Connect with us

Transgender? Don’t Try To Board A Plane In Canada

Published

on

This week bloggers exposed a regulation passed in July that could effectively bar transgender, transsexual, and gender non-conforming people from boarding airplanes in Canada. While it is still unclear whether the regulations have affected any trans people at the airport, the policy as it is written is disquieting – and asks us to think about how gendered documents affect movement.

There are two clauses of concern in Canada’s “Identity Screening Regulations”:

5.2 (1) An air carrier shall not transport a passenger if …

(c) the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents; or

(d) the passenger presents more than one form of identification and there is a major discrepancy between those forms of identification.

 

Crossing Borders

In a recent report, Human Rights Watch explains: “For many trans people, one of the most distressing consequences to having the wrong gender in their identity documents is that they repeatedly have no option but to reveal to perfect strangers … details of a particularly intimate aspect of their private lives, namely that they are transgender.”

International travel can be a high-risk experience for trans people as it calls for multiple identity checks in high-security environments – namely airports.

Paisley Currah and Tara Mulqueen explain that at airports, expectations of gender often reflect the “common sense” that gender is an unchanging biometric characteristic or, “that there is a perfectly harmonious relationship between the sex classification an individual is assigned at birth based on a visual inspection of the body (what one was), one’s current “biological sex” (what one is), one’s gender identity (what one says one is), one’s gender presentation (what one looks like to others) and the gender classifica­tion on the particular identity document one proffers.”

And when documents don’t match expectations, it’s an anomaly, which, Currah and Mulqueen argue, “is an event that automatically triggers higher levels of scrutiny.”

Most countries which allow gender to be legally changed at all still require intense – often medicalized and expensive – processes to change gender markers on documents. Some countries, however, are allowing gender identity to be increasingly based on self-identification when it comes to travel documents.

These progressive policies complicate the Canadian regulation even more. What would Canada do with a passport marked “X”?

Marking Papers

Australian citizens are required to list their gender on passports as M (male), F (female), or X (unspecified). While changing gender on documents requires certifying letter from a doctor, sex reassignment surgery is not required to issue a passport in the preferred gender. The letter from the medical practitioner must confirm intersex status or appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition. If unable to obtain a letter from doctor, citizens can apply for a Document of Identity with the gender marker field left blank, then complete the passport application.

In New Zealand, people have the option of changing the gender on their passports, also to M, F, or X. To get a name change, a Family Court must approve. However to obtain the gender change (including to ‘X’), citizens must simply submit a statutory declaration indicating how long they have been living in their current gender identity. The declaration must also promise that should the person’s gender identity change in the future through a court process, a new application and full fee will apply in order to have the new gender identity recorded in the passport. Citizens are not required to change their name to apply for a change in gender (including the X) passport.

India has issued passports to people who identify as a third gender, denoted by an “E” for “eunuch” since 2005. Nepal’s Supreme Court established a third gender category in 2007, and a third gender passport case is currently pending in the Court. Bangladesh implemented a similar passport gender category in 2011. In line with what LGBT human rights experts support, all three South Asian countries rely on self-identification to determine gender on identity documents.

Policies such as Canada’s, however, can be harmful in that they reinforce the assertion that if other countries won’t recognize a third marker – be in “E” or “X” – governments ought to not issue such passports.

Some countries do not allow legal gender change at all; some insist that gender appearance and performance must match that expressed on travel documents; some require medical evidence to substantiate any discrepancy; and some require nothing more than self-identification to list one of not two but three gender markers.

So then how is gender standardized as bodies cross borders around the world?

For international standards, we turn to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Convention on International Civil Aviation. According to the ICAO, there are four mandatory personal data points on all international travel documents: name, date of birth, nationality, and sex. ICAO standards for Machine Readable Passports indicate that sex may be listed as unspecified, both in the part inspected by humans, and that which is read by computers.

In the Visual Inspection Zone of the passport, the “sex” field must be filled in as follows:

Sex of the holder, to be specified by use of the single initial commonly used in the State where the document is issued and, if translation into English, French or Spanish is necessary, followed by a dash and the capital letter F for female, M for male, or X for unspecified.

In the Machine Readable Zone of the passport, sex must be marked as “F = female; M = male; Global Action for Trans* Equality. “While it is unlikely that any terrorists will be deterred by this silly piece of law, it violates all trans people’s right to freedom of movement and travel.”

What Gender Tells Us

The task of legally assigning sex or gender to citizens has come up relatively recently, and often only in countries whose medical institutions have developed extensive technologies which can alter bodies.

