[DRAFT] Transgender Rights Act

[ShrewLlamaLand]

This is intended as a replacement for the very outdated GA#91 "A Convention On Gender".

I plan to repeal GA#91 first before attempting to pass this, as this is intended to act as a replacement and does contradict that proposal in some areas, but would like to see this drafted to a very high standard before attempting that repeal.

Category: Civil Rights, Strength: Significant

Acknowledging that transgender people exist.

Asserting that transgender individuals have the right to identify as their chosen gender, or lack of gender, and thus should be permitted to transition free of prejudice.

Recognising the efforts of GA#571 "Access To Transgender Hormone Therapy" in providing unrestricted, affordable access to hormone therapy for transgender individuals.

Understanding that transgender individuals often require further, non-hormonal medical assistance to better align themselves with their identified gender.

Believing that additional protections are required to ensure that transgender individuals are able to easily and affordably access this care.

Hereby:

1. Defines:

a) "transgender" as an umbrella term referring to individuals with a gender identity that differs from their sex assigned at birth.
b) "transition" as the process of altering one's presentation to better align with their gender identity, including but not limited to: medical, physical, social and legal changes.
c) "surgical assistance" as any surgery performed for the purpose of altering one's physical characteristics to better align with their identified gender.

2. Acknowledges that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that may cause great distress in transgender people, leading to mental illness and/or the act of physical self-harm, not excluding suicide.

3. Notes that gender dysphoria itself is not a mental illness; clarifies that no individual may be considered as such for the sole reason of being transgender.

4. Mandates that all member nations allow transgender people the right to transition.

5. Permits transgender individuals the right to change their sex and/or gender on all relevant legal documentation.

a) Requires that all member nations recognise, at minimum, the genders "male", "female", and "other", and grant full recognition to the above changes.
b) Further requires that these changes are granted full recognition by all entities operating within member nations.
c) Forbids the requirement of any medical intervention as a prerequisite for the above legal changes.

6. Requires that all member nations provide affordable access to surgical assistance for transgender people;

a) [placeholder further elaborating on "affordable", thinking... suggestions welcome]
b) Permits transgender individuals the right to travel, and safe return, for the purpose of accessing surgical assistance.

7. Requires that all member nations provide adequate psychological assistance and medical advice to transgender people.

8. Mandates that transgender individuals must not be denied access to any of the above treatment as punishment for a crime. [or perhaps "unless a legitimate danger to their health would result", similar to GA#571?]

9. Prevents any individual from being coerced, or forced, to undergo gender transition against their will.

n.b. This topic is old - I had drafted previous versions of this proposal over a year ago, but they were put on hold due to NS gameplay drama. Previous drafts and context are saved below.

I posted a previous topic on repealing GA#467 to make way for a replacement, and the vast majority of that feedback was to either build upon that proposal, or draft up a full, more comprehensive replacement before attempting a repeal.

I've taken that second option, and hope to combine all existing transgender legislation under one more specific proposal. The below ultimately aims to replace both GA#467: Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy, and GA#91: A Convention On Gender with a single, much more comprehensive proposal.

Category: Civil Rights, Strength: Significant

Acknowledging that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that may cause great distress in transgender people, leading to mental illness and/or the act of physical self-harm, not excluding suicide;

Noting that gender dysphoria itself is not a mental illness, clarifies that no individual may be considered as such for the sole reason of being transgender;

Explicitly clarifying that one's gender identity is the construct of the individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise;

Asserting that transgender people have the right to identify as their chosen gender, or lack of gender, and thus should be allowed to transition free of prejudice;

Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict.

Hereby:

1. Defines "transgender" as an umbrella term referring to those with a gender identity that differs from their sex assigned at birth. This encompasses the following people:

a) transgender women;
b) transgender men;
c) gender non-binary people;
d) agender people;
e) any personal gender identity that does not match those above.

2. Permits transgender individuals the right to change their sex and/or gender on all relevant legal documentation;

3. Requires that all member nations recognise the genders "male", "female", and "other" and grant full recognition to the above changes; further requires that these changes are granted full recognition by all entities operating within member nations;

4. Mandates that all member nations allow transgender people the right to medically transition;

5. Defines "hormone therapy" as the use of any of the following medicines for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) naturally derived hormones;
b) synthetic derivatives of the above;
c) androgen blocker drugs (antiandrogens);
d) estrogen blocker drugs (antiestrogens);
e) other medicines that, as determined by a relevant medical professional, would assist the individual in their transition.

6. Requires that all member nations provide universal access, without fear of incurring financial difficulty due to cost, to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition;

7. Defines "surgical intervention" as any of the following surgeries for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) gender confirmation surgery, for the purpose of altering an individual's primary sex organs to match those of their identified gender;
b) orchiectomy, oophorectomy, or hysterectomy, to remove unwanted reproductive organs;
c) surgeries to augment, or remove, an individual's breasts as required to match their gender identity;
d) surgeries altering one's voice to match their chosen gender;
e) any other elective surgery undertaken in order to alter one's primary or secondary sex characteristics.

