Society/Culture Transgender athlete attempting to make history in the AFLW

[Proud SJW]

How is it not the point? If the original records exist, then they can be used for statistical analysis, which is what you are concerned about - correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't know, you're the one speculating about whether or not they do, I'm just going along with it.
The poster stated she's had her "birth certificate" altered, which I assume to be the original. And if it is, how many "layers" of truth does there have to be? Is anyone interested in pursuing records going to have to look at each one to see if there's a "hidden" deeper record somewhere? Do we have several birth certificates hidden away in various locations as each life change is made?
No, we don't. Because they are not a record of change.

Let me put it another way.
A married woman who changes her name to match that of her spouse cannot have her birth certificate altered to reflect that.
Why? Because it's not the name she was born with.
A drivers licence and other methods of identification display any changes made after that fact. Even a passport can be altered if you want to live as something else.

The point of the bloody thing is to be a record of birth. Is that point so very difficult to understand?

 

[ShanDog]

I don't know, you're the one speculating about whether or not they do, I'm just going along with it.
The poster stated she's had her "birth certificate" altered, which I assume to be the original. And if it is, how many "layers" of truth does there have to be? Is anyone interested in pursuing records going to have to look at each one to see if there's a "hidden" deeper record somewhere? Do we have several birth certificates hidden away in various locations as each life change is made?
No, we don't. Because they are not a record of change.

Let me put it another way.
A married woman who changes her name to match that of her spouse cannot have her birth certificate altered to reflect that.
Why? Because it's not the name she was born with.
A drivers licence and other methods of identification display any changes made after that fact. Even a passport can be altered if you want to live as something else.

The point of the bloody thing is to be a record of birth. Is that point so very difficult to understand?

I've just done some super quick googling and it looks like the new certificates have their own new ID number on them. I just checked my new birth certificate from Victoria and it has my old name written on the back. Births, deaths and marriages in NSW says that a new birth certificate issued by them for a change of sex will not necessarily be recognised in other states, so people should use their original birth certificates in that case, implying they are still extant as records. Therefore, original certificates are still registered - just superceded. Therefore, there is still a record of birth. Therefore I don't understand what you are finding so upsetting.

 

[King Brown]

Not sure on specifics, but I think in a few states, change of name is a separate record, whereas change of sex on a birth certificate alters the original record.

 

[ShanDog]

Not sure on specifics, but I think in a few states, change of name is a separate record, whereas change of sex on a birth certificate alters the original record.

Anything recorded by those departments since electronic record keeping became the norm will very likely still have all the originals. I'd wager most places would also have the original records from before then too - there are lots of regulatory requirements about public record keeping that have been around for quite a while and would require them to be kept for substantial periods, even if amended.

 

[King Brown]

Anything recorded by those departments since electronic record keeping became the norm will very likely still have all the originals. I'd wager most places would also have the original records from before then too - there are lots of regulatory requirements about public record keeping that have been around for quite a while and would require them to be kept for substantial periods, even if amended.

I'm quite certain, but I can't find it at the moment, that at least one jurisdiction scrubs the original document for sex changes. Probably the ACT but I can't say for sure. Either way, the transgender movement asserts that is what should happen.

 

[ShanDog]

I'm quite certain, but I can't find it at the moment, that at least one jurisdiction scrubs the original document for sex changes. Probably the ACT but I can't say for sure. Either way, the transgender movement asserts that is what should happen.

Would be an odd stance from them if that's the case. Would have thought the more data that could be gathered would be better.

 

[Proud SJW]

I've just done some super quick googling and it looks like the new certificates have their own new ID number on them. I just checked my new birth certificate from Victoria and it has my old name written on the back. Births, deaths and marriages in NSW says that a new birth certificate issued by them for a change of sex will not necessarily be recognised in other states, so people should use their original birth certificates in that case, implying they are still extant as records. Therefore, original certificates are still registered - just superceded. Therefore, there is still a record of birth. Therefore I don't understand what you are finding so upsetting.

Because, again, you and Kirsti were the ones saying you had the original altered.
I took issue with that, and with good reason. If you've now found evidence saying that isn't quite the case, then well done for clarifying the original statement.

And again, the historical record should not be altered.... ever.
Regardless of whatever emotional issues are in play. I'm not upset by it, I'm *ingg annoyed that people think it's a good idea. If anyone here is upset by a birth record, it's those seeking to change it, not me.

A more rational (and healthy) approach would be to accept the current condition without forgetting the previous one. You are what you are, and what you were is a major formative factor in who you are now.

 

[ShanDog]

Because, again, you and Kirsti were the ones saying you had the original altered.
I took issue with that, and with good reason. If you've now found evidence saying that isn't quite the case, then well done for clarifying the original statement.

No I didn't. I said I had a new one issued and thought the original was more than likely in existence. It's what I've said the whole time. I still don't know why you're arguing with me. I agree the originals birth certificates should be maintained as records.

 

[kirsti]

I don't know, you're the one speculating about whether or not they do, I'm just going along with it.
The poster stated she's had her "birth certificate" altered, which I assume to be the original. And if it is, how many "layers" of truth does there have to be? Is anyone interested in pursuing records going to have to look at each one to see if there's a "hidden" deeper record somewhere? Do we have several birth certificates hidden away in various locations as each life change is made?
No, we don't. Because they are not a record of change.

Let me put it another way.
A married woman who changes her name to match that of her spouse cannot have her birth certificate altered to reflect that.
Why? Because it's not the name she was born with.
A drivers licence and other methods of identification display any changes made after that fact. Even a passport can be altered if you want to live as something else.

The point of the bloody thing is to be a record of birth. Is that point so very difficult to understand?

When a name change has been completed with births deaths and marriages a new birth certificate can also be issued using the new name. This amended birth certificate will not have the Old name on it but it will identify that the holder has been known by another name the same applies with a change of sex birth certificate.

 

[Proud SJW]

Ok, well here is a simpler question.

This is from a data perspective, not a personal one. A researcher isn't necessarily going to be interested in what paperwork you carry around with you but in total numbers and trends. Neither is your personal information going to be of any interest to someone seeking to run a simple database query by way of response to a request.

If I were that researcher looking at birth records and put in a request for information, would the results a standard database admin provide indicate that you were born a man or a woman?

 

[ShanDog]

Ok, well here is a simpler question.

This is from a data perspective, not a personal one. A researcher isn't necessarily going to be interested in what paperwork you carry around with you but in total numbers and trends. Neither is your personal information going to be of any interest to someone seeking to run a simple database query by way of response to a request.

If I were that researcher looking at birth records and put in a request for information, would the results a standard database admin provide indicate that you were born a man or a woman?

Dunno. But if the researcher's results are going to be worth the paper/electricity it's stored with, they'll know this is a consideration and will get the info they want or control for it in their analysis.