Read on Twitter
The New Zealand government will likely be revisiting the 'Self-ID' Bill (The BDMRR Bill) at the end of February.
Part of this Bill will allow transgender people to update their Birth Certificate to show their correct gender, and this would be done via statutory declaration.
Part of this Bill will allow transgender people to update their Birth Certificate to show their correct gender, and this would be done via statutory declaration.
There is opposition to this bill from anti-transgender hate groups - groups like Speak Up For Women NZ.
They attempted to block the Bill from its second reading, but they have failed.
So what are these these anti-trans groups actually claiming to oppose?
Let's break it down.
They attempted to block the Bill from its second reading, but they have failed.
So what are these these anti-trans groups actually claiming to oppose?
Let's break it down.
They claim that 'Self-ID' (a statutory declaration of your gender) will allow anyone to ID as a woman, and then enter women's spaces.
Specifically, that men will change their Birth Certificate to enter women's bathrooms.
They state this is a 'reasonable concern'.
Specifically, that men will change their Birth Certificate to enter women's bathrooms.
They state this is a 'reasonable concern'.
Is this a 'reasonable concern'?
Well, first consider this: we have had gender 'Self ID' (stat declaration) for both forms of photographic ID in New Zealand since 2012.
That's right, 'Self-ID' has been in practice since 2012 in this country!
Well, first consider this: we have had gender 'Self ID' (stat declaration) for both forms of photographic ID in New Zealand since 2012.
That's right, 'Self-ID' has been in practice since 2012 in this country!
So the next question a reasonable person would ask is "Has there been ANY evidence of this being abused?"
And the answer to that question is a resounding NO!
There have been no reports of Self-ID being abused in NZ by men attempting to harm women.
Zero. Nada. Zilch.
And the answer to that question is a resounding NO!
There have been no reports of Self-ID being abused in NZ by men attempting to harm women.
Zero. Nada. Zilch.
As a Birth Certificate is an inferior form of identification to photo ID documents (and passports are an *International Standard* of identity document), there isn't any reasonable, logical argument to oppose the 'Self-ID' Bill on the basis of men abusing it.
It hasn't happened.
It hasn't happened.
Which brings us to the second argument used by the anti-transgender campaigners:
It's falsifying a legal/identity document.
Most people will see this argument as immediately absurd, since our identity documents are in a state of change our entire lives.
It's falsifying a legal/identity document.
Most people will see this argument as immediately absurd, since our identity documents are in a state of change our entire lives.
Let's take me as an example.
I was legally adopted by my father's second wife. This means my birth mother was COMPLETELY REMOVED from my Birth Certificate and replaced with my adoptive mother.
Erased as if she never existed.
This is a commonplace edit to Birth Certificates.
I was legally adopted by my father's second wife. This means my birth mother was COMPLETELY REMOVED from my Birth Certificate and replaced with my adoptive mother.
Erased as if she never existed.
This is a commonplace edit to Birth Certificates.
Yet there has been no outcry from these purists who demand that Birth Certificates should never be altered.
Not only has my birth mother been changed, my name has also been changed. No problem with that either.
But my sex changing?
Apparently that's worthy of a public outcry.
Not only has my birth mother been changed, my name has also been changed. No problem with that either.
But my sex changing?
Apparently that's worthy of a public outcry.
So these are the two primary arguments used to oppose the BDMRR Bill - and they are both terrible.
Neither is logically sound. The first is predicated on scaremongering and conflating trans women with rapists and perverts, while the second one doesn't even make any sense.
Neither is logically sound. The first is predicated on scaremongering and conflating trans women with rapists and perverts, while the second one doesn't even make any sense.
Feel free to link this thread to anyone who is arguing against the BDMRR Bill; I hope you find it useful in debunking the absurd claims/arguments of these anti-trans campaigners.
