I was doing some readings for my Gender and Society class this morning and something occured to me that I had overlooked. We had been talking about gender ambigious people in class, like those with Turner syndrome, but I wasn't really dwelling on it until I read this old article called "The 5 Sexes." What caught my eye was this story of Levi Suydam who tried to validate his right to vote as a Whig in a coming local election that was hotly contested. The opposing party contested his right to vote on the grounds that he was more female than male. A doctor was brought in and uppon finding a penis, said there was no debate, Levi was a man and could vote. The Whigs won the election with a majority of one. A problem that the doctor hadn't noticed though was that Levi menstruated regularly and had a vaginal opening. That's right, we are talking about a Hermaphrodite. So what just occured to me is if marriage is defined as only between a man and a women, what do we do about hermaphrodites and other similar people who weren't born as clearly a male or a female? These people aren't defined as men or women, so a man/women only law wouldn't allow them to get married. Not just married to eachother mind you, but what about a hermaphrodite and a women or a hermaphrodite with a man? These people were BORN this way, they can't change who they are, so technically, they would be descriminated against. There's no debate, you don't choose to become a hermaphrodite. Anyways, I thought it was interesting thought, I apologize if it was brought up already. Enjoy your breakfasts.
ok well here is something you probably didnt know if your sex is legally changed then you can get married like transsexuals can legally get their sex changed for safety reasons and then since they are legally female they can then legally marry a man even if they still have a penis
I believe the hardcore conservative term for 'hemaphrodite' is 'freak', I've heard it with my own ears, they are not considered people by some. Im sure someone with twisted reason would think that God made them a hemaphrodite because they were a sinner and should be punished by not being made a real person.
Tucker Carlson laughed at them today on Crossfire saying that if they're a man and wear dresses, they should be laughed at.
Doesn't sound very Christian to me. It might be hardcore something, but not Christian. Jesus even addresses the issue in John 9: There are other references you could make, including Job, that suggest that our condition does not stem from personal sin (only Orginal Sin). Oski, with an hermaphrodite, isn't there still a legal gender designation for them, regardless of the biological bluriness? So, an hermaphrodite who was designated male would be able to marry a female? I really don't know about the bureaucratic red tape involved, but might an hermaphrodite be able to get such a gender designation switched if he didn't like the one he was assigned?
Wasn't there a case recently in Texas where a person who had had a sex change was attempting to marry. The state eventually said that the sex of a person was determined by what that person was at birth (which does nothing for the hemaphrodites, I guess), but that would negate sex changes as changing anything for those who were born one or the other. EDIT: I found an article: Lesbian wedding allowed in Texas by gender loophole Same-sex union allowed because one was born a man Thursday, September 7, 2000 By MICHELE KURTZ COX NEWS SERVICE SAN ANTONIO, Texas -- Two Houston lesbians, hoping to turn conventional Texas thinking on its head, obtained a marriage license yesterday and will tie the knot next week. As in most states, Texas family law prohibits same-sex marriages. These two women can legally get married, though, because one of them was born a man. An opinion last year by the state 4th Court of Appeals in San Antonio said chromosomes -- not sex-change operations or outward gender characteristics -- determine a person's gender. In that case, the court invalidated the marriage of a couple because it said the woman, who had been born a man but had undergone a sex-change operation before the marriage, was still legally a man and therefore not legally married. That ruling worked in the favor of Jessica Wicks, 53, and Robin Wicks, 44. They're thought to be the first couple living as the same gender to be granted a marriage license in Texas. It's not clear what impact the case might have on gay rights issues in Texas, but many say it will likely call attention to same-sex marriages and thorny questions about who determines a person's gender -- and how. "It points out, partially, how ridiculous all of this is. Marriage is a private matter," said Dianne Hardy-Garcia, executive director of the Lesbian/Gay Rights Lobby of Texas. "I don't think the state has any business defining who should be able to get married between consenting adults." Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth, R-Burleson, the president of the Texas Conservative Coalition, said although the case is unusual, the group does not oppose the Wicks' wedding even though both partners live as women. "We don't object to a marriage license being issued since we do favor a marriage between a man and woman and this fits the legal definition of gender," Wohlgemuth said. "They are legally a man and a woman. What they do once they are married is up to them." But other issues complicate things, said Jack Sampson, a University of Texas law professor. Not everyone is born with a set of chromosomes, XX or XY, that clearly defines their gender. Hermaphrodites and other cases of confused genetics could pose problems, he said. In its opinion, the 4th Court of Appeals said the Legislature is a better venue for deciding gender. And some advocates for transsexuals say they'll ask lawmakers to do that next year. Phyllis Randolph Frye, an attorney for the Wicks, said yesterday she'll encourage other transsexuals to travel to San Antonio and get married. She hopes such a groundswell would give traditional gay couples ammunition to question why they can't be wed, too. Frye also represents Christie Lee Littleton, who is fighting the 4th Court of Appeals' ruling that came in her wrongful-death lawsuit against a doctor who treated her husband, who died in 1996. The court threw out the suit and Littleton's marriage because Littleton was a male by birth. The Texas Supreme Court has twice refused to hear the case, which is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Wicks met about three years ago. Jessica was born Grady Roland Wicks and has an "M" on her birth certificate. About a year ago she took steps to legally become a woman, Frye said. News reports have said Jessica has had a sex-change operation, but she and her attorney refuse to confirm that. They say it is irrelevant because the 4th Court of Appeals defines gender by chromosomes, not anatomy. A few weeks ago, Robin changed her last name to Wicks. The couple tried to get a marriage license in Houston but were refused when the county clerk said Jessica was a woman. But Bexar County is one of 32 counties where transsexual couples could argue that the 4th Court's ruling applies because the court covers those counties. Yesterday, the Wicks clutched their newly acquired marriage license and the office's standard lavender "newlywed kit." "We know we love each other, and in a real sense we're already married in our heart," Jessica Wicks said. "But there's something about the piece of paper that says this is the way it should be." Only Vermont, in response to a state supreme court ruling, has legalized a sort of parallel marriage system for same-sex couples.
