I've just sent this email to Amnesty ([email protected] if anyone wants it). It is long! I really debated over whether to send it due to my fears of consequences, especially as I have worked with them before, but I've made something of that point - the hostile and fearful environment to which they are contributing with their stance against dissenters.
Here it is -
Hello,
I am writing to express my disappointment with Amnesty UK's stance on the GRA reform, its failure to consider the impact on or views of women and its contention that transphobia and media coverage are distorting the debate.
As a long time supporter of Amnesty, and someone who has worked with you on repeated occasions, I am dismayed that your engagement with this complex issue has been so one-sided and shallow. You advocate for the rights of women and girls around the world, highlight discrimination and violence suffered on the basis of their biological sex (periods, reproductive systems, lesser physical strength) and in particular push their right to same sex facilities for example in refuges or refugee camps - only this morning, you published a press release complaining about the dangers and discomfort for women in Greek refugee camps due to "men walking in" while they shower. Yet you uncritically accept the idea that in the UK anyone should be able to identify as a women and access such spaces whether or not they remain male bodied or have any intention to ever live as a woman, simply by filling in a form.
There are already many cases of this having been abused in the UK where organisations or institutions are already accepting self-id and in other countries where self-id has been implemented by law. The consequences of this expansion of the law are endless, from women being unable to request a female bodied person performing gynaecological treatment, even if a male bodied person doing so would cause them extreme distress; abusive ex-partners accessing their victims in refuges or traumatised rape victims feeling unable to go to refuges due to the presence of male bodied and male presenting people; male sexual offenders identifying as female and going on to assault women inmates - or even, in an ongoing case in Ireland, arguing that they shouldn't be liable for the crime committed under their previous identity at all; in sport, girls and women being discouraged from participation due to the physical advantage of male bodied competitors; to the skewing of statistics on which vital women's policies is based. This is not - as is repeatedly stated by those who wish to simply cry "transphobe" at any dissenter - a contention that transpeople are a danger, it is a contention that this is an enormous legal loophole which would be taken advantage of by non-trans people who wish to access women and children in vulnerable places, as predatory people have done in the Catholic church and public institutions throughout history. These are not even statements on trans rights, they are statements on the rights of women, who have a right to advocacy also. I therefore believe your characterisation of any questioning of the policy as transphobic is extremely simplistic and frankly discriminatory.
Just like women in Greek refugee camps, many women in the UK also feel uneasy while in the shower to have male bodied people walking in. Under self-id, they will not be able to challenge any man doing so even if they have strong reason to believe that that person is not truly a trans woman but accessing the space for malicious reasons, because if that person says he is a woman, then he is, and if you question that, you are a bigot. You do not appear to support the same rights for women in the UK as you do in the rest of the world, which is alarming. Nor do you appear to support free speech for women or indeed any group wishing to engage in debate about a fundamental question of gender and biological sex which does not only affect the transgender community but indeed all of us.
I have been engaging in the self-ID issue for some time now, and not on one occasion have I seen any gender critical person direct physical threats or slurs at transpeople or trans activists, yet people simply asking for a debate on the policy - which is currently open to public consultation - have been no-platformed, threatened, branded terfs - often accompanied with references to physical violence - had their personal details published online and calls put in to their employer demanding their firing. Jonathan Best, a gay activist, has been repeatedly threatened with violence since appearing on Radio 4 yesterday simply for asking for all views to be heard. Transgender women expressing dissenting opinions have received similar treatment, and given your support for both trans rights and freedom of expression, one would reasonably expect that support to extend to all transgender people, not only those whom you agree with.
I fully support trans people having exactly the same rights as anyone else of that gender. But there are huge safeguarding issues involved in a badly drawn policy of this kind that must be examined. Rights do not exist in a vacuum, they must also be balanced against the rights of other groups, and at the moment there are several other marginalised groups - including lesbians and gay men - who are sounding the alarm over the impact on their rights. Lesbians have been told, for example, that they are not gay women but in fact transgender straight men - their right to exist apparently being inconsequential. They have been told that they must accept sex with male bodied people who identify as trans women, or they are transphobic. To many lesbians this is tantamount to the idea of corrective rape. Yet you are blindly disregarding these concerns. Women and girls are disproportionately the victims of violence and discrimination more than any other group, yet your assessment focuses only on that suffered by trans people.
I also take strong issue with your contention that gender stereotyping is being encouraged by the gender critical - far from it, it is trans activists who are pushing the concept that if you don't feel like you "conform" to your birth gender along stereotypical lines then you probably don't belong to it. The narrowing of the boxes around what constitutes male and female is in fact extremely concerning, and I say this as a woman who has fought gender stereotypes throughout my life and career.
Amnesty has always stood for the right of people around the world to express their views. I believe in, and have consistently worked to promote, human rights and freedom of speech for all, not the prioritising of one group's human rights and freedoms over another. Amnesty should be encouraging reasoned debate, not taking a position that shuts down the views of one and brands them hateful while completely endorsing a view that is not shared by many, including many transgender people, gay men, lesbians, women and women's rights advocates. I am not asking Amnesty to support one side or the other, I am asking it to stick to the purpose for which it was founded - that of speaking up for the liberties of all, and for the right to dissent.
I cannot see that Amnesty UK has a women's rights officer, which seems to be a major failure, especially as other country offices do. If I am incorrect in that please let me know so I can direct my concerns to them. If I am not, perhaps in the interests of balance, and given that you do have officers for other marginalised groups, may I respectfully suggest you consider appointing someone who is able to represent the rights of women who do require protection on the basis of their biology.
Given the threats and harassment currently directed at those who engage with this issue, I must stress that you do not have permission to share any of my comments or personal details. I have debated long and hard about even sending this email, as like many women I now fear the consequences of speaking out in the hostile environment that has been created by branding dissenting views transphobic, to which Amnesty has contributed. I am afraid given the hardline 'no debate' position declared by your LGBTQ team, I will have to request that if my comments are passed around internally it is done so anonymously.
I never thought I would have to consider such risks to my career, reputation and person when contacting an organisation such as Amnesty that has done so much for freedom of speech and opinion around the world. I am truly shocked that this is the point to which we have arrived in this supposedly tolerant age.
Sincerely... etc