US tells airlines to disregard ‘X’ sex markers on passports and input ‘M’ or ‘F’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/18/airlines-passports-x-sex-markerOpen linkView original on reddthat.com203
Comments44https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/18/airlines-passports-x-sex-markerOpen linkView original on reddthat.com
"You may not fly on our planes without explicitly disclosing details about the nature of your genitals."
Instructions unclear: I showed my genitals at O’Hare and now I am no longer allowed in.
Honestly I think it would make sense to remove gender from all forms of government identification… does it REALLY matter to anyone other than your medical practitioner?
To most people? No. But it really matters to Republicans what's in your pants.
Tricky trans people tricked them once in college, and they liked it. Can’t have that.
My phone, wallet, keys, and knife. That's as much detail as anyone needs.
Practically, yes. If the embassy were evacuating citizens, they’d need to know if the Tracey Warner they’re looking for is male or female.
How helpful is that discriminator going to be for someone who chooses to put X as their gender? Not to mention just being actively misleading for butch women of feminine men.
"I can't interact with you unless I know what your genitals look like"
"Wait, why aren't you color-coding your baby based on genetalia?"
But it's discrimination to make fat people pay nore for a ticket.
...why is sex required anyway?..
...no, I really want to know...
Most identity documents do have a "sex" field, going all the way back to your birth certificate. It is seen as a key part of ones identity.
We can argue (and have argued) as a society about whether they are conflating "sex" with "gender". I just checked, though, and both my state-issued drivers' license and my Federal passport list my "sex" as an identifying trait.
The article gives a pretty good analysis of why it is good that we now have an "X" designation, for those who choose to use it. It's none of anyone's business how people present themselves vs. what is in their pants. However, we have very invasive technology that can see very intricate details, and a human with a penis who looks female may raise suspicion when they find bulges where they "shouldnt" be.
What is happening now is a bit of overreach, though. Identity documents have been issued, both in the US and other countries, with the "X" designation, and this policy just directs officials to ignore that. What else will they be told to ignore on official documents next?
...i require why sex is important, and you favour the argument that sex isn't important, i like you...
I mean, it is a key part of ones identity, so it makes sense that it appears on identification documents.
The key question is whether it is more important to document the organs you had at birth, or how you present yourself now.
A bit?
That last bit is the important part.
I agree that this is a ridiculous overreach, of course.
But I'm also so weary of this "Obsession with what's in your pants" argument everyone keeps memeing, as if, somehow sexual dimorphism is not a thing in our species and it's 100% about genitalia.
It's generally a valid descriptive trait that is often useful for identifying humans you otherwise know nothing much about.
I think there's room for understanding a rationale of such things while still condemning how petty, hateful, and stupid 100% of this administration's ideas are.
It does make sense on a birth certificate. As soon as I have a document with my current picture on it, and/or other biometric info, gender is no longer a necessity on a document IMHO.
Only for the continuation of the species, not personally. So you are ok!
Mostly so they can more easily punish those who dare to stray too far from stereotypical gender roles.
…fuck them he/she sexy bitches…. /s because you bitches is too literal
It's me, I'm he/she sexy bitches, please fuck me. =3
Because virgins aren't allowed in, duh
But it says "VIRGIN" right there on the plane! :(
Different societies consider it an important part of one's identify.
Some countries have religion on the passport.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It does seem a bit weird. Who would I have to screw to board the plane? The pilot?
We have climate change, extreme disparity in wealth gap leading to poverty expanding, never ending wars, no functional right to healthcare, etc and these gaping bloviating rectums focus energy and attention on this bigoted nonsense. All by design.
I did say it was all by design. And it is systematized bigotry and affects real people so I'll call it what it is.
That is a very optimistic/distanced perspective when they are backing genocide and Kristalnachting real people in US cities. At the end of the day they are disappearing and killing people backed by corporate oligarchies and right wing billionaires.
If they couldn't attack blacks, Jews, women, gays, trans, and now liberals, then they'd actually have to do some work.
Precisely, and a very good reason to not get into the stupid ideology of "working across the aisle".
Fascists are only focused on one thing.
I mean the US government is literally shutdown but they still have time for this bullshit....
Hi, I’d like to buy a plane ticket to San Fr-
PENIS OR VAGINA?
Wouldn’t that be done at the passport application process where airlines aren’t involved?
It was, already. That's why some documents have "X" in the first place. The government is explicitly directing them to ignore that, and just make shit up to put in that field.
When someone is missing or is a possible threat, they give a description - white 35yo male - or whatever. I get having sex on ID info. I'm old and I'm confused by m/f and why the person needs to change instead of society changing? Can you still be what you medically are but wear, look, alter how you choose? How much is "i feel female" versus "i feel like what society expects female to be" ? I dunno- like I said, I'm old and confused.
I’m also old, and often confused, but less about this one, because of personal experience.
The world is shifting quickly away from “almost everyone adheres to gender norms” to “what’s wrong with people being perceived the way they’d like to be?”
It’s about individual expression of self. The bits and bobs that people have under their clothes may have zero correlation with what their traditionally recognized appearance is.
If someone is lost or a threat, it makes more sense to look for them based on how they present themselves in public, and not how they look naked. (Which can be ambiguous, too.)
Your recognizing your own confusion is a good thing. It means that you are aware that there are still things you need to learn. You’re all right.
If they're putting out a description, someone with an X market is probably better visually described as "gender non-conforming" than a gender they're not really presenting as. They may even present as one gender for the flight and then another when out in public, so being described with one gender could actively disrupt visual identification.
I mean at that point it's just philosophical. Is a woman an ideal for you to fit, or is it defined what the people do, how they act, and what they wear?
Says you, my trolley is pretty hot!