8. Requires that WA member nations must not deny access to surgical intervention for transgender people;

9. Orders all member nations provide adequate psychological assistance and medical advice to transgender people, with these resources determined by medical professionals on a case-by-case basis;

10. Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to any of the above treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status;

11. Prevents any individual from being forced to undergo medical transition, including both hormone therapy and surgical intervention, against their will;

12. Forbids the requirement of surgical intervention as a prerequisite for the above legal changes.

I believe GA#467 has several flaws:

- the resolution does not sufficiently detail what "affordable and easy to access" entails
- the resolution defines "hormone therapy" as "medical treatment involving the use of naturally occurring hormones", which does not include synthetic testosterone blockers, "antiandrogens", commonly used in feminizing treatment;
- the resolution is ambiguous as to whether it includes synthetic estrogen and testosterone derivatives, which are often required for effective administration of these hormones;
- are gender non-binary people, who also may want to alter their secondary sex characteristics, entitled access to hormone treatment? The resolution is unclear.

GA#91 covers transgender legislation more broadly, and unfortunately, not in a particuarly correct way. I consulted with an actual trans person I know and she agreed this was the case (I know, CCD actually seeking feedback - what is this?!) The proposal is now over a decade old, and uses several outdated terms, several more terms I don't think were ever widely accepted, and includes several phrases that could be interpreted poorly, for example:

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;

The above seems to imply that transgender people must be recognised as "intersex" if they do not wish to undergo surgical intervention.

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;

This clause is vague and seems to imply that people with, for example, some unrelated mental deficiency would not be "mature enough" and hence never permitted to undergo "GAPs".

The current plan is a repeal of the outdated GA#91, as this draft both duplicates and slightly contradicts the existing legislation. My hope is that a repeal of GA#467 is not required before this is passed - and if it does - I will likely submit a modified version of a previous draft (https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=483436) to repeal the then-redundant GA#467.

Any and all feedback welcome.

[spoiler=Draft 1 and context]I posted a previous topic on repealing GA#467 to make way for a replacement, and the vast majority of that feedback was to either build upon that proposal, or draft up a full, more comprehensive replacement before attempting a repeal.

I've included two slightly different proposals below. The first ultimately hopes to replace GA#467: Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy, which I believe has several flaws:

- the resolution does not sufficiently detail what "affordable and easy to access" entails
- the resolution defines "hormone therapy" as "medical treatment involving the use of naturally occurring hormones", which does not include synthetic testosterone blockers, "antiandrogens", commonly used in feminizing treatment;
- the resolution is ambiguous as to whether it includes synthetic estrogen and testosterone derivatives, which are often required for effective administration of these hormones;
- are gender non-binary people, who also may want to alter their secondary sex characteristics, entitled access to hormone treatment? The resolution is unclear.

If this proposal passes, I will likely submit a modified version of a previous draft (https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=483436) to repeal the redundant GA#467 - although I am not sure if, with the proposal in the below state, this is broad enough to not to count as duplication (in which case a repeal would need to be passed first)?

Acknowledging that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that may cause great distress in transgender people, leading to mental illness and/or the act of physical self-harm, not excluding suicide.

Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise.

Noting that "transgender" is an umbrella term that encompasses transgender women, transgender men, gender non-binary, and agender people.

Asserting that transgender people have the right to identify as their chosen gender, or lack of gender, and thus should be allowed to transition free of prejudice.

Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict.

Hereby:

Requires that all member nations allow transgender people the right to medically transition.

Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition.

Defines "hormone therapy" as the use of any of the following medicines for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) naturally derived hormones;
b) synthetic derivatives of the above;
c) androgen blocker drugs (antiandrogens);
d) other medicines that, as determined by a relevant medical professional, would assist the individual in their transition.

Orders all member nations provide adequate psychological assistance and medical advice to transgender people, with resources determined by medical professionals on a case-by-case basis.

Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to this treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status.

While drafting this, however, I found that many other changes I would ideally like to legislate on are already covered by GA#91, and unfortunately, not in a particuarly correct way. I consulted with an actual trans person I know and she agreed this was the case (I know, CCD actually seeking feedback - what is this?!) The proposal is now over a decade old, and uses several outdated terms, several more terms I don't think were ever widely accepted, and includes several phrases that could be interpreted poorly, for example:

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;

The above seems to imply that transgender people must be recognised as "intersex" if they do not wish to undergo surgical intervention.

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;

This clause is vague and seems to imply that people with, for example, some unrelated mental deficiency would not be "mature enough" and hence never permitted to undergo "GAPs".

This proposal would ideally intend to replace both GA#91 and GA#467 and bring most transgender specific legislation under one comprehensive proposal, but I assume I'd need to repeal, at the very least, one of those before it's legal to submit this as replacement due to the duplication rule.

Acknowledging that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that may cause great distress in transgender people, leading to mental illness and/or the act of physical self-harm, not excluding suicide.

Noting that gender dysphoria itself is not a mental illness, clarifies that no individual may be considered as such for the sole reason of being transgender.

Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise.

Asserting that transgender people have the right to identify as their chosen gender, or lack of gender, and thus should be allowed to transition free of prejudice.

Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict.

Hereby:

Defines "transgender" as an umbrella term that encompasses the following:

a) transgender women;
b) transgender men;
c) gender non-binary people;
d) agender people;
e) any personal gender identity that does not match those above.

