3 ms·
The situation you described is irrelevant to the point here. It's the basis of your legal documentation. It's almost like saying that you don't need to specify
by lykr0n 9y ago
The situation you described is irrelevant to the point here.
It's the basis of your legal documentation. It's almost like saying that you don't need to specify a name, as there is an almost insignificant chance that they might want to change it in the future.
To get my license, I need to provide documentation that says who I am. Same for a passport or other form of documentation. Name, DOB, SSN, Eye, Hair, Skin, Sex. These are all attributes that go into uniquely identifying someone. If the argument is that someone might want to change one of these, our ability to identify ourselves uniquely is degraded which leads me to think that this will get to the point where someone can make a good argument for setting up a database of DNA or fingerprints so we can identify someone.
I can see more harm in someone who does not have their Sex listed on their birth certificate not being able to get a passport or ID from a state. It's a lot easier for a state to say (with good reason) that all identity documents needs to have name, DOB, sex, and eye color. That's tangible, and realistic harm.
The solution should be sex is listed on your birth certificate, but you can get a court order to switch it with a *. Or have a column for Sex and Gender
Side note, I think it is incredibly fucked up that a parent can make that choice for a kid. 99.999% of the people born will have sex listed. For the 0.001% chance, not having it listed tells me that the parent has already decided that they want a trans kid. That's the true harm.