Yes it reads like a lot of over-dramatic hyperbole but I can hear the genuine distress of the writer and that's a real emotion that shouldn't be dismissed. The author, and JKR too who the author highlights as in agreement with this, lay out that the 9,000ish post-op transsexuals are being genuinely damaged by the actions and beliefs of 500,000 or so other people who are lumped together under the trans umbrella and I can well believe it.
I've read less emotional writing from someone post-op before, I don't recall who, but I remember that it made sense that the operation was only done after an enormous amount of psychotherapy to explore whether any other treatment than the surgery might possibly relieve their suffering. The Psychiatric approach also included ensuring that the patient fully understood and accepted that the surgery would not make the person "actually" a woman, they would remain male, but the surgery would, if successful, relieve the dysphoria that they couldn't live with. That was a logically consistent approach and in combination with the Supreme Court clarification there is no contradiction that for the purpose of single-sex provisions, the operation does not change the sex category that the person is in.
However these provisions were never intended to cover the far, far greater number of people who don't have dysphoria, do not wish to pursue surgery and just want to present as the opposite sex whilst keeping their body the same. That status has been taken, for decades, as being the same thing and that's hugely damaging for all concerned.
The protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment is supposed to cover someone if they are proposing to undergo, are undergoing, or have undergone this process, but the vast majority of people under the trans umbrella are not remotely intending or expecting to undergo this process and that is 100% correct - the surgery is a huge risk to take and should only be done when it's the only possible option, therefore being on a pathway towards it should never be any kind of goal or tickbox as a means of achieving a different ambition. It is important that we should uphold that going through with the surgery does not make a man into a woman and does not entitle an individual to use women's spaces and facilities - any other position would be unethically pushing people towards the risks of a surgery that should not be carried out unless there is no other option. It would be hugely unethical to say to someone who wants X "you have to consent to this dangerous surgery with lifelong consequences in order to obtain X" - therefore the only compassionate thing to do is to confirm that the surgery will have no consequences for access to anything, and must only go ahead if the benefits to the individual within their own mind and body are sufficient in themselves without there being any such consequences.
It is right that people who consider themselves trans should be protected from discrimination. Conformity to sexist stereotypes should never be a requirement for participation in society and community and certainly there are plenty of places that will discriminate against gender nonconforming people. But the 500,000 people under the trans umbrella who are definitely not proposing to undergo, undergoing, or have undergone surgery should have a different category of protected characteristic that protects them.
Legislation should clarify and renact the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act together to set out formally that
- sex and gender are different things
- everyone has a sex and it is fixed at the moment of conception and remains the same throughout life. Disorders of Sexual Development do not create additional sexes or exist in a limbo between sexes, each DSD is a category within male or female.
- not everyone has a gender and gender may be fluid, no one has to conform to the gender expectations associated with their sex.
- a new protected characteristic of gender nonconformity should be created such that no one is discriminated against if their gender presentation is unconventional. This PC should apply equally to anyone who is gender non-conforming, some of whom may consider themselves trans and some will not. (noting that gender nonconforming butch lesbians get a lot more discrimination than gender conforming fem lesbians and they are being discriminated against for their gender nonconformity not their gender identity or their sexuality)
- People can obtain a gender recognition certificate, but that is simply recognising their gender and does not change their sex.
- People can undergo surgical or hormonal changes to their body but that also does not change their sex.
- People who have obtained a gender recognition certificate, people who have (or are intending to) undergo surgical or hormonal changes to their body to change sexual characteristics, and people whose gender presentation is very different from expectations for their sex, are all fully entitled to 100% human rights, dignity and respect.
- The fundamental principle of equality should be that other than for the legitimate exceptions all facilities and opportunities everywhere are open equally to everyone irrespective of any of the listed items of protected characteristics. Where it would be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim to reserve some kind of facility or opportunity to people with a specific characteristic, then that is allowed but the exclusion must be applied without exceptions otherwise the rational basis of it being a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim is negated.
- If the rational basis for creating something that is separate for women is constructed due to differences between male and female bodies then it cannot be the case that some male people are included - but if it is appropriate to include male people then the appropriate action is to revisit whether there is actually a need for the exclusion at all, and redefine the facility/opportunity as open to all
- Discrimination means treating someone at a disadvantage compared with how they would have been treated if they didn't have a particular characteristic. A male person with a protected characteristic of gender non-conformity (presenting according to female norms) must not be treated with any disadvantage compared to a male person without the protected characteristic of gender non-conformity - they are not being discriminated against if they are not treated as female because they are not female - that does not stop them from being treated with the utmost respect which is their absolute right.