Requires that all member nations allow transgender people the right to medically transition.

Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition.

Defines "hormone therapy" as the use of any of the following medicines for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) naturally derived hormones;
b) synthetic derivatives of the above;
c) androgen blocker drugs (antiandrogens);
d) other medicines that, as determined by a relevant medical professional, would assist the individual in their transition.

Requires that WA member nations must not deny access to surgical intervention for transgender people.

Clarifies that "surgical intervention" may consist of any of the following:

a) gender confirmation surgery, for the purpose of altering an individual's primary sex organs to match those of their identified gender;
b) orchiectomy, or hysterectomy, to remove unwanted reproductive glands;
c) surgeries to augment, or remove, an individual's breasts;
d) surgeries altering one's voice to match their chosen gender;
e) any other elective surgery undertaken in order to alter one's primary or secondary sex characteristics.

Orders all member nations provide adequate psychological assistance and medical advice to transgender people, with resources determined by medical professionals on a case-by-case basis.

Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to any of the above treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status.

Permits individuals the right to change their gender on all relevant legal documentation; requires all member nations grant full recognition to these changes.

Prevents any individual from being forced to undergo medical transition against their will; forbids the requirement of surgery as a prerequisite for the above legal changes.

Any and all feedback welcome.

Draft 2

Acknowledging that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that may cause great distress in transgender people, leading to mental illness and/or the act of physical self-harm, not excluding suicide.

Noting that gender dysphoria itself is not a mental illness, clarifies that no individual may be considered as such for the sole reason of being transgender.

Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise.

Asserting that transgender people have the right to identify as their chosen gender, or lack of gender, and thus should be allowed to transition free of prejudice.

Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict.

Hereby:

Defines "transgender" as an umbrella term that encompasses the following:

a) transgender women;
b) transgender men;
c) gender non-binary people;
d) agender people;
e) any personal gender identity that does not match those above.

Requires that all member nations allow transgender people the right to medically transition.

Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition.

Defines "hormone therapy" as the use of any of the following medicines for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) naturally derived hormones;
b) synthetic derivatives of the above;
c) androgen blocker drugs (antiandrogens);
d) other medicines that, as determined by a relevant medical professional, would assist the individual in their transition.

Requires that WA member nations must not deny access to surgical intervention for transgender people.

Clarifies that "surgical intervention" may consist of any of the following:

a) gender confirmation surgery, for the purpose of altering an individual's primary sex organs to match those of their identified gender;
b) orchiectomy, or hysterectomy, to remove unwanted reproductive glands;
c) surgeries to augment, or remove, an individual's breasts;
d) surgeries altering one's voice to match their chosen gender;
e) any other elective surgery undertaken in order to alter one's primary or secondary sex characteristics.

Orders all member nations provide adequate psychological assistance and medical advice to transgender people, with resources determined by medical professionals on a case-by-case basis.

Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to any of the above treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status.

Permits individuals the right to change their gender on all relevant legal documentation; requires all member nations grant full recognition to these changes.

Prevents any individual from being forced to undergo medical transition against their will; forbids the requirement of surgery as a prerequisite for the above legal changes.

Draft 3

Acknowledging that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that may cause great distress in transgender people, leading to mental illness and/or the act of physical self-harm, not excluding suicide;

Noting that gender dysphoria itself is not a mental illness, clarifies that no individual may be considered as such for the sole reason of being transgender;

Explicitly clarifying that one's gender identity is the construct of the individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise;

Asserting that transgender people have the right to identify as their chosen gender, or lack of gender, and thus should be allowed to transition free of prejudice;

Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict.

Hereby:

1. Defines "transgender" as an umbrella term referring to those with a gender identity that differs from their sex assigned at birth. This encompasses the following people:

a) transgender women;
b) transgender men;
c) gender non-binary people;
d) agender people;
e) any personal gender identity that does not match those above.

2. Permits transgender individuals the right to change their sex and/or gender on all relevant legal documentation;

3. Requires all member nations grant full recognition to these changes; further requires that these changes are granted full recognition by all entities operating within member nations;

4. Mandates that all member nations allow transgender people the right to medically transition;

5. Defines "hormone therapy" as the use of any of the following medicines for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) naturally derived hormones;
b) synthetic derivatives of the above;
c) androgen blocker drugs (antiandrogens);
d) estrogen blocker drugs (antiestrogens);
e) other medicines that, as determined by a relevant medical professional, would assist the individual in their transition.

6. Requires that all member nations provide universal access, without fear of incurring financial difficulty due to cost, to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition;

7. Defines "surgical intervention" as any of the following surgeries for the purpose of altering one's physical appearance:

a) gender confirmation surgery, for the purpose of altering an individual's primary sex organs to match those of their identified gender;
b) orchiectomy, oophorectomy, or hysterectomy, to remove unwanted reproductive organs;
c) surgeries to augment, or remove, an individual's breasts as required to match their gender identity;
d) surgeries altering one's voice to match their chosen gender;
e) any other elective surgery undertaken in order to alter one's primary or secondary sex characteristics.

