Japan's top court says trans sterilisation requirement unconstitutional - BBC News
In a landmark ruling the court says it is unconstitutional to require a trans person to undergo surgery.
It strikes me as wild but so much of the opposition towards LGBT rights in Japan is, effectively, a paperwork issue. Backed by bigotry, but fronted by paperwork.
The koseki system, or family registry system, basically cannot handle same-sex couples or parents. The system only allows for one male partner and one female partner, one male parent and one female parent. So Japan can't register same-sex marriages or parents.
But this might also be why sterilisation is required for trans people. Because the requirement for recognition of gender isn't actually just to be sterilised. The requirements are to be unmarried, have no children, and be permanently sterile. Because anything less than that could lead to a system where a marriage involves two same-sex partners, or a child has two same-sex parents. Which is impossible using the current paperwork, so it is forbidden.
So trans people have to be sterilised, and if they have children already, they can never be recognised by the current system. Because bureaucracy.
Sounds like they need to update their system.
Maybe it's just me, but in the digital age I don't think there's an excuse for systems like this to be too difficult to change. Heck, if you designed it like an idiot, then you deserve to pay the costs to fix it.
I know Japan lives in the stone age when it comes to governing, but that's simply not an excuse. Do better. Take money from your ruling class to fix these issues.
It's do-able. Let's get off our fucking hands and do it.
Sounds like they need to update their system.
Oh definitely. Desperately.
Maybe it’s just me, but in the digital age I don’t think there’s an excuse for systems like this to be too difficult to change. Heck, if you designed it like an idiot, then you deserve to pay the costs to fix it.
Thing is. I don't even think it would be that difficult to change. It's not like it's the first time we've ever had newer versions of forms. And the change isn't even drastic, just de-gender the terms. Partner 1 and Partner 2, Parent 1 and Parent 2.
One of the simple benefits of the paper-based way Japan tends to favour is that it can be updated and overriden by the person performing the process.
Boy, thank God that you don't have to deal with the draconian legacy codebases that governments have. There's a reason no sane engineer wants to get even near them, and it's because any change, no matter how small it is, completely breaks the entire system and no-one knows how.
Sure, a new system could be developed from the side, but implies getting engineers in a higher level than interns and governments don't have good reasons to hire them. Their broken system gives them the perfect excuse for their bullshittery.
Bureaucracy does tend to be inherently conservative, because it has to condense people into neat and tidy boxes in order to make them legible to an authority, so it will only allow formally defined categories, which will always lag behind culture. It also reduces people to numbers and strips them of their identities, which is another win for conservatism.
So it's a great excuse for conservatives, because they can just say, "computer says no" and deny you healthcare.
Bureaucracy is a necessary evil in a modern society. Perhaps if you're using a traditional definition of "conservative," that could be accurate in that it (purposefully) slows things down to allow the administrative state (just a bunch of regular people working in their field of expertise) to review permits, etc.
But if we're going by the current definition as used by the Republican party? Absolutely fucking not. These people are actively and openly working to literally "dismantle the administrative state." That is their stated goal.
Without bureaucracy, society would be untenable.
As it should be. What kind of moron would suggest that sterilising people is the right thing to do?
Its been the standard in Europe also. This has been changing, but only recently.
Ooooh, you're not gonna like this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
And btw, this decision has, to this date, never been overturned. So yes, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, it is ok and constitutional to forcibly sterilize people.
to the best of my knowledge even after this ruling, you would still need to be sterilized to get your gender marker changed as the requirement of having genitalia that matches your preferred gender is still in effect. You also need to be 18+, unmarried and have no children who are minors.
In case anyone wasn't aware, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in 1927 that forcibly sterilizing people is constitutional and totally cool.
This ruling still stands to this day.
We already found out just how secure rights backed only supreme court precedent are against the current court. If that taught us anything it is that any right not explicitly spelled out as an amendment can be revoked at any time. Don't jinx it.
Uhh, God I hope so, wait, how was this a question?
Japan is a very regressive nation.
Racism, classism, sexism, transphobia, xenophobia, you got it all in Japan and most of them are proud of it.
Yup, peeps don't like to admit how totalitarian / dystopian all the sea countries really are, or how enourmously proud the average man or woman are of all the regressive ideals and cultural norms. Thinking real change is possible in a system if we "get off our hands" is so unbelievable naive. Has anyone in this thread actually spent any time working or living in Japan or any other Asian island nations? The xenophobia and classism is so next level the only comparison in the west is a deranged Trumper who believes white people should be paid more than any other race for their contributions to ccultured civilization.
I don't have alot of personal experience with transphobia as other than Fillipino and Thai ladyboys, who are kinda their own thing, culturally. (Not to say their societal reputation is very good, or even a positive, as they are basically expected to emgage in sex work. I have never meet a asian trans person outside the west other than the two previous examples.
Japan is on of the few western aligned countries that i believe literally needs a big dose of post modern French style feminism. Full on women strikes across the board. The average Japanese man is physically and emotionally incapable of taking care of himself and any potential children or dependents.
Last week, for anyone else feeling a sense of déjà vu. It's nice of BBC to catch up.
Not saying this is the case, but they should take their time to fact check and develop a story like this.
I mean, yes fact checking is good, but beyond translating existing Japanese sources on a Supreme Court ruling, which is already written down... there's not much to clarify here. It's not like it's war coverage where it's dangerous to even cover stories at all.
I am glad that BBC was able to give me a timelier update on much more 'impactful' news like Blackpink's Jisoo and actor Ahn Bo-Hyun's break up though.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Japan's Supreme Court has ruled that it is unconstitutional to require citizens to be sterilised before they can officially change genders.
The woman's lawyer had argued that her reproductive ability has already been diminished by years of hormone therapy, adding that surgery entailed physical suffering and the risk of after-effects.
"The government now needs to act quickly to remove the clause," Kanae Doi, Japan director of Human Rights Watch told news agency Reuters after the verdict.
Recent opinion polls have shown growing support for LGBTQ-friendly laws - although there is opposition from conservative sections of society and politicians.
Earlier this month, a local family court ruled in favour of a transgender man - Gen Suzuki- who requested to have his gender legally changed without undergoing the surgery.
The family court judge, Takehiro Sekiguchi, said the current law violated Article 13 of the Constitution that stipulates all people shall be respected as individuals.
The original article contains 307 words, the summary contains 152 words. Saved 50%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!