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

Mandatory sterilization & trans men in Australia

Started by Shana A, April 12, 2010, 10:38:50 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Shana A


Mandatory sterilization & trans men in Australia
By Feature Writer | Published: April 11, 2010

http://globalcomment.com/2010/mandatory-sterilization-trans-men-in-australia/

The fight over reproductive rights keeps dragging on in the United States, but in Australia, hot-button issues like abortion and contraception are rarely a subject for public debate. In Australia, instead, a new front in the fight has opened for a new group – transgendered men. Two recent test cases in New South Wales and Western Australia have seen three trans men fight for the right to be legally male without being sterilized.

In both states, transgendered people of both sexes are allowed to change the sex on their birth certificates after they have had genital surgery (commonly known as SRS, Sexual Reassignment Surgery). Further evidence from GPs, endocrinologists, and psychiatrists are also required. This status quo has meant the compulsory sterilization of all transgendered people wishing to change their documents.
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken." Oscar Wilde


  •  

Britney_413

Here's a radical thought! How about allowing the individual themselves the right to decide whether or not they are transgendered? There is something intrinsically wrong when a sovereign human being cannot decide which gender they are or will be without medical and government approval. I don't understand why governments even assign genders in the first place. A photo ID shows a person's face. Why the government or anyone else needs to know what is hanging or hollowed out in a person's pants is beyond me. Is it going to get to the point where a person cannot decide if they are smart or strong without government approval. Gender as in most personal things should be something that is individual-directed, NOT government-directed.
  •  

LordKAT

Quote from: Britney_413 on April 13, 2010, 01:09:35 AM
Here's a radical thought! How about allowing the individual themselves the right to decide whether or not they are transgendered?

Individuals are allowed to decide. The article is talking about after that point.

There is something intrinsically wrong when a sovereign human being cannot decide which gender they are or will be without medical and government approval. I don't understand why governments even assign genders in the first place. A photo ID shows a person's face. Why the government or anyone else needs to know what is hanging or hollowed out in a person's pants is beyond me.

Actually, it is a part of telling who you are just as much as eye or hair color and usually just as noticeable. Now if they could leave it as sex and let gender be something else they might get somewhere.

Is it going to get to the point where a person cannot decide if they are smart or strong without government approval. Gender as in most personal things should be something that is individual-directed, NOT government-directed.

Government is not deciding gender, only stating that men should not have the ability to have children as females.  I am not saying I agree or disagree with that.

  •  

Britney_413

QuoteGovernment is not deciding gender, only stating that men should not have the ability to have children as females.  I am not saying I agree or disagree with that.

That is the cornerstone of my point. That is not up to the government to decide. Since the government obviously believes that transmen should be sterilized, a better plan would be to sterilize the politicians so that we could get a better generation of lawmakers.
  •  

Silver

Quote from: Britney_413 on April 14, 2010, 01:24:31 AM
That is the cornerstone of my point. That is not up to the government to decide. Since the government obviously believes that transmen should be sterilized, a better plan would be to sterilize the politicians so that we could get a better generation of lawmakers.

Lol.
  •  

rejennyrated

This one will run and run until the day that someone manages some sort of stem cell manipulation chromasomal gene therapy leading to a true sex change in a human.

I personally believe that such an outcome is probably a lot closer to being possible than most people think. I am pretty confident that within the next 70 years it will happen at some point.

At that point ALL the laws will have to be rewritten because otherwise they will be faced with someone who is chromasomally and biologically completely the sex they now present as, fertile, possibly now a parent and yet still legally recorded as the opposite sex from that which, at that point, they will unambiguously be.
  •  

Rock_chick

Quote from: rejennyrated on April 14, 2010, 02:14:46 AM
This one will run and run until the day that someone manages some sort of stem cell manipulation chromasomal gene therapy leading to a true sex change in a human.

I personally believe that such an outcome is probably a lot closer to being possible than most people think. I am pretty confident that within the next 70 years it will happen at some point.

Hopefully it will be sooner, humanity has the potential to make some exponential leaps in various sciences and technologies in the next 50 to 100 years...unless of course we see repressive legislative controls grounded in fear. 
  •  

justmeinoz

In my State, Victoria, the definition of surgery of reproductive organs covers the case of people who have a double mastectomy , so there is a precedent if their lawyers take this issue further. I have a close relative who had no trouble getting their name , drivers licence etc changed.
"Don't ask me, it was on fire when I lay down on it"
  •  

Britney_413

The problem I have is when government decides that it knows what is best for you and that you couldn't possibly be smart enough to make your own decisions without their help. Maybe some day scientists will be able to grow reproductive organs allowing for a complete and full transition. That still does not mean people should be required to do so. There would likely still be trans people of different types. Some would want to present as the other gender but not have all the procedures done. Some may just be occasional crossdressers. It is up to the individual to decide how to live, not Uncle Sam. They may even create a pill that would change gay people to straight. That doesn't mean that any gay person should be required to do so.

