Advertisement
by Wallenburg » Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:25 pm
by Maowi » Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:38 pm
Wallenburg wrote:Mikael steps into the drafting room at the last minute and takes a look at the proposal put to the queue. "Reluctantly, I must oppose this resolution. Had you not included the blatantly unscientific and absurdist requirements of clause four, I would have voted in favor."
by Wallenburg » Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:51 pm
Maowi wrote:Wallenburg wrote:Mikael steps into the drafting room at the last minute and takes a look at the proposal put to the queue. "Reluctantly, I must oppose this resolution. Had you not included the blatantly unscientific and absurdist requirements of clause four, I would have voted in favor."
"If it helps, clause four dictates that member states must allow its citizens to choose their own gender; the assignment of their biological sex can be subjected to each individual nation's own rules, as far as this proposal goes. Therefore, I do not see what is scientifically wrong with clause four. It is generally accepted that one's gender is to do with the mind and the intellect, and one's sex is the biological features one is born with."
by Kranostav » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:21 pm
by Kenmoria » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:25 pm
Snoburg wrote:If citizens had the right to choose their gender, Couldn't that make cataloging files and the like very difficult? It would no longer be a male or a female, the concept I agree with, but choice of any gender? That would muck things up quite a lot.
by Wittebosland » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:37 pm
by Maowi » Thu Feb 07, 2019 3:31 pm
Wallenburg wrote:Maowi wrote:"If it helps, clause four dictates that member states must allow its citizens to choose their own gender; the assignment of their biological sex can be subjected to each individual nation's own rules, as far as this proposal goes. Therefore, I do not see what is scientifically wrong with clause four. It is generally accepted that one's gender is to do with the mind and the intellect, and one's sex is the biological features one is born with."
Mikael stares at his colleague in confusion. "Ambassador, you're saying the same thing and giving it different definitions. I don't understand."
His translator leans down and passes a whisper to him. Mikael now looks to his translator, even more confused. "W--why? There's not even a word for that. There's no such thing."
Kranostav wrote:I'm curious as to why you excluded Theocracies and religious governments and associations. Did you not want to offend them?
Wittebosland wrote:Although i'm usually all for the more liberal approach to my nation's politics, i'm going to have to pass on this one. It feels like quite an overlap from GAR #35, just as everyone else said, but with even more points that would frustrate a lot of the more "eccentric" WA members. In addition, I feel that it skirts dangerously close to a "game mechanics" contradiction, as marriage and sexuality are usually Issue-based matters first and foremost.
by Kenmoria » Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:19 pm
Maowi wrote:OOC: I am not an expert on this, but I would've thought that seeing as WA resolutions do not affect how you answer issues, only game stats, this wouldn't fall under violation of the Game Mechanics rule? I thought that was more for things like trying to force all non-complying member nations to be banned from the WA for example?
by Wallenburg » Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:43 pm
Kranostav wrote:I'm curious as to why you excluded Theocracies and religious governments and associations. Did you not want to offend them?
by Maowi » Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:46 pm
by Barichvaria » Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:53 pm
by Sackelshorth » Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:07 pm
by Otaku Stratus » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:25 am
by Araraukar » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:30 am
Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: I think a good-faith interpretation of clause 4 wouldn’t include things such as identifying as anything inanimate, as is parodied in internet memes, but just male, female and some kind of epicene/agender/neutral.)
Otaku Stratus wrote:Jiminy. If it didn't break the entire functionality of the site, this would be the straw that got me to resign from WA.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by A Cornstar » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:38 am
Maowi wrote:Wallenburg wrote:I'm not sure you can interpret this as granting theocracies a free pass.
Exactly, if there is a theocracy that legally recognises marriages for people of a certain gender, and the marriage is formalised as a civil contract, it will have to legally recognise civil marriages between people of any gender.
by Kenmoria » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:44 am
(OOC: While I do understand that gender can be a bit more complex than the thre I reduced it to earlier, indeed there’s a gender wikia that has over a hundred pages, I don’t think that is what is required by member states to comply with this piece of legislation.Araraukar wrote:Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: I think a good-faith interpretation of clause 4 wouldn’t include things such as identifying as anything inanimate, as is parodied in internet memes, but just male, female and some kind of epicene/agender/neutral.)
OOC: "Trans" catches most things that fall between male and female. I know it means "across" and technically refers to "opposite from birth gender", but if you were born a girl and identify as male, you identify as "male", not "trans". Like I personally identify as 75% male, 25% not-female (and my official gender diagnosis reflects that) so as I'm not "fully male" (though I prefer male pronouns), I identify as "mostly male transgender". (Being only attracted to males make me trans and gay just to make things extra awkward. )
Barichvaria wrote:"MANDATES that all member nations must allow each of their citizens to choose or change their own gender, and that member nations must officially recognise and accept the individual's chosen gender."
