Norrie and diversity

(This is already moving away from being a specifically student politics blog. We'll see where it ends up)

So I imagine a lot of people have heard the news about Norrie, who last week became the first person in Australia (and going from reports abroad, the world) to be legally declared to be neither a man nor a woman, with 'Sex: Not Specified' listed on hir Recognised Details Certificate (equivalent to a Birth Certificate for naturalised Australian citizens).

This news quickly went around the news, being reported on the BBC, the British gutter tabloids, in New York, and countless other places. Norrie even got a wikipedia page on hir (under hir birth name, 'Norrie May-Welby'). For who-knows-how-many, the news was a great relief - finally, there was a path to legal recognition for sex and gender diverse people (including myself). It has caused conversations around the globe as to whether this is a good thing, with most reports being extremely positive.

But wait, there's more. And it's not so good.

Last Tuesday afternoon, Norrie was phoned by the Attorney-General's Department (I believe NSW, not federal) that they had received legal advice that what had happened was in error. So it was canceled. This despite Norrie having been told in writing that the process had been finalised, signed by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages.

Then, to add further confusion to the mix, Norrie received hir new Name Certificate (zie had also changed hir name to Norrie, from Norrie May-Welby. On this certificate, the sex was listed as 'Not Stated'. Why this? What's the difference between 'Not Specified' and 'Not Stated'? Why is one allowable and the other not?

In any case, how can the Attorney-General cancel something after it has been signed off? The person on the phone cited 'legal advice' - but that doesn't hold water. There has been no court ruling. It isn't within the AG's remit to alter the Register without due process.

So a hastily organised protest was set up, on the street outside the Human Rights Commission. Many of the usual suspects turned up, Rachel Evans from Socialist Alliance and CAAH, the current head of the Scarlet Alliance (who I met and was introduced to, but can't for the life of me remember her name), Lee Rhiannon from the Greens, several friends of Norrie's, and also a couple of people who heard about it via Facebook and quick emailing.
There were a few people from the press, which is always good. I saw 2UE, ABC, 7 and SSO logos, there may have been one or two others.

I went along, because I thought it important. The initial ruling that Norrie could be considered 'Sex: Not Specified' was for me a truly wonderful thing. It opened the door to true legal recognition for myself and so many others. I posted on here before some of my thoughts regarding filling out forms etc - this looked like a path out of that disaster.

To try and close this door now it has been opened is, I truly believe, beyond the powers of this ignorant AG's department. The genie is out of the bottle, the cat is out of the bag, and so on and so forth. You've all heard the phrases used before. But it'll still be a difficult fight. Norrie put in an official complaint about all of this to the Human Rights Commission today, and getting them on board will help a lot. But it'll still likely take a while.