Fighting for legal and social recognition outside the societal gender system
NEW ZEALAND PASSPORT AUTHORITIES PERMIT NON GENDER-SPECIFIC OPTION
Sometimes it is easy to miss what is already there and right under your nose – or on the other side of the world in this instance.
It would appear that Australia is following in the wake of New Zealand, a country where it is now possible for non-gendered citizens to obtain a passport with a non gender-specific reference in the sex/gender field.
The non gender-specific option is not visible on the passport application form (at least not on the one that I found online) but a quick enquiry to the NZ issuing authority returned a helpful response and confirmation the NZ authorities will issue a passport with ‘X’ in the sex/gender field once the passport applicant has completed a statutory declaration in affirmation of their identity.
Some more online research found the following websites which offer further information:
Department of Internal Affairs
Human Rights Commission of New Zealand
Many thanks to Kathy for bringing NZ to my attention.
THE IDENTITY AND PASSPORT SERVICE
With thoughts of emigration on my mind I drag myself back to the UK.
Written correspondence is ongoing with IPS and I will give an update when more information is available.
Following my previous posting on this site, I am aware of a generally positive response to my call for action but more will inevitably be required if we are going to make an impact. I cannot stress enough how important this is. If this issue affects you and you have not already done so, you should write to IPS at the address given in my previous posting and state your requirement that IPS make provision for you to obtain a non gender-specific passport. This would be in accordance with an ICAO accepted standard that permits three value entries under sex/gender field and a concession to which we should all be entitled.
It will be extremely difficult to persuade IPS to change existing policy but I do not want to give up this time. Personal identification documentation that is an accurate representation of the identity must be a universal fundamental right and not an area that is compromised in order that all human life is categorised into the gendered societal structure.
WESTMINSTER AND EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
Talks still ongoing. Will post news as soon as such news becomes available.
A FEW LOOSE ENDS:
No response from WPATH to multiple requests mailed to different people within the organisation for clarification based on their statement of 26 May 2010 concerning the “de-psychopathologisation of gender variance worldwide”. I had wanted an affirmation that this statement would incorporate persons of non-gendered identity but WPATH have chosen to ignore my communications.
It would have been good if someone at the organisation had the guts to openly recognise the logic behind this issue and furthermore had demonstrated a confirmed belief in the fundamental human right of equal treatment for all people. It would also have been good if someone had had the courtesy to reply to my emails, but their lack of empathy or response indicated none of this applies.
Not the end of the world however and I never did feel any sense of need for permission or approval from anyone before I could embrace my identity. WPATH are no exception.
Useless. Useless. Useless. A farce. Second complaint now in the system (except this complaint is in a different complaint category and therefore going through a different complaints procedure to the standard complaints procedure where my previous complaint was upheld last year – please don’t ask!).
If only EHRC would follow in the wake of the HRCs of Australia and New Zealand. If only EHRC could apply the same dedication and effort towards doing something as they appear to apply in a zealous and dedicated effort towards doing NOTHING! If only ......
But this is not funny. The organisation has complete disinterest in getting engaged with the extraordinary plight of being a non-gendered person trying to function within a gendered societal structure, and they are failing in their public duty in a display of obvious reluctance to take the issue on board. They were not even honest with me about their (lack of) intention and only admitted there would be no involvement on their part after I made clear that after several months of procrastination I was tired of being fobbed off with excuses.
I see no point whatsoever in maintaining any further dialogue because the attitude at EHRC senior level actually appears representative of the wider problem.
The denial of existence is the worst act of discrimination by the gendered majority against the non-gendered.