Transgender Floridians can no longer change the listed gender on their driver licenses.
...."Permitting an individual to alter his or her license to reflect an internal sense of gender role or identity, which is neither immutable nor objectively verifiable, undermines the purpose of an identification record and can frustrate the state’s ability to enforce its laws," wrote Robert Kynoch, the department's deputy executive director, in the memo.
There are gray areas in transgender policy that are legitimately hard to settle. Most of them have to do with minors, who are edge cases in lots of policy areas.
But there's no excuse for harassing adult trans people like this. It's just performative cruelty with no serious state interest involved.
Everyone involved in this should be ashamed of themselves, and that includes the entire Republican caucus in the state legislature, which has been pushing a bill to make this state law. Their goal isn't to protect kids or anything like that. It's to come as close as they can to outright criminalizing being trans.
performative cruelty with no serious state interest involved.
More or less the official slogan of today's Republican Party.
I think if you were to ask them, they would say the state has a great interest in not normalizing deviant behavior that disrupts the status quo (status quo being stodgy old people who live in HOAs where everyone has a lush lawn and an American Flag). It's bad enough that they have to accept gays, men in dresses absolutely shall not be tolerated.
Make $300 each hour. How Can Someone Without Work Experience Apply Online for a Job? It’s time to move on to the next phase, which is to apply for and be hired for the job. These are our finest recommendations for showcasing yourself as a candidate and getting vx10 that distant job.
Check It....................... https://easybusiness77.blogspot.com/
No true Scotsmen?
So if you don’t like it you don’t have to go to Florida. I, for one, would much rather have lush lawns and American flags than men in dresses. And I prefer to live around people that prefer the same.
Then find yourself a private community and live with the sorts of bigots you prefer.
No need to live in a private community.
"...undermines the purpose of an identification record and can frustrate the state’s ability to enforce its laws..."
Motorist, when stopped by FL State Police: "Here's my drivers license and registration, officer."
Police Officer: "We don't bother with that paperwork stuff. Just get out of your vehicle and pull down your pants."
Is there a purpose to having sex on driver's licenses? I'm not sure.
If there is such a purpose then presumably Florida has an interest in the information being accurate and they consider sex at birth to be the accurate sex. If there is no purpose then perhaps remove this information from the license and avoid the whole issue?
Of course there’s a purpose - to provide identifying information. You know, on a piece of identification.
Is there a purpose for having name, DOB, height, weight, eye color? Presumably yes? So why make a special exception by not requiring sex?
Honestly, this issue has completely broken the brains of lefties. I say this as a lefty myself.
This is straight up illegal, as Oklahoma has already lost this lawsuit.
Not representing people as they appear is abusive and misleading.
...And yes, this is about criminalizing being trans. Without a matching ID, every stop becomes a strip search, every job application becomes fraught. And you will be harassed by bigots who will use this inconsistency to claim sexual harassment from you acting like any other person of your gender.
I was there, almost three decades ago. This is a huge step backwards.
But they will be sued, and they will lose, because they can't deny court orders and documents from other states.
That's an interesting claim, but I do not think it is correct.
For example, can Trump avoid all prosecutions for prior actions if the State of Florida issues a death certificate for Donald Trump and then a new birth certificate for Donald Two Trump?
"Hey, that guy you are mad about is dead. I'm Donald Two Trump!"
I think in the case you hypothecate, one would contest the death certificate as fraudulent, rather than having no standing with other states. "Full faith and credit" is written right into the Constitution.
That's so funny. Good for them! There's no point in pretending they care.
republicans need fake pedophiles so no one goes after the christian conservative pedophiles
The kids have already decided and accepted that This Is The Way It Shall Be, so they can perform all they want until enough of them die off for the next generation to take over.
Just out of curiosity, is a lot of crime committed by trans-humans? I would suspect not...
OK but ... exactly what in the quoted paragraph is incorrect?
I'm 90% sure you're just a troll, but on the off chance that your question is sincere I'm going to answer it:
"Permitting an individual to alter his or her license to reflect an internal sense of gender role or identity . . ."
And right there is already a lie. The vast majority of trans people aren't going to get their licenses changed the minute they realize they are trans. They are going to do that after they are some ways through the transition process. That is, through medical treatments, wardrobe and hairstyle changes, and plain old practice they have begun to look, dress, talk, and act like their new identity. Mr. Kynoch (and his political bosses) are deliberately minimizing all of that and simply focussing on the "internal sense".
" . . . undermines the purpose of an identification record and can frustrate the state’s ability to enforce its laws."
Actually, letting people change their ID after transition would enhance the purpose of an ID and enhance the state's ability to enforce its laws. When someone looks, talks, and acts convincingly like a woman but still has an old M on their ID, that would undermine the purpose of an identification record more than just letting them change it to a W.
