4 ms·

There’s a percentage of children born every year considered “intersex”. The percentage will vary depending on what your criteria for “intersex” is. In the past

There’s a percentage of children born every year considered “intersex”. The percentage will vary depending on what your criteria for “intersex” is. In the past, the doctor would just pick a gender, and then (in the case of ambiguous genitalia) perform surgery on the child to make their genitalia conform to the norms for the gender that the doctor chose. This is a bit of a crapshoot, since you don’t know if you made the right choice for that child. This is the demarcation problem rearing its ugly head again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem If you decide that all people are either male or female, you are going to end up arguing about where to draw the line. This is not particle physics, gender does not take “integer values” like the spin of a boson. So we add “X” to the passport to acknowledge the fact that, as much as some people may wish for gender to be a simple binary, reality sometimes defies simple categorization.

aikah 5y ago
> There’s a percentage of children born every year considered “intersex”. The percentage will vary depending on what your criteria for “intersex” is. "intersex" isn't a precondition to put X on a passport, so it's irrelevant. If gender is irrelevant, then remove it from the passport all together.
- klodolph 5y ago
  > "intersex" isn't a precondition to put X on a passport, so it's irrelevant. I think you may be reading something I didn’t write. I’m certainly neither saying nor implying that being born intersex is or should be a necessary condition for having “X” on your passport.
- wpietri 5y ago
  I am entirely for removing it altogether, but change rarely happens all at once. "X" seems like a good start.
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  The sex field is an ICAO requirement. No country can remove it unilaterally. They can do this.
tablespoon 5y ago
> This is the demarcation problem rearing its ugly head again.... > If you decide that all people are either male or female, you are going to end up arguing about where to draw the line. This is not particle physics, gender does not take “integer values” like the spin of a boson. So we add “X” to the passport to acknowledge the fact that, as much as some people may wish for gender to be a simple binary, reality sometimes defies simple categorization. But "X" doesn't really solve that problem, especially because this is an area where some people want near-infinite gradations, and because there can be differing opinions about how "X" should be used. The demarcation problem is unavoidable. The real criteria here should be practicality and the suitability of the passport for its intended purpose. I can see "X" as solving some clear practical problems, but on the other hand, using self-identification for any field including sex creates them [1]. [1] And I can see arguments for self identification for almost all passport fields. Name? I might feel more affinity to a non-official name, but lack the resources to change it (or change it as frequently as I would like, or have as many as I'd like). Birth date? Maybe I don't identify more strongly with the Islamic, Chinese, or Julian calendar than the Gregorian one; and want my birth date in my calendar of choice. Place of birth? I may have grown up elsewhere or "adopted" another place, and want that listed because that better reflects my identity.
- klodolph 5y ago
  Nothing "solves" the demarcation problem. But we can come up with something a bit more reasonable than the M/F binary. > And I can see arguments for self identification for almost all passport fields. This isn't relevant. The desire for self-identification is not a sufficient reason to let people change fields on their passport in the first place. Think of it more like hair color. You can dye your hair any color you like, or shave your head, and your passport will simply reflect what hair color you happen to have. It's not necessary to know what hair color someone was born with. People can self-determine their hair color, but all that really means is that they can dye it, or if your hair is in the middle between blond and brown, you can write down either option (your choice).
jfengel 5y ago
"Demarcation problem" is specifically an epistemological question about science and pseudo-science, so not really appropriate here. But it is a good example of a false dichotomy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
- klodolph 5y ago
  Sorry, meant the Continuum fallacy, or Sorites paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox

aikah 5y ago

> There’s a percentage of children born every year considered “intersex”. The percentage will vary depending on what your criteria for “intersex” is. "intersex" isn't a precondition to put X on a passport, so it's irrelevant. If gender is irrelevant, then remove it from the passport all together.

klodolph 5y ago
> "intersex" isn't a precondition to put X on a passport, so it's irrelevant. I think you may be reading something I didn’t write. I’m certainly neither saying nor implying that being born intersex is or should be a necessary condition for having “X” on your passport.
wpietri 5y ago
I am entirely for removing it altogether, but change rarely happens all at once. "X" seems like a good start.
pseudalopex 5y ago
The sex field is an ICAO requirement. No country can remove it unilaterally. They can do this.

tablespoon 5y ago

> This is the demarcation problem rearing its ugly head again.... > If you decide that all people are either male or female, you are going to end up arguing about where to draw the line. This is not particle physics, gender does not take “integer values” like the spin of a boson. So we add “X” to the passport to acknowledge the fact that, as much as some people may wish for gender to be a simple binary, reality sometimes defies simple categorization. But "X" doesn't really solve that problem, especially because this is an area where some people want near-infinite gradations, and because there can be differing opinions about how "X" should be used. The demarcation problem is unavoidable. The real criteria here should be practicality and the suitability of the passport for its intended purpose. I can see "X" as solving some clear practical problems, but on the other hand, using self-identification for any field including sex creates them [1]. [1] And I can see arguments for self identification for almost all passport fields. Name? I might feel more affinity to a non-official name, but lack the resources to change it (or change it as frequently as I would like, or have as many as I'd like). Birth date? Maybe I don't identify more strongly with the Islamic, Chinese, or Julian calendar than the Gregorian one; and want my birth date in my calendar of choice. Place of birth? I may have grown up elsewhere or "adopted" another place, and want that listed because that better reflects my identity.

klodolph 5y ago
Nothing "solves" the demarcation problem. But we can come up with something a bit more reasonable than the M/F binary. > And I can see arguments for self identification for almost all passport fields. This isn't relevant. The desire for self-identification is not a sufficient reason to let people change fields on their passport in the first place. Think of it more like hair color. You can dye your hair any color you like, or shave your head, and your passport will simply reflect what hair color you happen to have. It's not necessary to know what hair color someone was born with. People can self-determine their hair color, but all that really means is that they can dye it, or if your hair is in the middle between blond and brown, you can write down either option (your choice).

jfengel 5y ago

"Demarcation problem" is specifically an epistemological question about science and pseudo-science, so not really appropriate here. But it is a good example of a false dichotomy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

klodolph 5y ago
Sorry, meant the Continuum fallacy, or Sorites paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox