Susan's Place Logo

News:

Based on internal web log processing I show 3,417,511 Users made 5,324,115 Visits Accounting for 199,729,420 pageviews and 8.954.49 TB of data transfer for 2017, all on a little over $2,000 per month.

Help support this website by Donating or Subscribing! (Updated)

Main Menu

This really irritates me! (CA Name/Gender Change Process)

Started by Magnus, October 13, 2010, 08:58:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Magnus

Why is it that some states REQUIRE that you have had SRS to get your gender legally changed so that all of your documents (publically available, especially to employers) can be updated to reflect your correct and presented gender?

More to the point, why do we HAVE TO even be in physical transition AT ALL before we can be legally identified as the Men and Women that we already are and always have been?

I really don't understand this. To me, that is just plain cruel AND discriminatory/exclusionary because there are some of us who, for whatever reasons, CANNOT get SRS straight away if ever at all, HRT too... so why is that a requirement for everything but your ID/DL? Don't they know the damage this causes for many of us, especially now in a practically dead economy for those of us desperately trying to find some work, but meeting only rejection?

I only mention that last point because when many employers notice the discrepancy of this situation (yes, even here in CA), an appearing Male/Female which they actually find out to NOT be actually physically Male/Female based on their ID, Birth Certificate and SSN documents, we are dismissed 9 out of 10 times from the candidate pool of a job (I know, because it's been happening to me constantly for the last half of a decade, even Pre-T because I pass nearly 100% and I haven't gotten past an Interview yet to a real offer)!

Is there absolutely no way around this? Can these asinine and outdated laws be challenged so that we can get the true equality we deserve in this matter of legal gender markers on our documents if only to head off and avid these issues?

Also, does anybody know of any good pro bono LGBT-friendly lawyers who might be willing to fight this with us, or know where I might be able to find them?

I for one want to challenge this and get this clause abolished.



On a more personal note, I was going to go ahead and get that out of the way because I was going to take my step-father's last name and rather than have to go through this twice (once for my name, again for my gender marker later) in addition to PAYING twice, I wanted to kill two birds with one stone... now I can't, because of this ridiculous SRS-only policy! It has to go!


  •  

Summerfall

I agree completely. SRS should not be an obstacle to overcome, to validate us in the eyes of anyone but ourselves.

It reminds me of a great article posted on this site a while ago.

http://www.questioningtransphobia.com/?p=3175
Quote
What becomes particularly maddening about this is that we then find that cis people are saying we are the ones obsessed with genitalia. Fixation on the fact that some trans people include their genitals in a much larger program of transition is then projected back onto us as being our own fixation. It is summed up in a recent interview conducted by Oprah with Dr. Christine McGinn, a trans woman, where Oprah spoke of SRS as "the surgery that made you a woman." These are cis people's ideas, not ours. This is how they read us, not how many of us know ourselves. Some trans people may see no problem with such phrasing, but they have no right to define us all.
  •