Well I didn't see this posted up on the news boards so forgive me if I missed it but I wanted to discuss this.

This is the article in question http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_15019001?source=most_viewed

The transgender person was born intersexed and found they had ovaries when they were younger and then had a sex change operation and legalized a female name. By the way the article talks, it doesn't seem like this person ever had their Birth Certificate changed.

Because of this, the transwoman and her partner (bio female) were able to get married because of the birth certificate which still says that the transwoman is male.

Don't mistake me, I think it's great that they were able to marry their partner if that is what they wished. But for a lot of others, they would never get that opportunity. In a legal sense, is this really fair?

It illustrates how unfair it is to prohibit same-sex marriage, when it can come to a doctor's (mis)judgment whether a union can be legal.

Quote from: Kaelin on May 05, 2010, 08:57:40 PM
It illustrates how unfair it is to prohibit same-sex marriage, when it can come to a doctor's (mis)judgment whether a union can be legal.

It was actually based on a Judge's decision, I believe. But I guess when it boils down to it, it's the doc's fault. Apparently the transwoman was raised as a boy and had some sort of operation as an infant.

But it isn't fair because legally there are only two genders and it isn't fair because in most places in the US you cannot have a same-sex marriage or have it legalized.

I think this is just some thin ice that is being tread on, legally.

The judge in the case 10 years ago said that people in texas are the sex originally placed on the texas birth certificate for purposes of marriage in texas, and it does not matter what is on a certified copy of a birth certificate that was amended by a judge.

In 2009, the texas legislature changed the law to specify that an original or certified birth certificate can be presented as ID, and so can a court ordered name and/or gender change.

So that old case is really out now.

I don't know for sure, but from what I've read it appears that, in this case, the transitioner did not legally change her sex.  She presented an original birth certificate and a court ordered name change, but not a court ordered gender change.  In other words, she chose to stay legally male for purposes of marriage.

Every other state or country I know in which the new sex of a transitioner can be recognized for purposes of marriage permits the transitioner to choose to stay the old sex for marriage purposes.  The alternative is to invalidate valid marriages against the will of the married couple upon transition of one of them.  So, even in a binary gender world, its only fair to let transitioners choose.  However, once the transitioner chooses to legally be the new sex, they are stuck with that unless they transition back.

It seems fair enough, except for the whole unfair BS about the binary gender prison they force us to fit within.

But I wonder how you would liek to treat hermaphodites, who literally have both sex organs.  Do you think they should be forced to have sexual specification surgery, or be prevented from marrying anyone until they do?

I think this case exemplifies how two wrongs don't make a right, and I think its a bit petty for gays to cry foul because they don't get to marry the person of their choice. But I see it happening on some other blogs.

I don't think that inter-sexed people should be operated on birth to be given a specific sex. I have heard of some parents who wouldn't allow it to be done to their child but some people still do it but I don't know how routine it is if the child is even slightly ambiguous.

It's really messy because its a lot simpler in a legal sense to have two genders. I don't think having a middle-gender/non-specified would be that hard to implement, legally, but then you'd still have the argument of same-sex marriage.

Quote from: Rhalkos on May 05, 2010, 10:00:03 PM
Actually, most parents do it, under the advice of the doctors.
I asked the local hospital how many intersex babies they dealt with each year. The reply was "None, we fix them so that they are not intersex."

Well you can't 'fix' inter-sex, since the genetics will always be there, but if you are talking genitals then yes I guess they could 'fix' it. I think it's a terrible thing to do. Unless there would be serious physical complications from being inter-sexed then they shouldn't be taking babies under the knife for it.

Quote from: Rhalkos on May 05, 2010, 10:10:23 PM
Plenty of intersex babies are normal XX or XY, their conditions are often based on anomalies in different gene sequences which cause deformation of the genitalia.
Other types of intersex babies can present with normal genital appearance, but will be variations of XX or XY.

Ah, ok. I guess I didn't quite understand what was included in the inter-sex spectrum; for some reason I always thought it was purely from a chromosomal standpoint. I read up about it just now though and you are right.

From what I'm reading on some blogs, some countries don't let intersexed people marry at all, even after having surgery to select a gender.  How fair is that?

Quote from: glendagladwitch on May 05, 2010, 09:43:19 PMHowever, once the transitioner chooses to legally be the new sex, they are stuck with that unless they transition back.

Except that, so far, we in the U.S. can choose which documents to change. I have friends with M on their driver's licenses and F on everything else. Some of those people are eligible to make other changes, but maybe they are lazy.

I'm male with California and the feds, but (for a number of reasons) my birth certificate remains unchanged. Lovely loophole. Maybe someday I can legally marry the man of my dreams, even if gay marriage isn't legal in my state.

---

Post Merge: May 05, 2010, 09:25:25 PM

---

Quote from: glendagladwitch on May 05, 2010, 10:18:03 PM
From what I'm reading on some blogs, some countries don't let intersexed people marry at all, even after having surgery to select a gender.  How fair is that?

I've heard that some STATES don't allow IS people to marry. Don't know if it's true.

---

Post Merge: May 05, 2010, 10:28:18 PM

---

In response to the original question, I'm mostly in line with Kaelin. It's not particularly fair, but that's because the law isn't fair in the first place.

Phate - Trust me on this intersex includes a number of conditions which range from very severe to quite mild.

All of them are caused by a small genetic fault but in most cases it is so tiny that it is just one cruical gene and certainly not a whole chromasome.

The particular condition that I have Anddrogen Insensitivity comes in five different grades too ranging from complete to mild - with partial as the most common form. In it's mildest form, which I have, it is often not even diagnosed until puberty or even later when fetility or other problems manifest themselves.

There is even some interesting work being done by Dr Vincent Harley in Melbourne which strongly indicates that for some people at least this is the route cause of trangender feelings as there is a varient on the andgrogen receptor gene specific to the brain... so if this version malfunctions whilst the more general version responsible to the body works then you end up with a female brain in a male body... sound familiar?

If this is correct then being trans is in itself a rather specialised form of intersex anyway.

But to return to the point, the judge is adopting the same legal position which existed for years in British law. It was inconsistent and it lead to much bad feeling between members of the trans and gay communities. So I sincerely hope that this silly situation is soon resolved.

Quote from: Rhalkos on May 06, 2010, 03:25:24 AM
Would you happen to have any papers or links on these different grades of AIS? I'd heard vague mention of them before (PartialAIS), but have never seen any professional writing on them. I've long suspected that I must have something similar, since I developed almost none of the secondary male characteristics (no body hair, no facial hair, andro body, etc).

Sure two from the AIS support groups and one from a general medical site asociated with the NHS should surfice.
http://www.intersexualite.org/AIS.html
http://www.aissg.org/21_OVERVIEW.HTM
http://www.thefamilygp.com/nhstopic/Androgen-insensitivity-syndrome.htm

Oh and here is a magazine article refering to the research on transpeople. Sadly I can't direct you to the original medical Research paper because it's on a paid for site. But this magazine article gives you a reasonable abstract of it.

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/health/278937/sex-change-men-born-with-female-like-brain.html