3 ms·

More than likely the answer is: pandering for votes. A reasonable persons understands you are: XX (Female), XY (Male), or one of many extraordinarily rare edge

More than likely the answer is: pandering for votes. A reasonable persons understands you are: XX (Female), XY (Male), or one of many extraordinarily rare edge cases such as (not inclusive): XXY, XYY, XYY, XXX, etc. The fact this under debate shows the level of disillusionment and detachment from science among the individuals arguing for it. This is the opinion section of my comment: I think LQBTQ individuals desire to have their sexual preferences reinforced by society. I imagine the thought process is something like "If I can only prove it's biological, I no longer have to constantly justify my choices to others and there will be acceptance." This is sad in my opinion, as we should not be lecturing others unless they ask for your opinion. You certainly aren't required to support anyone's decisions, but treating them less than human isn't acceptable. Unfortunately, I see LQBTQ communities are further distancing themselves by pushing this agenda of redefining science. Like another commentor said, I don't think it's any government's business who I am. And while that's a great theory, the real world doesn't work out this way. Marking your passport this way will more than likely cause issues at international borders and it would be good to stick to scientific identification to avoid unjust arrest.

Majromax 5y ago
> A reasonable persons understands you are: XX (Female), XY (Male) [...] A reasonable person is also not applying a chromosomal test to determine gender. Instead, the reasonable person identifies gender by appearance, incorporating anatomical features, grooming choices, and social paraphernalia like wardrobe. In most people, chromosomal, hormonal, anatomical, and social genders conform. The "reasonable person" heuristic is therefore correct in the majority of cases. However, the risks are borne disproportionately by those for whom there is nonconformance. A gender-neutral option on identification provides at minimum a signal that the a binary (social) gender marker is not helpful for identification of the bearer. That's rights-enhancing, with no cost to the gender-conforming majority.
- buckfast 5y ago
  > grooming choices, and social paraphernalia like wardrobe That's a very regressive approach, based on cultural stereotyping and expectations related to restrictive ideals of masculinity and femininity. A woman who chooses to shave her hair short is still a woman. A man who chooses to wear a dress is still a man. Let's not discriminate against gender non-conforming people by denying or questioning their sex due to their reluctance to adhere to stereotypes. It's not really a reasonable position to take.

Majromax 5y ago

> A reasonable persons understands you are: XX (Female), XY (Male) [...] A reasonable person is also not applying a chromosomal test to determine gender. Instead, the reasonable person identifies gender by appearance, incorporating anatomical features, grooming choices, and social paraphernalia like wardrobe. In most people, chromosomal, hormonal, anatomical, and social genders conform. The "reasonable person" heuristic is therefore correct in the majority of cases. However, the risks are borne disproportionately by those for whom there is nonconformance. A gender-neutral option on identification provides at minimum a signal that the a binary (social) gender marker is not helpful for identification of the bearer. That's rights-enhancing, with no cost to the gender-conforming majority.

buckfast 5y ago
> grooming choices, and social paraphernalia like wardrobe That's a very regressive approach, based on cultural stereotyping and expectations related to restrictive ideals of masculinity and femininity. A woman who chooses to shave her hair short is still a woman. A man who chooses to wear a dress is still a man. Let's not discriminate against gender non-conforming people by denying or questioning their sex due to their reluctance to adhere to stereotypes. It's not really a reasonable position to take.