I meant the wording for passport applications, which I linked in post #2, as an answer to the OP.
2 Likes
I would nitpick this and say assigned sex at birth (my understanding is that a trans woman’s gender was always female whereas her assigned sex at birth was male).
But other than that nitpick, yes, what you said.
1 Like
I think “gender identity” is the term you’re looking for.
1 Like
I’ll just PM you next time. 
1 Like
New here?
1 Like
Not P&C, but there has been some conversation on what to gather in the pension and employee benefits world and how that information should impact assumptions. AFAIK, not much has been published and certainly no “meaningful” conclusions have been developed that have wide acceptance.
1 Like
Why not record both the birth certificate sex and the current gender identity and use both? Would you then have six classifications? (MM, FF, MF, FM, MX, FX) Some customers might be bothered by the idea, and companies might be concerned about the Anheuser Busch effect.
IATP
A quick google found this
Transgender individuals 3x-5x more likely to die of suicide/homicide. If you’re an auto insurer, do you think their risk is higher? There are other studies too and I’m not going to pretend that I’m going to spend hours and hours comprehending it all.
Because an actual trans person would eventually get the sex on their birth certificate changed whereas an anti-wokester imposter or a cis-male who just wants cheaper car insurance probably wouldn’t bother.
1 Like
Oh. In my mind I imagined that the historical recorded sex would stay the same but that there would be updated information, as opposed to wiping out the historical record completely, but what do I know.
Yeah when I said sex on the birth certificate I meant whatever the birth certificate currently says.
And TBH if there are states that don’t allow a trans person to change it (not my area of expertise) then it wouldn’t be a good metric to use.
Sorry my post wasn’t clearer.
This is pension focused, but may be relevant
Since no preview
Key Points
• The prevalence of adults identifying as transgender and nonbinary is much higher in the under 30 age range compared to older populations, suggesting that the prevalence of reporting of sex/gender expansive data may become greater over time.
• Actuaries may want to engage in conversations with plan administrators to ensure understanding of the sex/gender expansive data provided and to evaluate process changes to accurately reflect the plan’s population in the valuation.
• Actuaries can contribute to research and development of best practices and methods, new mortality differentiators, and other potential future solutions to the collection and use of sex/ gender expansive data.
2 Likes
Huh. Well now I’m wondering if there are more mtf or ftm folks, or maybe they’re equal.
In Canada at least only a few provinces prohibit it for PPA. Otherwise it is allowed. It typically isn’t used for many P&C lines though likely because of fear of public/customer perception or in some cases it simply isn’t predictive
For PPA where it is allowed, one can chose “X” rather than Male/Female which will work as long as it is consistent with government ID. There is no hard/fast rule for how that impacts rates… some companies will rate it the same as “F” and some will rate it between “M” and “F”.
Incidentally the use of gender on PPA was challenged in court in Canada and the supreme court said that it wasn’t “discrimination” as long as there was sufficient facts to back it up (I am not a lawyer, just quoting what I have been told over the years).
Apparently MTF is twice as common as FTM.
Interesting. I would have assumed the exact opposite due to the relative ease of a woman passing as a man. I just saw a play with a FTM trans person and thought they were a cis guy until told.
Perhaps there is some factor that being a “tomboy” is okay, but not an effeminate man. Perhaps there are some born-female sexed people who feel more like a man, yet somewhat genderfluid, and are comfortable just being an internally genderfluid tomboy who doesn’t have to field questions on gender, without needing a full transition to being a Man.
That kind of ratio resonates with me, completely because of your reasoning.
I also would have thought the opposite because it’s just easier to be a man. Would have thought that people questioning the value of them transitioning would be more likely to transition to male than male to female.
Though I suppose any trans person has a high probability of being a victim - probably more than an average woman (happy to be shown different) - so of course the FTM path is not as simple as “I get all the benefits of patriarchy now”.
I think there’s a lot of this.
Leaving aside the question of who’d be more likely to be victimized. I’m guessing the answer to that is related to how similar the individual’s appearance is to that of a cis man.
Addressing your first point though: It’s not as simple as a woman thinking “It’s easier to be a man” leads immediately to “Then I’ll just change my body, my face, my hormones, my voice, my socialized responses to things (woman and men are socialized differently, you’d be changing the habits of a lifetime) so I can get some of those benefits, even though everyone who knows me knows I used to be a woman, so I’d have to change careers and completely start over to be convincing”. Some things are just too drastic to be done, even assuming all of the above was completely successful, which wouldn’t always happen.
If I could flip a switch at work to be treated as a man, would I? Yes. If it involved severe life changes? The cost is just too high and the benefits are anyway uncertain.
My point being, the motivation has to be something else.
Yes, of course no cis woman is going to just become a man because patriarchy.
I’m also cis and hetero and can’t fully imagine myself in the shoes of a trans/nonbinary person.
However, I was speaking toward my preconception that people who may feel more as a trans man or woman, but also feel somewhat nonbinary, being more convinced to openly transition to male rather than just be an androgynous person than would a similar person transitioning to female.
Not that I think somebody would just “become trans” because it’s easier to be a man.
The numbers don’t back up my presupposition, regardless.