Hello, just signed up on here but been following these issues for a year, off and on, on Twitter and on here. With the consultation deadline tonight (which I know has now been extended) I felt compelled to put something on my FB a couple of days ago too in the hope that it may open one or 2 people's eyes and persuade them to complete the consultation. It was a daunting thing to do, but it seems to have persuaded a few people to do the consultation and (as far as I'm aware - I don't seem to have lost any FB friends or had any negative comments) has been pretty well received. Here's a copy and paste, feel free to comment/feedback (and to use if you think it could be useful):
Right, I’ve just watched “Feminists: What Were They Thinking?” on Netflix and feel like I need to SPEAK OUT. These amazing women fought so hard back in the 70s, when “Women’s Lib” was frowned upon and ridiculed, and their hard fought battles resulted in many of the legal rights and protections women in England & Wales have today. Yet, almost 50 years on, women are now at risk of a massive dilution of those hard won rights and protections. This may not be immediately apparent to everyone, because (a) it’s not being pitched as a women’s rights issue and (b) women who are trying to speak out about this are being silenced.
So – here goes. There’s a consultation going through Parliament at the moment – public responses close at 11pm on 19 October 2018, tomorrow! Time is short!! The consultation concerns reform of the Gender Recognition Act 2004. Not immediately apparent that this will impact women’s rights, right? The proposed legislative reforms are around people’s right to change “gender”, moving from the current process that requires a diagnosis of gender dysphoria + 2 years commitment living in the desired “gender” to self-ID. Self-ID means that anyone at any time will be able to change their “gender” if they feel like it by simply filling in a form, without any gatekeeping or legal & medical checks and balances.
This all sounds on the face of it incredibly inclusive and compassionate. Of course, trans-identifying people should have the right to live their lives how they want, with full legal protection from abuse and discrimination and with access to sensitive and appropriate services to support them. That’s not for debate, that’s a fundamental human right.
However, a legislative move to self-ID presents a direct conflict with existing women’s rights. Under English law, women have a number of sex-based rights, with good reason, as female-bodied people as a class have disproportionately experienced, from at least the time of Aristotle, objectification, exploitation, discrimination, injustice, oppression and violence due to their reproductive sex at the hands of male-bodied people. Male-bodied people are generally anatomically stronger than female-bodied people. Three quarters of violent crimesand 98% of sexual offences are committed by male-bodied people. 90% of sexual assault victims are female. Over 400,000 females are sexually assaulted in England & Wales each year. An estimated 85,000 women are raped in England & Wales every year. Women’s only spaces and services were introduced by law to protect females from these male-based threats, recognising that women as a sex are a disadvantaged, vulnerable group.
But if self-ID becomes law, a male-bodied person will be legally recognised as female purely upon his say-so. This will potentially give him unchallenged access to women-only spaces such as changing rooms, hostels, refuges, domestic violence shelters and prisons. Let’s be clear - he doesn’t need to have undergone any gender reassignment surgery or hormone treatment, he doesn’t need to look like a biological female, he doesn’t need to change a single thing about himself, but on his say-so and that alone - without any checks and balances whatsoever - he will be legally recognised as a woman. So the new law will allow male-bodied people who self-identify as female access to women-only spaces and services, spaces and services designated by law to protect females from the disproportionate threats we face from male-bodied people and which provide us with safety, dignity and privacy when we are physically vulnerable.
Wild accusations of transphobia are being hurled at women who are voicing their concerns about this. Not only is this untrue, unfair, hurtful and damaging, it’s also wholly undemocratic when the result is that women’s opinions around a significant legislative change are being shut down and cast aside. It’s not transphobic for women to say that they’re concerned about a legal change that will allow male-bodied people into their spaces without any gatekeeping. Women are not saying that trans-identifying men as a group are by nature predatory. The concern is the threat that predatory male-bodied people present to female-bodied people, a threat that is currently protected by law via the designation of women-only spaces and services. Predatory male-bodied people already go to great lengths to gain access to vulnerable women and girls, so self-ID is a gift to these men. A process lacking any objective evidence, gatekeeping or checks & balances is wide open to abuse by predatory men. As self-ID will allow a male-bodied person to legally access women’s spaces without undergoing any physical changes, how will women be able to distinguish between a genuine, harmless, trans-identifying male and an opportunistic predatory male who has abused the legislation to gain access to women’s spaces for nefarious purposes? It will be impossible to police – in fact, as a pre-emptive response, we have seen proprietors opening up female-only spaces such as changing rooms, youth hostels and swimming ponds to everyone, re-designating them as “gender neutral”. Prison services have also been pre-emptively employing self-ID in anticipation of the law changing – just last week “Karen White”, a male-bodied person with a history of sex offences who was moved to a women’s only prison because he claimed to identify as female, was convicted of sexually assaulting a number of female inmates (www.scotsman.com/news/uk/trans-prisoner-jailed-after-sexually-assaulting-inmates-at-women-s-prison-1-4813696).
In addition to the concerns around women-only spaces, there are other potential implications of this change in law:
Intimate care and contact
• Disabled and elderly women who prefer that a woman assists them with washing, dressing etc. won’t be guaranteed a female-bodied carer.
• Women who prefer that a woman does their bra fittings, smear tests, mammograms, midwifery etc. won’t be guaranteed a female-bodied professional.
• Trans-identifying male-bodied police and security officials will be able to perform intimate body searches on women.
Therapy
• Trans-identifying male-bodied people may be able to work as counsellors in women-only services and join therapy groups for women who have survived sexual abuse and assault, rape and domestic violence.
Sports
• Trans-identifying male-bodied people may be able to compete in women-only sporting events. Most sports are sex-segregated for good reason - the natural physiological attributes of biological males such as body size, muscle mass, lung capacity and heart size give them a competitive advantage. Without sex-segregation, what chance do women have of being top of the game?
• This is already happening. Last week Rachel McKinnon, a trans-identifying male-bodied person, won gold medal in a women’s world championship cycling event (www.cyclingnews.com/news/mckinnon-is-first-transgender-woman-to-win-world-title/).
Statistics and reporting
• Gathering accurate sex-based statistics is essential for monitoring crime, health and discrimination and addressing inequalities. For example, isn’t biological sex-based data critical for monitoring the incidence of certain cancers e.g. cervical, ovarian, breast, testicular and prostrate cancers? How can this be properly monitored if biological sex is replaced by self-identified gender in the data?
• Already, criminal offences committed by trans-identifying male-bodied people are being recorded as having been committed by women. This distorts crime statistics and makes it harder to address biological sex-based violence.
I hope that explains why the introduction of self-ID is a concern for women and why there needs to be further discussion, consideration and healthy debate - involving women - around the proposed legislative changes so that women’s rights are considered in parallel with those of trans-identifying people. It’s not transphobic to say and expect this in a democratic society. Our lawmakers are accountable to women as well as to trans-identifying people.
If you’ve managed to get to the end of this post and are concerned about the issues I’ve raised, then PLEASE do complete the consultation before 11pm on Friday 19 October –
consult.education.gov.uk/government-equalities-office/reform-of-the-gender-recognition-act/
It’s a pretty hefty and daunting document, so if you feel like you need some guidance (from a women’s rights angle) then the following resources are helpful:
womansplaceuk.org/wpuk-guidance-on-gra-consultation/#question-1
fairplayforwomen.com