GA Resolution: A Convention on Gender

[Ananke II]

This is the discussion thread. Please go here to cast your vote.

A Convention on Gender
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Sionis Prioratus


Description: AWED by the progress the World Assembly has made in Civil Rights;

AWARE that in spite of said progress, there are still persons who, while free from discrimination, are denied their basic self-sense of personhood & identity, an abuse often beginning in the earliest infancy;

FURTHER AWARE said denials are a source of untold countless horrors, among them depression & suicide;

DESIROUS of eliminating those horrors;

IT IS ESTABLISHED:

1) Definitions:

• “Majoritarian genders (MG)”: The most prevalent genders found on any given sapient species (e.g. female & male) defined not only by genetic and/or anatomical features, but also by cultural roles each culture usually ascribes them. This resolution does not in any way deny that many sapient species do not have dichotomy in gender; but may differ in number of prevalent genders;
• “Intersex persons”: Due to genetic variations, cannot be assigned to any MG by evidence of genetic and/or anatomical features;
• “Transgender persons”: Born in a given MG, their basic self-sense of personhood & identity belong in another MG;
• “Intergender persons”: Self-identify as belonging to more than one MG at once, or not belonging to any MG at all; may express combinations of MG attributes, or none at all; also may have any MG features;
• “Gender-adequation procedure (GAP)”: Medical procedures seeking to assign to intersex, transgender or intergender persons gender-related anatomical and/or genetic features needed to fit in a person-centered adequate gender.

2) No intersex, transgender or intergender person shall be considered diseased by the sole reason of being intersex, transgender or intergender;

3) No nation can prohibit GAPs to intersex, transgender or intergender persons; nor can they be prohibited to travel to other nations for the sole reason of seeking GAPs in said nations; nor can return be denied for the sole reason of having had GAPs;

4) No intersex, transgender or intergender person shall be forced to choose to fit in any gender; persons are free to keep whatever life-compatible features Nature gave them. They shall be recognized as “intersex” (or culturally equivalent gender terms) if documents require gender identification;

5) Full recognition shall be given to gender changes & intersex/gender status in international/national personal documents, if they mention gender;

6) No intersex, transgender or intergender persons of any age shall have GAPs until they are mature enough to make an informed decision regarding their own future;

7) Intersex, transgender & intergender persons shall be:

a) Provided access to a list of expert GAP providers, as well as peer support, before & after GAPs. Said support shall also be provided to intersex, transgender & intergender persons who choose not to have GAPs;

b) Consistently told the truth, within the limits of their advisors’ knowledge and belief (including providers’ honesty about uncertainty) & given copies of their medical records as soon & as often as they ask for them;

c) Allowed to have GAPs after they have been informed of the risks & benefits (plus evidence, or lack thereof, for both).

[Kanaia]

AGAINST
Somehow I don't think the WA should be involved in peoples genders.

[Eldine]

AGAINST

[Boltor]

I'm against, the whole bill just feels wrong, and do we really need to classify everything?

[Elite]

AGAINST

[Anime Daisuki]

Classification may be counter-productive, actually.

[Inquirius]

Okay this is just eerie. Get it away.

The intentions are clearly good, but this won't work. Transgendered people are some of the most self-aware people on the planet; no amount of official classification will be adequate. Better to leave it alone.

AGAINST

[Echolilia]

Apr 23, 2010 6:01:45 GMT -5 Boltor said:

I'm against, the whole bill just feels wrong, and do we really need to classify everything?

I think you are missing the point. The bill classifies in order to include members of those classes in its protections. And it kind of needs to be explicit to succeed at that.

[Minurva]

Against...

[kingdomofrokaan]

The way I see it, they are trying to not single out people with gender disorders, not labeling them diseased and such, and to be recognized for what they are.... maybe its just me, but I'm for it.

[Walabamba]

FOR

I agree with Echo and Rokaan.

[ImperialPoland]

against

[Quelesh]

While my nation does not reside in your region, the depth of my support for this proposal compels me to advocate for the votes of such an influential region as 10ki, especially considering the 370 delegate votes Ananke II brings to bear.

I am surprised that many of the responses in this thread so far have opposed this proposal, and I hope that this is not indicative of the general level of support within 10ki.

This proposal merely codifies in law the natural rights to equality and bodily sovereignty that all transsexuals possess. It will be a godsend to those suffering with a physical body that contradicts the nature of their spirit in a nation that does not allow them to change it, and I strongly encourage all residents of 10000 Islands to vote in favor of this proposal in the poll.

Eternally grateful,

Leonard Roku
Ambassador to the World Assembly, Empire of Quelesh
WA Delegate from the Youth Rights Alliance

[evestigio]

Against

[Echolilia]

There are a lot of "against" comments with no further details; would any of those nations care to provide more information about their reasoning?

[Walabamba]

I was wondering the same thing, or are we just going by popular vote

[vitius]

The General Assembly's mission is to improve the world. Wouldn't this further argument into this debate? Surely, nothing good will come out of this.

AGAINST

[Lord Reigner (LJCS[A])]

I am ashamed, very ashamed...

I deliver my case:

1. What right should a government or a company have to look at or even know what's going on down between one's legs? That is clearly invasion of the most dear privacy! I say we just label them Male/Female for who they are, forget about what's going on down there, and treat them like a regular male or female. It's the little secret of the diet(ies) that made you, and to whomever you wish to let know!

2. There is plenty of hate or dislike against people that are transgender or paragender. If this gets approved, we will have to label these people by what they are (rather than by who they are) Since everyone's going to know what features everyone has, violence against these people will be on the rise. Again, if we label the M/F, forget about what's going on down there, and treat them as regular males or females, nobody will have a clue, and anyone who tries to find out will be punched for perversity (Unless he/she's a doctor ;D )

3. Since it is technically a "disorder," and since we don't need the public or the government to find out about people's features, I say we let only the doctors have this information. Since different medicines tend to work differently between both genders, why not let the doctors do a little research from their patients (Provided the patient gives the hospital permission) and find out how to make a paragender version of such medicines? It can help these people receive higher-quality treatment from any virus or bacteria they get!

I rest my case.

AGAINST!!!

[Echolilia]

Nowhere does this resolution mandate any invasion of privacy. I believe the intent is that, if documents to require gender be entered, they allow for more than just male or female. So I don't see the sense of your objection at all.

[Echolilia]

The General Assembly resolution "A Convention on Gender" was passed 3,363 votes to 2,560, and implemented in all WA member nations.

[Ananke II]

Final tally; 5 for, 11 against, 1 delegate's prerogative.

I cast my vote against.