icon bookmark-bicon bookmarkicon cameraicon checkicon chevron downicon chevron lefticon chevron righticon chevron upicon closeicon v-compressicon downloadicon editicon v-expandicon fbicon fileicon filtericon flag ruicon full chevron downicon full chevron lefticon full chevron righticon full chevron upicon gpicon insicon mailicon moveicon-musicicon mutedicon nomutedicon okicon v-pauseicon v-playicon searchicon shareicon sign inicon sign upicon stepbackicon stepforicon swipe downicon tagicon tagsicon tgicon trashicon twicon vkicon yticon wticon fm
23 Sep, 2020 12:23

The UK ditching plans to allow trans people to 'self identify' their gender on their birth certificates is just common sense

The UK ditching plans to allow trans people to 'self identify' their gender on their birth certificates is just common sense

Activists will no doubt be enraged, but what difference would ticking another box on an old form make to gender identity anyway?

Picture this: 500-years or so from now, an archaeologist is scratching away at the soil of what used to be a human settlement way back in the twisted 2020s, the days when King Donald I established his American throne.

This future scientist has found human remains, but there's not a lot there - pretty much just a smear on the earth. But there's enough to take a sample back to the lab for analysis.

A rudimentary test proves, conclusively, that this long-departed human was genetically a male; a man or a boy. It's right there for anyone to read, written by nature's hand in the DNA - those two undeniable chromosomes: one X and one Y.

It's a science fact. No retrospective surgery nor the unticking of a box on an old form can change that fact, and it simply doesn't matter how loud the screams of protestors are outside that laboratory window.

This male human may well have been trans female. But the hormone treatments, the silicon implants and the nail varnish have long since been washed away. And there's simply not enough evidence to be sure if the testes were present, let alone tell whether or not they were removed with a scalpel.

So, here's the thing, who wins when the factually correct and the politically correct simply cannot match?

Plans developed under Theresa May's government would have allowed people to 'self identify' as their chosen gender without having to provide any kind of medical input.

It's not quite so easy at the moment.  People have to apply to a panel for a 'gender recognition certificate' and produce two gender dysphoria reports. They must also prove they've lived in their chosen gender for two years and plan to stay that way for the rest of their lives.

Instead of allowing people to self-identify, in changes announced by the Minister for Women and Equalities Liz Truss, the cost of applying for a gender recognition certificate will be reduced and the process shifted online and made, Truss has said, “kinder and more straightforward.”

A birth certificate is the first link in the official paper trail most of us ever make, going on through school and university, to work, and on and on - the tax man, passport, driving license, national insurance, pensions, etc etc etc. And then it all ends with the death certificate and maybe, if you're wealthy, a row over your will.

Also on rt.com Trans activist praised for ‘shutting down’ woke critic on air, as she defends JK Rowling’s upcoming ‘transvestite-killer’ book

Don't all those other bits of paper on life's long and winding road need to be changed too, retrospectively? Is gender really defined by paper work? And anyway, bureaucracy being what it is, you can be damn sure there's a note somewhere on file revealing the sex the person was physically born into - even after the changes are made.

A new born baby, of course, has not had the chance to identify as anything. But the physical gender is factually correct on their birthday - when the midwife checks the calendar for the date of birth and has a quick glance down to where the genitalia tends to be, and then marks 'male' or 'female' on the form.

And it might be a little old-fashioned these days, but parents tend to want to know if it's a boy or a girl, too. The baby, of course, doesn't care. All they instinctively want - need - is their mama's breast. Her milk.

Trans folk who don't menstruate are not demanding the right to give birth (even if they physically cannot). Not yet.

Yes, of course, gender identity is not written in anyone's DNA. Just the same as it's not recorded whether the person was a Buddhist or Christian, a Republican or a Democrat, whether they support Manchester United or Chelsea.

Most reasonable people don't give a damn if a person wants to identify as something other than the gender they were born in. I mean, really, who cares? What business is it of anyone else anyway? And what does it matter if old pieces of paper say something to the contrary? What factual difference would it make to rewrite them all?

Go ahead, if you really think it'll make you happy, dear.

The most interesting factor about interesting people - same as with friends, relatives, colleagues, acquaintances and even enemies, for that matter - is not their gender, not their sexual preference.

And most people simply cannot stomach a bore, someone who identifies as one thing - and pretty much nothing else. It's exactly the same as that Man Utd or Chelsea fan in the pub, the one who always shows up in his football shirt and only ever talks about the pros and cons of a 4-4-2 formation. There's also the right or left winger who does little else but bleat on about politics.

After a very short while, these people are not much fun to be around.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.