Rights for transgender people
Right-wing forces now claim that the Transgender Act is un-Islamic, four years after its historic and astonishing (given our tendency toward the right) multiparty passage. The current attacks against long-abused transgender people may have been motivated in part by the label “anti-religion.
The legislation is often comparable to other laws, but it also has gaps, such as those regarding marriage, adoption, access to gendered spaces, etc. Many campaigners fail to notice the gaps due to regional sensitivities. However, its critics now want to further undermine it by creating uncertainty and disinformation about transgenderism.
Many people mistake them for intersex individuals, who have unknown reproductive organs. While some intersex people identify as transgender, many accept the gender they were born with. However, transgender people frequently feel like a different gender or none at all, similar to non-binary people, despite having clearly determined organs. Intersex is widely accepted, while transgenderism is not. Scientific research has demonstrated that even if they do not share physical characteristics, from an early age, their brains may resemble that of the preferred gender. So they are constantly anxious.
Science claims that this condition is natural and not an illness, and that forcing the first sex can have negative physical and psychological effects. Many states forbid such dubious treatments, allowing people to change their gender on their own without having to undergo physical examinations or sex change surgery. The decision to have surgery is up to the individuals in question because to the cost, privacy concerns, and hazards.
Many people find it strange to choose to change their gender identification, which has traditionally been seen to be fixed based solely on physical characteristics. Research suggests that these identity criteria may have changed over time, nevertheless. Now, experts are concentrating on minds as well. Therefore, demands for organ checks disregard the differences in transgender brain chemistry. Furthermore, sustained self-identity is a powerful enough social test since it has a significant danger of being a fad or fraud because of their widespread exploitation, particularly in our state. Many people even long conceal their desires because of fear.
Critics have exaggerated the possibility that other people will suddenly demand changes to their race, age, species, etc. However, unlike examples involving transgenderism, neither science nor history supports such claims. A similar strict social test will discourage others from making the same pretense. Some people spread the ridiculous idea that Pakistani women might appear as men to receive bigger inheritance. But if a woman behaves improperly, her family will exclude her, and if she is married, she must receive a divorce. Even then, her family might reject her, forcing her to participate in a drawn-out, uncertain legal battle. Pakistani women, who frequently avoid pursuing their legitimate rights out of fear, cannot assume such a significant risk through fraud. Such situations have not occurred in the four years since the law was passed.
Some detractors of the measure have incited a panic among the public. The flaws in the statute were widened by its 2020 business rules. The legislation gives each person complete autonomy over gender reassignment, and corporate policies must follow parental regulations. In the Nadra databases, transsexual men and women are classified in gender categories that are different from the norm. Despite the fact that the legislation doesn’t explicitly specify this, they and intersex persons are only given the identity “X” on official documents. All of this heightens bias.
The ambiguous “X” symbol, unlike “F” and “M,” is dehumanising because it is not based on a gender name. In contrast to the 2018 law, a few people had their gender changed between the two predominant genders through protracted legal and surgical procedures. Many campaigners disregard such discrepancies because of regional traditions and a fear of losing even recent victories. However, others who oppose the bill now call for even more restrictions, such as physical examinations for changing identities and the elimination of free will. However, this only applies to intersex individuals, who frequently maintain their identity while having ambiguous reproductive organs. For many transgender persons who require the law more as their self-identity changes, frequently as a result of brain patterns, this shift may completely destroy the legislation. However, given their clear birth organs and lack of gender-change surgery, many people might fail organ testing. Some opponents of self-determination may even restrict surgery to intersex instances.
Some claim that the law promotes same-sex relationships. However, if a guy is allowed to officially identify himself as a woman, this might not be the case. By expanding access to sex-change surgery, it can assuage concerns as well. Some people’s criticism is based on the idea that religion forbids states from allowing citizens to self-select their gender. However, they just express their own opinions and do not provide convincing religious proof. We should support and accept transgender persons since they suffer for no fault of their own. One hopes that further rights are gained and that their limited freedom of choice, free from medical examinations, survives the anti-act movement.
