Now this appears to be a shitpost, but it is actually worth discussing

Just makes us more delusional as a society. There is a clear biological difference between male and female and those differences aren't arbitrary, and they have distinct physiological and psychological implications. To upend truth and medical science for the feelings of a few people with a mental disorder is peak 2018.

Just because you "feel" you're a woman, doesn't mean you are. And if you've never actually been a woman you can hardly pretend to know what one feels like anyway. There are a whole range of schisms and discorders that exist that make people think they're something that they're not but I am not sure why it is this particular one that has taken a foothold and allowed itself to infect the rest of our society. Soon we will be invited to share the delusions of schizophrenics, because what is reality anyway, rather than our brains decoding of data? Let's just get rid of the concept of truth and live in la la land.

Just makes us more delusional as a society. There is a clear biological difference between male and female and those differences aren't arbitrary, and they have distinct physiological and psychological implications. To upend truth and medical science for the feelings of a few people with a mental disorder is peak 2018.

Just because you "feel" you're a woman, doesn't mean you are. And if you've never actually been a woman you can hardly pretend to know what one feels like anyway. There are a whole range of schisms and discorders that exist that make people think they're something that they're not but I am not sure why it is this particular one that has taken a foothold and allowed itself to infect the rest of our society. Soon we will be invited to share the delusions of schizophrenics, because what is reality anyway, rather than our brains decoding of data? Let's just get rid of the concept of truth and live in la la land.

World gone mad.

"The same as if you are sexually attracted to the opposite sex, conversations around sexual orientation would have sounded ridiculous 15 years ago.

Your perspective on same sex marriage has probably changed in that time. Eventually, the perspective on gender will, too.

So maybe this is 'peak 2018' and your perspective is 'peak 1998.'"

-----

Well, how about no? People have always understood that homosexuality exists. They may not have always embraced and agreed with it, but the fact that there are people of the same sex who are sexually attracted to eachother is an objective truth. "Hannah" Mousey thinking "she" can play professional football with women because "she" is a woman despite being 100 kilos and still having an operating penis is not someone living with objective truth any more than a painted cat is a zebra.

-----

"Why not acknowledge the existence of trans people and have actual policies in place to deal with situations where they wish to compete in - generally - women's sport despite having been born male. You can't develop or implement those policies if you're busy running around shouting "it's a mental disorder lalala.""


----

Trans people exist, insomuch as there exists people who believe they are the opposite gender. But to pretend their belief is reality and gives them an access pass into the realm of the other gender is straight up crazy. Putting transwomen in womens jails, toilets and gyms has already proven to be a volatile issue for the biological women who have to deal with it. Hannah Mousey is a severe injury risk to the women 'she' is playing against. Men and women are different and have different spaces in the community for a reason, and that reason is often to safeguard women. I find it disingenuous for us to say as a society that we care about violence towards women and then say, "yeah, 100 kilo ruckman with a wig, go play against those women half your size. Don't worry about leaving them in a wheelchair. Your feelings matter!"

Not saying we have to be cruel to transpeople, run around calling them names, discriminating against them or harassing them, but reality is reality.,

Im feeling more and more disconnected with the (modern) world...

being homosexual or not does not come into my 1st post. What I am asking is if there is no gender given on your birth certificate, how in later life are you classified in society and in sport?

Are we all the same gender?

Food for thought is spot on, and I'll add that in a society with no gender on birth certificates, it is so easy to gain an advantage by claiming to be a woman if you're in fact a biological man.

But hey, women's sport would become a more commercially attractive package (as opposed to the other kind of attractiveness) because of the quality of play, which is what they want. So hey, maybe Tasmania is on to something. Maybe it's a good thing.

And in response to #713542, the child would know it's male and the parents would know it's male, but it's easy to make a living being a male athlete in a female competition isn't it. Some parents would tell their child that they should classify themselves as female because it's better for their career prospects. Parents in sport are weird and extreme enough as it is, you don't want to introduce this shit.

So because of the .5% of humanity who feel this way we are all letting it be imposed on us-i already lived in a communist country & was dictated how to think,now i live in one of the biggest democracies & the same all over again.

