First Transgender Marriage in Hong Kong

A little less than two years ago, same-sex marriage was legalized here in New York.  Since then, Maryland, Maine, Washington State, Rhode Island, Delaware and Minnesota have followed suit, bringing the total number of US states that permit such unions to twelve.  And, of course, other countries--including, most recently, France--have passed such legislation.

Outside of those US states and Canada, all except one of the nations that have legalized same-sex marriage are in Europe or, interestingly enough, South America.  On the other hand, the fight for same-sex marriage has been more difficult in the Asia-Pacific region, where only New Zealanders have that right.  In Thailand, where more gender-reassignment surgeries are performed than in any other nation, same-sex civil unions, let alone marriages, still aren't legal.  In fact, gay Thai people aren't even allowed to donate blood!

In this region, it seems, it's a victory simply for trans people to be recognized in their "new" gender, even after having had surgery.  Now, for the first time, Hong Kong is allowing a trans woman who underwent surgery five years ago to marry her boyfriend. Although the British returned control of Hong Kong to the Chinese in 1997, the island still maintains a separate legal system from that of mainland China, where transgender people have been allowed to marry in their "new" gender--but only to members of the "opposite" sex--since 2003.


In Australia, there is pressure to legalize same-sex marriage.  I think it will happen soon:  After all, New Zealand did it.  Also, while there are vocal conservatives and religious people--and, as some gay Australians have told me, more than enough homophobia to go around--religion probably plays less of a role in politics than it does here in the US.

If and when Australia legalizes gay marriage, will that be a "tipping point" for the rest of the region, as some have suggested?  Will Hong Kong, China, Thailand and the other countries of that region allow people to be married as the people they are to the people they love?

 

No Irish Transgenders Need Apply--In Ireland

I'm going to tell you one of my dim, dark secrets, in case I haven't revealed it elsewhere on this blog:  I was born in Georgia. 

How that happened is a long story.  I lived in Georgia only for the first few months of my life.  I have no dislike of the state and have met some perfectly lovely people who hail from there.  However, I've spent so little time there since those early days of my life that I really can't have a positive, negative or even neutral feeling about it.  I simply can't think of myself as a Georgian, and probably have no right to do so.

Actually, I can't speak too badly of the Peachtree State.  (I mean, how can you hate a place with a name like that?)  After all, they did something a few other states still don't do.  After I had my surgery, they issued me a brand-new birth certificate with my new name and my female gender.  As I understand, some states issue amended birth certificates in which the original name and gender are crossed out.  

Some would argue that post-operative trans people should get amended birth certificates, or shouldn't be able to change it at all.  After all, they say, it's a historical document that records a fact.  

That is true, up to a point.  A person's gender is recorded according to the best judgment of the doctor who delivered him or her.  A few babies' sexes are difficult to determine even for the most experienced obstetricians; however, there are more--including yours truly--whose brains weren't constructed in accordance with their sexual organs.  Of course, the doctor--and, for that matter, just about anybody else--has no way of knowing that.  So, it could be said that the doctor, however unintentionally, made a mistake in determining the baby's gender.  

Perhaps not all mistakes are worth correcting.  However, the gender recorded on your birth certificate determines all kinds of things, from what you're named to (in most places) whom you're allowed to marry. 

So this business of birth certificates is very important.  The State of Georgia, not known for its progressiveness (Is that a word?) is still miles ahead of other places in that regard.  One of those places is Ireland.

Now, you might think that's not so unusual, given Ireland's longstanding reputation as a conservative Catholic country.  But the Emerald Isle's refusal to recognize a gender "change" means that, in essence, it's all but impossible for an Irish trangender person to get married.  A male-to-female is still seen as male; therefore, she cannot marry a man.  And it would probably be all but impossible for her to marry a woman, as nearly all Irish marriages are performed by Catholic priests, most of whom won't marry a transgender person who lives in his or her true gender.

What's really strange about all of this, though, is that Ireland is willing to recognize the status of transgender people born outside of Ireland.  An amended birth certificate from a state that recognizes sex "changes" will allow a person to enter into a marriage or civil union in Ireland, but those born in Ireland can't obtain such a documents.

So, let's see...In Ireland, I have more rights than an Irish transgender person--even one, like Lydia Foy, who had gender-reassignment surgery in England. You can drink a lot of Irish whiskey and not see anything stranger than that!

I mean, it's as if the Irish government were saying "No Irish Need Apply."  Or did Mahmoud "There Are No Homosexuals In Iran" Ahmadinejad move to Ireland and make transgenders the new target of his bigotry?

A White House Engagement Leads To...A Second-Wave Marriage?

You probably heard that back in June, a transgender man who goes by the single name of Scout proposed to Liz Margolies during the LGBT pride month celebration at the White House.



Well, the other day, they got married.  Actually, they eloped, more or less.  The only people on hand were the rabbi who officiated and two friends who served as witnesses and signed their marriage contract.  Some of their friends and family members disapproved of their union, they said.  I also have to believe that had their wedding more public, it could have been turned, possibly by uninvited guests, into something they never wanted it to be.

Here is an edited copy of their ceremony:



While I am happy for them, I have one question for Liz (assuming, of course, she reads this blog!):  You describe yourself as a "second wave feminist."  Every second-wave feminist whom I've read, or of whom I've heard, has been transphobic.  Some even deny the existence of transgenderism or transsexuality.  So I wonder how marrying a trans man fits into your views?  Or have they changed?  

If she still thinks herself a "second wave" feminist and is marrying Scout because, in spite of what she thinks, she's madly and irrationally in love with him...well, then, what can I say?  Maybe that's true love.  If it is, that's all the more reason to be happy for them!

A Judge Had To Make UPS Deliver

In most states--New York included--if you undergo hormone therapy and gender-reassignment surgery, you can remain married to the person to who whom you were married.  In most states--not including New York--if you and your spouse should split up after your changes, you can only marry someone of the gender "opposite" the one in which you are living.

So, if you are a MTF who married a woman while you lived as a man, you can remain married to her.  However, if you and her should divorce after your legal status is changed to that of a woman, you have to marry a man if you ever want to get married again.

However, the way corporations treat transgender unions is another story. Specifically, a MTF married a man after her changes, but was denied her husband's UPS medical benefits for other, non-transgender-related, procedures. A federal judge in Minneapolis ruled that she can be so denied.  UPS, for its part said that the denial was due to a "clerical error."


Perhaps it wasn't a deliberate omission on UPS's part. But I can't help but to think of how many other organizations are denying benefits to the transgender partners of their workers, not to mention transgenders themselves.