Are we serious? Official recognition of changed gender is forced?
You didn't even spell recognize correctly.
Against 100 times over. This law infringes on my national sovereignty so much.
by Kokoku » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:45 am
by Araraukar » Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:50 am
Kenmoria wrote:‘Gender’ is defined as being ‘either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female’, on the google dictionary
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Tinfect » Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:24 am
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by ICCT » Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:43 am
Kokoku wrote:The proposal states the following:
"MANDATES that all member nations must allow each of their citizens to choose or change their own gender, and that member nations must officially recognise and accept the individual's chosen gender."
This removes safeguards for public safety and mental health. There are reasons why anyone wanting sex reassignment surgery require a psychological evaluation. The consequences of SRS is extreme and permanent, and some who do go through it find themselves regretting it, which lead to terrible consequences for that individual. This change can't be considered lightly and certainly not for social reasons or pressure.
Furthermore, the proposal puts minors at risk for serious harm and abuse. Under this resolution, any individual can declare their own gender, including minors. That doesn't take into account the pressure and manipulation from parents. As a result, this can lead to serious mental damage for a minor, and the possibility for serious harm.
This bill also puts people in serious danger in general. Under this proposal, a sexual deviant, with no intention to become a gender other than their biological sex, can simply change genders to gain entry to public places that are segregated by genders. For example, any man can declare themselves a woman to enter the women's restroom or locker room for malicious purposes, and the state cannot take preventative action to keep the public safe.
With these in mind, I am strongly AGAINST this resolution and urge all members to vote in opposition as well.
by Tinfect » Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:10 am
Wallenburg wrote:Mikael steps into the drafting room at the last minute and takes a look at the proposal put to the queue. "Reluctantly, I must oppose this resolution. Had you not included the blatantly unscientific and absurdist requirements of clause four, I would have voted in favor."
Kokoku wrote:This removes safeguards for public safety and mental health. There are reasons why anyone wanting sex reassignment surgery require a psychological evaluation. The consequences of SRS is extreme and permanent, and some who do go through it find themselves regretting it, which lead to terrible consequences for that individual. This change can't be considered lightly and certainly not for social reasons or pressure.
Kokoku wrote:Furthermore, the proposal puts minors at risk for serious harm and abuse. Under this resolution, any individual can declare their own gender, including minors. That doesn't take into account the pressure and manipulation from parents. As a result, this can lead to serious mental damage for a minor, and the possibility for serious harm.
Kokoku wrote:This bill also puts people in serious danger in general. Under this proposal, a sexual deviant, with no intention to become a gender other than their biological sex, can simply change genders to gain entry to public places that are segregated by genders. For example, any man can declare themselves a woman to enter the women's restroom or locker room for malicious purposes, and the state cannot take preventative action to keep the public safe.
ICCT wrote:In general, we do not strongly encourage sex change. But in our country, as long as a person is alive and aware of himself, he has the right to do with himself what he pleases.
ICCT wrote:1. If a person is aware of himself as a different sex, he must undergo psychological testing and evaluation, and then receive all necessary assistance from the state in carrying out sex change operations.
ICCT wrote:It is necessary not to allow one to define oneself as the opposite sex without any visual, physical or other changes.
ICCT wrote:An exception may be cases when a citizen has the intention to perform an operation, but still in the process of definition and self-consciousness. In this case, he may be presented with a temporary official definition, of him, as a representative of the other sex.
ICCT wrote:And also to maximize the limitation of cases when after a change of gender a person regrets what he has done, it is necessary to limit the age of a citizen, when he can make such a decision and make such a choice.
Our recommendation is 25 years, but in any case, this value should not be less than 21.
At the age of 25, a person already, in principle, realizes what he wants from life, and leaves as much as possible from impulse solutions.
While people age 21 and less prone to hasty and impulsive decisions.
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by Falcania » Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:39 am
by Wallenburg » Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:55 am
Tinfect wrote:Wallenburg wrote:Mikael steps into the drafting room at the last minute and takes a look at the proposal put to the queue. "Reluctantly, I must oppose this resolution. Had you not included the blatantly unscientific and absurdist requirements of clause four, I would have voted in favor."
OOC:
I sincerely hope that this is just an IC thing, wally.
by Audioslavia » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:10 am
Tinfect wrote:
First of all fuck you. If I hadn't been allowed to transition for three fucking years, or god fucking forbid seven, I'd be fucking dead. "Impulse" doesn't fucking play into it. People don't just spontaneously decide to be another gender. Restricting access to gender recognition based on fucking age is absolutely the most absurd thing I have ever heard, and does absolutely nothing but harm people.
by Malsti » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:14 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement