Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

Necro

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

#GenderFluidTransMatterToo

Mod:

Don't post in this thread again

WhenPigsCry

Gatling wrote: »

But they would be within their rights to switch back and forth as they see fit ,

What minister covers gender identity,and how much power would they have to prevent someone switching gender on a yearly or monthly basis

You could read the legislation:

Requirements on application for a gender recognition certificate

10. (1) A person who applies for a gender recognition certificate under section 8 shall furnish the following to the Minister:
[...]
(f) a statutory declaration declaring that he or she—
[...]
(ii) has a settled and solemn intention of living in the preferred gender for the rest of his or her life,

GENDER RECOGNITION ACT 2015

Hardly sounds like repeated "switching" is envisioned, even if some applicant were minded to do so.

Gatling

WhenPigsCry wrote: »

You could read the legislation:


GENDER RECOGNITION ACT 2015

Hardly sounds like repeated "switching" is envisioned, even if some applicant were minded to do so.

And if the person detransisions will they be forced to live as a gender they don't identify with .

Hence why I asked the question

WhenPigsCry

Gatling wrote: »

And if the person detransisions will they be forced to live as a gender they don't identify with .

Hence why I asked the question

You asked how the minister could deny someone who applied to switch genders on a monthly basis, and the answer is that they have to provide a solemn declaration they plan to live as that gender for the remainder of their life, which one could not plausibly do repeatedly.

There are other provisions (once again, maybe read the legislation before jumping to conclusions) which allow the Minister to request more information, which can come into play if someone detransitions and makes a fresh application to change back.

Baggly

Mod

Gervais08's threadban has been lifted after discussion via pm.

Gruffalux

WhenPigsCry wrote: »

You could read the legislation:


GENDER RECOGNITION ACT 2015

Hardly sounds like repeated "switching" is envisioned, even if some applicant were minded to do so.

Yes.
Interesting.
But would it be constitutional to prevent redeclaring, undeclaring, redeclaring again?
In divorce law one has to show that the marriage is irrevocably over. I am not familiar with divorce law but I believe one is then free to marry again. What if one falls back in love with divorced spouse - can one remarry them? If not why not? Is it because the state says ahhh now come off it? And what if then after a period of time one regretted falling for the scoundrel again, can one divorce them again? If not why not? Does the state say you had your chance.
How many divorces is one allowed before the state wags its finger at you?
In the same vein if self declaration is valid once re gender then I do wonder if the state can constitutionally wag its finger and say only so many goes allowed young lad/lass!
I genuinely do not know what the position is re divorce but I presume in spite of its requirement to prove stable long term intention the law once passed cannot truly constrain one forever into the future?

Limpy

WhenPigsCry wrote: »

You asked how the minister could deny someone who applied to switch genders on a monthly basis, and the answer is that they have to provide a solemn declaration they plan to live as that gender for the remainder of their life, which one could not plausibly do repeatedly.

There are other provisions (once again, maybe read the legislation before jumping to conclusions) which allow the Minister to request more information, which can come into play if someone detransitions and makes a fresh application to change back.

Regardless of what a court says, if a man is a women, if he so decides to be. The 99.9% of us will follow the science, Which states he is not a she. They may be Intersex, Which is neither, an anomaly. Or they are biological women. That above all need to be respected by the 0001.%.

WhenPigsCry

Gruffalux wrote: »

Yes.
Interesting.
But would it be constitutional to prevent redeclaring, undeclaring, redeclaring again?
In divorce law one has to show that the marriage is irrevocably over. I am not familiar with divorce law but I believe one is then free to marry again. What if one falls back in love with divorced spouse - can one remarry them? If not why not? Is it because the state says ahhh now come off it? And what if then after a period of time one regretted falling for the scoundrel again, can one divorce them again? If not why not? Does the state say you had your chance.
How many divorces is one allowed before the state wags its finger at you?
In the same vein if self declaration is valid once re gender then I do wonder if the state can constitutionally wag its finger and say only so many goes allowed young lad/lass!
I genuinely do not know what the position is re divorce but I presume in spite of its requirement to prove stable long term intention the law once passed cannot truly constrain one forever into the future?

Point to the bit of the Constitution you think is relevant.

