News and Events => People news => Topic started by: Shana A on March 12, 2010, 05:57:29 AM Return to Full Version
Title: Australia is first to recognise 'non-specified' gender
Post by: Shana A on March 12, 2010, 05:57:29 AM
Post by: Shana A on March 12, 2010, 05:57:29 AM
Australia is first to recognise 'non-specified' gender
By Jane Fae • March 11, 2010 - 17:29
http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2010/03/11/australia-is-first-to-recognise-non-specified-gender/ (http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2010/03/11/australia-is-first-to-recognise-non-specified-gender/)
Australia may have made gender history this week, as the New South Wales government lays claim to being the first in the world to recognise an individual's sex as officially "not specified".
This milestone in the evolution of gender queer came about with the issuing of a 'Sex Not Specified' Recognised Details Certificate in place of a birth certificate to Norrie (also known as norrie mAy-Welby) a resident of Sydney.
By Jane Fae • March 11, 2010 - 17:29
http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2010/03/11/australia-is-first-to-recognise-non-specified-gender/ (http://gay.pinknews.co.uk/2010/03/11/australia-is-first-to-recognise-non-specified-gender/)
Australia may have made gender history this week, as the New South Wales government lays claim to being the first in the world to recognise an individual's sex as officially "not specified".
This milestone in the evolution of gender queer came about with the issuing of a 'Sex Not Specified' Recognised Details Certificate in place of a birth certificate to Norrie (also known as norrie mAy-Welby) a resident of Sydney.
Title: Re: Australia is first to recognise 'non-specified' gender
Post by: spacial on March 12, 2010, 06:23:29 AM
Post by: spacial on March 12, 2010, 06:23:29 AM
It's been said many times, but this is most likely going to be Australia's century.
The UK started the 20th century as the predominant power. It's deminse was, in no small part, due to its refusal to let go of outdated notions it believed were related to its own superiority.
The US seems to be in exactly the same position now. Too many people in positions of power, feeling insecure and attempting to hold onto silly notions.
I once heard a lecture by an historian who, at the time, was one of the most prominant, who claimed he couldn't see any patterns in history. Inspite of his status and my respect for him I found this very strange. I see patterns everywhere in history.
I don't gamble, but if I could live for another 100 years, I would lay money that the US will be where the UK is right now.
The UK started the 20th century as the predominant power. It's deminse was, in no small part, due to its refusal to let go of outdated notions it believed were related to its own superiority.
The US seems to be in exactly the same position now. Too many people in positions of power, feeling insecure and attempting to hold onto silly notions.
I once heard a lecture by an historian who, at the time, was one of the most prominant, who claimed he couldn't see any patterns in history. Inspite of his status and my respect for him I found this very strange. I see patterns everywhere in history.
I don't gamble, but if I could live for another 100 years, I would lay money that the US will be where the UK is right now.
Title: Re: Australia is first to recognise 'non-specified' gender
Post by: tekla on March 12, 2010, 07:24:22 AM
Post by: tekla on March 12, 2010, 07:24:22 AM
Well first off, Aussie Aussie. Oi Oi Oi!!! Australia lucked out because they only got the Irish Catholic criminals (and face it, being Irish was pretty much a crime in England at that time) while we got the religious nut-cases - The Puritans, Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson, Jonathan Edwards, and Cotton Mather (mmmm, spectral evidence). It's made a hell of a difference in the social histories of the two nations.
It's deminse was, in no small part, due to its refusal to let go of outdated notions it believed were related to its own superiority.
Nah, empires always fall for the same reason, and that they over-reach and extend their power out further than they can pay for it. They either go broke trying to defend the empire, or else give up and then you get barbarians at the gate.
he couldn't see any patterns in history. Inspite of his status and my respect for him I found this very strange. I see patterns everywhere in history.
I'm down with him. I don't see any patterns in any long range analysis of historical events. Which is why history is utterly unable to predict the future. That you, or I, see patterns, well that's just how our brain is hardwired - humans love to see patterns, and will see them even when they are not there. But history is just one damn thing after the other, there is no rhyme or reason to it.
if I could live for another 100 years, I would lay money that the US will be where the UK is right now.
Actually we seem to be mirroring the USSR far more than the UK when it comes to decline, collapse, and disintegration. And in 100 years we are going to be way, way past the end of oil, and the end of cheap energy and that is going to have (is having) a cataclysmic impact that has no historical antecedents or precedents.
It's deminse was, in no small part, due to its refusal to let go of outdated notions it believed were related to its own superiority.
Nah, empires always fall for the same reason, and that they over-reach and extend their power out further than they can pay for it. They either go broke trying to defend the empire, or else give up and then you get barbarians at the gate.
he couldn't see any patterns in history. Inspite of his status and my respect for him I found this very strange. I see patterns everywhere in history.
I'm down with him. I don't see any patterns in any long range analysis of historical events. Which is why history is utterly unable to predict the future. That you, or I, see patterns, well that's just how our brain is hardwired - humans love to see patterns, and will see them even when they are not there. But history is just one damn thing after the other, there is no rhyme or reason to it.
if I could live for another 100 years, I would lay money that the US will be where the UK is right now.
Actually we seem to be mirroring the USSR far more than the UK when it comes to decline, collapse, and disintegration. And in 100 years we are going to be way, way past the end of oil, and the end of cheap energy and that is going to have (is having) a cataclysmic impact that has no historical antecedents or precedents.
Title: Re: Australia is first to recognise 'non-specified' gender
Post by: mickie88 on March 12, 2010, 08:25:55 AM
Post by: mickie88 on March 12, 2010, 08:25:55 AM
didn't they technically already do this when they issued passports with X for the designated gender of persons?? X technically isn't a gender either, but it seemed the more transsexual people that showed up it would possibly become one??