[/list][/list]

8. Requires that WA member nations must not deny access to surgical intervention for transgender people;

9. Orders all member nations provide adequate psychological assistance and medical advice to transgender people, with these resources determined by medical professionals on a case-by-case basis;

10. Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to any of the above treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status;

11. Prevents any individual from being forced to undergo medical transition, including both hormone therapy and surgical intervention, against their will;

12. Forbids the requirement of surgical intervention as a prerequisite for the above legal changes.

[Jocospor]

The Confederation commends the Commission to the World Assembly for their efforts. A casket of Monet & Chardin is en route to your offices now.

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: You appear to have two drafts in one thread, which isn’t very advisable, since it makes giving feedback much harder. I suggest splitting one of the proposals onto a separate thread. Alternatively, if you are planning on submitting just one proposal to the WA, then the other piece of legislation shouldn't really be in the opening post.)

[ShrewLlamaLand]

(OOC: You appear to have two drafts in one thread, which isn’t very advisable, since it makes giving feedback much harder. I suggest splitting one of the proposals onto a separate thread. Alternatively, if you are planning on submitting just one proposal to the WA, then the other piece of legislation shouldn't really be in the opening post.)

I'd usually agree with this, but at this stage I'm more seeking an opinion on which draft to pursue rather than fine tuning the draft itself.

One draft is effectively a longer, more comprehensive of the other but (I assume) would require an additional repeal before passing. Once I have a bit of feedback I'm going to focus on drafting the one and spoiler all of the old content.

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: You appear to have two drafts in one thread, which isn’t very advisable, since it makes giving feedback much harder. I suggest splitting one of the proposals onto a separate thread. Alternatively, if you are planning on submitting just one proposal to the WA, then the other piece of legislation shouldn't really be in the opening post.)

I'd usually agree with this, but at this stage I'm more seeking an opinion on which draft to pursue rather than fine tuning the draft itself.

One draft is effectively a longer, more comprehensive of the other but (I assume) would require an additional repeal before passing. Once I have a bit of feedback I'm going to focus on drafting the one and spoiler all of the old content.

(OOC: I think that your second draft is far more comprehensive and offers a lot less leeway for member nations to pursue creative compliance. However, as you say, it would require a repeal of GA #091, due to a contradiction with clause 4.

I think that it is not certain, at this stage, whether that draft would duplicate GA #467 substantially enough so as to require a repeal. It might count as duplication to expand upon an area of legislation, but, since you are essentially making 467 redundant, could very easily be regarded as illegal levels of duplication.)

[Araraukar]

OOC: Not got time to comment in detail, but just letting you know, as you're a fairly new face around here, that at least two GA regulars (myself and Tinfect) are trans in RL. Just so you know you're not talking about some nebulous group of people that might or might not be GA-relevant.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

OOC: Not got time to comment in detail, but just letting you know, as you're a fairly new face around here, that at least two GA regulars (myself and Tinfect) are trans in RL. Just so you know you're not talking about some nebulous group of people that might or might not be GA-relevant.

Whenever you have time for more in depth feedback, I'd be very happy to hear it.

[Morover]

Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to this treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status.

"I fail to see how this is preferable to 'affordable and easy-to-access' - especially in regards to cost of treatment. While this would make it so that the services cannot be specifically denied to people due to their financial status - which is already covered by the Charter on Civil Rights, mind you - it does not put a cap on the cost. There is nothing to prevent member-nations from hiking prices up on hormone therapy while still remaining in good faith, so long as they do allow individuals to receive the treatment if they scrounge together enough money to pay for the treatment."

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Mandates that transgender people must not be denied access to this treatment as a result of their social, legal or financial status.

"I fail to see how this is preferable to 'affordable and easy-to-access' - especially in regards to cost of treatment. While this would make it so that the services cannot be specifically denied to people due to their financial status - which is already covered by the Charter on Civil Rights, mind you - it does not put a cap on the cost. There is nothing to prevent member-nations from hiking prices up on hormone therapy while still remaining in good faith, so long as they do allow individuals to receive the treatment if they scrounge together enough money to pay for the treatment."

You missed the above clause:

Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition.

The phrase "universal access" implies "the ability or opportunity of people to secure necessary health services without fear of incurring financial problems due to the costs."

This is a stronger and more specific term than "affordable", because what can be considered affordable for most citizens may not be for those poorest in society.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Given the above feedback, my own thoughts, and some further discussion I have had regarding the proposal, I have decided to focus on the more comprehensive draft that would replace both GA#91 and GA#467. I have amended the OP to reflect this.

As Kenmoria pointed out above, GA#91 would definitely need to be repealed first, although it is possible this would be legal to pass without first repealing GA#467 (which can then be repealed afterwards). If a GenSec member could share their thoughts on this, that would be much appreciated.

As always, all feedback is very welcome.

[Auze]

“Honestly we have what, 5 people who are transsexual or transgender in our country? We’ll support or oppose depending on how the vote goes, they deserve the same lack of rights as anyone else in Auze.”

[Pope Saint Peter the Apostle]

We will support the repeal of GA#91 and 467, although we will oppose the passage of this Proposal.

--Saint Luke the Evangelist, patron of physicians and surgeons
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii

[Araraukar]

You missed the above clause:

Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition.

The phrase "universal access" implies "the ability or opportunity of people to secure necessary health services without fear of incurring financial problems due to the costs."