Gatling

Gruffalux wrote: »

Yes.
Interesting.
But would it be constitutional to prevent redeclaring, undeclaring, redeclaring again?
In divorce law one has to show that the marriage is irrevocably over. I am not familiar with divorce law but I believe one is then free to marry again. What if one falls back in love with divorced spouse - can one remarry them? If not why not? Is it because the state says ahhh now come off it? And what if then after a period of time one regretted falling for the scoundrel again, can one divorce them again? If not why not? Does the state say you had your chance.
How many divorces is one allowed before the state wags its finger at you?
In the same vein if self declaration is valid once re gender then I do wonder if the state can constitutionally wag its finger and say only so many goes allowed young lad/lass!
I genuinely do not know what the position is re divorce but I presume in spite of its requirement to prove stable long term intention the law once passed cannot truly constrain one forever into the future?

But this
(f) a statutory declaration declaring that he or she—
[...]
(ii) has a settled and solemn intention of living in the preferred gender for the rest of his or her life,

Preferred gender for the rest of his or her life , surely no law can be used to forceable stop a person changing gender and back,

You can Marry and divorce the same person over and over as long as you go through the legal separation and final divorce process .

Remember marriage was till death do us part at one stage

Gruffalux

WhenPigsCry wrote: »

Point to the bit of the Constitution you think is relevant.

Ugh. I have just finished work and am too knackered to look but I suppose any challenge could come under Articles 40 to 44 in a general sense. I was kinda comparing it to divorce in the sense that divorce requires stated long term intention too ie no reasonable prospect of reconciliation..but is one thus forever constrained? By divorce laws? By gender recognition laws? It is speculative on my part. I don't want more homework please!

Gruffalux

Gatling wrote: »

But this
(f) a statutory declaration declaring that he or she—
[...]
(ii) has a settled and solemn intention of living in the preferred gender for the rest of his or her life,

Preferred gender for the rest of his or her life , surely no law can be used to forceable stop a person changing gender and back,

You can Marry and divorce the same person over and over as long as you go through the legal separation and final divorce process .

Remember marriage was till death do us part at one stage

I did not know one could marry and remarry the same person again and again. In that case I would imagine it is theoretically possible to change gender identity repeatedly. If one satisfies thst this is the new present long term intention etc

WhenPigsCry

Gruffalux wrote: »

Ugh. I have just finished work and am too knackered to look but I suppose any challenge could come under Articles 40 to 44 in a general sense. I was kinda comparing it to divorce in the sense that divorce requires stated long term intention too ie no reasonable prospect of reconciliation..but is one thus forever constrained? By divorce laws? By gender recognition laws? It is speculative on my part. I don't want more homework please!

If someone doesn't like the Minister's decision they can appeal to the Courts, but I don't know what anyone could point to in the Constitution specifically, since I don't know what -- if anything - it has to say about gender.

IAMAMORON

I cannot see how divorce law is relevant regardless.

Getting hung up on the legal minutia of a hypothetical scenario where a minister for state is being asked every month to give approval on a transsexual jumping genders is hardly plausible either, I don't even see how it is relevant to the discussion. It is a highly unlikely scenario all things considered.

Even if it were happening, I would imagine after a few instances of a transgender appearing to abuse such a system the state would be in a position to seek remedy through some sort of intervention by a medical doctor who could give proper advice pertaining to such an instance.

There would have to be distinctive scope, within current legislation, to support both citizens and the state, as regards it being open to cynical manipulation by a transgender hoping to abuse the system. This as opposed to a person quite possibly suffering some sort of a negative mental episode or similar.

Eitherways, I would imagine if it became an issue the minister responsible would need direction from the courts. I don't see how the onus would be placed entirely on the minister if there were obvious technical issues arising in regards to interpretation of the legislation, it would be a legal matter.

Necro

Mod:

MikeOxsgreen's threadban lifted after discussion with user

volchitsa

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I cannot see how divorce law is relevant regardless.

Getting hung up on the legal minutia of a hypothetical scenario where a minister for state is being asked every month to give approval on a transsexual jumping genders is hardly plausible either, I don't even see how it is relevant to the discussion. It is a highly unlikely scenario all things considered.

Even if it were happening, I would imagine after a few instances of a transgender appearing to abuse such a system the state would be in a position to seek remedy through some sort of intervention by a medical doctor who could give proper advice pertaining to such an instance.

There would have to be distinctive scope, within current legislation, to support both citizens and the state, as regards it being open to cynical manipulation by a transgender hoping to abuse the system. This as opposed to a person quite possibly suffering some sort of a negative mental episode or similar.

Eitherways, I would imagine if it became an issue the minister responsible would need direction from the courts. I don't see how the onus would be placed entirely on the minister if there were obvious technical issues arising in regards to interpretation of the legislation, it would be a legal matter.