Matching appearance to documents is too often based on arguments of common sense that gender classifications are obvious and clear, and common sense that these real classifications uniform across administrative systems. Governments have a legitimate interest in knowing the sex or gender of their citizens – how else, for example, would they implement sex segregation in prisons, an essential protection included in virtually all of the world’s detention standards?

However, as international travel demonstrates, documents and the genders they list can indicate far more about the institutions that issue them than they do about the people carrying them, say, at the airport.

On Monday, Canada’s Foreign Minister spoke in London about Canadian foreign policy values. He slammed Uganda’s gay rights record, paid homage to the late David Kato and, toward the end of the speech, declared:

We will speak out on the issues that matter to Canadians – whether it is the role and treatment of women around the world, or the persecution of gays, lesbians, bisexual or transgendered persons…

If Canada’s policy on gender and air travel was developed in the name of security, international standards clearly show that argument to be weak. And if Canada’s government is going to push for LGBT rights in its foreign policy, it might consider allowing trans people to board planes within its borders.

Image by Noble

Kyle Knight is a Fulbright Scholar in Nepal where his research focuses on the LGBTI rights movement. He previously worked at Human Rights Watch, where he focused on children’s rights issue. For three years, he worked as a suicide prevention counselor for LGBTQ youth at the Trevor Project in New York City. He currently sits on the Trevor Project’s Advocacy and Public Policy Committee, is the president of the Duke University LGBT Network, and a is lecturer in Gender Studies at Tribhuvan University, Nepal’s state-run university in Kathmandu. You can follow him on Twitter @knightktm.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘No Amnesty’ and No Plan: Trump Ag Sec Grilled on Farm Labor as Deportations Continue

Published

on

One day after appearing in front of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to tell reporters there will be “no amnesty” for undocumented farm workers while insisting adults on Medicaid could replace them, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins faced sharp criticism for having no “concrete” plan to meet what she declared is the Trump administration’s goal of an entirely “legal” U.S. farm worker workforce.

“It sounds like you don’t yet have a concrete proposal to deal with farmers who rely on undocumented workers, am I right?” a Fox News Business host asked (video below).

“Well, no, we are working on it. We’re working on a concrete proposal,” Secretary Rollins insisted.

READ MORE: ‘Secretary Chaos’: Hegseth Running ‘Absolute Clown Show’ Critics Say, Amid Calls to Resign

“You’re working on it but that’s not a concrete proposal,” the host sharply charged.

“Well, no, the president has been very, very clear. We need to make sure that the food supply is safe,” Rollins said, before insisting that “ultimately, we have to move toward a 100% legal workforce, and that’s what this president stands for, and that’s what we’re doing.”

“The mass deportations will continue, but the president has been very clear that we have to make sure we’re not compromising our food supply at the same time,” Rollins said before declaring that “Congress has to fix it,” and U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer “is on it.”

“The border has to be secure and there will be no amnesty,” Rollins added, before the host again pointed out the administration has no plan yet.

READ MORE: Trump Claims ‘Tremendous Power’ to Run ‘Places’ Like DC and NYC

“It’s not easy, but I don’t think it’s fair to say there is a concrete proposal when you’re still working out details to try to deal with the needs of farmers who need a lot of these undocumented workers and at the same time not providing an amnesty.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Stupid Liberals With Stupid Policies’: Trump Transportation Secretary Slams NYC

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Secretary Chaos’: Hegseth Running ‘Absolute Clown Show’ Critics Say, Amid Calls to Resign

Published

on

Last week, reportedly without consulting the White House, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth unilaterally approved the decision to halt critical weapons shipments to Ukraine, which has been the target of increased attacks in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s illegal war against the sovereign nation.

President Trump on Tuesday claimed he had no knowledge of who ordered the halt in weapons shipments. That pause came just after his July 3 call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Hours later, Russia launched a massive bombing campaign against Ukraine.

“Russia launched its largest-ever drone and missile barrage on Ukraine, two days after the US stopped the delivery of some key weapons to Kyiv — including crucial interceptors used to shoot down Moscow’s missiles,” The Financial Times reported on July 4. “The barrage began soon after an hour-long phone call between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.”

READ MORE: Trump Claims ‘Tremendous Power’ to Run ‘Places’ Like DC and NYC

The halt of weapons to Ukraine was so catastrophic and damaging that it set off “a scramble inside the administration to understand why the halt was implemented and explain it to Congress and the Ukrainian government,” CNN reported. “The US special envoy to Ukraine, Ret. Gen. Keith Kellogg, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is also Trump’s national security adviser, were also not told about the pause beforehand and learned about it from press reports, according to a senior administration official and two of the sources.”