How about you people with left-wing values actually conduct debate the way it should be, with facts and statistics.

"Holy shit, this is the hottest of hot takes!!!"

"Oh FFS!!! You're seriously going to draw a comparison to the ongoing domestic violence issue with a one-off concern about a man/woman who doesn't quite fit in with the norms of the world?"

Those two comments mean absolutely nothing and turn discussion into mud slinging. It's pathetic. It's obviously the same person, because of the use of exactly three exclamation marks. Seriously, person, your contribution is shit.

Can we talk more about how this issue impacts sport specifically? I feel like some good discussion can take place.

Skull, I like your comment. It could have been straightforward to just simply promote greater respect for the LBGTxxxx community but the fact things are taken as far as they have is a red flag that there's something a whole lot more political to it all and in my opinion an ungodly and anti-godly agenda, disguised and dressed up as human rights (IMO the string pullers behind it don't care two hoots about the LBGTxxx community). We've seen unsavory governance take shape and gain control elsewhere in the world throughout history and history has and does continue to repeat itself. Commonly tyrannous governments have sought to introduce methods designed to break down the stronghold of family structure.

AshT,spot on, but I'd say "break down 'social' structure."

Family structure inherently follows.

Violence toward women generally speaks to a societal mentality, but its roots lie in the safety of women. I see no problem with what FFT said.

There is overwhelming evidence that shows a transgender child does not remain transgender when they get older. Almost as though it's either a phase or they don't know themselves enough to make that decision (you know, because they are children).

^the majority of trans children, I should say

The minute you deny fact (fact that comes from over a dozen different objective studies, no less) is the minute you lose a debate.

I'm out.

Really good points FFT, Manu, AshT, concerned et al... apart from the anon.

Go ahead and post them since you see to be the resident expert?

An anon on hoops posting some form of evidence.

The end is nigh.

I agree with FoodForThought. This is PC gone absolutely crazy.

In days of old when record keeping was poor, and many people literate, recording gender (and sometimes race/colour) was considered an unchangeable part of your identity.
As the fundamental record of birth, gender was likewise considered a fundamental element of that record.

In theory, I don't oppose this measure. On the basis that for many things people should not be classified by gender. If a kid wants to learn ballet, and another wants to become a demolition expert, why should gender factor in to it?

But yes, I can foresee a problem when the birth certificate is the primary means of identification and it comes to situations (eg sport) in which genders are split.

The biggest problem I feel, especially with young children, is that any "disconnect" is more likely to be created by a whackjob parent than by the actual child.

the previous post stated "We are classified as the gender we identify with"

How is this governed in junior/senior sport? Do you believe it is OK for girls to be at a physical disadvantage playing against "boys" who identify as girls.

I am only concerned about an even playing field for the majority of people, junior or adult. How many WNBL players would get a game in the NBL?

In all aspects of life, the minority appear to be running the show.

So if we have the WNBL - should it not also be the MNBL ? - By just calling it the NBL we are saying the mens league is the National League - but it is not as both genders are equal.

I am asking, how will all issues be administered without gender.

Retirement age , insurance , apart from sport are currently rated/different for male/female.

If we are to have no gender, is it the best solution for the majority?

What is the purpose of this change? I don't know whether this is a movement to individualise us or de-individualise us? With this gender debate, you can either create new labels within a category, remove labels/categories, or keep the status quo.

If we are departuring from categorising labels, are we leading to a single label, "citizen"?

The reality is that the government and companies need these distinguishing labels. They need to base actuarial and other statistical analysis on data using labels such as age, gender, income, marital status, area of residence etc. Sensible drivers, healthy people, and so on, that deviate from their statistically predicted status, are disadvantaged. Remove these labels altogether and those healthy/sensible people will be further disadvantaged. Is that alternative fair?


It's abnormal to be normal in a wide set of categories, so most of us are a minority in some way. If we appeal to one specific minority group, we have to ask, will we do so with every other minority group? To not do so would be to discriminate, which is surely the main objection of the minority group. But to do so would become farcical. The alternative is to just accept that sometimes you are given a label and sometimes that doesn't accurately reflect who you are.

"Most of the posts here can be summarised as "I can't understand the situation because its not something I am personally experiencing, but I'm going to say its wrong regardless.""

It is scientifically, biologically, and just factually wrong. Someone's experience, aka their thoughts, do not change reality.

------

"Oh FFS!!! You're seriously going to draw a comparison to the ongoing domestic violence issue with a one-off concern about a man/woman who doesn’t quite fit in with the norms of the world?"

Yeah, way to grossly mischaracterize what I said. I suppose when you can't make a valid point it is best to strawman the person you're debating against into views they don't even hold. I said there's a reason why there are men's and womens spaces, and explained why, and you ignored that and conflated the argument to be me having a personal vandetta against people who are different. Give yourself an uppercut, champ.

----

"What has been imposed on you, ringlord? Living in a democracy doesn't mean the rights of minorities are trampled on just because things they want make you feel uncomfortable. "

It's about more than uncomfortable. A society that panders to lunacy and delusion is not a healthy society, and everyone has a right to an opinion on that. When you start denying objective truths in some areas you open the door to doing it in other areas as well. Transgender people do not have a "right" to circumvent biology for their feelings because it makes them feel uncomfortable.

-----

"Quite frankly if you are concerned about who is using a bathroom you weird. You enter the bathroom, you use the bathroom you leave. Bathrooms are for the personal elimination of waste. As long as you are doing it in a clean and appropriate manner it's not anyone's business what stall you use."

Survey women. Say nothing about transgender. Ask if they would like a man in the bathroom stall next to them. And then you tell me whether there is an issue here.

------

"Violence toward women generally speaks to a societal mentality, but its roots lie in the safety of women. I see no problem with what FFT said."

Yes, violence towards women exists. So does violence towards men (and there is technically more violence on men than on women in our society but that's another topic). We cannot control all situations where genders mix, but we need to accept that biological women are generally not able to defend themselves against biological men, and therefore we need to keep them separate in areas where those women are most vulnerable. I'd count toilets among those places, wouldn't you? Hey, no is assuming all men or all transgenders are a threat to women but we do have to act with the understanding that the potential is definitely there and put the safety of the vulnerable above the feelings of the unhinged.

--------

"There is overwhelming evidence that shows a transgender child does not remain transgender when they get older. Almost as though it's either a phase or they don't know themselves enough to make that decision (you know, because they are children)."

There is a movie about this called "I want my sex back". Many of the transgender suicides are caused by the sex change.

----

"If size is such a massive issue, I hope they stop Aaron Sandilands playing in the same league as Caleb Daniel."

Isn't as simple as just size. Men's abilities to overcome physical injuries are better than womens. And even if you compare that size difference, even in men and women the same size, the man will have more bone and muscle density even if from outside they fit the exact same shape. Literally comparing a small and large apple, and a small and large orange, to a small apple and a large orange and thinking you have the same thing. You don't.

-----

"No, minorities are asking to have things considered from their perspective for certain things. As always, that is met with privileged responses such as yours.

It was barely 50 years ago that African-Americans didnt have the same rights to vote as white citizens of the US. There would have been those that thought minorities were running the show then too."

That's not even comparable. You're suggesting we change the way we document births to appease people with psychological difficulties with black people not being allowed to vote? Is that really what you're doing here? You're going to pretend they're equivalent?

"Did you respond with a strawman of your own with any sort of irony there?"


What I did wasn't a strawman. He literally compared the two. He compared black man not getting the vote to transgenders having a little bit of noise against upending how we document births. There was nothing false about it.

"So if we have the WNBL - should it not also be the MNBL ? - By just calling it the NBL we are saying the mens league is the National League - but it is not as both genders are equal."

I would say it means the NBL is open to all basketballers where the WNBL is open to only female basketballers.

It's funny how these people think they are a member of a different group because their beliefs or feelings don't align with the stereotyped idea of what a person of that gender should be. They are so wrapped up in the concept of group identity that their first thought is to say they are of a different group. They should instead see themselves as a single person who doesn't conform to the steoertyes of that gender. Can't that just make them a 'different kind of boy' or 'different kind of girl'?

If this was a genuine condition, then why do so many backflip on their gender choice later in life? For that simple fact alone, it screams of a psychological disorder. Like a personality disorder.

We're supposed to be in a country of free speech...

So when Hanna Mouncey was refused entry into AFLW, people came out publicly to dissaprove the decision, but what's to be said about all of the AFLW players who didn't want Moncey to be allowed to play but were too scared to publically say how they felt?

Democracy? Dictatorship? Or do we live in a democratic dictatorship?

I think there will be a lot on un-intended consequences.

Identifying a gender on a birth certificate is used by a lot of government departments for a lot of different reasons. What is the process to now determine gender for those departments? Did you just assume my gender?

As far as basketball is concerned, gender is used to separate boys and girls for many reasons, including OHS. A parent producing a birth certificate is generally not used to make that distinction, a both certificate is typically the way to settle the argument if necessary.

Netball could be in a bit of trouble. From what I understand, they discriminate against boys from playing with the girls once they turn 12.

"Telethon instute and Harvard I'll take the latter. "

You haven't seen how ridiculously left wing universities have got recently have you? I don't see how you can discredit one thing that is far right but be completely down with something that is far left. When most of these people come from a background of feminist gender theory I think I'd take Brietbart over that any day.

Transgenderism is a mental illness

So as somebody wrote above that minority should not make me feel uncomfortable,well if future children have to learn to be gender free then i have a big problem with it.A conspiracy to break up the traditional family unit is in swing big time,most sheeple going along accordingly.

There was a reason we put genders into a class. It was to separate them. The same went for noting our ages. Governments changing the rules will have serious side effects. It will take years to evolve but it will mean the end of womens sports, as if there is no gender then they will compete together. At juniors it means (girls) making lower division teams like U14 division 11. Sure we will get some talented (females) who will compete highly, but very rarely at elite level. But this takes a generation to evolve. Same if we change the rules on birthdates. It will evolve and come full circle until rules are put back in place.

I am a 5 foot 10 caucasian male.

If i identify myself as a 6 foot 4 chinese woman, does that mean i am in fact a 6 foot 4 in reality?

All for respecting a minority's wishes but by not permitting anyone to have the gender that they are born into stipulated on their birth certificate, whilst it may accommodate those parents( because a new born baby can’t tell you what "sex" it feels it is, it effectively restricts those who wish to have their child’s gender on their birth certificate.

As for allowing trans gender players in sport, why can a trans gender make who identifies as a female not simply play n a male team, regardless of how they think and dress, physically they are still a man, with the same strength as a man, putting them in a women’s team sport is wrong on many levels.

My parents called me Sue. They were years ahead. Was bit tough at school being the only boy called Sue. But now I am glad. Tasmania I love you.

Ok, well let's for argument sake say gender can’t be stated, how do you do a census.....?
How do you collect data, how do you find family history in years yo come, how do you have a balanced educational class room, how do you validate your child’s gender "should" that be YOUR preference, or does everyone have to bow to the transgender theory now?

Sorry but children need to be children first and foremost and yes that dies include recognising their natural born gender, should they wish to change that when they are able to understand what that entails then they should be free to do so, but not even a parent has the right to deny a child it’s DNA.

It’s absolutely getting ridiculous now

Do junior clubs sight a birth certificate as part of the enrolment process?

Recording gender at birth is an administrative exercise. We don't record skin colour on birth certificates, which has "biological and psychological" implications. Similarly, the birth certificate doesn't carry a record of the child's genotype, which is now practicable and has more and wider such implications.

Most of the implications of not recording gender on birth certificates are administrative and relate to other systems/processes relying on access to such information as a definitive record of a person's gender. e.g., the examples cited above around eligibility for certain sporting and social activities, or in cases where the law specifically relies on gender differentiation (such as prosecution under anti discrimination laws).

Even in these administrative cases, the frequency with which people are required to present their birth certificate as a means to identify their gender is very very small. How many times has a Census form or other administrative form asked you to attached your birth certificate to prove your answer to the Gender question is true? In my 60 years, zero.