This is a stronger and more specific term than "affordable", because what can be considered affordable for most citizens may not be for those poorest in society.

OOC: It really doesn't mean that. If you want it to mean your explanation, then either define it as such, or actually use the words instead of "universal access". I have "universal healthcare" in RL, but it still costs me money to use and if I wanted the state's help for it, I'd first have to use up all my savings and be calculcated unable to afford paying the healthcare bills on top of living costs and food. (I mean, the costs are helluva lot lower than in a USA-style for-profit system, but still. 40 euros for a simple dentist's visit to replace a filling, is a lot when it's over half your "frivolous spending budged" per month that is left over from living costs and necessities.) Though, funnily enough, medicines that you have been prescribed to treat an ongoing issue - like HRT meds would be - ARE free for the individual.

Also, your definition should likely be for "transgender people" since that's what you use in the text. Because if you replaced the defined term with any of the defined words, you'd end up with wordings like "transgender women people" or "gender non-binary people people". It would mean some minor tweaks, like instead of "transgender residents", you'd need to use "transgender people who are residents", but it would help your preamble to work better as well.

Why are only androgen blockers mentioned? Not estrogen blockers? Transmen exist too, damnit!

Put definitions before you use the defined term in a mandate.

Hysterectomy is not the removal of the female gonads (ovaries) but the removal of the womb. The word you're looking for is oophorectomy, though I'd definitely keep hysterectomy as part of the list, it just doesn't fit removal of "unwanted reproductive glands".

The breast augmentation subclause needs "to match one's gender identity" or something like that, so you don't run into opposition from nations on "why should we pay for a woman's breast implants just because she thinks her breasts are too small?" (As an example: B-sized breasts mark you as a woman easily, there's no need to go to D or E or F for Frightening, just to look like a woman.)

What resources are referenced in the orders clause?

Should be "gender and sex", not just "gender" in the line about paperwork. Most ID documentation doesn't list gender, it lists sex. Also, the clause should likely be rewritten as "Requires that member nations permit an individual [stuff goes here], and that such changes are granted full recognition on all relevant occasions" or something like that, because right now a nation could say "yeah okay, you're the gender you claim to be", but then a pub might force someone born a woman to use women's bathroom anyway, because the pub is not the nation.

You also have a problem, now, in the last clause, about how you use the term "medical transition" without defining what all fits underneath it. Also, move the part that starts with "forbids" to be its own clause entirely.

And for the love of all that's good, number your clauses!!!

[Lakshapura]

(OOC: Thanks for sharing. I'll just talk about the parts that drew my interest.

"Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise."

This part expands the scope of the bill way, way beyond what it would be otherwise. And I'm not sure I agree anyway -- gender is a social construct, and while it includes individuals, it really is a society-wide phenomenon. I think this line is trying to say that governments can't tell people what gender to identify as, but it comes across as a philosophical statement instead.

" . . . and thus [trans people] should be allowed to transition free of prejudice."

This line confuses me a bit. It leaves the term "prejudice" wide, wide open. A government that doesn't like trans people could interpret prejudice to mean physical persecution, which makes the whole resolution super narrow.

"Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict."

So my initial reaction to this line, and the resolution as a whole, is that it prioritizes trans people who experience dysphoria over everyone else. It codifies the position that trans people who don't have dysphoria aren't "legally" trans. Maybe that's your position, and it's not an inherently wrong position -- but if we want this resolution to be as inclusive as possible, we should be broader with our definitions.

"Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition."

I cannot see the resolution passing if it has this line. The rest of the bill is geared towards preventing injustice, but now it's about actively subsidizing medical transitions. My own nation isn't opposed to this in principle, as it is socialist and subsidizes tons of things anyway, but more capitalist or libertarian nations will be staunchly opposed to this. Instead of treating transitioning as a right, it could instead be treated as a protected privilege. Meaning that it can't be denied to someone, but the government won't be required to pay for it.

The same goes for the provisions about surgical intervention and post-transition therapy.

"Permits individuals the right to change their gender on all relevant legal documentation; requires all member nations grant full recognition to these changes."

I think this line here is the real heart of this resolution. It gives legal recognition to those who identify as something other than their gender assigned at birth. In my opinion, this should go first.

The problems you list with GA#467 are all valid, but you run into trouble where you go beyond those fixes. I can see lots of opposition to the parts of your proposed resolution that require active government intervention. Libertarian nations will see it as a "nanny state" measure, and conservative nations will see it as a government endorsement of something they morally oppose. My own personal positions on this issue are probably pretty clear, but you need votes to pass a resolution. That means taking a step back sometimes, unfortunately.

Oh, and one more thing. Past resolutions have included intersex people, but your resolution strangely drops any mention of them. It's also a little odd to me that you include nonbinary and agender people under the "trans" label -- would they agree with that? I honestly don't know the answer to that question. Maybe you have it right. But it's worth thinking about.

That's it, I think. Feel free to clarify if I misunderstood part of your resolution. Thanks for posting.)

(PS: Your resolution is a long list of incomplete sentences. End your lines in commas and treat it like one huge sentence. "The World Assembly, acknowledging [x], asserting [y], declaring [z], hereby does [a], requires [b], and stipulates [c].")