For legal purposes isn't sex determined by the type of chromosome a person has (XX or YY). I believe that is what the Olympics uses. I'm guessing here that transgendered (the PC term) must only have one type. So the president's constituional admendmet would probably be worded that way. What puzzels me though is the reference in today's trial ballon to the states reserving the right to define other types of civil unions. So are they just trying to preserve the definition of the word 'marrige'? Would the constitutional definition only apply to federal programs like Social Security?
ok well i know a transsexual who is a lawyer who has helped other transsexuals change their sex legally on the argument that it is for safety reasons and wins everytime.
XX or XY, although rarely some folks have absorbed a twin before birth and have IIRC two sets of DNA and could fail this. The Olympics does use such a test so folks like Renee Richards are ineligible for them as a woman, however, as Renee Richards demonstrated with tennis, it's up to other sports to determine how gender will be assayed.
Um, I guess I'll try to answer a lot of questions here as best as I can. If I miss any, please ask. Oh, and I'll just use the feminine pronoun forms instead of he/she, her/his, etc... just because I feel like it. In general, a transexual can get her gender legally changed and as such marry someone of the opposite gender of her new gender. In most (?) places, this requires a letter from the surgeon that performed the SRS surgery. However, the specifics of different states and countries can vary greatly. The generally accepted term is intersexed and not hermaphrodite. There is no gender designator for an intersexed person. By law, you are either male or female, period. This is decided by the doctors. In the case of an (obviously) intersexed child, there is usually a meeting among a number of doctors to decide the legal sex of the child and surgeries and other procedures are performed to make the child fit that sex better. In my opinion, this is more of a social problem than a problem with the child. Our culture doesn't like anything other than "men" and "women" and will go to great lengths to erase everyone else. But that's just my opinion. The Texas case mentioned was the Littleton case. IIRC, it was a wrongful death lawsuit, or something similar. The surviving wife was a transexual. The problem was that she hadn't changed her legal gender before they married and thus it was deemed a same sex marriage. As part of this the judge also stated that a person could never change ones gender/sex and would always be the sex at birth. He also stated that sex was determed by chromosomes. In my opinion, this showed a lot of ignorance of genetics, because it completely ignored the fact that there are many more than two chromosome patterns (including people who have more than one chromosome pattern as someone mentioned, and women born with XY chromosomes) and ignored the numerous factors that are involved in ones gender/sex. Additionally, very few people have ever had chromosome tests and thus few people, according to this ruling, know their sex! I'm guessing the transexual lawyer Robbie380 is talking about is Phyllis Frye. It is possible to to get a court order to change the gender designation on ones driver license and other public/private documents. This cannot be used to change the gender designator on birth certificates and cannot be used to marry someone of the "opposite" gender. I thought the Olympics quit using chromosome testing because of the complications? Maybe I'm wrong. In my opinion, intersexed and trans people present a big whole in the same sex marriage debate. However, I think most people (particularlyhose against same sex marriage) will simply ignore the complexities or simlpy say they don't exist.
mori you may be right, but from how i understood it they could marry if they had their gender changed only legally without the operation. simply because they don't check between your legs to investigate those claims from what i understand. also, maybe they just simply change their sex on their birth certificate in the same way that they change all their other documents. outlaw...i know one girl who is going to get the operation done and her lawyer is phyllis frye. from what the girl said i don't think she will have trouble marrying a man.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/24/1077594830755.htmlWear a dress and win gold February 25, 2004 Men living as women may be allowed to compete in the Olympics, reports Simon Hart from London. Male athletes aiming to win Olympic medals without having to resort to banned drugs may soon have a new, legal way of gaining an advantage over their rivals - wear a dress for two years and then compete as a woman. This week the International Olympic Committee will decide whether to amend its rules to allow transsexuals who have had a sex change to compete under their new gender. That proposal is controversial enough, since most sex changes are man-to-woman and critics say those transsexuals will retain unfair advantages of height and strength over female opponents. But the IOC is preparing to go further and allow transsexuals who have not had sex-change surgery to compete under their new gender so long as they have "lived as a woman" for two years. Supporters of the proposal argue that it is about "equal opportunities" and "human rights", but many senior figures in athletics say that it will put female athletes at a severe disadvantage if they are forced to compete against "men dressed as women". The IOC's move follows a recommendation from its medical commission. The IOC has refused to discuss the issue until after its executive board meets in Athens on Saturday. The proposed changes would require the IOC to reintroduce gender-testing for athletes, a practice that it phased out before the Sydney Olympics in 2000 on the grounds of sexual discrimination. The IOC's decision will be eagerly awaited by Claire Ashton, formerly a West Mercia policeman called Tony Ashton who is involved in a legal battle with the British governing body for time-trial cycling. She claims she was sexually discriminated against by being asked to take a gender test after competing in the 2002 national 24-hour time-trial championship. Ashton, who has had full sex-change surgery, has postponed her action until after the Government's new Gender Recognition Bill becomes law. . . .