In those cases where biological gender is important, it can be determined through physical inspection in most cases and by a simple medical test in others. Let's face it, how many times have you been asked by a doctor or a hospital to present your birth certificate as a means to determine that you're of a given biological gender. Again, in my case it's zero.

So recording gender on a birth certificate is just an administrative function. The decision to retain or remove the requirement should be made with that purpose in mind.

In any discussion like this, it would be helpful to know how gender originally came to be recorded on birth certificates in the first place. e.g., was it to provide an authoritative reference for birth date and gender for identifying the eldest male offspring and thereby clearly identify the line of succession for royal and noble titles? Does anyone know? I don't.

Do junior clubs sight a birth certificate as part of the enrolment process?

"n case anyone else is curious like I was about the youtube link - if you are far-right and only like hearing far right views then you will feel warm and cozy listening to 10 minutes of Ben Shapiro (former editor of Breitbart News).
If you want to see an actual debate then look elsewhere."

Yeah, Ben Shapiro was never affiliated with Breitbart news. You're thinking Milo Yiannopolous. But thanks for playing.

---

Anyway, not gonna wade into the debate further than to say that taking away gender from birth certificates is the left gone completely mad, whether or not it has lasting implications on the life of the child. It is placating a small minority of people who have a misplaced belief about their own identity at the detriment of logic and reason. Assigned sex is a biological and immutable truth and if we're going to start denying reality to suit fringe groups we're in for trouble as a society. It troubles me that we have government agencies and agencies in charge of maintaining and collating important information buying into the ravings of people who essentially have a form of body dysphoria disorder. People can say it's just a meaningless form, but as we've seen time and time again, when you give an inch to leftist loonies, they take a mile, and that meaningless form will not be enough. They will keep chipping and chipping away as they always do. I think a foot needs to be put down on this idiocy just for the merit of it.

Why is it important information? As PeterJohn has said, it's rarely required for administrative reasons. I couldn't even tell you where my birth certificate is or when I was last asked for it.

For use of toilets? Because they check birth certificates at the toilet door, right? The toilet argument is largely a function of how toilets are currently laid out and little else IMO.

For sport? Rare occasions (Semenya, etc - a small minority as said) obviously provide a talking point that will defy easy or convenient solution, but I doubt people are suddenly going to enter their sons in girls basketball just because of something omitted from their birth certificate. That problem could well exist regardless.

I'm not saying there's no discussion to be had, because it's certainly intriguing, but the idea that it gets people so riled up amazes me. It seems there's a huge awkward reaction to a pace of change. I can appreciate that - in my lifetime (I'm 41) we've gone from homophobic sleights being common in the schoolyard to me having to look up "cis" and having no idea what the latest LGITYBYD acronym is (I don't think I could even get close to guessing).

I suspect there will be a future society without gendered pronouns. They're pretty needless really. Fast forward 100 years. Assume every public toilet has been renovated. Ignore sport for a second. Should we even need a LGBTetc label? For what reasons would gender be important to know in a formal or administrative sense?

"When I've been on committees we generally just had the parent fill in the standard form of name, address, boy/girl, DOB, phone number etc. I can recall the committee only requesting a birth certificate once from a parent to settle a dispute regarding age after the association received a complaint, but the gender question was always pretty clear.“


But if no gender is assigned why do they need to quantify whether they are boys or girls

Do you see where it all leads

It's absolute madness on steroids all this non binary rubbish

Your born one of two sexes unless an heamophrodite, and even then your still going to have no be dominate sex gene

Where does it lead? One side of the argument says there is no point accounting for what is a really small minority. If it's that small, surely the disruptive cases would be few?


Slightly related, I can imagine an argument:

"A board room quota for women is such rubbish. It should just be whoever is best for the job!"
"Good thinking. What if we took gender off birth certificates and let everything be decided on merit."
"No, that would be insane! Are you crazy?"

In some instances,some body types may fit in,but in the majority of cases no way,there would be way to many injuries.Giving hormone blockers to children should be illegal,these days they say your brain is adult at 25 so after that do as you wish.The few trans people i know do not even want these changes,neither do a lot of gay men/lesbian ladies i am friends with,so who is pushing this-lets see maybe the same people funding studies on the matter.Remember 405 of people who fully transition want to go back to original body type within 3 years.