[Marxist Germany]

"We already have 3 resolutions, far too many, protecting transgendered individuals. We don't need more."

[Centai Mal]

"We already have 3 resolutions, far too many, protecting transgendered individuals. We don't need more."

[Auze]

"We already have 3 resolutions, far too many, protecting transgendered individuals. We don't need more."

“If they mandate equality in all but name, there isn’t really a need for another. Especially if another group has yet to have equal rights. Once again, the fact that there are practically no trans people in Auze (and we find the fact that other nations haven’t permanently solved this a little weird) means that we honestly hope this resolution goes to vote, if only because it will delay resolutions that we actively wish to avoid.”

[Pope Saint Peter the Apostle]

Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise.

If gender is merely a social construct, that would mean that gender-based preferences are the result of nurture, not nature. But, then, why do male monkeys - just like boys - prefer human wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys - like girls - prefer plush toys? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/

--Saint Luke the Evangelist, patron of physicians and surgeons
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii

[Ardiveds]

...

If gender is merely a social construct, that would mean that gender-based preferences are the result of nurture, not nature. But, then, why do male monkeys - just like boys - prefer human wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys - like girls - prefer plush toys? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/

--Saint Luke the Evangelist, patron of physicians and surgeons
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii

OOC: That was an interesting read actually. I'd like more studies on the topic. Though you probably shouldn't have dumbed down the result to what fits your opinion since in the rhesus monkeys, the males chose wheeled toys but the female ones chose both wheeled and plush roughly equally. And before that, the vervet monkeys, the males choose both masculine and feminine toys roughly equally while the females chosethe feminine ones.

[Pope Saint Peter the Apostle]

If gender is merely a social construct, that would mean that gender-based preferences are the result of nurture, not nature. But, then, why do male monkeys - just like boys - prefer human wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys - like girls - prefer plush toys? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/

--Saint Luke the Evangelist, patron of physicians and surgeons
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii

OOC: That was an interesting read actually. I'd like more studies on the topic. Though you probably shouldn't have dumbed down the result to what fits your opinion since in the rhesus monkeys, the males chose wheeled toys but the female ones chose both wheeled and plush roughly equally. And before that, the vervet monkeys, the males choose both masculine and feminine toys roughly equally while the females chosethe feminine ones.

OOC: I merely generalised the results, which do show a trend where male monkeys overall are more likely to choose human wheeled toys, compared to female monkeys, and where female monkeys are more likely to choose plunche toys, compared to male monkeys. Although different groups of monkeys return different results, that doesn't mean we can't recognise a trend.

[Jocospor]

Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise.

If gender is merely a social construct, that would mean that gender-based preferences are the result of nurture, not nature. But, then, why do male monkeys - just like boys - prefer human wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys - like girls - prefer plush toys? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/

--Saint Luke the Evangelist, patron of physicians and surgeons
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii

Sex and gender are two different entities. Admittedly, I haven't read the document you linked, though I know Shrew will when he gets a chance. Put simply - and I hope this is an accurate reading - monkeys aren't aware of their gender, only their sex. They behave according to their physiology, not necessarily their perceived identity. Similarly, there are probably (very rare) cases of hermaphrodite monkeys. If you asked a hermaphrodite monkey what it identified as, it would theoretically be unable to opt for a binary position. Thus, it would identify as transgender.

I stress: this is NOT my area of strength. Medical science is Shrew's forte and I look forward to his contributions on this specific issue.

[Araraukar]

Instead of treating transitioning as a right, it could instead be treated as a protected privilege. Meaning that it can't be denied to someone, but the government won't be required to pay for it.

OOC: At which point it would contradict an existing resolution that requires WA nations to pay for all healthcare costs for their inhabitants who can't otherwise afford them.

Sex and gender are two different entities.

OOC: Well, one is anatomical, the other is psychological, so I don't think anyone's tried to claim they are the same thing, but point you and many others here seem to be mistaking for gender is gender expression. THAT is definitely an artificial construct based on the local culture. Like in RL in places like most of Europe or North America, wearing a dress or a skirt is considered a female culture impression. But look at qamis/kameez in Middle East, many parts of Africa and South Asia - men's traditional wear is what would on a woman in a Western nation be called a dress or a skirt, and might or might not differ from what women wear, except in ways (like maybe certain colour patterns being reserved for women and oters for men) difficult for someone unfamiliar with the culture to recognize.

A man can dress up as a woman, or vice versa, without being trans - just look at drag artists - so clearly gender expression (drag is a very very simplified example) does not equal gender just like it doesn't equal sex either.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

"We already have 3 resolutions, far too many, protecting transgendered individuals. We don't need more."

Two specifically focus on transgender rights, and this proposal aims to correct several flaws and ultimately replace both of them.

Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise.

If gender is merely a social construct, that would mean that gender-based preferences are the result of nurture, not nature. But, then, why do male monkeys - just like boys - prefer human wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys - like girls - prefer plush toys? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/

--Saint Luke the Evangelist, patron of physicians and surgeons
Senior membrum, Sanctus Commissio Sancti Imperii

This is an interesting point you've raised, but I want to first clarify that the phrase I've used does not refer to gender itself, but to each individual's own gender identity. Each individual's gender identity is their own, and entirely their own, to decide and others - including government - have no right to interfere with this. I will make this more clear when I update my draft.

