Recent trans news

A fresh start. Please note the title is copied from the document linked below; I hope it's acceptable, or suggest changes.

Canada is the first country to provide census data on transgender and non-binary people

(...) These modifications reflect today's reality in terms of the evolving acceptance and understanding of gender and sexual diversity and an emerging social and legislative recognition of transgender, non-binary and LGBTQ2+ people in general, that is, people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, Two-Spirit, or who use other terms related to gender or sexual diversity. In 2017, the Canadian government amended the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canadian Criminal Code to protect individuals from discrimination and hate crimes based on gender identity and expression. (...)

Of the nearly 30.5 million people in Canada aged 15 and older living in a private household in May 2021, 100,815 were transgender (59,460) or non-binary (41,355), accounting for 0.33% of the population in this age group.

The proportions of transgender and non-binary people were three to seven times higher for Generation Z (born between 1997 and 2006, 0.79%) and millennials (born between 1981 and 1996, 0.51%) than for Generation X (born between 1966 and 1980, 0.19%), baby boomers (born between 1946 and 1965, 0.15%) and the Interwar and Greatest Generations (born in 1945 or earlier, 0.12%). (...)

Among the 59,460 transgender people, there were more transgender women (31,555) than transgender men (27,905). (...)

Transgender men (34.9 years) were almost a decade younger on average than transgender women (43.3 years).

Close to two-thirds (62.0%) of the 100,815 individuals who were transgender or non-binary were younger than 35.

Gender diversity was highest among those aged 20 to 24, almost 1 in 100 (0.85%) of whom were transgender or non-binary. In comparison, 1 in 700 were transgender or non-binary among people aged 65 and older. (...)

Among people aged 15 to 34, about 1 in 500 (0.20%) in Canada were transgender men and 1 in 650 (0.15%) were transgender women. (...)

This was also in the news:

Oklahoma bans nonbinary gender identities on birth certificates
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/27/1095040631/oklahoma-bans-nonbinary-birth-certific...

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt signed a bill Tuesday explicitly prohibiting the use of nonbinary gender markers on state birth certificates, a ban experts say is the first of its kind in the nation.

The bill followed a flap last year over the Oklahoma State Department of Health's agreement in a civil case allowing a nonbinary option. The birth certificate in that case was issued to an Oklahoma-born Oregon resident who sued after the agency initially refused the request. People who are nonbinary do not identify with traditional male or female gender assignments.

to be honest, if we're not gonna have an actual conversation about anything and are just gonna re-post text from articles without any commentary, then i would rather not see titles that give me panic attack

>3 sashame:

You can Ignore any thread by clicking on the x next to thread title.

And again (as I said in >1 LolaWalser:), if anyone has complaints about the thread title, please be constructive and suggest changes.

>1 LolaWalser: Did I understand correctly, that the new question added about gender asked for a write in answer, it wasn't a single-select or multi-select checkbox?

>5 LolaWalser: ok, here's my constructive title suggestion: "recent trans news". i feel like its a somewhat obvious alternative title

>7 sashame: Agreed. I read the thread title & a knot of dread formed in my stomach. In this specific forum we had a thread a while ago that started with someone asking about the validity of transitioning. Everyone clapped back informatively & appropriately, but the beginning of that discussion was upsetting & I don't think it's weird that readers here would worry when they see a title like this.

No big insult or fight, just awareness.

As an admin, I have the ability to rename threads, as was done in the previous instance, also in response to people saying the thread's title caused anxiety and dread. Since this is a brand new topic intended as a "fresh start," I want to hear from Lola as well.

>6 southernbooklady:

Yes. I think this Globe and Mail story is freely accessible. Also, if you're interested there's an accompanying podcast.

>9 southernbooklady:

Sorry, I didn't realise you were waiting--please go ahead with whatever.

>6 southernbooklady:

Yeah, multiple pre-set options and a fill-in.

Okay, if there is a consensus I can re-name this topic. Is "Recent Trans News" what people want?

>10 librorumamans: >11 LolaWalser: I'm always hyper-aware that how we answer questions depends a lot on how they are asked. That's why I wondered about the write-in option. It is something that has come up for me at work, where "gender" is one of those things our membership software tracks, but only provides the male/female options for selection. We don't use it, and in fact, we've turned the question off so people don't see it. So over the last couple years, I've been re-tooling all our forms and templates to use a customized gender query that prioritizes the write-in option first, and then allows an "or, choose from one of the following" afterward if they want to use they/them, she/her, he/him.

I have always thought about "the census" as an external measurement -- the government tallying up its citizens and checking off this or that box with a view towards beefing up the tax roles: man/woman, husband/wife, employed/not employed, own/rent, house/farm, etc, etc. But it really isn't just that is it? It's also where people self-define themselves.

>12 southernbooklady:

I'd say just go ahead with that since no other suggestions were made and if there are other complaints, deal as necessary.

>12 southernbooklady:
i've been putting together a survey that we need demographic information for (otherwise honestly i'd just leave it all out entirely) and the only satisfactory way i've found to ask anyone to answer any demographic questions at all is to allow people to self-define across the board. their own language, their own identity, no check boxes, no putting labels or words in other people's mouths. if you have to have check boxes, then i like having the write-in option first like you described.

>14 overlycriticalelisa: one of the reasons I like having the question (it's never "required") is that it is training our people not to make assumptions about gender. That is most obvious in practice when we hold events, where MCs are coached not to assume anything about presenters but to ask, and where attendees are given the option to have buttons or stickers on their badges to let people know what pronouns they use. Even if an attendee doesn't use them they are surrounded by people who are, hopefully creating a sense of normalcy.

>15 southernbooklady: certainly, the more people see other options than the binary and people using pronouns, the more mainstream it becomes. i'm seeing more and more people have their pronouns on zoom calls, and i'm loving that.

An extract from the upcoming memoir by Lucy Sante (who I learned just now has transitioned a few years back):

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/mar/09/lucy-sante-i-heard-her-call-my-nam...