Finally, about 1 in 1,000 people are non-binary by birth, and a growing number are non-binary by choice. The federal government accommodates these people by allowing X as a gender option on US passports. More states are beginning to do so as well. Florida is making a giant step backwards.
OK. So, say a person "looks, dresses, talks, and acts" like the opposite sex, but *doesn't* have an "internal gender identity" as the opposite sex. Should that person then be able to change the sex on their ID?
I'm guessing you would say no, which means that the Florida official is correct that the reason people want to change the sex on their ID is to conform with an internal - and thereby unfalsifiable - sense of "gender."
The person in your hypothetical is evidently a trans person who for whatever reason has not yet begun to transition. My answer to your question is Yes, though I doubt they actually want to get a new ID yet.
No. If you read my comment, it's apparent that I'm talking about a person who "acts" like the opposite sex (and it's worth taking a beat to think about what that means and how sexist it is) but doesn't "identify" as the opposite sex. I'm pretty sure no one would describe such a person as trans, which is why it is the case that "gender identity" is internal and not external. The reason that matters is that a purely mental state is subjective and unfalsifiable and not something we should be hanging public policy on.
Well, we have historically called such people "transvestites". And most of them don't engage in the cross-dressing behavior 24/7. It can be confusing to separate them from trans people, because well, they aren't necessarily going to be interested in explaining themselves to people like me and you.
I think the thing that matters is how are you going to present yourself while driving around randomly in a car? You are probably going to go with "least effort" unless you have a specific activity in mind.
And for most people, "least effort" means matching your internal sense of gender, which is very resistant to change, whatever it might be. Performing a gender that conflicts with that internal sense is burdensome.
I think that the GOP actually kind of LIKES trans folk in the sense that their existence fires up the base which are a little uncomfortable with that stuff (to put it charitably).
If they did not have these "crisis" like transgender rights, DEI programs, and the border, they might actually have to explain why they have, for instance, no climate policy (other than perhaps to encourage climate change...)
Speaking as a Republican, you’re partly correct for the most part. This whole thing is tiresome and annoying that it’s even an issue. But we feel fortunate that Dems consistently keep supporting boys that want to dress like girls and compete in girls sports. It’s the gift that keeps on giving.
Only somebody who has never personally observed someone transition, and seen for themselves the relief it brings, like some great burden has lifted, could say some crap like this.
It's garbage. Get rid of your smugness and get out more.
And have you personally observed someone transition and seen the morass of unhappiness they fall into, the lack of joy, the inability to do much except perform as trans, the burden of trying to convince the world you are something that eons of evolution tell them isn't true, the hateful regret and the suicides?
I'm sure you haven't. It worked well for your child. Great ... you've got an N of 1 AND you lack long term results - not a good basis for telling other people they're smug. So wander over to /r/detransition and read some stories and stop denying that this isn't for every kid whose questioning.
But Attiicus is correct that this is an own-goal by the Democrats.
Of course we've strayed far from ID issues now...
The problem is not with people "being trans." I don't care in the slightest how someone presents to the world. The problem is with misclassification under the law. I'm surprised by how many people who otherwise fully support evidence-based legislation and scientific precision would, in this case, support the idea that simply thinking something ("I am a woman") would make it so in reality.
Females will forever be female. Males will forever be male. Thinking or feeling otherwise does not make someone the other sex; it means they are mistaken.
as are you
Take a look at these pictures and ask if you’d want them in the locker room with your daughter at the local public pool.
https://www.out.com/photography/2018/9/13/18-portraits-trans-male-models-represent-strength-confidence#rebelltitem11
Good point.
Fuck off troll
"... undermines the purpose of an identification record and can frustrate the state’s ability to enforce its laws."
This is key - and this is of course the reason we have any characteristics listed on passports, licenses, etc. The question is always "is this the actual person who has been granted this license?" The purpose is not to affirm the self-id of the bearer, its for others to be able to validate that yes, you are the person this document says you are. Without that we fall into a terrible low-trust society.
Sure that ID says you're over 21 ... but it also says you're four inches taller, 40 lbs lighter and have blue eyes. Either its a stolen/fake id or it shows that you want to be taller, thinner and have blue eyes. Either should be invalidating of the ID.
Yes, yes, people dye their hair, wear contacts, etc. This complicates validation and we're not about to say your hair must always match the stated color. But height is nearly constant, weight nearly so ... and sex is fixed and thus extremely useful for validation.
Unless we start encoding IDs with DNA sequences I don't see a path out of this. Middle ground is to keep sex and have a "gender expression" field ... which would allow affirmation of the individual as well as make "gender expression" part of official state language.
US passports permit an X. My youngest was thrilled about that.
Probably not a good idea if you use your passport for travel rather than self affirmation. For example:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-travel/International-Travel-Country-Information-Pages/UnitedArabEmirates.html#:~:text=Personal%20travel%20of%2030%20days,in%2C%20or%20through%20the%20UAE.
