The Death Eaters are in the Ministry

[steepholm]

Rowling is of course a symptom, not a cause - but she's also a convenient stalking horse, and I'm sure the timing of this announcement is no coincidence.

This really is Clause 28 for trans people. It's stand-up-and-be-counted time: there's no fence left to sit on.

There are many aspects to Johnson's attempt to go full Viktor Orbán. I might mention, for example, that in pursuing this course Johnson (that self-proclaimed democrat) is disregarding 70% of the responses to the public consultation. But life's too short, and "Johnson is hypocrite" ranks with "Dog bites man" in the tally of unsurprising headlines, so let's cut to what, for some reason, has become the most urgent issue of our times: toilets.

For decades, trans men and women have legally used the toilets appropriate to their gender, without incident, here and in many other countries. Somehow, though, the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act, which were actually about reducing the red tape involved in legally transitioning, became mixed up in the public mind with access to toilets. (Actually, it's no mystery: it was through a concerted campaign of lies, and a public - the very people inclined to nod along to JKR - all too ready to believe them.)

So, the current proposal is a reversal of existing and long-established rights that have been exercised without issue: its only motivation is bigotry. The proposal is that only trans people who have fully transitioned (for which, read "undergone genital surgery") can use the appropriate toilets.

If it passes:

a) any woman, cis or trans, can expect to be challenged about their genitals, any time they go to a toilet - especially if they don't look "sufficiently feminine."
b) people in the process of transition will not be allowed to use a toilet at all, except in private homes. Why? Part of the current requirements for transition is that people live as their required gender for two years before they are able to access medical treatment (this is on top of the two years they probably spent waiting for an appointment in the first place). Under the proposals, these people cannot use a public toilet without breaking either a) the law or b) the terms of their medical regime, which might be seen as disqualifying them for treatment. (That's leaving aside the real physical threat faced by any trans woman using a male toilet - as opposed to the wholly imaginary threat faced by cis women using a women's toilet with a trans woman in a neighbouring cubicle.)
c) access to surgery is not equal - it was far easier to obtain for me (middle-class, steady job, articulate, of a certain age, no pre-existing health conditions) than for many less privileged people - so this is a hugely discriminatory measure.
d) Nonbinary, genderfluid and others will become non-persons.
e) Trans men (some of whom look very conventionally masculine) will presumably be forced to use women's toilets. (I say "presumably" because, as ever, the focus is on trans women.) Talk about unintended consequences!

Oh, and lest you think you can get round the issue by using unisex toilets, they are to be banned.

In a transparent ploy to separate the LGB from the T, gay conversion therapy is also to be banned. (Trans conversion therapy, by contrast, will I imagine be warmly encouraged.) Trans people have always supported LGB rights: I have no doubt that this stinking sop will be seen for what it is, and that the vast majority of LGB people will continue to reciprocate. There is in any case a huge intersection between the groups, and butch lesbians, in particular, are likely to be as adversely affected by the toilet provisions as trans people (see a) above).

Comments

[shewhomust]

Thankd for the pointer!

I had hoped that unisex toilets might be a solution / silver linig to the 'how to emerge from lock-down' conundrum, and am sorry to hear that won't be allowed.

(You've missed the angle bracket at the end of your blockquote: just saying ...)

[steepholm]

Thanks for spotting the typo! If only all errors were as easy to fix...

[cmcmck]

'They' never did much like the idea of those of us who have not been 'changed, changed utterly' by GC surgery.

The only interesting part in all this, the one constantly forgotten is that the GR Act was a result of an ECtHR judgement and that's pan European, not EU so I suspect any changes 'they' attempt to make may not be as easy as they think.

If it comes to showing a BC (can you imagine that) mine says 'girl'..........

[steepholm]

I don't think many women will be prepared to show their BC to take a pee - but if this goes through, they'd better get used to the idea.

[tree_and_leaf]

an ECtHR judgement and that's pan European, not EU so I suspect any changes 'they' attempt to make may not be as easy as they think.

I have zero faith in this government's willingness to remain signed up to the ECHR.

[cmcmck]

You may well be right I fear, but that doesn't change this judgement which was given back at the beginning of the century and led to the GR Act in 2004

I know because I was one of those there fighting for it.

Forty odd years of campaigning and I really need that t shirt saying 'trans and tired'.......... :o(

[cmcmck]

And then there'd be the question of who we'd show it to.............

[maellenkleth]

And here in the colonies I had always thought that TP stood for 'toilet paper', not 'toilet police'.

Biggest problem I ever had in England was coming up with the 10p for the loo at Paddington Station (oh, that and wrangling my suitcase down and up the stairs!)

[cmcmck]

50p these days................

[lilliburlero]

It's difficult to make any sense out of what was leaked to the Sunday Times (I've seen some plausible speculation that the source might be Andrew Gilligan) but I think it's something like:

- GRA reform is definitely dead in the water (but we knew that)
- some kind of crackdown on trans people accessing private healthcare (the irony of the Tories discovering their opposition to deregulated private provision in this one particular context, eh?)
- guidance to service providers on implementing the Equality Act will reflect the transphobe script, which is going to land a lot of them in the courts tout bloody suite, I imagine, and we get the protracted and tiresome thrashing out of whether "sex" means lived sex or sex assigned at birth, what a "proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim is" and so on. Delightful.
- possible tampering with the Equality Act to try to limit the definition of the protected characteristic of gender reassignment in some way (if they go with genital surgery as the criteria the situation for trans men becomes particularly...interesting) which should set all sorts of alarm bells ringing even for the DroptheT crowd, because sexual orientation is absolutely going to be next.
OR
- It's all Classic Dom dead cattery and very little will actually change except some local councils will close their already doomed public toilets because they can't make them work under the new guidelines, making life slightly more uncomfortable for everyone but especially disabled people, but hey, now they can blame the transes.

It's all awful, I'm sorry, but I think it is very definitely fightable, and I think the government's lack of imagination where non-cishet identities are concerned could end up being their undoing.

[steepholm]

I certainly hope that it's a deliberate distraction and that not much will come of it, but we can't afford to take that chance, and this government's absolutely mean and bigoted enough to do it for real.

[lilliburlero]

Oh, I don't underestimate their malignancy and we absolutely shouldn't be complacent, but I think what is proposed in these leaks is mainly informed by transphobe talking points and not the actual legal position, acquaintance with which could prove salutary.

[tree_and_leaf]

I'm writing to my MP. Given who she is, I can't imagine she'll take a blind bit of notice, but for what it's worth....

[steepholm]

Thank you.

[maellenkleth]

Ponders... would such a ban on unisex toilets extend to single-use public loos (of which Neath has quite a few)?

[calimac]

Wondering the same thing. In particular, restaurants with limited space often have 2 single-use loos, which used to be labeled M and F, but many have come to their senses now and delabeled them. They're now whatever the person currently occupying them is, and if that person is genderfluid, they're genderfluid.

Also: agree that most transitioned people (of either sex, actually) look more like the sex they've transitioned to than what they were assigned at birth. Trans men with beards are particularly notable that way. (And both of the trans men I know whom I knew before they transitioned have beards.) It's the hormones what does it, not the surgery. Sending them back into the wrong restrooms would be far more panic-producing among the general punters than anything the transphobes are afraid of.

[steepholm]

The newspaper reports aren't that detailed, but I wouldn't put anything past them.

[thistleingrey]

I am reading, learning, and sympathetic. I don't think there's a meaningful contact for a US resident, but if there is, I'm happy to try. I too thought of toilets--much fuss here too, if with different fluctuations.

[steepholm]

I appreciate it.