Coming out of lurkdom to discuss some legislative amendments happening in Tasmania currently.
The leader of our Greens party has launched a personal crusade to get our very own version of Self-ID through the State Parliament. As per usual for this lot, the amendments were cobbled together at the last minute and handed to members with very little discussion in the press.
The reforms will be read in the Upper house on Tuesday. I urge anyone who is willing, to send emails and make noise to the members of the Legislative Council, who are mostly Independents and whose contact details are publically available at the Parliament Tasmania website.
I wrote a submission this morning and sent it to all 22 members. I also included as an attachment Datun's wonderful post on the Peak Trans analogy of walking up a hill, which seems to be key to getting people to put this in context. Anyway, here it is in full:
'I am writing to you with concern at the proposed gender recognition reforms passed by the Lower House on Tuesday evening.
As a mental health Social Worker working in acute care with a vulnerable population group, it is my opinion that these reforms will effectively dismantle all of the safeguarding measures we have in place in regards to women and children.
I emphatically deny that this is a matter of LGB concern. In fact, there remains an increasingly bitter divide within the community, with those who understand that Transgender political aims are an entirely different beast to those of the Gay and Lesbian community, and in fact the two communities have opposing interests on many issues.
When you vote on these reforms, please do not make the grave mistake of conflating gender identity with sexuality because the two are not the same, and any short-term feeling of having done a good deed - ‘been on the right side of history’ etc will dissipate very quickly in the polls and on the ground when your constituents realise that previously protected spaces are now opened up to all and sundry; with the only barrier to violations of privacy and dignity being a signed statutory declaration.
That there is no alternative view being presented in the public press should be a warning sign on the limitations and chilling effect that this issue has on free speech. If there is no balance in reporting I would argue that true public consultation is not possible.
There is nothing wrong with being transgender and that is not my issue here. However, biological fact is immutable and to say otherwise is dishonest. What is really being asked here is that less that one percent of the population are given legal precedence over more than fifty percent of the population – those who fought for their rights over generations and are now threatened with seeing them dismantled in the blink of an eye. Inclusion should not come at the expense of cohesion, and the right to sex-specific spaces and services exists for very good reason.
Proposals for similar legislation have recently caused significant backlash in the UK. I include as an attachment one of my favourite explanations of how far-reaching this legislation will be, and how one may react when seeing the ramifications within a broader context. I hope you will take the time to read it because it remains one of the most viewed posts on one of the most trafficked websites in the UK.
I thank you for your time and hope you will take this on board when coming to a decision.
Regards'
I will keep you all posted on any interesting replies.
Anyway, cheers and thankyou to everyone who participates here for facilitating my ongoing education on this issue 