anti free sex on demand society the Right wanted all along.

*Those that don't want X, don't want it because it outs them as being trans rather than born male/female.
It's a circle that can't be squared IMO. I now understand this bit too. I would love to know the reasoning behind it. What the aim is and why?

quencher

Watch the two videos. The first one is very short. And all your questions will be answered.

BetsyM00

Before he actually mentioned feminism, or anything to do with it, his language was giving him away, to me.

He, like all men, does not realise the privilegehe he is steeped in.

And that part of it was also fairly fascinating.

He’s clearly an intelligent, well informed man who has broken down the trans-ideology into its constituent parts, very accurately. What’s interesting is he is concentrating on the sexual aspect. And ignoring the reasons why firstly gender is damaging and secondly why gender roles are at the root of this.

He comes right out and says if there was no gender you wouldn’t have trans. Whilst having no, or little, analysis of why we have gender roles in the first place.

He is happy to acknowledge that socialisation plays a part, but cannot detach himself from the idea of a lot of it being innate.

His response to some of the comments, again, were steeped in sexism.

Fascinating. And his inability to apply his thinking to any form of self analysis doesn’t, in my opinion, detract from him absolutely nailing the ideology in general.

It is fascinating, and has given me a morning of thought!

He is, as you say, intelligent and well informed, so it perturbed me to read him stating as scientific fact that there are innate brain and gender differences and dismissing out of hand the questioning feminist voice in the comments section. But it is just not possible to know this - we are simply not able to analyse adult brains that have not been socialised and had their structure altered by behaviour patterns.

To be fair, he did say that trans people were treating women appallingly - but then said feminists brought it upon their selves.

And he would be Scottish as well. I love hearing our accents on screen, but now I'm faintly disappointed!

IKR! Is it impossible for people to self analyse? Even when we are well informed or well educated - is this part of the problem?

Rod claims prostitution is about agency and cites female power over men, while feminists say its the opposite & prostitution is from a position of need not choice.
Is it this mystical female power that AGP's fetishize and need to control?

Going back to the X on passports, someone has just won the right to have a judicial review on the matter: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41582874. This has been fought more for non-binary people who see themselves as neither male nor female. As said before TIMs don't want this - they want the opposite sex label.

Although which sex would carry out out the airport searches on X-people is a dilemma.

Always amuses me to see the contradictory arguments being fought by TIMs and NBs all under the transgender label.

Always amuses me to see the contradictory arguments being fought by TIMs and NBs all under the transgender label.

I agree that the goals conflict. Which is why I still struggle with the incessant inclusion of non-binary under trans-. They go out of their way to include it.

I’m lead back to the thought that they want it to be fluid so that they can be Susie on Saturday and Mark again on Monday.

Maybe. If, as in that Rod Fleming video, there is no longer the social pressure for 20 years of suppression of the 'female' personality before it takes over completely in AGP trans, perhaps we are getting the public version of binge and purge?

Absolutely. Philip (Pips) Bunce , the credit Suisse executive who alternates between male and female.

All his Christmases have come at once. He can in enact his fetish in plain sight, and be lauded for it.

No outside need to purge, but if internally he feels he needs to, guess what he shows up as Philip not Pips.

I will be interested in the outcome of the judicial review. Plus it should be in the papers etc when it happens and most people think non binary gender identities are ridiculous so hopefully it will highlight the absurd demands of this group. Who are largely self absorbed navel gazing people and this will come out loud and clear.