New York Times: “Separating anatomy from what it means to be a man or a woman”

Posted on November 6, 2006

No, this is not from the Onion…I wish it were: New York Plans to Make Gender Personal Choice

Separating anatomy from what it means to be a man or a woman, New York City is moving forward with a plan to let people alter the sex on their birth certificate even if they have not had sex-change surgery.

Under the rule being considered by the city’s Board of Health, which is likely to be adopted soon, people born in the city would be able to change the documented sex on their birth certificates by providing affidavits from a doctor and a mental health professional laying out why their patients should be considered members of the opposite sex, and asserting that their proposed change would be permanent.

Applicants would have to have changed their name and shown that they had lived in their adopted gender for at least two years, but there would be no explicit medical requirements.

“Surgery versus nonsurgery can be arbitrary,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, the city’s health commissioner. “Somebody with a beard may have had breast-implant surgery. It’s the permanence of the transition that matters most.”

That garbage like this is being considered by governments at any level should leave no doubt that the cliff is near and extremist bureaucrats are providing the plummet-nudge. Only “intellectuals” could be such fools.

In New York, the proposed change comes after four years of discussion among health officials, an eight-member panel of transgender experts and vital records offices nationwide. It is an outgrowth of the transgender community’s push to recognize that some people may not have money to get a sex-change operation, while others may not feel the need to undergo the procedure and are simply defining themselves as members of the opposite sex. While it may be a radical notion elsewhere, New York City has often tolerated such blurring of the lines of gender identity.

And the proposal reflects how the transgender movement has become politically potent beyond its small numbers, having roots in the muscular politics of the city’s gay rights movement.

Transgender advocates consider the New York proposal an overdue bulwark against discrimination that recognizes an emerging shift away from viewing gender as simply the sum of one’s physical parts. But some psychiatrists and doctors are skeptical of the move, saying sexual self-definition should stop at rewriting medical history.

“They should not change the sex at birth, which is a factual record,” said Dr. Arthur Zitrin, a Midtown psychiatrist who was on the panel of transgender experts convened by the city. “If they wanted to change the gender for all the compelling reasons that they’ve given, it should be done perhaps with an asterisk.”

The change would lead to many intriguing questions: For example, would a man who becomes a woman be able to marry another man? (Probably.) Would an adoption agency be able to uncover the original sex of a proposed parent? (Not without a court order.) Would a woman who becomes a man be able to fight in combat, or play in the National Football League? (These areas have yet to be explored.)

“Trangender experts?” Any time the word “expert” appears, you should take another step toward the foodstocks and firearms…

Hey dopes: there is no prohibition on women playing in the NFL.. This is exactly the type of horse bleep that passes for thought and good reporting at the New York Times. Psst…the reason why there are no women in the NFL is because of physical differences between men and women. Now go back and reconsider this story (and this jackassery-based proposal) based on this COMMON (effin’) SENSE observation. Or better yet, shred it.

Read the whole sick thing.

Allah hit this too: New York City brilliantly outflanks state ban on gay marriage

» Filed Under ACLU, Homosexual Agenda, News

Trackback URL

Comments

One Response to “New York Times: “Separating anatomy from what it means to be a man or a woman””

kerwin_brown on November 8th, 2006 6:45 am

Since when has a city’s Board of Health had the legal power to change a legal document produced by the state. I believe that change would make it a forged document. I believe they are depending on no one challenging the regulation.