Sounds like he or his doctor could be on the hook for fraud…and yet what should the legal standard be for determining gender identity?
Just… prosecute him for fraud and perjury. We don’t need to bring the standards up to where they were previously. We shouldn’t have to jump through hoops in order to be seen under the law and by our peers as ourselves.
Edit: This is more about the strange biases in auto insurance (though there’s good rationale), but throwing us under the bus (and giving ammunition to bigots) is not a good way of going about it.
Generally I think prosecuting him for fraud is what would or will happen. However, there is a point to be made regarding making legal gender status less arbitrary, especially if metrics or statistics businesses use depend on data relevant to gender being accurate.
Ok, I don’t want to turn this into a debate, not in this thread.
But I have to ask: What do you mean by, “making legal gender status less arbitrary?”
I’m not sure how to redefine that. If gender status is fluid or arbitrary, that doesn’t necessarily make it easy to arbitrate cases of fraud or deceit regarding what people report their gender to be. I’m not saying there need to be more hoops. I don’t even know what hoops there are. I guess I’m saying there is a valid argument to have hoops and for them to be well-defined.
Often there doesn’t even need to be concrete legislation (regarding said hoops) where caselaw in the courts establish a precedent for what they consider fraud and what they don’t. So there’s also a legal argument against the need for additional hoops.
I really was making no judgment about whether gender was too easy or hard to change.