Under what law would this happen? As far as I know it would not be possible under Irish law, because "self declaration". It's that simple. The law would have to be amended first - and if there was no question of that rather than put a dangerous psychopath in a woman's prison, there's no way it's going to be done because of somebody repeatedly jumping genders.

Gruffalux

"A transgender" seems a really strange term.

My thoughts on this are pretty straightforward:

Cis-male or Cis-female are pandering terms. Male and Female are what they are. Trans as a prefix is enough. My wife is female, because she was born female, like all females are. Stick a trans in front to signify someone was born the alternate to what they wish they were. All pretty simple. No need for confusion or obfuscation with latinological bollixology.

Intersex, that’s the mutation, the statistical anomaly. As with all anomalies they should be excluded from consideration to any great degree. Doctors, family and professional support resources should be doing their best for the individuals, but there the line should be drawn.

Which brings us to gender. There are two. You are one or the other. You can change it on paper and in practice, but let’s call a spade a spade here: people who do need mental health services, they suffer from an illness and their condition should be managed with a view to helping their recovery, rather than be encouraged or facilitated by preposterous enactment of laws to enable their illness distort simple truths. There are only two genders. Born male, you’re a man. Born female, you’re a woman.

Necro

Necro wrote: »

Mod:

MikeOxsgreen's threadban lifted after discussion with user

Apologies all, I stepped offside and got pinged by the ref.

Gruffalux

And the conversation was really about whether people could change their minds. Not whether people would willy nilly jump back and forth every month. That is reductio ad absurdum, isn't, in terms of argumentatiin fallacies. My opinion is if the law says you can self ID one way then you could not be constrained from self ID ing another way.

Gatling

Gruffalux wrote: »

And the conversation was really about whether people could change their minds. Not whether people would willy nilly jump back and forth every month. That is reductio ad absurdum, isn't, in terms of argumentatiin fallacies. My opinion is if the law says you can self ID one way then you could not be constrained from self ID ing another way.

This is the point one saying no no no your not allowed discuss or bring this up ,
Proves it could in theory happen and no minister or judge would say otherwise ,if people can be sacked for saying that they don't buy into the ideology and be tarnished for being transpobic would could cost you a career ,I would hardly imagine a judge to minister standing up and saying you can't change your gender and back again regularly or otherwise .
It's a kin to saying in court you have been sentenced to being a woman or man till your death .

It sounds dramatic but it's quite possible

Annasopra

Omackeral wrote: »

Where did I once say I was against gender recognition? Quote me. I’ve said here umpteen times I refer to people by their preferred pronouns out of courtesy and respect. The gender fluid nonsense though, nah.

But you just argued that legal gender recognition is lunacy because there is also a process to revoke it. That argument is an argument against legal gender recognition.

Cilldara_2000

Has anyone yoyoed back and forth every month anywhere in the world? Is there a shred of evidence that it's a thing that happens?

Gruffalux

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Has anyone yoyoed back and forth every month anywhere in the world? Is there a shred of evidence that it's a thing that happens?

No one ever suggested people have except those wishing to turn the argument to absurdity. There was apart from that messing some simple questions about whether one could self identify as one gender and at another future time revert. I would say that would have to be the case. To lock a person in would seem unworkable if self ID exists in the first place.

jam_mac_jam

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Has anyone yoyoed back and forth every month anywhere in the world? Is there a shred of evidence that it's a thing that happens?

No. There are very few countries where you can self ID anyway.

I don't even see why it would happen or why you would do it. Nefarious or otherwise.

Annasopra

Gatling wrote: »

But they would be within their rights to switch back and forth as they see fit ,

What minister covers gender identity,and how much power would they have to prevent someone switching gender on a yearly or monthly basis

Again this is just absurd and silly and pointless and weird arguments. A person applies. The Minister (for Social Protection) can accept or reject the application. The Minister can revoke the cert if something is bought to her attention or if the person applies for it to be revoked. Like honestly I really cannot see a scenario where someone is applying for a cert, then the cert to be revoked back and forth on a monthly or annual basis and I cant see a Minister signing off on that. They would just start rejecting.

Neyite

Gruffalux wrote: »

And the conversation was really about whether people could change their minds. Not whether people would willy nilly jump back and forth every month. That is reductio ad absurdum, isn't, in terms of argumentatiin fallacies. My opinion is if the law says you can self ID one way then you could not be constrained from self ID ing another way.

