IN SHORT, THIS WAS AN OBVIOUS CALL FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
ARE MPS THE WEAK LINK WHEN IT COMES TO SAFEGUARDING CANADA? CLIMATE FEARS ARE REAL, SO OILSANDS MUST CLOSE DON’T BELIEVE TRUMP’S HYPE ON HIS SUMMIT WITH CHINA’S XI
records to vanish from the register of births, deaths, marriages and registered partnerships. This would have a variety of undesirable legal and societal implications.”
In short, this was an obvious call for obvious reasons. But the court made the right call for another less obvious reason: had it granted Ratelband’s wish to change his age, the world would most likely be an even harsher place for transgender people.
If you don’t believe me, consider Ratelband’s core argument — repeated throughout the media — about why he should be allowed to change his age. He is quoted in major publications saying, “We live in a time when you can change your name and change your gender. Why can't I decide my own age?”
If Bruce can legally become Caitlyn, in other words, why can’t a 69-year-old legally transform into a 49-year-old to affirm how sprightly he feels inside? For that matter, why can’t anyone become anything under the law?
Transgender rights campaigner Jane Fae tried to answer this question when she appeared on the BBC with Ratelband last month. Being transgender, she told him, is “not just an identity. It’s a medical condition that has been understood for 50 years. What you are actually doing is trying to make a comparison that is really quite tasteless.”