INTRODUCTION

In this chapter I have been generously given the freedom to take a somewhat different approach to providing the Australian response to the questionnaire issued by Dr Jens M. Scherpe for this book (the ‘Questionnaire’).

In the course of my work as a lawyer, social advocate and writer I have been privileged to be introduced to the best of Australian and international expertise concerning the nature and medical treatment of human beings who experience Difference or diversity in sexual formation. In the course of seeking legal and social reform, I have been obliged to confront the challenges of effectively thinking about and communicating, to courts, government and community, an appreciation of the experience of Difference or diversity in gender expression.

While in sections II, III and IV of this chapter I have sought to provide the information requested in the Questionnaire, I have also sought to deconstruct and critique Australian government policy documents, legislation and case law based upon the factors I identify in section I as being the causes for what I argue is the current chaos of perception and discourse in relation to people who experience Difference or diversity in either the sexual differentiation and development of their bodies or the way they need to express gender in the world. This description includes the groups of people labelled ‘Transsexual’, ‘Transgender’ and ‘Intersex’. In section V, I include my own model legislation for the reassignment of Legal Sex for your discussion and critique.

I acknowledge the considerable assistance offered to me by the wide range of ideas and perspectives shared at the conference supporting this ambitious project held at the University of Hong Kong on 6 and 7 September 2013. I am also indebted to Craig Andrews and my former client ‘Kevin’ for their mature and subtle insight into the distinct predicament of Affirmed Males, to the Honourable Richard Chisholm for his review of an early draft of this chapter and to the continuing benefit of the wisdom and insight of my legal colleague, mentor and friend, Teresa Anderson.

As soon as the Questionnaire invites us to think about ‘Transsexual’, ‘Transgender’, ‘Legal Sex’ and ‘Legal Gender’, we are obliged to start thinking about meaning and language.