Well, there's an individual that does bounce back and forth on a weekly basis in the UK.

Pip Bunce is gender fluid and lives roughly half the week as a woman and the other half as a man. They were named on the Financial Times 100 businesswomen of the year, which would indicate that needing a GRC wasn't any barrier to being fully accepted as female when it came to professional recognition.

I have no idea if PB does have a GRC, obviously, but it demonstrates that it may be optional, but not any impediment to living as your true authentic self, however you present.

Annasopra

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I doubt a minister of state would have any power.

This is the law

Application for a gender recognition certificate

8. (1) A person referred to in section 9 may apply to the Minister for a gender recognition certificate.

(2) An application under this section shall be in writing in the form, including electronic form, as may be prescribed, and no fee shall be charged by the Minister for considering the application.

(3) The Minister shall consider an application under this section and shall decide to either—

(a) issue a gender recognition certificate, or

(b) refuse to issue a gender recognition certificate.

(4) In considering an application under this section the Minister shall consider the information furnished by the applicant and may request further information from the applicant regarding any information or evidence furnished by the applicant or on his or her behalf.

(5) The Minister shall give notice in writing to the applicant of a decision under subsection (3), as soon as practicable after it is made, which shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (3)(b) —

(a) include reasons for the decision,

(b) inform the applicant that he or she may, under section 17 , appeal the decision within 90 days of the date of the notice, and

(c) inform the applicant that the decision shall be suspended until—

(i) the decision becomes final under subsection (6), or

(ii) the disposal of an appeal under section 17 (2).

(6) If, on the expiration of the period of 90 days beginning on the date of the notice under subsection (5), no appeal under section 17 is made, the Minister’s decision under subsection (3)(b) is final.

(7) If, following an appeal under section 17 the court, under section 17 (2)(b) orders the Minister to reconsider his or her decision, the Minister’s decision under subsection (3)(b) is suspended until the Minister reconsiders his or her decision.

Revocation by Minister

14. (1) The Minister may revoke a gender recognition certificate if he or she is satisfied that he or she would not have issued the certificate under section 8(3)(a) had he or she been aware of information or facts before deciding to issue the certificate which since that issue have been brought to his or her notice.

(2) The Minister shall give notice in writing to the person whose gender recognition certificate is proposed to be revoked which shall inform him or her that he or she may make representations in writing in relation to the proposal to the Minister within 30 days of the date of the notice.

(3) In considering any representations made under this section the Minister may request further information from the person concerned as may be necessary for the purposes of making a decision under subsection (4).

(4) The Minister shall consider any representations made or further information furnished pursuant to a request under subsection (3) and shall decide to—

(a) revoke the gender recognition certificate, or

(b) not revoke the gender recognition certificate.

(5) The Minister shall give notice in writing to the person concerned of a decision under subsection (4) as soon as practicable after it is made, which shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (4)(a)—

(a) include reasons for the decision,

(b) require the person to surrender his or her gender recognition certificate as soon as practicable,

(c) inform the applicant that he or she may, under section 17 appeal the decision within 90 days of the date of the notice, and

(d) inform the applicant that the decision and requirement to surrender the gender recognition certificate shall be suspended until—

(i) the decision becomes final under subsection (6), or

(ii) the disposal of an appeal under section 17 (4).

(6) If, on the expiration of the period of 90 days beginning on the date of the notice under subsection (5), no appeal under section 17 is made, the Minister’s decision under subsection (4)(a) and the requirement to surrender the gender recognition certificate are final.

(7) If, following an appeal under section 17 the court, under section 17 (4)(b) orders the Minister to reconsider his or her decision, the Minister’s decision under subsection (4)(a) and the requirement to surrender the gender recognition certificate are suspended until the Minister reconsiders his or her decision.

(8) (a) A gender recognition certificate revoked under this section shall be deemed to always have been void and of no effect.

(b) Paragraph (a) shall not operate to prevent a person from recovering damages in respect of any loss incurred by acting in reliance on a gender recognition certificate revoked under this section.

(9) The Minister shall give notice in writing of a decision under subsection (4)(a), or an order of the court under section 17 (4)(c) to—

(a) where the decision or order relates to a person referred to in sub paragraph (i) or (ii) of section 9 (1)(a), an tArd-Chláraitheoir,

(b) where the decision or order relates to a person referred to in subparagraph (iii) of section 9 (1)(a), the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade who shall as soon as practicable following receipt of the notice, if applicable, amend the register of gender recognition of foreign births referred to in section 27 (3A) of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 in accordance with the decision or order, or

(c) where the decision or order relates to a person referred to in subparagraph (iv) of section 9 (1)(a), the Adoption Authority of Ireland.