Here is how I believe transgendered care should be handled:

1. Gender on DL or ID is self-identifable. No questions asked.
Anyone may use the bathroom for the gender they are presenting or self-identifying. No letters or papers needed.
2. Trans people who would like therapy may do so but such decisions are optional.
3. Any trans person who wishes to take hormones may do so. No law would require a prescription or even that they see a doctor or pharmacy. Pharmacies may elect to refuse and require a doctor referral and they would be strongly recommended to be under the care of a physician for their own health and safety. Regardless, no law would be in place requiring gatekeepers for any of this.
4. If an individual wants SRS or other surgeries, that is between them and the surgeon. No surgeon is required to provide the surgery or deny the surgery per any law.

Do I think it is wise to do things properly? Do I think people should seek therapy, make sure that they are in good shape to receive HRT as determined by their doctors, and live RLE before making a decision they might regret? Absolutely. There is a difference, however, between strongly recommending something and outright requiring it. I don't believe in forced safety. If people screw up their lives, it is called personal responsibility. If one doctor is strict about RLE and another is not, it is called the free market.

The point is that there is no reason that the government should be anywhere in the picture with the possible exception of licensing the physicians that treat us. Trying to protect us from ourselves is a bunch of hogwash. If people think it is working, ask yourself why so many TG people are injecting hormones bought illegally off the street and going to other countries for SRS to bypass all of the regulations here. People want what they want and don't need permission from the state to get what they want. It is called freedom. Enough said.
  •  

LordKAT

Quote from: Britney_413 on April 15, 2010, 01:00:00 AM
The problem I have is when government decides that it knows what is best for you and that you couldn't possibly be smart enough to make your own decisions without their help. Maybe some day scientists will be able to grow reproductive organs allowing for a complete and full transition. That still does not mean people should be required to do so. There would likely still be trans people of different types. Some would want to present as the other gender but not have all the procedures done. Some may just be occasional crossdressers. It is up to the individual to decide how to live, not Uncle Sam. They may even create a pill that would change gay people to straight. That doesn't mean that any gay person should be required to do so.

Uncle Sam has yet to tell an individual how to live, especially in Australia.

Here is how I believe transgendered care should be handled:

1. Gender on DL or ID is self-identifable. No questions asked.
Anyone may use the bathroom for the gender they are presenting or self-identifying. No letters or papers needed.
This is already true, at least it is for any place I have ever been.
2. Trans people who would like therapy may do so but such decisions are optional.
Agreed
3. Any trans person who wishes to take hormones may do so. No law would require a prescription or even that they see a doctor or pharmacy. Pharmacies may elect to refuse and require a doctor referral and they would be strongly recommended to be under the care of a physician for their own health and safety. Regardless, no law would be in place requiring gatekeepers for any of this.

Major disagreement here. Hormones over the counter and not regulated in any way would create more problems, not less. Leave them as prescription drugs. I do think more doctors are needed who will work with Trans patients.

4. If an individual wants SRS or other surgeries, that is between them and the surgeon. No surgeon is required to provide the surgery or deny the surgery per any law.

This is also already the way it is.

Do I think it is wise to do things properly? Do I think people should seek therapy, make sure that they are in good shape to receive HRT as determined by their doctors, and live RLE before making a decision they might regret? Absolutely. There is a difference, however, between strongly recommending something and outright requiring it. I don't believe in forced safety. If people screw up their lives, it is called personal responsibility. If one doctor is strict about RLE and another is not, it is called the free market.

The point is that there is no reason that the government should be anywhere in the picture with the possible exception of licensing the physicians that treat us. Trying to protect us from ourselves is a bunch of hogwash. If people think it is working, ask yourself why so many TG people are injecting hormones bought illegally off the street and going to other countries for SRS to bypass all of the regulations here. People want what they want and don't need permission from the state to get what they want. It is called freedom. Enough said.


Doctors don't want to risk their license by not following the SOC guidelines. They are not required to follow them. Doctors in other countries are used usually for price not regulation problems. Quality of work has a bit to do with that also.
  •  

Shana A

Quote from: Britney_413 on April 15, 2010, 01:00:00 AM
Here is how I believe transgendered care should be handled:

1. Gender on DL or ID is self-identifable. No questions asked.

I don't believe that specifying gender should be necessary at all. My gender has nothing to do with my ability to drive (except perhaps when it comes to parallel parking)  ;D

"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken." Oscar Wilde


  •  

LordKAT

Quote from: Zythyra on April 15, 2010, 06:27:05 AM
I don't believe that specifying gender should be necessary at all. My gender has nothing to do with my ability to drive (except perhaps when it comes to parallel parking)  ;D



Hair color doesn't affect how you drive either. The point is to identify you. We keep saying sex is physical and gender in your head. Then sex on your DL is a physical trait although very difficult to tell for certain with clothes on. Gender however is self identified.

I get the point, but the argument doesn't work.
  •  

Silver

Quote from: Britney_413 on April 15, 2010, 01:00:00 AM
3. Any trans person who wishes to take hormones may do so. No law would require a prescription or even that they see a doctor or pharmacy. Pharmacies may elect to refuse and require a doctor referral and they would be strongly recommended to be under the care of a physician for their own health and safety. Regardless, no law would be in place requiring gatekeepers for any of this.

Female bodybuilders- lying for steroids perhaps?

People could screw themselves up and sue the pharmacy (or whatever drug provider you have in mind.)
  •