To respond to the point itself, it's actually very difficult to establish whether gender identity exists in animals. The evidence we do have is inconclusive, and it's a difficult topic to research on - animals can't communicate, animals don't have the choice to take hormones to alter their physical characteristics, animals don't wear clothing identifying of gender - you get the point.

The study you linked is one of few that does seem to support that gender differences exist between male and female monkeys, but as pointed out above, the results are not clear cut and vary between species.

Now, I personally think that the best way to look at this issue is the following: whether gender itself is a social construct is not clear, but we do know that many aspects of gender roles are social constructs. There is no biological basis for women wearing skirts and dresses, and men wearing pants, for example.

Sex and gender are two different entities. Admittedly, I haven't read the document you linked, though I know Shrew will when he gets a chance. Put simply - and I hope this is an accurate reading - monkeys aren't aware of their gender, only their sex. They behave according to their physiology, not necessarily their perceived identity. Similarly, there are probably (very rare) cases of hermaphrodite monkeys. If you asked a hermaphrodite monkey what it identified as, it would theoretically be unable to opt for a binary position. Thus, it would identify as transgender.

Not quite how it works. As above, we don't for sure whether gender identity exists in animals at all, so we can't say that this hypothetical "hermaphrodite monkey" (intersex is actually the correct term, "hermaphrodite" implies fully functioning sexual organs of both sexes, which I do not believe is possible in primates) really identifies as anything.

However, many more simple species are hermaphrodites, or have the ability to change their sex depending on conditions. This does not make them transgender because this term refers to an individual's identity, and even if gender identity does exist in animals, it's almost certainly limited to those most intelligent such as birds, dolphins and higher primates.

Ultimately the whole field of research into gender identity in animals is poorly known, and very difficult to research on. However, I want to point out that the results of the above study, and even if they were absolutely conclusive in confirming gender itself is not a social construct, says absolutely nothing that would invalidate transgender identities as a whole. Animal studies do not invalidate anything in humans, and the concept of "gender" being a social construct is not one that is required for, or even really supportive of, transgender identities. For example, we know for a fact that brain structure in transgender individuals resembles their identified gender rather than their biological assigned at birth sex.

- - - - -

I'll also take a moment to elaborate on the difference between sex and gender, before it comes up:

Gender refers to identity - if a transgender woman identifies as female, her gender is female absolutely regardless of her physical appearance.

Sex refers to physical characteristics. The sex of a transgender woman who has not yet began her transition is male, but this is exactly what physical transition aims to change. While with current medical technologies we can't get 100% of the way there, for almost all intents and purposes after transition a transgender woman looks female, and thus the sex of a transgender woman is female.

The old sex = chromosomes, "XY = male" argument is deeply flawed and easily proven wrong if you know literally anything about biology.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Thank you Araraukar and Lakshapura for the in-depth feedback, I'm going to edit the draft now.

You missed the above clause:

Mandates that all member nations provide universal access to hormone therapy to all transgender residents who choose to proceed with physical transition.

The phrase "universal access" implies "the ability or opportunity of people to secure necessary health services without fear of incurring financial problems due to the costs."

This is a stronger and more specific term than "affordable", because what can be considered affordable for most citizens may not be for those poorest in society.

OOC: It really doesn't mean that. If you want it to mean your explanation, then either define it as such, or actually use the words instead of "universal access". I have "universal healthcare" in RL, but it still costs me money to use and if I wanted the state's help for it, I'd first have to use up all my savings and be calculcated unable to afford paying the healthcare bills on top of living costs and food. (I mean, the costs are helluva lot lower than in a USA-style for-profit system, but still. 40 euros for a simple dentist's visit to replace a filling, is a lot when it's over half your "frivolous spending budged" per month that is left over from living costs and necessities.) Though, funnily enough, medicines that you have been prescribed to treat an ongoing issue - like HRT meds would be - ARE free for the individual.

It does mean the definition I've used, at least where I live, but I think it's probably a good idea to elaborate on this in the draft. I'll change this.

Why are only androgen blockers mentioned? Not estrogen blockers? Transmen exist too, damnit!

My understanding is that testosterone alone is usually enough to suppress estrogen production in transgender men, and estrogen blockers are rarely needed for this purpose. I do think it's worth including, though, so I'll add it in.

Also, your definition should likely be for "transgender people" since that's what you use in the text. Because if you replaced the defined term with any of the defined words, you'd end up with wordings like "transgender women people" or "gender non-binary people people". It would mean some minor tweaks, like instead of "transgender residents", you'd need to use "transgender people who are residents", but it would help your preamble to work better as well.

Good point, I think I'll change the definion of "transgender" to correctly regard the term as an identity, rather than referring to people who are transgender, and additionally clarify on who the term encompasses below that.

Hysterectomy is not the removal of the female gonads (ovaries) but the removal of the womb. The word you're looking for is oophorectomy, though I'd definitely keep hysterectomy as part of the list, it just doesn't fit removal of "unwanted reproductive glands".

Whoops, I know, that's a bad mistake from me. Will fix.

