> In closing, I wish that there was the same level of zeal for protecting the very poor, homeless, mentally and chronically ill!
Very much agreed. I suspect that a lot of these identity issues are being deliberately pushed as a distraction from these more fundamental and wider societal concerns of material wellbeing that successive governments have largely failed at addressing.
> While I do not believe that sexuality and dysphoria are chosen
The leap of logic with gender dysphoria in recent years seems to be that if a person has dysphoria, then they actually are the alternate gender (in terms of a replacement to the concept of sex) that they desire to be. So, we're told, people identify into the role of a man or a woman, rather than simply existing as such in material biological reality. Personally I find that assertion rather questionable, but it seems it's no longer acceptable to question this.
> And is why not let children get married, why discriminate based on age?
The really awful thing is, there are paedophiles (or "minor-attracted persons", as they prefer to rebrand themselves nowadays) and their advocates making this exact argument in earnest. Including some in academia trying to influence from a position of supposed research. It's sickening.
Agreed, we see similar in places like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, where women and girls are harshly discriminated against and restricted in society. They simply don't have the option to opt out of the misogyny inflicted upon them because of their sex.
These assertions that permitting an 'X' sex marker on passports will somehow reduce discrimination don't really make any sense.
> grooming choices, and social paraphernalia like wardrobe
That's a very regressive approach, based on cultural stereotyping and expectations related to restrictive ideals of masculinity and femininity. A woman who chooses to shave her hair short is still a woman. A man who chooses to wear a dress is still a man.
Let's not discriminate against gender non-conforming people by denying or questioning their sex due to their reluctance to adhere to stereotypes. It's not really a reasonable position to take.
Could you explain your arguments in more detail please? I don't see how permitting an 'X' marker for sex will reduce discrimination. Depending on the country the passport holder is entering and its border control policy, it may well increase the risk of being discriminated against.
I also don't really understand what parallel you are attempting to draw between sex and race - they're very different types of classification, in many ways. For example, sex is either male or female, and typically easily determined by fundamental biological features - but how would you even begin to usefully classify race, and from the global, international perspective expected of passport documentation?
Very much agreed. I suspect that a lot of these identity issues are being deliberately pushed as a distraction from these more fundamental and wider societal concerns of material wellbeing that successive governments have largely failed at addressing.
> While I do not believe that sexuality and dysphoria are chosen
The leap of logic with gender dysphoria in recent years seems to be that if a person has dysphoria, then they actually are the alternate gender (in terms of a replacement to the concept of sex) that they desire to be. So, we're told, people identify into the role of a man or a woman, rather than simply existing as such in material biological reality. Personally I find that assertion rather questionable, but it seems it's no longer acceptable to question this.