Regarding your editorial (January 18th) on the ‘constitutional battle’ over the Scottish gender recognition bill, I am no stranger to devolution and its complex operations. And as the main architect of Labour’s 2019 General Election manifesto compromise policy on the clash of rights arising between women and girls’ need for single-sex spaces and a more effective gender recognition system, I’m no stranger either about the toxic arguments surrounding these debates.
“Demedicalizing” the gender recognition process aims to reduce the stigma associated with transgender people. Instead, in its proposed forms, it opens the legal way to change legal gender for any purpose to a much wider group of people.
Although our society has for decades agreed to require women and girls to make limited accommodations in the public sphere for all who experience gender dysphoria in order to facilitate an accessible public sphere, we are still a long way from being ready to extend those same accommodations to people who would simply prefer access to sports teams, shelters, hospital wards, rape crisis services, locker rooms and sleeping spaces designated for the opposite sex.
This is not a condemnation of trans people. It is understandable why so many people oppose these reforms in their current form, which make a mockery of the protected equality laws that facilitate an accessible public sphere for women and girls.
The UK government is not provoking a constitutional crisis, it is doing its job within the established framework of a British constitutional settlement. In light of the 2014 referendum, allowing nationalist overreach is bad for devolution, especially when that overreach has been emphatically rejected by the people of Scotland. Lachlan Stewart Head of Domestic Policy, Labor Party 2016-2020
It’s a shame that most of the people commenting on the Scottish Parliament’s reforms to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill haven’t bothered to look at what it actually covers. All anyone is entitled to on a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) is birth, marriage (if applicable) and possibly death certificates in their acquired gender. Nothing else.
Scottish Secretary Alistair Jack didn’t seem to know that when asked in Parliament last week. Your editorial seems similarly dark on this point, stating: “There are concerns, which cannot be dismissed lightly, that this move will expose women-only services to men who falsely claim to be transgender.” If such fears exist, it is only because of the fear mongering and misinformation spread by transphobic people. The GRC and the new birth certificate that comes with it read in bold capital letters “Warning: Certificate is not proof of identity”.
Recklessly spreading this misinformation harms trans people and their families, and also results in cis women who don’t conform to stereotypical notions of what women “should” look like being harassed when using women-only spaces. It would be better to encourage the UK Government to follow the Scottish example and revive the reforms to the Gender Recognition Act originally proposed in 2018. Dr Jane Hamlin, President, Beaumont Society
The idea that Scotland should be asked to compromise on providing some basic dignity to one of the most marginalized groups simply because the UK as a whole does not is frankly disgusting. Similar laws in countries as diverse as France, Argentina and Norway have caused none of the problems that transphobic groups who want to block it claim. Also, if it was really just about the legal ramifications of this bill, a section 33 order should have been used to take it directly to court instead of blocking it outright, even if it would have the same result. This is disgusting political theater. Duncan Adamson Göttingen, Germany
What most commentators miss in the Tory-fuelled clamor over the Scottish bill making it easier to get gender recognition certificates is that most trans people don’t need one. A GRC is needed to change your birth certificate and get married to your new legal sex, but not to change your name, NHS record, passport or driving licence. So, apart from a few rare cases, the certificate is not necessary.
I, and most trans people, refused to go through the painful process required to obtain it. In some circumstances, the law allows single-gender service providers to restrict trans people’s access to the service; but as it is often impossible to tell if someone is trans and it is illegal to ask for proof of a GRC, the value of such a document is very limited. Matilda SimonMarple Bridge, Greater Manchester
Add Comment