Category: LGBTQ+

  • “An increasingly hostile environment”

    Hate crimes against trans people in Scotland have doubled since 2015, the Daily Record reports. It’s almost as if having almost all of your country’s newspapers and high-profile social media users constantly portraying you as perverts, paedophiles and rapists has an effect.

    I’ve written before about the false claim that the rise in numbers is fuelled by “snowflakes” reporting arseholes misgendering them on Twitter. It isn’t, because being an arsehole isn’t a crime (although there are laws about malicious communications such as harassment and threatening behaviour online). Hate crimes are crimes that are aggravated by hatred towards particular groups; if something isn’t a crime, it can’t be a hate crime and won’t be recorded as such.

    Most hate crimes happen in the street, in public spaces or in the workplace. For trans people they tend to be verbal abuse, physical attacks or sexual assault. Stonewall’s investigation into trans people’s lives is full of saddening statistics and horrific experiences.

    We aren’t rushing to report fabricated hate crimes; quite the opposite. I haven’t reported the various incidents I’ve experienced, which have been humiliating and sometimes frightening; I know I should but I also know that the people who did it won’t be caught. Four-fifths of trans people feel the same: according to Stonewall, 79% of us haven’t reported hate crimes we’ve experienced.

    What happens instead is that we become more afraid. Many trans people won’t come out at work for fear of trouble, fear that’s entirely justified: one in twelve trans people has been physically attacked at work by a colleague or customer. Two in five of us adjust how we dress to try and avoid attracting the wrong kind of attention; nearly half of us avoid certain streets altogether because we don’t feel safe there.

    The constant drumbeat of anti-trans bullshit in the media and on social media fuels that. We’ve seen the same pattern in all kinds of bigotry: when racists, homophobes or transphobes believe that they’re “thinking what everybody else is thinking”, it emboldens them.

    Here’s Esme, from Scotland, as quoted by Stonewall.

    We are constantly questioned on our existence, treated hostilely and ridiculed in the name of debate. We are constantly exposed to hate and criticism in media and daily life as the public respond to the media’s attitudes.

    It’s exhausting, and there’s no end in sight.

  • “It is an aged strategy, pitting one disadvantaged group against another”

    Dr Rebecca Crowther writes in the Scottish Review about Scotland’s women’s movement and the vocal attempts by a tiny minority to turn back the clock.

    Opposition to trans people is voiced almost daily in many newspapers and online. It is frequently featured on the radio and on television. It is an illusion that there are a majority of women against trans rights. An illusion ironically perpetuated by the very loud voices of the supposedly ‘silenced’.

    …It is absurd for opponents of trans rights to say that the majority of our population would be on their side.

  • Deception

    The reaction to 57-year-old TV presenter Philip Schofield coming out as gay has been interesting. Interesting because it’s been a very different and much more positive reaction than the reaction to Jameela Jamil coming out as queer the day before, which says a lot about the racism, misogyny and intolerance queer women of colour have to endure.

    And it’s interesting because despite the relative positivity there’s nevertheless been a really nasty outbreak of homophobia among some commentators and on social media.
    Max Morgan puts it very well:

    The main issue I want to address is the repeated portrayal of Schofield (and ergo other men who come out after years of marriage to a woman) as a liar and a deceiver, as someone who used his wife to cover his dirty little secret before ditching her when it was expedient for him to do so. I’m obviously not privy to the inner workings of the Schofields’ marriage, but I do know that in a great many cases this grubby insinuation couldn’t be further from the truth.
    …For me, and so many others, the closet wasn’t a place where I said, “I’m gay, but I’m going to hide it in here,” it was a place in which I fought tooth and nail, at great psychological cost, to convince myself I wasn’t gay at all. I knew I liked boys when I was about 6 or 7. And I knew very shortly after that that a boy who likes other boys was the very worst thing you could possibly be. So I convinced myself I wasn’t that.

    I’m older than Morgan and younger than Schofield, but we all grew up during a time when just to admit that LGBT+ people existed could cost people their jobs, when vicious homophobia was in the daily papers, when people like us were only ever portrayed as sick, perverted, predatory.

    LGBT people who grew up in the 70s, 80s and 90s did so at a time where every aspect of the public discourse was awash with a particularly nasty and virulent brand of homophobia. The press, the media, even the government – fuck, especially the government – displayed an unflinching commitment to hammering home the message that being gay was wrong, shameful, disgusting.

    We were perverts. We were predators. We were mentally ill. We were spreaders of disease. We were paedophiles, hell bent on corrupting children for our own nefarious ends. We were incapable of fidelity, or of love. We were a powerful lobby, to be feared and mistrusted. We were poofs, faggots and queers, dykes, rug-munchers and trannies. We were less than human and fair game for whatever violence came our way.

    So many of us did exactly what the advocates of lethal conversion therapy want people like us to do: we tried with all our might not to be gay, or trans, or whichever part of the rainbow we are. We fought to try and make ourselves “normal”, to deny what our own brains and bodies were trying to tell us, to refuse to see any signs that we were who we were trying so hard not to be. Many of us managed to keep that fight going for decades.

    I didn’t marry to deceive. I married because I was in love, and because I thought that love had cured me of my sadness. I genuinely believed that I could be Mr Right, and for a while I was.

    Morgan:

    I took those vows because I loved my wife, and that remains the case to this day. I would never knowingly have misled her, or undertaken any conscious act that would have hurt her in any way. Sure, there was a deception taking place, but it was a tangled and intricate web of self-deception, from which it would take me a further 13 years to extricate myself.

    And the more people depend on you, the more awful the consequences of untangling that web.

    I’m currently reading Stuck In The Middle With You, by Jennifer Finney Boylan – like me, a trans woman who came out after years of marriage and after becoming a parent. She writes:

    I still believed, on some fundamental level, that love would cure me. That if only I were loved deeply by someone else, I would be content to stay a man… Of course, nobody really gets cured by love, but transsexuals are hardly the only people who believe romance will lead them outside of themselves. You can’t fault a person for hoping that love will make her into someone else, someone better. The world is full of false hopes, many of them dumber than the hope of being transformed by love.

    But of course, understanding any of this requires compassion and empathy, something sorely lacking among the tedious contrarians and twitter trolls.

    It’s no coincidence that many of the people condemning Schofield for his supposed “deception” are the same people calling Jameela Jamil a fake, a liar who‘s pretending to be queer in order to get “woke points”. As ever, the pejorative use of “woke” is the battle cry of the intolerant and privileged.

    Many of them are also so-called “gender critical” activists who claim teenage trans kids aren’t old enough to know who they are (in many cases advocating dangerous and discredited conversion therapy, which converts many perfectly healthy LGBT kids into damaged or even dead ones) while telling trans women of my age that if we had really been suffering we’d have come out in our teens.

    The truth is that it doesn’t matter to these people if we come out in our teens when we’re single, in our thirties when we’re in a relationship, or in married middle age. They don’t want us to come out at all. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever.

  • Adult kids say the funniest things

    I’ve written before about dubious “the sinister trans cult stole my children” articles: all too often they turn out to demonstrate that some parents find it easier to blame sinister, shadowy forces than their own shortcomings when their grown-up children cut all contact. But I’ve rarely seen an example as downright awful as this one.

    This is from The Christian Post last year, and it’s being widely circulated again by anti-trans types. I’m not linking to it because it’s just hateful and packed with some really, really unpleasant stuff.

    The “kids” are in their twenties and thirties. The “anguished mom” is “tormented Lynn Meagher”.

    Meagher lost contact with her son for nearly a decade after he came out as transgender. She reconnected with him in 2013, which was a struggle because she didn’t feel she could call him “she” or a woman, and use his preferred female name while remaining true to her beliefs — particularly that sex cannot be changed and no amount of cosmetic surgery can alter biology.

    “I did the best I could to have a relationship with him where I just loved him for himself, and was hoping that we could just disagree on what we disagreed with and love each other anyway,” Meagher said.

    Got that? I just want to love you for who you are, except for the “who you are” stuff. Incidentally, did you count the deliberate misgenderings in those two paragraphs? I make it eight.

    The thing about grown-up children is that they can speak for themselves. Here’s Meagher’s daughter, posting in November in a discussion about the article.