“The episode underscores the often-haphazard policy-making process inside the Trump administration, particularly under Hegseth at the Defense Department,” CNN added.

Last week’s halt was the third time Secretary Hegseth unilaterally decided to stop weapons shipments to Ukraine, according to NBC News.

Pentagon officials last week said the halt was due to concerns over U.S. weapons stockpile levels, but NBC News reported that “an analysis by senior military officers found that the aid package would not jeopardize the American military’s own ammunition supplies, according to three U.S. officials.”

Hegseth’s decision “blindsided the State Department, members of Congress, officials in Kyiv and European allies.”

Now, critics are calling for Hegseth’s resignation.

Declaring the Defense Secretary “completely unqualified, and on an ego trip,” U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) responded to a post about Hegseth not informing the White House about his weapons halt.

“When is Pete Hegseth going to resign?” asked Congressman Lieu, a retired U.S. Air Force officer.

“This would be a good time for Congress to investigate Hegseth’s Pentagon and push for his resignation,” wrote Jeet Heer on Monday at The Nation.

READ MORE: ‘Stupid Liberals With Stupid Policies’: Trump Transportation Secretary Slams NYC

Many of my GOP friends and colleagues are decorated military veterans who have risked their lives for our country,” remarked U.S. Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY). “If they believe — as they must — that @SecDef poses a grave danger to our national security and that of our allies, I hope they will urge POTUS to finally fire him.”

Iraq War veteran Paul Rieckhoff, founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), and host of the Independent Americans podcast, blasted Hegseth.

“No surprise here,” he wrote, also responding to a post about the weapons halt. “The sloppiness and incompetence is consistent. And his flawed leadership continues to disrupt and frustrate folks all across the Pentagon. And now, it’s also frustrating the White House and Trump himself.”

“He is Secretary Chaos,” Rieckhoff continued. “And every day he falls deeper beyond his depth. We are less safe, our allies are weakened, and our enemies are celebrating.”

Decorated former CIA operations officer Marc Polymeropoulos of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, wrote: “Leadership dysfunction at DoD…. This stuff just can’t happen… serious real world ramifications… (ie Ukrainians die). Is there any accountability?”

“Hegseth is running an absolute clown show,” warned Colby Badhwar of The Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).

RELATED: ‘Cartoon Villains’: Ag Secretary Under Fire for Medicaid-to-Farm-Work Plan

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Trump Claims ‘Tremendous Power’ to Run ‘Places’ Like DC and NYC

Published

on

President Donald Trump claimed the White House has legal authority to run parts of the country including Washington, D.C. and New York City, especially should he oppose its elected leaders. His remarks were another attack on the nation’s largest city, which his Transportation Secretary also targeted earlier on Tuesday.

Trump told reporters, “we have tremendous power at the White House to run places where we have to.”

“We could run D.C.” he alleged. “I mean, we’re looking at D.C. We don’t want crime in D.C. We want the city to run well.” Hey also claimed that the White House is currently “testing” running D.C.

Washington, D.C. and its 700,000 residents have an elected city council and mayor. While Congress maintains some control over the nation’s capital, a complete federal government takeover of a city would be unprecedented. Presidents have, at times, had to send in the National Guard, but never to permanently occupy and run a local government.

READ MORE: ‘Stupid Liberals With Stupid Policies’: Trump Transportation Secretary Slams NYC

Trump added that his chief of staff, Susie Wiles, “is working very closely with the mayor and they’re doing alright. I mean, in the sense that we would run it so good, it would be run so proper, we’d get the best person to run it.”

“The crime would be down to a minimal, would be much less, you know, we’re thinking about doing it, to be honest with you. We want we want a capital that’s run flawlessly and it wouldn’t be hard for us to do it.”

If attempted, a federal takeover could raise serious concerns about voter disenfranchisement and further inflame opposition from advocates of D.C. statehood.

Trump also attacked Zohran Mamdani, New York City’s Democratic nominee for mayor, as “a man who’s not very capable, in my opinion, other than he’s got a good line of b—s—.”

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Mind Blowing’: Trump’s Ukraine Weapons Remark Draws Concern, Backlash

“I can tell you this,” Trump continued, I used to say, ‘We will not ever be a socialist country,’ right? Well, I’ll say it again. We’re not gonna have if a communist get elected to run New York, it can never be the same, but we have tremendous power at the White House to run places where we have to.”

Trump has previously threatened Mamdani “with arrest, denaturalization and removal from the country while repeatedly branding him a communist,” according to The Independent.

Watch the video below or at this link.


RELATED: ‘Cartoon Villains’: Ag Secretary Under Fire for Medicaid-to-Farm-Work Plan

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.