*What* reproductive rights?

August 18, 2009

West Australia:

Two West Australian female-to-male transsexuals have won the right to be considered men without having to undergo surgery on their reproductive organs.

[…]

“[The State Administrative Tribunal] accepted the evidence of each applicant that he intended to continue testosterone treatment for the rest of his life.”

“It accepted the medical evidence that each was, and would remain, infertile for as long as he continued testosterone treatment”.

(Via the Sydney Morning Herald)

Latvia:

[At a] meeting of secretaries of State the amendments specifying sex change for single individuals were approved.

[…]

Having surgery, it will be prohibited to keep reproductive function that is inherent to the previous sex of the person.

(Via TGEU listserv)

In each case, the outcome is the same – to stop trans people becoming parents to their own children – only the means of achieving it varies. One requires sterilisation by means of hormone therapy; the other requires sterilisation by surgical means.

The medical profession which pathologises and stigmatises us, is now being used to police us and yet again, the gatekeepers overrule the facilitators.

Well, we can’t have these awful trans people breeding, now, can we?

One Response to “*What* reproductive rights?”

  1. queenemily Says:

    The scary thing is that the West Australian decision really *is* a massive win. It moves away from genitality for legal sex recognition (admittedly it’s hard to tell if this will apply to trans women too without another test case). But yeah, charming cost innit.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: