Luettavissa myös suomeksi.
In honor of International Day of Trans Visibility and the Olemme olemassa citizens' initiative demanding a third legal gender which successfully gathered over 50 000 signatures two days ago, I wanted to elaborate on my thoughts about legal gender and names.
The state has no right to define a person's gender or name. The state's one and only task with regards to those issues is to affirm the gender and name that a person has chosen themselves, and to make space for those whose choice is still uncertain.
Nevertheless it is clear that many people — including many on the trans spectrum — benefit directly when the state actively recognizes their gender identities. When so many other parties are trying to question and undermine one's right to belong to one's true gender, the power of an official gender marker should not be underestimated, nor is it acceptable to refrain from taking any action towards such an important end in the hope that the issue will resolve itself through the actions of citizens or social forces. Therefore, it is not at this point in time a good idea to formally abolish the concept of legal gender entirely, no matter how much some of us would like to live in such a society where we did not have to think about gender at all.
The same logic also applies to names. As a person on the trans spectrum, I have lived through many long periods during which I would have rather had no official name, and I do not believe that I am entirely alone in this. However, it is unfortunately not yet a given that a chosen (or even a sufficiently exceptional given) name will be accepted even after it has been made official. People need to have the option of backing up their names' legitimacy via official and/or bureaucratic means as well, so that a small group of harassers cannot take it away. This however must not mean that everyone is required to have an official name, just as everyone must not always be required to have an official gender marker.
In practice this means that it must be possible to change one's name or gender marker by declaration only, without needing to prove anything, for people of all ages and everyone living in the country. A person's choice of name must not be restricted for any reason other than preventing impersonation or in cases where a name causes clear and provable harm to a school age or younger bearer. A person's choice of gender must not be restricted at all, an in addition to man and woman there must also be a third nonbinary option as well as the option to leave the field blank. A newborn's gender field should be left blank by default, so that the child may then define their own gender when they are ready.
Medically necessary information related to gender and genital state must be separated entirely from legal gender, and classified as confidential in the same way as other health-related information. These issues are often very sensitive to many people, just as e.g. weight or issues related to fertility are — there is no justifiable reason why they need to be public, let alone marked on a person's ID card. A person's genital state or their assigned gender at birth must be considered confidential and concealed from all parties other than those with whom the person has intentionally decided to share that information.
In order to prevent fraud, persons can be uniquely identified by a gender-neutral personal identification number, which by default would not change during a person's life and would not need to be seen outside of official contexts. In the same way, the picture, fingerprints and other information unrelated to gender on a person's ID make it possible to identify the person and differentiate them from others more effectively than a binary gender marker.
I have been forced to accept that we will probably not be able to get to the aforementioned ideal situation in a single great leap. It is however always possible to take smaller steps towards this goal, so that the bigger problems get solved as quickly as possible.
In my opinion, the first two easy steps are implementing a third legal gender and removing the age limit on changing one's gender marker. Despite the need for some updating of databases, the first of these would be very simple to implement bureaucratically as well, whereas the second would in practice require no administrative changes at all. The recently successful Olemme olemassa citizens' initiative demonstrates strong political will among citizens to begin implementing the former step in the near future; I hope that the latter can also be advanced during the coming governmental term.
Our greatest obstacles are, as always, people's attitudes and political will. Neither of these obstacles will go away on its own, but I believe that all of the goals I have presented in this post are achievable in the near future, if both activists and politicians on our side put effort into them. It is important to remember in this case that we do not have to change the world, but rather simply update outdated social and civil structures to reflect truths that have always been so.