Thread on the Quebec decision on changing sex markers on birth certificates. This is a civil law case so I can't comment on some legal issues but there are factual and procedural points that are relevant across Canada, and the world for that matter. /2
https://www.canlii.org/en/qc/qccs/doc/2021/2021qccs191/2021qccs191.html

In addition to the individual applicants, the parties were Center for Gender Advocacy, Egale Canada Human Rights Trust, LGBT Family Coalition and Gender Creative Kids Canada. Four parties on the same side with no public representation of the opposing view. /3

The hearing lasted 20 days and it took 2 years for the judge to deliver his decision. Compare the Bell v. Tavistock hearing, which lasted 2 days and was decided in less than 2 months. Costs and delay are a problem throughout the Canadian justice system. /4

This highlights a growing problem with human rights litigation in Canada. Instead of being a protection to individuals against excess of state power it risks becoming a way for well funded pressure groups to advance their agenda in a way that bypasses the legislative process. /5

In the absence of any serious opposition, the judge accepted some of the most absurd extremes of gender ideology as fact. The next tweet is an exact quote from the judgment. /6

"[34] Other than on the day they are born, we do not examine a person’s genitalia to identify whether they are male or female. We look instead to their name, clothing, hairstyle, and bearing, each of which is determined by the person themself. " /7

No mention of bone structure, facial features, voice and many other markers which humans have evolved to respond to over millions of years. Nor is there any discussion of the medical risks of not knowing the biological sex of a patient or his or her parents. /8

One of the parties was intersex and the plaintiff claims to advocate for intersex people, however they seem to have provided the court with a lot of misinformation on intersex conditions. For example at one point, the judge states, /9

"Second, the obligation to designate a sex does not take account of intersex babies who might be born with the partially formed genitalia of each sex. " This is a biological impossibility. /10

The court overstates the problem of intersex births. The number of cases where sex cannot immediately be observed is only a small fraction of the 0.02% of births with a VSD condition. They can be accommodated without discarding the whole concept of sex. /11

The court accepts the demonstrable falsehood of a fixed gender identity. "Gender identity is an immutable personal characteristic.  Dr. Kristina Olson and Dr. Françoise Susset confirm that gender identity develops at a young age and remains constant." /12

The judge is totally unaware of the growing problem of detransitioners. If you allow children to change their sex designation at age 14 you can be sure that a lot of them are going to want to change it back by 25. How many sex changes do you get in a lifetime? /13

The court heard evidence from Dr. Greta Bauer that allowing transgender people to have a legal identity document that matches their lived gender would results in a 27% reduction of suicide ideation and a 62% reduction in suicide attempts. /14

The Attorney General challenged this evidence with testimony from Dr. Brian Mishara, an expert on suicide prevention, on the impossibility of connecting suicide to any single factor, but it did not do any good. /15

There are a lot of loose ends in the case. Do both parents have to consent before changing a child's birth certificate? Does a child have a right to demand a birth certificate that accurately records the biological facts of his or her birth? /16

Some of these issues might be resolved through legislation but unless the decision is appealed the ability to fix the problems this decision will cause will be very limited.

@threadreaderapp unroll