I am not trans and not impacted by this in any way. Nonetheless, this worries me as trans people are just a small, convenient group to use to normalize state repression.

"First they came for the trans people and I didn't speak out, because I wasn't trans"

But as a deeper question: why is gender even listed on a passport in the first place? Why does it matter for the thing a passport does, letting you pass through a port?

Picture: yes, is the person standing in front of me authorised to travel in general? Name: yes, is the person standing in front of me connected to this specific non-transferable ticket with a name on it?

Gender: who cares, it's not like planes and trains have separate male and female seating and toilets.

If you're thinking ambiguous genitalia, the number is much lower. But other intersex characteristics are higher percentage.

It's not. It's a war against people who don't confirm to traditional gender roles, regardless of whether they are trans, gay, or just a square peg that doesn't fit in the round hole.

Think for a moment about what happens when a visibly trans person uses a washroom that matches their assigned-at-birth gender.

The exact same people who freak out over trans people using a bathroom that matches their transitioned-to gender, and who got those laws passed, lose their shit when they see a female-to-male trans person with a 5-o'clock shadow walking into the ladies' washroom.

Frankly, there isn't really a good reason that we should have a gender marker on our passports. The picture should be enough for any agent trying to visually identify us, and until and unless we can get to a world where every country is fully accepting of trans (and intersex) people, having a gender marker there forces them to make a choice between using a marker that does not match their gender identity (and thus may very well give them dysphoria), or using a marker that makes them a target for transphobic officials. (This is all true of drivers' licenses, too.)

Which, as others have pointed out, makes it a field of dubious utility on a document intended for unique identification.

This here has more to do with Trump pushing down a certain agenda. They also only focus on what they conveniently look as a "problem" while ignoring every other situation, such as genetic conditions.

Correct.

> sex field which means the biological sex

The idea that there's a binary "biological sex" is also wrong. There are many choices for what you can mean by that and for every one there will be outliers that classify as both/neither. (the points bounce up and down, but - feel free to post the specific criteria that you think avoid this issue instead)