I've drafted my reply and would be grateful for thoughts before sending:
Dear Kerry
Thank you for your further reply regarding the Gender Reform Act.
It is clear to me from your interpretation of my letter that the sticking point in our conversation is the definition and application of the word ‘woman’, and therefore what constitutes ‘womanhood’ and ‘women’s rights’.
There must be a definition, otherwise ‘women’ do not exist in any real sense and therefore women’s rights and womanhood are meaningless.
To me, it is simply logical and correct that ‘woman’ means ‘adult human female’, that is, an adult with two X chromosomes and natural female anatomy. It is this anatomy that then denotes the experience of ‘womanhood’: female puberty, menstruation, pregnancy, birth, breastfeeding and menopause. Stemming from this are processes that only women can experience; such as polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, premature ovarian failure and uterine/ovarian/cervical cancer to name a few. This anatomy also means women experience unique life experiences in the form of medical care such as smear tests.
If we examine the experience of transwomen, there is zero overlap or correlation; indeed trans people actually have their own very unique experience, which cannot be fully understood or lived by women. This includes the experience of having gender dysphoria; puberty blockers; hormone therapy; and gender reassignment surgery. The experiences they have stem from being trans, and could be appropriately termed as transhood.
The ‘overlap’ described by people that claim trans women ‘are’ woman such as yourself is limited to: transwomen dressing in a stereotypically female way; and at times, experiencing prejudice or mistreatment from other people due to their characteristics. These ‘overlaps’ simply do not relate to being a ‘woman’ in any real sense. Otherwise, women that do not dress in a feminine way (e.g. a butch lesbian) would not be women, whereas a ‘cis’man that experiences any form of prejudice or bias would be.
In short, there is simply no way in which a natal male can ‘be’ a woman in any meaningful way. If there is, I would be really grateful if you could outline what it is that solely transwomen and ‘cis’ women experience that natal males and transmen cannot experience, that then welds them into the same group.
‘This is not in any way to say that I don’t support the rights of women, or that I don’t feel that women and women’s voices are important in this debate.’
I assume you mean ‘cis’ women, although your own terminology would infer that you are also referring to transwomen (the importance of language rears its head!).
It very much feels that ‘cis’ women are heard for the sake of diplomacy, and then quickly dismissed. For example, your letter did not include a single question as to what would make me feel more safe in terms of sharing facilities with transwomen, or what measures the Labour Party would introduce to ensure the safety of ‘cis’ women if the GRA reforms proceed. Surely this has been thought through and systems have been agreed on? The (sadly more likely) alternative is that the GRA reforms have been agreed with without any analysis or evaluation as to how this would affect ‘cis’ women. Given that no women’s rights organisations have been consulted in any meaningful way, I would not be surprised.
‘Given the Government’s reforms were specifically focused on removing rights for trans people (particularly given that it had previously said GRA reform would happen), that trans people’s voices are important in the debate, too’
Can you please tell me which rights currently held by trans people would be removed if the GRA is not reformed.
I think there are ways to have policies that protect cis women and trans women in these spaces, and that cis women’s concerns should be taken on board when making these policies. One of the issues, of course, is that the debate on this subject is so toxic that it’s hard to develop answers and solutions to these questions and concerns.
This makes no sense. You have said there are ways to protect ‘cis’ women in women-only spaces, yet say it is hard to develop solutions to our concerns? Which is it? If the former, please let me know your proposed solutions.
‘natal males’ (which I think is a term that is deliberately denying the identity and existence of trans people)
If I were denying their existence, I wouldn’t need to write to you. In the same way I do not need to write to you about concerns regarding unicorns or dragons – because they do not exist. As you yourself have acknowledged ‘cis’ and transwomen are not synonymous, could you please inform me of the terminology you use to describe the difference?
if a trans woman has a history of violence against women and/or sexual assault against women, of course, I don’t think it would be appropriate for them to access women’s services and spaces
How can this be implemented and regulated in a day-to-day context? For example, Karen White, a convicted sex offender, would be able to access women’s changing rooms if released. How would you prevent that, rather than wait for it to happen and then penalise it?
That is to say, there is not an official, standardized method for recording the deaths of trans people across the UK. Nonetheless, trans people are at significant risk of being victims of violent crime
So there is no accurate or reliable data to suggest trans people are at the same risk of serious harm as women, however you can assure me that they are? How have you reached this conclusion without reliable data? Whereas we can be certain of the level of risk to women.
I actually read that statement from Mermaids a while ago, however it is misleading in the extreme.
Very cleverly, the entire piece is written solely to address the possibility of a ‘cis’ man pretending to be trans in order to attack women. It makes no mention of transwomen using these spaces to attack ‘cis’ women, despite the fact this does and has happened.
‘There is absolutely no evidence we’re aware of, from the police, local authorities, shops, refuges or anywhere else besides, that predators have used the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 to gain access to women’s spaces.’
Karen White is an extreme example, but there are others:
Katie Dolatowski – a transwoman who attacked a ten year old girl in a supermarket toilet. She grabbed the girl by the face, forced her into a cubicle, and ordered her to take off her trousers. She also told the girl there was a man outside who would kill the girl’s mother. Luckily the girl escaped. The same offender also tried to film a 12 year old girl in another supermarket toilet. Here is the link:
www.scotsman.com/regions/edinburgh-fife-and-lothians/female-spaces-need-better-protection-after-trans-woman-sex-assault-girl-say-campaigners-140883
Rory Stewart made claims only a few months ago that female-identifying trans inmates had raped female prison guards when he was the Prisons Minister:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/12/female-prison-officers-raped-inmates-claiming-trans-rory-stewart/
There have been further cases of transgender inmates sexually attacking women in prison, and despite making up 1% of the prison population, they are accountable for 5.6% of the sex attacks that take place within prisons.
So, the above statement by Mermaids is 100% false. Even one incident of this nature would refute that statement.
Essentially, what they are saying is that nobody has been adhering to single sex spaces in recent years so why bother trying to protect them now. I find that typical of today’s attitude to the safety of women; if something is too hard to legislate or enforce, just don’t bother with it.
In my view, allowing trans people to ‘live as they wish’ is not just to do with letting them ‘dress as they like’ – to free them from oppression and violence, they must be allowed to identify and be recognized in a way that’s in keeping with their gender identity.
Which takes me back to my original point. If ‘gender identity’ is not about simply dressing as a stereotype of the opposite sex, then what is it? Which part of womanhood are they ‘identifying’ with? It is clear the idea of a natal male ‘becoming a woman’ does not stand up to any form of scrutiny, science or reality.
I would be very grateful for a response, in particular relating to safeguarding you propose in order to assure me that reforming the GRA, which you support, will not result in any attacks on women or children within single sex spaces, or spaces designated for women.
Many thanks