As Prop 8 wound its way through the courts, I thought about that article often.
The legal briefs that were filed in both state and federal courts largely focused on equal protection for the LGBT community.
Genital irregularities and months of additional tests revealed that from a chromosomal and hormonal standpoint their child was, while not strictly genetically male, more “properly” categorized as a son.
I granted their request to modify the birth certificate to designate the child as male.
While she looked like a woman, and she and her parents had always believed she was female, from a genetic standpoint she was a man.
The article was published the year after California passed Prop 8, a version of DOMA.
It appears to be binary: An XX chromosomal pair is female, and an XY chromosomal pair is male.
On February 22, the Trump Administration reversed the Obama policy.
Since President Trump was elected, Alabama, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming lawmakers have introduced legislation that would determine access to public restrooms and changing rooms based on one’s assigned sex at birth. Gloucester County School Board (“Grimm”), which challenges a Virginia school board’s policy that requires students to use bathrooms according to biological sex.
A law cannot be vague — a person of ordinary intelligence must know what conduct the law requires or forbids, and judges must be able to consistently apply the law in a non-discriminatory manner. Many people share the ubiquitous notion that biological sex falls into two, mutually exclusive categories.
In 2009 my perspective changed when I read an article written by a woman who learned shortly after marriage that she and her husband couldn’t have biological children because she had an XY chromosomal pairing.