Well stated. ID is for identification. Clothing, hair, makeup etc are for self-expression.
Maybe we ramp up psychological services as a way out of this.
1% or so of human babies are born with ambiguous genitalia. Gynandromorphism in other species is common. Snails, for instance, commonly change sex.
As for the law, why can I not choose to identify as female or male as I choose? This is the land of the free, isn't it?
But all of that is beside the point. The purpose of the law is to harass people merely for a choice of ...style, quite honestly. I can choose to identify as female or male as I choose, as people have always done. This is the land of the free, isn't it?
" I can choose to identify as female or male as I choose,"
It's more complicated than that. As I'm sure you know. This is about the gender the person believes themselves to be. Not a choice in their minds. Just a fact of who they are.
People have all kinds of psychological disorders. It doesn’t make them realities.
You are a walking example.
but the south cherishes its freedom to kill or imprison people that rich white christian conservatives don't like
Citation needed
"1% or so of human babies are born with ambiguous genitalia."
That is false. I've spoken to a number of OB-GYNs about this, and every one of them said that ambiguous genitalia are vanishingly rare.
The Cleveland Clinic says it's between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 4,500. The NIH says it's the lower end of that range.
But there are many other conditions that also blur the line between the sexes. For example, the sprinter Caster Semenya has 5α-reductase 2 deficiency, which is why she appeared female at birth - not ambiguous - and has lived as female her whole life, in spite of having XY chromosomes. Many other such conditions are known to science. But not known to FL politicians.
"Ambiguous" means "doubtful in meaning." If NIH or anyone else says that one in a thousand babies can't be identified as male or female through pure observation, they are lying.
I did not say anything about intersex conditions as a general matter. My comment addressed genitalia.
I'd like to see the data for the Cleveland Clinic's position. On their site (I presume that's where your pulling that statement from) they state this as " How common is atypical genitalia (ambiguous genitalia)?"
The problem is that there are many instances of atypical genitalia ... but they are not ambiguous. Conflating the categories isn't helpful. In most of these instances the sex of the child is not in question ... the issue is what sort of interventions might be needed.
Oh, and sex is not a "style." Try "identifying" your way out of sex-based discrimination and violence. It won't happen.
"1% or so of human babies are born with ambiguous genitalia. "
What? This is utter nonsense that comes from conflation of a bunch of categories in an attempt to make "intersex as common as redheads".
How do I know? My wife is a pediatrician and in 25+ years has NEVER seen such a case. Don't like that? look at Leonard Sax on "How Common is intersex?" While I can't directly translate "born with ambiguous genitalia" to a specific condition, the true intersex conditions have a frequency of ... wait for it ... .000018 per 100 births. Thats ORDERS of magnitude away from 1%.
If you start counting DSDs - Differences in Sexual Development - then you can inflate your way to nearly 2% of the population but many of those conditions are not evident at birth and they are not "ambiguous".
And snails and clown fish are irrelevant because they aren't human. Show me a documented case of a man who successfully impregnated a woman and then was successfully impregnated as a woman and we'll talk. Until then, stop the nonsense.
See my comment to Atticus above. You think you have it all figured out, but it turns out you are wallowing in ignorance. Drop the smugness, and try and learn something about the world.
I believe this is a 1A issue. The data shown on your driver's license is subjective. Your height, weight, color of your hair and eyes are all alterable.
Gender is no different.
A genetic test is not dispositive -- androgynous people are nonbinary at birth. You would be forced to dictate which body parts have higher priority for purposes of gender classification.
Furthermore, we already have the ability to transplant ovaries, cervixes, penises, and testicles, and vaginoplasty is widespread. It won't be long before we can alter the core genetic code that identifies and presents people as M/F.
Gender is not immutable. The question of gender is, and always has been, how you want to express yourself. In the future, changes to gender will be undetectable.
I have bad news for you on that "genetic code" assumption.
Then explain.
Your gender is not alterable. That’s the point. I can sew a tail to my ass but that doesn’t make me a golden retriever
Let's start here: How can you tell what a person's gender is?
“How can you tell what a person’s gender is”:
The traditional answer is that sex is determined by anatomical sex characteristics. If you think that’s not the answer, the onus is on YOU to provide an alternative answer - not on us.
There are some very unusual configurations. For instance, an XY can be born with no testosterone receptors and undescended testes.
What is usually done in a case like this is to surgically remove the testes (they are a serious threat to get infected and kill the person) and identify them as female.
Once upon a time the doctors who did this didn't tell the parents or the patient, they just said "It's a girl!"
I knew a doctor, a gynecologist, who did this. She regretted that now they tell the parents, but I think it's the right call.
This stuff is a lot more complicated and there's far more variation than you imagine.
Seriously, drop the smug know-it-all crap and try and learn something.
They should have a section for sex (as in bio sex, m/f/int) and a section for gender.
Why?
Performative cruelty? With today's Republican party it's a feature, not a bug.