Writing to my MP about trans rights ...again

After the outrageous judgment at the Supreme Court yesterday I have once again written to my MP. The only changes I have made are to redact out my wife’s name.

Dear Stephen Doughty,

We are writing to you about this week’s Supreme Court ruling in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers, which declared that trans women do not meet the legal definition of woman, and that “woman” is legally a “biological woman” — but without defining “biological woman”. This is extremely concerning to us as it is now very easy to block trans people from any single-sex space, spaces that are vital to living a normal life, bringing the “urinary leash” back into British public spaces.

Trans rights have been rolled back over 20 years; the Gender Recognition Act 2003 has been completely undermined. The general consensus on the understanding of the Equality Act 2010 has been completely changed by this ruling.

On ██████’s part, as a queer cis woman who does not always conform to stereotypical expectations of femininity, this ruling leaves her less safe and emboldens violent bigots potentially to assault her because of physical features which might not meet their definition of womanhood. As a queer cis man, this ruling leaves Owen worrying for female friends and family — both cis and trans — who are less safe now than they were previously.

Most importantly, of course, this judgment leaves our transgender friends and family at even higher risk of assault every time they attempt to partake in normal public life such as shopping, eating in a restaurant, going to work or seeking medical attention, and cements the feeling that the state regards them as second-class citizens.

Legal definitions matter and affect the public perception. With a relentless torrent of transphobic articles being printed by the likes of The Times, The Telegraph, the Daily Mail and even The Guardian, the environment is intolerably hostile for trans people in the UK — in ways that feel very familiar to us, having both grown up during the 1980s and 1990s, when LGBTQ+ people routinely faced similar propaganda, disinformation and hate in the press and from the government, as we’re sure you too remember.

This ruling is not based in science, and it is important to note that no trans people were allowed to give evidence in a case affecting their own civil rights. This judgment aligns the UK not with the forerunners in human rights but with regressive regimes which our Governments, past and present, have rightfully denounced. Just because the judge said it doesn’t reduce trans rights in an authoritative way does not mean that they were correct, because everything else clearly contradicts this.

The judgment has left trans people in a limbo state that seems to go against legal decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, including Goodwin v United Kingdom (2002). The ECHR stated that forcing trans people to live in an “intermediate zone” between genders is unacceptable. This is exacerbated by statements this morning from the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission on BBC Radio 4 that she will seek to enforce trans-exclusive single-sex spaces in the Commission’s code of conduct for services, including the NHS and prisons.

This ruling has also completely erased the existence of non-binary and intersex people. It has even, bizarrely, created a legal definition of lesbians, based upon input of the LGB Alliance, described as a hate group by the the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism. In fact, only anti-trans groups were allowed to adduce evidence for this case. The fact that trans people were rejected from providing evidence and examining the evidence of anti-trans groups demonstrates quite how outrageous and unjust this case has been.

We are writing to you today to say that this ruling is politically motivated, prejudiced, and liable to fall in the European Court of Human Rights, and to ask you to refuse support to any further attempts to exclude trans women from public life and basic human rights. We understand that, as a government minister, you have some limits on what you can and can’t do and say in public, but we implore you to use as much latitude as you can to vocally stand up for your trans constituents both within the Parliamentary Labour Party and in public, including working with other trans-supportive MPs to support a bill to enshrine into law basic rights and dignity for trans people.

This is a pivotal moment in trans rights and now is the time to show up as an ally for trans people.

Yours sincerely,

██████ and Owen Blacker