Sorry that was 40% above.

I have a lot of empathy for all minority groups and understand many of the hardships they have encountered through bigotry and racism, however at the risk of being shouted down here I don't think anyone (very few by appearances) is able to comprehend the importance of the difference between sex & gender yet, at least it appears so in this thread.

The birth certificate should in fact show what a baby's sex is, as long as it is identifyable, which I would suggest is in 99.9999999% of cases, otherwise it may be listed as unknown or something.

Since we mostly agree on gender identification being recognaised as a mental rather than biological issue (obviously much more complex that that of course), the gender of a baby should not even be mentioned on such a document.

Humans, generally speaking, are born with either male or female sex organs, so identification at birth can only be from their sex, not gender!

No idea where the original post's information has come from, nor the validity of it, just trying to clear up something many appear to be missing here...

"A board room quota for women is such rubbish. It should just be whoever is best for the job!"
"Good thinking. What if we took gender off birth certificates and let everything be decided on merit."
"No, that would be insane! Are you crazy?"


But sex/gender isn't decided on merit is it, and the fact many of the make sex still feel the femakebsex is somewhat inferior and ncaoable of holding such places around a board room table, then regardless of what’s written on your birth certificate, it’s what they see in front of them that they form opinions n before they actually look at the worth of that person.

As for a birth certificate, it only states if the child is born male or female, it dies not state or even insist that said child should remain that sex it’s whole life, BUT it should be included on any birth certificate. Dictating that it’s no longer to be placed to meet the needs of a minority of parents who are yet to even know what or how that child relates to its own gender is actually restricting that child from its birth right IMO. And also then restricting other parents who are in the majority , of theirs.

A girl at my daughters university wrote a study on it,where exactly i have no idea,would you also like to know that divorce rates between same sex couples are double,like the heterosexuals didn't stuff this up enough already.

Topic of sex change regret on google will get you started.

Britain s independent will also tell you that the divorce rate of lesbians is 21/2 times the average.

Look,now i will leave this topic with a message that i did not wish to offend anyone with anything written beforehand.

Great thread.

When Harry Became Sally by Ryan T Anderson is a good book on this topic.

In terms of women's sport it's a minefield. The AFLW rules are based on testosterone levels.

This ignores that Mouncey grew to 188cm and 100kg before the transition. So, still gaining from male physical advantages- even if hormone levels have now been reduced to below male levels.

I wouldn't want my daughter playing footy against "her". Does that make me a "bigot" or some other buzzword? Welcome to 2018. Thanks Safe Schools. Thanks far left activists who are wielding increasing influence on our society.

The fundamental issue is that it's not a level playing field. Is this AFL Women's? Or AFL for biological women and those biological men who now identify as women and are on hormone treatment?

1 + 1 does not equal 3. Hannah Mouncey is not a "women" in the same way that biological women are. It's something roughly like letting an under 16 player play under 14s. Height is a clear advantage in AFL, and here's someone who grew to the top 0.3% of height for a women (or whatever) while they were a man. If Mouncey wins the female brownlow, is that really fair for the runner up? No. It's not.

On the topic of trans gender people in sport, those are murky waters indeed. Of course we want everyone to participate in sport, especially at junior level and of course at the senior or pro levels we want to see competitions between athletes of all sizes, shapes and abilities.

The fine line between fairness and equality, sportsmanship and cheating in sport hace been tested and abused many times.

We all hate the idea of drugs in sport, yet we all know it exists, we all want our team to win yet hate it when we see a team get flogged every week.

When it comes to sport, the rules now need to be clearer than ever and the distinction between male/femal sex, I believe, must be clarified. This is irrelevant in junior mixed or mixed adult competitions as the rules state male and/or female, however at the elite semi-pro or pro level we now have decisions to make and updates to rules to enforce.

I for one would not want a daughter of mine to work hard and sacrifice so much to make her team, only to be told sorry you are out because a male who now gender identifies as a woman has taken your spot. That right there is the issue for me, let's decide what the rules are going to be clearly and if we decide there will be a mixed gender competition allowance, fine then everyone at least knows the rules beforehand.

