40 A F T E R I D E N T I T Y
The Kansas and Texas decisions on marriage followed similar rulings in New York and Ohio, both of which at least sometimes tie sex to chromosomes at birth. New Jersey, on the other hand, looks to what it terms psychological sex.61 In the case of M. T. v. J. T, the New Jersey court ruled that ‘‘For marital purposes, if the anatomical or genital features of a genuine transsexual are made to conform to the person’s gender, psyche or psychological sex, then identity by sex must be governed by the congruence of these standards.’’62 As the Kansas Supreme Court itself conceded, England and Australia have also decided transsexual marriage cases in terms of a harmonization of body sex and psychological gender. Courts are not only divided on what counts as male and female for the purposes of marriage. They are also divided on the issue with regard to other questions. For instance, Ohio and Oregon deny transsexuals a right to change their sex designation on their birth certificates while for the past twenty-five years New York City has allowed them to do so if they have had sex-reassignment surgery.63 Likewise, the United States allows transsexuals to change their sex designations on their passports on the condition that they provide proof that they have undergone or are about to undergo sexreassignment surgery.64 In 1977, the United States Tennis ´ Richards, a male-toAssociation (USTA) sought to prevent Renee female transsexual, from competing in the United States Open Tennis Tournament as a woman. Using the Barr chromosome test, the USTA claimed that Richards remained a man and therefore could not compete in the women’s division. Richards sued and the New
61 62 63
64
See Greenberg, ‘‘Defining Male and Female,’’ pp. 301–302. M. T. v. J. T. 140 NJ Super 77 (1976). In December 2006, the New York City Board of Health unanimously rejected a recommendation to allow transsexuals to change their sex designation on their birth certificates with or without sex-reassignment surgery. (See Damien Cave, ‘‘New York Plans to Make Gender Personal Choice,’’ New York Times, November 7, 2006, pp. A1, A21.) See Greenberg, ‘‘Defining Male and Female,’’ p. 315.