Sex is immutable – part 2
Yesterday Steph blogged about sex being immutable; a few people were not so happy with what she blogged. Others laughed – that is what she intended a light-hearted piece.
Well, she can’t please all of the people all of the time, can she?
So this blog is more of a team effort between three of us – and we must emphasise this blog is principally about sex – not gender.
So let’s look again at “sex is immutable” – you can’t change sex.
As Steph mentioned in the first blog – legally, you can change sex by using the Gender Recognition Act.
In reality, it should be called the ‘Sex Recognition Act’ because successful applicants (about 12% of people are refused without leave to appeal) are given a new birth certificate recording the applicant’s preferred gender and sex.
But how do we define a “sex”?
In truth, it is very fundamental.
It is not if the human being can get an erection, produce and ejaculate sperm, grow a beard, be taller or more muscular.
It is not if the human being has a cervix, has periods, gives birth, can produce milk after giving birth, is smaller than those people who grow beards.
The fundamental criteria (according to societies norm) is the shape of the genitals at the time of birth.
There are no other tests.
People are not required in later life to take tests for feminity or masculinity. They are not required that they meet the norms of people who grow beards or give birth. They are not required to take DNA tests or tests for chromosomes or hormones.
The only test applied to everyone in the UK – is the shape of genitals.
And the fact is surgery can change the shape of genitals – that is, a sex change based on how we define sex at birth.
The fact that applied changes may well not work like most cisgender peoples genitals is wholly irrelevant – that is not the test.
The only test applied (rightly or wrongly) is the shape of genitals.
Yes, of course – but 100% TRUE.
The whole notion of our being recognised and registered incorrectly by sight and body shape was in fact cruelly highlighted with, amongst others, the sad case of David Reimer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer who was born in the ’60s at a time when the medical world fully believed we were defined only by our bodies, and in cases like this, medical procedures were carried out to alter the physical appearance of a babies deformed penis to surgically ‘change’ that person from male to female.
So to reiterate, 99% of people are likely to define sex by genital shape. Exactly as is done at birth.
So when people – trans people, now choose to change the shape of their genitals, often at considerable effort in time, psychiatric tests, embarrassment, physical pain and often by huge personal financial outlay – why is this country so unfair in awarding a Gender (should be Sex) Recognition Certificate?
In fact, unfair is not the right word; it is downright discrimination of the highest order.
These people have complied with the “test” of sex.
Other countries do it without question – even countries with the most extreme human rights record.
Iran, for instance!
But not the UK – we still make people go through a whole realm of bureaucracy even after surgery!
And Liz Truss has the UTTER GALL to say she is “kind to trans people – that the correct checks and balances are in place.”
Co-authored by Steph & Paul….aided by Claire.