The breast augmentation subclause needs "to match one's gender identity" or something like that, so you don't run into opposition from nations on "why should we pay for a woman's breast implants just because she thinks her breasts are too small?" (As an example: B-sized breasts mark you as a woman easily, there's no need to go to D or E or F for Frightening, just to look like a woman.)

What resources are referenced in the orders clause?

Should be "gender and sex", not just "gender" in the line about paperwork. Most ID documentation doesn't list gender, it lists sex. Also, the clause should likely be rewritten as "Requires that member nations permit an individual [stuff goes here], and that such changes are granted full recognition on all relevant occasions" or something like that, because right now a nation could say "yeah okay, you're the gender you claim to be", but then a pub might force someone born a woman to use women's bathroom anyway, because the pub is not the nation.

You also have a problem, now, in the last clause, about how you use the term "medical transition" without defining what all fits underneath it. Also, move the part that starts with "forbids" to be its own clause entirely.

And for the love of all that's good, number your clauses!!!

I mostly agree with all of this, I'll clarify on these issues in the next draft.

(OOC: Thanks for sharing. I'll just talk about the parts that drew my interest.

"Explicitly clarifying that gender is the construct of an individual, and no governing authority should presume to dictate otherwise."

This part expands the scope of the bill way, way beyond what it would be otherwise. And I'm not sure I agree anyway -- gender is a social construct, and while it includes individuals, it really is a society-wide phenomenon. I think this line is trying to say that governments can't tell people what gender to identify as, but it comes across as a philosophical statement instead.

" . . . and thus [trans people] should be allowed to transition free of prejudice."

This line confuses me a bit. It leaves the term "prejudice" wide, wide open. A government that doesn't like trans people could interpret prejudice to mean physical persecution, which makes the whole resolution super narrow.

This is part of the preamble, which isn't strictly legislating on anything. Thus I think the term "free of prejudice", although vague, is fine to use given I elaborate on what this entails in the legislative part below.

"Understanding that transgender people often require medical intervention to resolve their inner conflict."

So my initial reaction to this line, and the resolution as a whole, is that it prioritizes trans people who experience dysphoria over everyone else. It codifies the position that trans people who don't have dysphoria aren't "legally" trans. Maybe that's your position, and it's not an inherently wrong position -- but if we want this resolution to be as inclusive as possible, we should be broader with our definitions.

I understand what you're saying here, but that's the reason I've used "often". Those who do not experience gender dysphoria or who do not wish to physically transition are still entitled to benefits as I've mentioned below.

I cannot see the resolution passing if it has this line. The rest of the bill is geared towards preventing injustice, but now it's about actively subsidizing medical transitions. My own nation isn't opposed to this in principle, as it is socialist and subsidizes tons of things anyway, but more capitalist or libertarian nations will be staunchly opposed to this. Instead of treating transitioning as a right, it could instead be treated as a protected privilege. Meaning that it can't be denied to someone, but the government won't be required to pay for it.

The same goes for the provisions about surgical intervention and post-transition therapy.

GA#467 already sets a precident that requires governments to subsidise treatment for transgender individuals. I'm only trying to expand on this... more below.

"Permits individuals the right to change their gender on all relevant legal documentation; requires all member nations grant full recognition to these changes."

I think this line here is the real heart of this resolution. It gives legal recognition to those who identify as something other than their gender assigned at birth. In my opinion, this should go first.

I see what you're saying here - I'll consider moving this to the top if it doesn't interrupt the flow of the resolution, yes.

The problems you list with GA#467 are all valid, but you run into trouble where you go beyond those fixes. I can see lots of opposition to the parts of your proposed resolution that require active government intervention. Libertarian nations will see it as a "nanny state" measure, and conservative nations will see it as a government endorsement of something they morally oppose. My own personal positions on this issue are probably pretty clear, but you need votes to pass a resolution. That means taking a step back sometimes, unfortunately.

I think every provision I've made here is important in its own right. If this comes to vote and fails to pass in this form, then yes I'll take a few steps backwards and try again.

Oh, and one more thing. Past resolutions have included intersex people, but your resolution strangely drops any mention of them. It's also a little odd to me that you include nonbinary and agender people under the "trans" label -- would they agree with that? I honestly don't know the answer to that question. Maybe you have it right. But it's worth thinking about.

"Transgender" is an umbrella term usually includes nonbinary and agender people.

Intersex people are not necessarily transgender, and their rights are defended in previous GA resolutions. However, if intersex people do wish to access hormone therapy or surgical intervention, then they would be covered under the act in its current form, which is why I did not specifically mention them here. Thoughts?

(PS: Your resolution is a long list of incomplete sentences. End your lines in commas and treat it like one huge sentence. "The World Assembly, acknowledging [x], asserting [y], declaring [z], hereby does [a], requires [b], and stipulates [c].")

I've structured past (ill-fated) SC proposals I've authored like this and yes you're correct - I'll change it.

[Araraukar]

My understanding is that testosterone alone is usually enough to suppress estrogen production in transgender men, and estrogen blockers are rarely needed for this purpose. I do think it's worth including, though, so I'll add it in.

OOC: Perhaps, but not in non-binary individuals not wanting to enhance their masculinity but simply reduce their femininity.