Firefighter changes gender to qualify for women's quota in Vizcaya

Firefighter changes gender to enter Vizcaya's women's quota

In the latest recruitment drive for Vizcaya Firefighters, a 46-year-old applicant, married and with children, officially changed his gender designation in the Civil Registry. His goal: to compete in the female category, which has only four reserved spots.
According to El Correo, he is now ranked among the top contenders in the female ranking list, making his acceptance into the corps highly probable.

The case has reignited the debate regarding the effects of gender identity law, often referred to as trans law. This regulation, championed by Irene Montero, allows any person to change their registered sens through a simple declaration, without needing medical reports or tests. Given this framework, the possibility of alleging legal fraud is nearly non-existent: the law itself does not define what it means to be a woman, so any challenge regarding the sincerity of the declaration lacks legal basis.

There are precedents supporting the 'loophole' theory

In 2024, two firefighters from the Generalitat—one in Badalona and another in Vic—did the same thing just before the women's quota came into effect. The Directorate General for Prevention and Extinction peine an investigation into alleged fraudulent conduct, but it was closed without sanction due to lack of evidence. In Madrid, an applicant who also declared herself female faced exclusion in October 2024 (first due to testosterone levels, then reinstated in December) and was finally expelled in March 2025. The testosterone route is another path the administration can utilize.

Legal loophole or legal fraud?

Analysis of the case is divided. On one side are those who see this situation as proof that gender quotas create perverse incentives: a man, who had not met the male standards, can now access a spot with milder requirements. On the other side are those who maintain that law is law, and anyone can declare the sens they feel without challenge.
Some go further: they argue that the real issue is that the physical requirements for women are more permissive, not the gender change itself.

The Supreme Court ruled in July 2025 on a similar case: a registry change made after the facts occurred has no retroactive effect. However, this does not affect those who change before the call for applicants.
The resolution emphasizes that Article 14.2 of the European directive on equal treatment allows for sens-based differences when they constitute an essential professional requirement. Nevertheless, the path falls short if the administration itself does not apply this article.

Meanwhile, the Vizcaya case remains open. What is surprising is that, given the ease afforded by the law, only one applicant has taken advantage of it. Or perhaps not: it is difficult to pass as someone you are not, even if the paperwork says so.