The problem we face today is that we confuse sex for gender, they are not the same and therefore sporting competitions need to address the fact that they are not the same, or clearly make policy accordingly to include trans gender people.

Like I said, murky waters...

In terms of sport, we have women's professional leagues separate from the top competitions for physical reasons, not for social reasons, therefore eligibility to play in women's leagues should be done on physical factors, as it is with the olympics via hormone levels etc.

So, if it's decided on testosterone levels, does that mean the birth certificate isn't used there either?

OP raised:

womens sport - doesn't seem the birth certificate is involved at junior or professional level
toilets - I've never encountered one which checks birth certificates

And what has divorce and regret got to do with any of this? Not seeing the relevance. Gaols and violence are predominantly the domain of us men but it would not be a mainstream argument by any stretch to statistically prevent men from being out after dark, running in politics, etc. "Well, I'm statistically more inclined to be corrupt or rape someone. Seems fair."

I find the dichotomies in general political beliefs so interesting. All about freedom from intervention but wait, gay people are more likely to get divorced so maybe they shouldn't be allowed to get married!

[Why is everyone so focused on how this issue would affect them, instead of how this issue affects Hannah Mousey (in this case)?]

How about thinking how this impacts on everyone else she competes against? If you create a non level playing field, it's unfair for everyone else. Every single other competitor.

Completely agree with your posts Isaac.

In some respects it's a fascinating insight into the mind of people who somehow need to care about how other people conduct their lives.

The idea of letting people do what they want is somehow "left-wing lunacy" - god forbid people have freedom of choice in their lives.

You are either a bloke or a shiela its pretty simple.

the less than 0.001% pf people who are born that aren't either so effect the rest of us and what we do.

People only care about this sort of stuff because life is to easy and people have time to worry about this shi*t that really is of no significance either way!


The only time it should matter is if clearly a person is male and is getting the advantages of being a male (hormones/physical build etc) and wants to compete against girls/females then its cleary wrong and cheating (body shape/bone structure matter as does longterm higher hormone levels!)

Let kids be kids and lets not sweat the 0.001%

Anon #714236, Do you like people telling you what to do?
Do you like the Government legislating how we should live our lives?

I'd think Australians traditionally have a "GAGF" approach to people telling us how we should do things.

I walked into my bank this morning and told them that I identify as a billionaire now and that I would like to make a withdrawal... They were having none of it unfortunately.

So your argument is "don't tell me what to do by saying not to tell people what to do?"

"Doesn't change the facts of the topic."

The topic here is the idea of removing the gender from birth certificates, they're not re-defining genders, they aren't changing facts, they just don't see that information on a piece of paper as bureaucratically necessary.

What facts are relevant to that? Why is it necessary?

Why is it so important that certain things are listed on someone else's birth certificate that by all likelyhood you'll have zero right to ever look at in the first place?

You are either a bloke or a shiela its pretty simple.

the less than 0.001% pf people who are born that aren't either so effect the rest of us and what we do.

Re the birth certificate issue, my question would be, why?

What's the reason for removing sex from the birth certificate?

Roughly 1 in 5000 births have one of various disorders that would have them categorised as intersex. Their underlying DNA will still be male or female, but there has been a developmental problem.

The other 4,999 will be male or female.

We record this in every other area of life. eg: Medical studies must always record sex, because there is increasing scientific understanding that males and females have differing levels of many diseases and often respond differently to treatment. What's different about a birth certificate?

In terms of recording population data, there can be public benefit of knowing the numbers.

So, what benefits are there of removing this from birth certificates?

[Roughly 1 in 5000 births have one of various disorders that would have them categorised as intersex. Their underlying DNA will still be male or female, but there has been a developmental problem.]

Let me clarify that. In *most* cases the underlying DNA is still male or female. That's my understanding.

"I walked into my bank this morning and told them that I identify as a billionaire now and that I would like to make a withdrawal... They were having none of it unfortunately."

I'm with you there - I identify as a playboy millionaire. I have a robe but still working on the money, women and flash car side of things. :(

They identify as trans by choice.