[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Skybird

With a full beard in a women's prison?

https://www-faz-net.translate.goog/a..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Germany, land of the thinkers and poets.

https://www.achgut.com/artikel/pech_..._ist_eine_frau


Tough luck - Marla-Svenja is a woman

Marla-Svenja Liebich's outing as a woman is causing those who have longed so much for the Self-Determination Act to hyperventilate. Why? Should a person convicted of incitement to hatred not be allowed to be a woman?

With a single official application for a few euros in fees, a woman named Marla-Svenja is currently demystifying the so-called Self-Determination Act. This law declares the assignment of every person to a biological sex obsolete. Since fall 2024, only the self-assessment of one's own gender, to be submitted to the responsible registry office, is decisive.

Now the apologists of the law are howling because they don't like Marla-Svenja's courageous step towards her true self. What a joke. People suddenly don't believe that Marla-Svenja is a woman. Could it be because of Marla-Svenja's facial hair? Is it because her clothes are perceived as masculine? Or the fact that she has legal problems because of her right-wing views?

Now the apologists for the law are howling because they don't like Marla-Svenja's courageous step towards her true self. What a joke. People suddenly don't believe that Marla-Svenja is a woman. Could it be because of Marla-Svenja's facial hair? Is it because her clothes are perceived as masculine? Or the fact that she has legal problems because of her right-wing views?

However, the relevant circles should know that: The question of what someone looks like is simply no longer relevant to social gender. Neither is the person's capacity for understanding. Incidentally, this is demonstrated by the fact that parents can now determine the gender of their underage children themselves. Even for a male infant who, contrary to expectations, reaches for the pink instead of the blue rattle in his crib. The objections to the law were well known, yet it was pushed through with rare arrogance. “Trans women are women,” said Family Minister Lisa Paus, brushing off detailed questions. The Federal Minister of Justice, Marco Buschmann, who is also responsible, was also unable to identify any problems.

Now many people are sitting there, “not believing” Marla-Svenja's gender change and whispering that this is abuse. These are the same people who have taken the desire for freedom to the extreme. The law doesn't provide for an examination of whether I actually want to change my gender. It was the declared intention of those responsible that “degrading” tests, as provided for in previous laws, should be abolished. Apparently, even the harmless check question as to whether the whole thing might not just be an attempt at trolling was seen as degrading. Result: Even the nastiest trolls can now be women. If there are female trolls, which I don't want to google now, the reverse is of course also true.
Consequently, there is no provision in the Self-Determination Act that Marla-Svenja has to change anything about her appearance, speak in a squeaky voice or even take hormones. The so-called self-assessment is legally unassailable; there is no abuse clause. And anyone who, like so many others, now violates this legal requirement by using cynical or even harsh words about Marla-Svenja in the face of the much-desired law is also violating the personal rights and dignity of this courageous woman - in a blatant, downright inhumane way.

Marla-Svenja has already announced that she will sue anyone who does not respect her wish to live as a woman for at least a year until the end of the first transition period. She can sue anyone who reveals, for example by mentioning her former name, that she once went through life as a “man”. The fine for a violation of the so-called prohibition of disclosure is not insignificant. Deadnaming can cost up to ten thousand euros, which is more than the fine for insulting Agnes Strack-Zimmermann.

Marla-Svenja also has claims under civil law. Her gender entry now defines her gender, completely detached from biological truths. This goes hand in hand with a legal claim to respect. So anyone who merely mentions that Marla-Svenja was not always a woman risks being sued for injunctive relief and damages. In view of the intensity with which the poor woman is currently being picked on, her media lawyer will be very busy in the coming months.

Interestingly, the law does not make any special provision for the traditional press. The latter must therefore also respect Marla-Svenja's gender - with effect in the past. But well, a small restriction here. This is the first high-profile case. The courts will probably see an overriding interest in reporting here, provided that the malice towards Marla-Svenja's decision, which can certainly be found in previous reports, does not outweigh this. Freedom of the press may therefore take precedence by a hair's breadth, as it is not possible to report on a case without describing it. But this will no longer apply to future deadnaming.

Conclusion with best regards to Lisa Paus, Marco Buschmann and the community: Marla-Svenja is a woman. You asked for it, now live with it.

The author Udo Vetter is a specialist lawyer for criminal law and runs his own law firm.