Women who transitioned decades ago feel their safety and security has suddenly been removed
Last week’s supreme court ruling sent shock waves through the UK’s trans community.
The unanimous judgment said the legal definition of a woman in the Equality Act 2010 did not include transgender women who hold gender recognition certificates (GRCs).
That feeling was compounded when Kishwer Falkner, the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which is preparing new statutory guidance, said the judgment meant only biological women could use single-sex changing rooms and toilets.
Someone can present anyway they want, that doesn’t change their biological sex. If some countries look at your passport and think you look like a gender that doesn’t match their biological sex, so what?
So your middle ground is to not give passports to trans people that allows them safe passage. Literally, what passports were designed to do.
removed by mod
Why do you think sex is listed in passports? Do you think it is because it is important to understand the reproductive capabilities of the traveller or is it a data point that corresponds with appearance, like eye color?
I’m trying to imagine a scenario outside maybe immigration where a country a traveler visits would need to know your “biological sex” or “birth sex”.
Well I would think sex is more important to be on a passport because it is something that can’t be changed, like your birthday. So yes it is a data point, but not one related to your appearance. If you are using gender on a passport, it seems kind of pointless because you may identify one way but look like another.
But what is it for, why have sex on the passport at all? Why is it important to know the “biological sex” of a traveler? Have you been genetically scanned at a border crossing before?
Why have you birthday or place of birth on there then?
Ah go shove a pineapple up your ass. A big one.