View Single Post
Old 07-15-2014, 06:36 PM   #39
BullDog
Infamous Member

How Do You Identify?:
Dominant Stone Butch Daddy
Preferred Pronoun?:
She
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: In A Healing Place
Posts: 5,371
Thanks: 18,160
Thanked 22,781 Times in 4,469 Posts
Rep Power: 21474856
BullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST ReputationBullDog Has the BEST Reputation
Default

People have fought long and hard for legal recognition of same sex marriage. People have fought long and hard for legal sex changes. Neither group (with overlaps of course) are the ones holding institutional power.

The "loophole" to me is "heterosexual" marriage. In many places you still must have one person with male legal status and one person with female legal status to enjoy the full benefits of marriage. This could include couples where one or both of them is transsexed but queer identified. So there are times when some queers could get married under this "loophole" where a lesbian couple could not. I don't see those who do marry trying to exploit same sex couples.

I watched the video again. They look quite happy. Christine refers to Jacki as she. So yeah looks to me like Jacki did it to marry the woman she loves. I wonder what life is like for Jacki because to me s/he doesn't seem like s/he would pass for male most of the time despite her male legal status and lack of breasts. I don't see her as somehow taking advantage of a loophole and now living on easy street. Far from it.

If I had a partner who really needed health insurance or needed to emigrate or there was some real need for the woman I loved, and the only way to achieve it was to get my sex legally changed to male, I would do it. To me that's having to fight the system where the deck is stacked against you, not trying to take advantage of another disenfranchised group.

Their situation didn't seem that dire as far as legal issues in California, so yes it is puzzling. They seemed to just be in love and really want to get married, so that's why they did it.

If you put a lot of conditions on who can transition or have a legal sex change, isn't that going to hurt transsexed/transgender people? Jacki could very well end up with some unintended issues that s/he is not prepared for. I don't see the road being unproblematic for anyone who legally changes their sex- no matter what their reason is. Shouldn't it be the person's right to make the choice to transition/change their legal status rather than try to gate keep who can legally change their sex and for what reason? Some people may not make good decisions with this or based on what you agree with, very true. Many people get married for poor reason as well.
__________________
Love consists in this, that two solitudes protect and touch and greet each other.

- Rainer Maria Rilke
BullDog is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to BullDog For This Useful Post: