Should we be allowed to change the sex marker on our passport? Between pragmatism and ideology the debate is fraught, but the real impact remains limited – even for trans people.
This piece was originally published in French on 4 February 2025.
Many Western countries allow transgender people to swap the sex marker in their passport from male to female, and conversely from female to male. It is an administrative process, but it is not without controversy. Biological sex is immutable, so the new marker is at best a legal fiction. Appearances, however, can change significantly to the point where that legal fiction best matches other people’s perceptions.
It raises the question, what is the key purpose of a passport? Does it define the person who is named within it, or does it merely describe them to link them to their nationality, and their legal status in other countries?
Donald Trump seems to be in no doubt about this. On his first day in office, he announced that “government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards will accurately reflect the holder’s sex”.
By sex he meant two sexes that “are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality”. Biology, then? Or maybe the sex that was observed and recorded at birth? Of course, in the vast majority of newborns, biological sex and observed sex are exactly the same. But not always, and – when they differ – perception is crucial.
As a science teacher and a transsexual, I have skin in this game. Next time I visit the United States I will probably need to indicate my biological sex – male – on my application for the ESTA that I need to board my plane across the Atlantic. But I am not troubled by the prospect.
It’s remarkable that we are in this position at all. When sex markers were first changed on passports and other government documents, it aligned the legal paperwork with common sense. If a transsexual was routinely perceived by other people to be the opposite sex, then it was reasonable to amend descriptive documents so that they fell in line. Otherwise, it would likely lead to difficulties, and not only at national borders. For example, a British passport will prove that the holder has the right to work in the United Kingdom. There are other ways of proving this to a new employer, but most people use their passport.
However, when transgender ideology infiltrated society about a decade ago, rules changed. Transgender activists demanded that sex markers could be changed on demand. In several countries, the only condition was a declaration of “gender identity” – something known only to the individual. A biological male could keep his beard as well as his genitals but change his passport simply because he said the magic words, “I am a woman”. That is an affront not only to biology but also to common sense. Trump is right to object to that nonsense, but a blanket ban on changing sex markers in passports creates new absurdities for transsexuals who have lost both their beard and their genitals.
“Are you sure this is your passport, ma’am?”
“Yes, I am a male transsexual. I might appear to be a woman – both to you and your body scanner – but my biological sex is male.”
“Can you prove it?”
Facial biometrics that match the photograph will probably suffice, but life becomes more difficult for everybody involved. Some people, of course, might object to the whole concept of gender transition where someone changes their body and their appearance to resemble the other sex. But as long as these so-called “sex changes” are taking place (anywhere in the world) the law either makes concessions or risks looking like an ass.
That, however, is a problem for the law to worry about. As I said, Trump’s decision personally does not trouble me. Most people in Western countries could not care that I am transsexual, and that includes the people who check passports at national borders.
Arriving at Boston airport with my wife and three children, back in 2015, the US immigration officer was initially hesitant. My initial suspicion was transphobia. His frown was clear and his questions were probing. I answered them, presumably to his satisfaction, and he told me to put my fingers on the scanner. Immediately, his expression changed when he looked at the computer screen. “You have visited the United States before, madam! Welcome back.”
“Several times”, I replied. The US Department of Homeland Security presumably had all records going back to my first visit, long before my transition. Our passports were stamped, and we were all waved through. He now knew why two people he perceived to be women had three children in tow. My passport did include a female sex marker, but he called me “madam” as I was approaching his desk. We judge someone’s sex by our evolved instincts, not by a single character in a passport.
Since then, I’ve talked to fewer and fewer immigration officers, and stood in front of more and more machines that measure the distance between my eyes, ears and chin and compare it to the photo on my passport. Sex markers matter less to facial scanning software than they do to human beings.
I did, however, speak to a Canadian officer when driving north across the border from the United States. My wife (who happens to be a Canadian citizen) was back home but two of my children were in the back of the car.
“Why are the children travelling on Canadian passports while you have a British passport?”
“Their mother is Canadian.”
“Well who are you then?”
“I’m their father!”
The silence was deafening, but it lasted all of five seconds until the penny dropped. He stamped my passport, handed all three back, smiled and wished us a safe onward journey.
The fact is nobody really cares that I am transsexual. Crucially, neither do we rely on the sex marker in a passport when deciding whether someone is a man or a woman. We just know. Making that call is an evolved instinct that we all share with everybody else. Indeed, we share that same instinct with other species who can very well distinguish the male and female of their own kind without paperwork or any knowledge of biology.
Trump is wise to reject gender identity – that really is an affront to common sense – but no government can control our basic instincts. But they don’t need to. There are times and places where biological sex does matter – sport for example – but in most everyday contexts, governments need to trust their citizens to get on with it. As Rishi Sunak – a former British prime minister once said, “a man is a man and a woman is a woman; that’s just common sense”.
As sex markers in transgender passports go, the debate will no doubt continue. But one thing is certain – the outcome will be far less important than both sides of the debate might anticipate. How often does anyone produce their passport to prove their sex? As a transsexual, my experience is never. A male marker in my passport would likely cause confusion at national borders, but in the West, it would probably not hold me up for long.
“Is this your passport?”
“Yes, I’m transsexual”.
“Have a good day, madam!”
By Debbie Hayton
Debbie Hayton is a teacher and journalist.
Her book, Transsexual Apostate – My Journey Back to Reality is published by Forum
* This article was first published in French by Le Point on 4 February 2025: Sexe biologique ou identité ? Le dilemme du passeport.
Debbie Hayton 
9 replies on “Biological sex or gender identity? The dilemma of the passport”
I’m struggling to make sense of all that, Debbie. You seem to be saying – or a reasonable corollary of what you’ve written is – that it’s fine for someone to have a “legal fiction” on their passport if they “pass” sufficiently. That’s all I can take from the idea that you, as a “transsexual” feel vindicated in having “F” on yours, but “transgender activists demanded that sex markers could be changed on demand. In several countries, the only condition was a declaration of ‘gender identity’ – something known only to the individual.”
You continue, “a blanket ban on changing sex markers in passports creates new absurdities for transsexuals who have lost both their beard and their genitals,” but there are absurdities in your concessionary position, too. Who gets to decide whether someone looks sufficiently like the typical male or female (whatever those are!) to be granted the special pleading you allow yourself? What about the opposite situation (which we meet fairly often) in which a woman looks exceptionally masculine or vice versa (yet have made no attempt to meet expectations of the opposite sex or claim to be such)? Can they apply to have their sex marker changed if they feel like it?
You seem to provide the following as encapsulating the “absurdity” of a “blanket ban”:
But part of your argument is that documents such as passports are merely descriptive. If so, there is no need to prove your sex even if it seems at odds with your visual appearance. And this is no more awkward or problematic than explaining to someone that you are the father of children, not their mother, despite your passport appearing to confirm your female status. You seem to be cherry-picking what you consider a problematic absurdity and what you shrug off as just one of those amusing, inconsequential moments when someone recognises that you’re a man.
This all seems to hinge on an odd distinction you keep making, apparently, between how you describe yourself, a “transsexual”, and those in the thrall of “transgender ideology,” the “transgender activists,” and, I assume, trans-identified people. What is the defining difference, please? Since there is a complete and virtually continuous spectrum of measures a person might take to approximate the appearance we associate with the opposite sex, the difference would have to be some arbitrary judgement about where to draw the line on how well they pass (a subjective, but external judgement made by others). If it’s not that, does it hinge on the nature of the claim of a “trans” identity – i.e. as an accepted non-fiction (in your case) or as a counterfactual claim by the deluded? Is what makes you a “transsexual” that you appear to pass reasonably well as a woman, or that, if asked, you know and state your biological reality? Or something else?
My confusion (or yours) is writ large in this paragraph:
We just know? We just know what? If you mean we have an evolved instinct to detect actual biological sex, that is clearly at odds with your apparent claim that most people take you to be a woman unless otherwise informed. (It’s also clearly at odds with the many anecdotes of those taking home a partner for sex only to find they have different genitals from those expected.) If you mean we have an evolved instinct to make a judgement based on certain appearances, it must involve the fact that it can be wrong, that appearances can deceive, which seems to get us nowhere.
I’m not sure whether sex markers on passports are of much importance at all, to be honest, but the subject has drawn out these questions that have been bubbling up for me for some time. I hope you don’t mind me asking them. However, it seems that there are two reasonable arguments to be made: we scrap them altogether if they don’t really do anything; or we make it a free choice whatever anyone wants to put on theirs. Perhaps a third is also reasonable – we allow people to put their gender identity on their passport, as if it’s their sex, but add a “C” or “T” so we know how to read it in relation to their biological sex. Trying to devise a compromise that gives the right to some (on the dubious basis of whether they “pass”) is more absurd than any of the above, to my mind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was exploring the issues. It’s an interesting case to discuss. The key question, I think, is What is the purpose of the passport?
1. To prove the nationality and visa status of the person carrying it, or
2. To verify the bearer’s physical attributes (in this case sex).
The sex marker takes on a different purpose in each case.
As an analogy, UK passports used to list hair colour. If hair colour was still on there, should mine say brown or grey?
Also interestingly, my first UK passport, issued in 1985, didn’t give my sex. Sex was only added to UK passports when the ICAO standard format was adopted in 1988.
For some people, the passport struc
LikeLike
Your reply seems to have got truncated.
I’m fine with the idea that you were exploring the issues around the sex marker on passports, but it elicited a few questions on wider issues. One was your self-identifying as a “transsexual,” as opposed to someone who identifies as “trans” (in the sense of transgender). I was curious what you see as the defining difference.
I also asked about what you mean by our evolved instinct that just knows. We obviously don’t know infallibly what sex someone is, and sometimes we can’t even decide. So you must presumably mean only that we make a judgement based on appearance, including their voice, behaviour, and the behaviour of others, such as their use of pronouns or titles.
These – however we consider them – must be fairly fundamental to the question of legal markers like those on passports, so would be useful to clarify as part of your exploration. They suggest to me that you would argue for appearance-based sex markers, or perhaps none. Or perhaps there is some medico-legal status that you acquired through your transition, which validates your “F” but which you would deny a bearded bloke in a dress who says he’s a woman.
I, too, am just exploring, and they seem more and more problematic the more I look, so it might be best to dump them altogether. On the other hand, there may be valid reasons for requiring a biological sex marker, for example, in case of a medical emergency, where one’s sex might be important to any first-aid treatment (I don’t know; I’m just thinking that sort of thing could be important).
I think there are problems with gender-based (including “transsexual”) markers, because this could only refer either to “gender identity” (which, being a subjective belief, seems entirely pointless – like “favourite icecream”) or as a more objective judgement about how we appear. The latter is a recipe for endless battles, because how we appear is a sensitive issue to most of us and we would object to our “gender-aspect” being decided by a panel of adjudicators (or AI).
But that best fits what you appear to be arguing – including the analogy of hair colour. If a passport is merely a descriptive document to help check our legal status at borders, then, like the colour marker or reg plate on a document for vehicle ownership, it should be updated to reflect changes, but what sex someone appears to be is a risky characteristic to put in print.
Pauline has made a good point, that passports are also used for proof of identity in other circumstances, and perhaps this should tip the balance in favour of Trump’s “blanket ban.” Remember, for example, the defence the sporting body came up with for allowing a biological male to fight in a women’s boxing match – they checked his passport, where it said he was female. Or consider other situations where sex matters – prisons, women’s refuge centres, etc. If care is taken about the passport reflecting reality, nobody has to strip off or do a DNA test at the door.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is an interesting question given that forged and stolen passports exist despite the authorities best efforts. I suppose it’s purpose is to connect you to other records which are held by different authorities but at the point of entry into another country what exactly is it telling the customs officer who checks it?
I had my handbag containing my passport stolen in Barcelona hours before I was due to fly back. I was given a form to leave the country but on arrival in the UK I was told to sit to one side while they checked me out. I had no ID with me at all as everything had been in my bag. I saw them comparing the screen image with me sitting there and this appeared to satisfy them but given a passport photo lasts for 10 years my appearance could have changed dramatically in that time so it seems an odd way to prove identity. Something like fingerprints would make more sense but people are outraged at that idea but ok with their facial images being held by the authorities?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suspect that we are going to end up with our biometrics on a database held by our passport issuing authorities that we then agree to share with other countries when we want to visit. It does seem a bit of an anachronism to rely on printed pieces of paper.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If a passport was purely a document allowing travel sex markers probably wouldn’t matter but it is also used as an identity document for many other things. Today in the news we hear about potential problems regarding data which is apparently now collected about gender identity rather than sex. One problem appears to be trans people not being called for certain screenings because of their gender identity. Well my view is that this is the responsibility of the individual. If you know you have a prostate or a cervix make sure the NHS is aware of this and yes the only way to do that may be to register your biological reality but if getting screened is important to you that’s what you must do. We cannot turn our institutions upside down for a tiny minority who refuse to make compromises.
By the way Debbie I have read with interest your wife’s account of how she felt during your transitioning but I would be very interested to know how your children have coped. I only ask as you brought up the issue of having to state you were their father. Do they not find this strange?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Interestingly, until 1988, UK passports didn’t include sex – it was only added when we adopted the ICAO standadard format. My thoughts about gender identity are well documented. I think it’s nonsense, and it certainly has no place on passports.
You asked about my children. They are now all in their 20s and they are doing fine. I’m very proud of them. Situations like the one you discussed would be met with amusement rather than embarrassment. I’m still their father and my most pressing parental duty is to remind them that next Sunday is Mothers’ Day.
LikeLike
Such a complicated discussion for something that could so easily be solved. Avoid the whole appearance/expectation conundrum by having passports identify the immutable fact of sex, while also including biometrics which would be more precise identifiers than a general description or photo. The current trans movement does not advocate this, in fact many activists attack one as “transphobic” for merely suggesting such ideas. They demand that we the falsification of sex be allowed not just on passports, but everywhere, even on birth certificates.
Those dominating the current “trans” movement do not seem to be interested in practical solutions. Rather, the aim is to indulge the fantasy that someone can “change sex” or are “really” the opposite sex– and force everyone else to go along with the fiction.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Thank you for your comments, and sorry for the delay in ‘approving’ them. There is just me here and I’ve been very busy at work.
LikeLike