Application to Minister to revoke a gender recognition certificate

15. (1) A person referred to in subsection (8) may apply to the Minister to revoke a gender recognition certificate.

(2) An application under this section shall be accompanied by the gender recognition certificate and the application shall be in writing in the form, including electronic form, as may be prescribed, and no fee shall be charged by the Minister for considering the application.

(3) The Minister shall consider an application under this section and shall decide to either—

(a) revoke the gender recognition certificate, or

(b) refuse to revoke the gender recognition certificate.

(4) In considering an application under this section the Minister shall consider the information furnished by the applicant and may request further information from the applicant regarding any information or evidence furnished by the applicant or on his or her behalf.

(5) The Minister shall give notice in writing to the applicant of a decision under subsection (3) as soon as practicable after it is made, which shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (3)(b) —

(a) include reasons for the decision,

(b) inform the applicant that he or she may, under section 17 , appeal the decision within 90 days of the date of the notice, and

(c) inform the applicant that the decision shall be suspended until—

(i) the decision becomes final under subsection (6), or

(ii) the disposal of an appeal under section 17 (6).

(6) If, on the expiration of the period of 90 days beginning on the date of the notice under subsection (5), no appeal under section 17 is made, the Minister’s decision under subsection (3)(b) is final and the Minister shall return the gender recognition certificate to the applicant.

(7) If, following an appeal under section 17 the court, under section 17 (6)(b) orders the Minister to reconsider his or her decision, the Minister’s decision under subsection (3)(b) is suspended until the Minister reconsiders his or her decision.

(8) This section applies to a person—

(a) to whom the Minister has issued a gender recognition certificate under section 8 (3)(a),

(b) who, subject to section 12 , has attained the age of 18 years on the date that he or she applies to revoke the gender recognition certificate,

(c) who is not married or a civil partner, and

(d) who furnishes the following to the Minister:

(i) the gender recognition certificate concerned;

(ii) a statutory declaration declaring that he or she—

(I) is not married or a civil partner,

(II) has a settled and solemn intention of living in his or her original gender for the rest of his or her life,

(III) understands the consequences of the application, and

(IV) makes the application of his or her free will.

(9) The revocation of a person’s gender recognition certificate under this section shall not affect the rights or liabilities of the person or consequences of an action by the person in their preferred gender prior to the date of that revocation.

(10) The date of revocation of a gender recognition certificate shall be—

(a) the date on which the Minister decides to revoke the certificate under subsection (3)(a), or

(b) the date of an order of the court under section 17 (6)(a).

(11) The Minister shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (3)(a) or an order of the court under section 17 (6)(a), as soon as practicable and as applicable notify—

(a) where the decision or order relates to a person referred to in sub paragraph (i) or (ii) of section 9 (1)(a), an tArd-Chláraitheoir,

(b) where the decision or order relates to a person referred to in subparagraph (iii) of section 9 (1)(a), the applicant concerned advising them that they may apply to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to amend the register of gender recognition of foreign births referred to in section 27 (3A) of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 in accordance with the final decision or order, or

(c) where the decision or order relates to a person referred to in subparagraph (iv) of section 9 (1)(a), the Adoption Authority of Ireland.

Annasopra

Gruffalux wrote: »

"A transgender" seems a really strange term.

Agreed. I'm not being rude but it is like calling a person with a disability "a disabled" or "a disability"

km991148

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

This is the law

Jesus.. a link or a summary would do!! :pac:

Gervais08

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

But you just argued that legal gender recognition is lunacy because there is also a process to revoke it. That argument is an argument against legal gender recognition.

I don’t believe it is.

Now I am against simple self-ID, It can and has caused problems that have been widely noted in here.

However if a person feels they are “born in the wrong body” I support their right to to live as the correct one as they see it. So many don’t transition though - and I know “old school” transsexuals (yes the ones I know are cool with the term) feel it dishonest given their journey.

What my main issue is that there are kids who aren’t following the usual - outdated- gender stereotypes. They’re pushed into changing gender, why ??? They’re perfectly normal kids - some might be gay, some bi, some straight - who cares???

But they end up down a road of pills and potions and therapy - with drugs that no one knows the long term effects where they could just be adults who know their own individual likes and dislikes!!

It’s bordering on abuse in my opinion.