The New Zealand birth certificate will soon be just a vanity document.

Sex self-ID legislation is looming to come into effect in New Zealand this year. In mid-January I tweeted –

“On June 15 this year it will be legal in NZ to buy a birth certificate online, with any sex on it desired, for the princely sum of $10. This purchased-online certificate (not a copy of one’s original birth certificate) will be considered a valid document”.

In the same thread, replying to a question about the possibility of fraud, I wrote –

“If you get a copy of your original birth certificate before getting a changed one, you could have two birth certificates on hand, each with a different sex on it”.

My tweets were picked up by writer, Graham Adams, and mentioned in his opinion piece ‘Alice in Aotearoa-land’¹ about the trend of magical thinking by our leaders in recent times. For those outside of New Zealand, the picture below which accompanied this piece has Labour party Minister Nanaia Mahuta’s head superimposed on Alice from the fictional story ‘Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland’, and National party ex-Prime Minister John Key’s head superimposed on the Mad Hatter from the same story. Perhaps the heads should have been superimposed the other way round?

These two aren’t the only magical thinkers, though, as every single one of our Members of Parliament voted for sex self-ID, thinking that nothing could go wrong with a person being allowed to change the recorded sex on their birth certificate. Graham Adams hits the nail on the head when he writes in his piece: “In New Zealand, biological markers such as sex have become a moveable feast about which it is possible to assert anything you like and make it true.”

Prior to my tweet, the Scottish wāhine toa² Elaine Miller’s marvellous merkin made headlines after the sex self-ID bill was passed by Scotland’s Parliament in December. I and many others cheered her long and loud from here in New Zealand³.  Then, when the UK Government decided to block that bill, one of our own mainstream media did an extraordinary thing and actually reported on it, and a reasonably rational piece at that⁴. Although our MSM did report on the passing of NZ’s own sex self-ID bill in December 2021, they barely report on anything else ‘trans’ that’s not a puff or pity piece.

So, with sex self-ID making the news again, Speak Up for Women NZ decided it was time to begin the process of clearing up a few misunderstandings about our sex self-ID bill, due to be passed into law on 15 June 2023. A first foray into this has been written by Suzanne Levy from SUFW⁵. In it she shows that the Human Rights Act of 1993 still allows for single-sex spaces, even though our Human Rights Commission appears to be trying to obfuscate this by conflating sex and gender, to the confusion of service providers.

In addition to that single-sex entitlement, clause 79(2)b was added to our Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Act 2021, thanks to pressure from groups and individuals in opposition to sex self-ID. This clause states that “any other relevant information” can be taken into account to ascertain a person’s sex. In other words, as opposed to checking genitals like the woke brigade would have us believe is the only way, we can believe our eyes and our other senses. After all, they’re there for a reason – i.e. to help us navigate the world, not just for decoration or as a fashion accessory. These work well for us in the vast majority of cases, and there’s nothing in the clause to say we must scrap these normal mechanisms for ascertaining a person’s sex if we are momentarily incorrect on the rare occasion.

I have been engaged with the Christchurch City Council over allowing “people who identify as being a woman” i.e. men - into the women’s session at Te Pou Toetoe:Linwood Pool. It was astonishing to see how much effort the Council put in to make this a safe and enjoyable session for women, and then they go and include men! The template response from them to complaints about this stated that by law they could not discriminate. I believe it would be correct to surmise that this statement was made upon advice from their legal team. Whether their lawyers are confused by the law, or have intentionally construed it to fit the narrative the Christchurch City Council wishes to disseminate, I don’t know. However, they are wrong and have been advised so, but remain wedded to their stance. The matter remains live.

All the signs point to it still being legal to provide single-sex services in New Zealand, even after sex self-ID becomes law on 15 June this year. Any service provider who doesn’t is likely to be doing that out of choice, confusion, or fear, and not because they’re legally compelled to allow men who say they’re women into women’s spaces. Clause 79(2)b is yet to be tested in court - hopefully that might not be too far away.

I encourage New Zealanders, and anyone else who may be interested, to read Suzanne Levy’s article ‘Know Your Rights – Sex Self-ID in New Zealand’ as the first step in understanding that we do not have to be held hostage to sex self-ID here in New Zealand.

¹Alice in Aotearoa-land | The Platform

² Wāhine toa - Māori term for warrior woman

³Gussie Grips rips Scottish Parliament a new a-hole. (substack.com)

⁴UK government to block Scottish gender bill | RNZ News

⁵Know Your Rights - Sex Self-ID in New Zealand (speakupforwomen.nz)