Australia: FTMs Recognised as Men
Aug. 18th, 2009 05:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ftmichael posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
transhttp://abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/18/2658751.htm
Transsexuals recognised as men
By James McHale
Posted Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:26am AEST
Updated Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:38am AEST
Two West Australian women who changed their gender have won the right to be legally considered men, despite still having female reproductive organs.
The transsexual men were previously denied legal recognition of their sex change and appealed against the decision.
The state's Attorney-General, Christian Porter, intervened, arguing that until they had hysterectomies they could not be considered men under the Gender Reassignment Act.
The State Administrative Tribunal found that because the legislation did not specify reproductive surgery as a requirement, the pair could be legally considered men even with female reproductive organs.
One of the men, whose identity is legally suppressed, says he is happy with the tribunal's decision.
"It means that it opens up lots of opportunities for lots of other people who until now have never tried to get their sex legally changed because they didn't think they'd be able to," he said.
"Now it means that rather than having an arbitrary set of surgeries that people have to have, each case can be taken on its merits.
"[It's] a result that will make life easier for both myself and the other applicant and for lots of other transpeople."
The Attorney-General has declined to comment on the decision.
Transsexuals recognised as men
By James McHale
Posted Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:26am AEST
Updated Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:38am AEST
Two West Australian women who changed their gender have won the right to be legally considered men, despite still having female reproductive organs.
The transsexual men were previously denied legal recognition of their sex change and appealed against the decision.
The state's Attorney-General, Christian Porter, intervened, arguing that until they had hysterectomies they could not be considered men under the Gender Reassignment Act.
The State Administrative Tribunal found that because the legislation did not specify reproductive surgery as a requirement, the pair could be legally considered men even with female reproductive organs.
One of the men, whose identity is legally suppressed, says he is happy with the tribunal's decision.
"It means that it opens up lots of opportunities for lots of other people who until now have never tried to get their sex legally changed because they didn't think they'd be able to," he said.
"Now it means that rather than having an arbitrary set of surgeries that people have to have, each case can be taken on its merits.
"[It's] a result that will make life easier for both myself and the other applicant and for lots of other transpeople."
The Attorney-General has declined to comment on the decision.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-08-19 01:32 pm (UTC)So no, I'm not sure it does make things easier for "lots of other transpeople (sic)". It means that trans folk in Australia are going to have to go to trial if they want legal recognition (if each case being taken on its merits means what I think it means). It means the burden of proof is STILL on us. And it explicitly states that we're not allowed to breed.
Yeah, that's a huge step forward.