The New England Journal of Medicine, the oldest continuously published peer-reviewed medical journal and one of the most prestigious, recently published an article describing sex designations on birth certificates as "harmful for intersex and transgender people."
In an article, titled "Failed Assignments – Rethinking Sex Designations on Birth Certificates," the authors argue that sex designation on birth certificates provide "no clinical utility" and propose moving such designation below the line of demarcation.
According to the authors, the birth certificate is an "evolving document" that has historically been revised to reflect "social change, public interest, and privacy requirements." The authors contend that biological sex should go the way of other retired characteristics, such as race and parents' marital status.
"Assigning sex at birth also doesn’t capture the diversity of people’s experiences," the authors write. "About 6 in 1000 people identify as transgender, meaning that their gender identity doesn’t match the sex they were assigned at birth."
The authors go on to say that since the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional, "only a few legal contexts relying on sex designations remain."
But not everyone is buying their arguments.
Um... The entirety of a birth certificate (not just a sex designation) offers no clinical utility. None. So picking this fight isn't about health. https://t.co/VB9W3fk6l2— David Martosko (@dmartosko) December 18, 2020
Yes! It is scientifically silly to classify people based on their biological sex for a sexually reproducing and sexually dimorphic species. Do you remember when you scoffed and mocked my testimony, dear @SenateCA members? I warned about this exact possibility. https://t.co/zIPfhONZf5— Gad Saad (@GadSaad) December 18, 2020
The suicide of science continues... https://t.co/1jKNi6B5aQ— Reverend Doctor Jill Biden Derek Hunter (@derekahunter) December 18, 2020
A person in America is 5 - 10 times more likely to be color blind than ever feel the need to change their sex marker on their birth certificate.— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) December 18, 2020
Are traffic lights harmful to the color blind community? Should we replace them all with something else?
Trans: 1% of the population. https://t.co/dcrQh3QvY7
These are the ppl who control the science on COVID https://t.co/E1xAhQ6UVu— Will Ricciardella (@WillRicci) December 17, 2020
When nutty far-Left, anti-science activism infects medicine... https://t.co/wp2VK8lL1E— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) December 17, 2020
Soon there won't be a single institution left to take seriously. https://t.co/yeWRq3XhvI— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) December 17, 2020
The experts are discrediting themselves now. https://t.co/P2RnZuPnzA— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) December 18, 2020
I'm old enough to remember when the New England Journal of Medicine was one of the most respected medical journals & not a place to push ideologies contrary to biology. https://t.co/gLS8mUISHA— Fr Matthew Schneider LC?????? (@FrMatthewLC) December 18, 2020
A similar breakdown in the "science" occurred when public health officials greenlit Black Lives Matter protests over the summer while scolding Americans to avoid large gatherings and practice social distancing.