    She didn’t lose me to a cult. She lost me to her racism (she’s a Proud Boy). She lost me to her abuse (she threw me against the wall so I would stop crying). She lost me to her transphobia (she collected signatures for the anti-trans bathroom petition). She lost me to her greed (she stole survivors’ benefits the federal gov’t gave me to buy herself fur coats and a car). She lost me to her cruelty…

    The Proud Boys are a US far-right group. If they’re not actually neo-Nazis, they’re incredibly good friends with many people who are.

    Just in case you had any doubts about this woman’s eligibility for the Mother of The Year award, here’s a message from her son, responding to an article critical of his mother.

    thank you thank you thank you for addressing her, her hateful rhetoric, and the article she wrote (which was originally uploaded with mine and my siblings full names, and was found when a friend of mine had searched my name for my top surgery fundraiser, basically outing me as trans to future employers. it makes my situation more manageable to know that people see through her BS, even without knowing about the emotional/religious abuse and physical violence she inflicted on all of her children and husband for years. thank you.

    The article notes that our anguished mom has made lots of new friends, not just from far-right groups but also some of the leading lights of the UK anti-trans movement. They gave her “lots of hugs.” Which sounds like more love than she ever gave her children.

  • If the Starbucks Mermaids advert was real

    Starbucks’ lovely and groundbreaking advert, which features a young trans man summoning up the courage to ask for his new name on his coffee cup, is important: as I’ve written before, representation matters. Seeing someone like you in mainstream media, in this case on a major TV channel, can help you feel that you’re not alone. I had a good cry when I saw it.

    There’s been a somewhat mixed response online (discounting the obvious fury of the Prosecco Stormfront mob on Mumsnet) because of course, Starbucks is a big company that’s hardly known for its positive effects on the world around it. But if it’s going to be throwing its money around on advertising anyway, I’d much rather it threw its money at adverts like this one and at charities such as Mermaids, which this campaign is supporting.

    My own reaction is amusement, because when I first used my new name in a Starbucks things didn’t happen quite like they did in the advert.

    Barista: What’s the name?
    Me: Carrie.
    Them: Gary?
    Me: No, Carrie.
    Them. Sorry, Karen.
    Me: No, sorry, it’s Carrie.
    Them: Kerry?
    ME: No. Carrie. With a C.
    Them: Ciara?
    Me: No. Carrie. C-A-R-R-I-E.
    Them. Carrie?
    Me: Yes, Carrie. Like Carrie Fisher. Yes.
    Them: OK. (Writes “Harry” on cup)

  • What doesn’t hit print

    I linked to a Roy Greenslade piece the other day about the way UK newspapers invented a so-called immigration crisis. In it he wrote:

    If you want to understand the populist media’s underlying agenda then you have to look not only at what gets published, but what doesn’t.

    Here’s a great example of that. Every single time an anti-trans pressure group or disgruntled axe-grinder makes unsubstantiated claims about the supposed dangers and alleged overprescription of puberty blockers, it gets printed in the Daily Mail, The Sunday Times and other print publications.

    Last week, a massive, reputable study with a huge sample size reported that puberty blockers are safe, reversible and in many cases life-saving. They have proven positive effects on teens’ mental health.

    Not a single UK newspaper has mentioned it.

  • Fun with official application forms

    I sent off my application for my Gender Recognition Certificate this week. So far it’s cost me £140 for the application, £48 to get a statutory declaration notarised, £30 for medical reports and £7.40 in postage; they’ve asked for additional evidence so that’s another trip to the Post Office today. It’s good to finally set the wheels in motion; I’ve had to wait more than two years to do so because I need to provide documentary evidence that I’ve been living as me for that period.

    Under the proposed reforms to the Gender Recognition Act I’d still have to provide most of the things I’ve had to provide, but I wouldn’t have had to wait three extra months for a psychological report and I wouldn’t have had to pay £140. The postage bill might be a bit lower too.

    That’s pretty much the only difference between the system we’ve had in place for sixteen years and the proposed reforms to it.

    Here’s what my GRC will enable me to do in everyday life:

    • Nothing.

    GRCs have nothing to do with everyday life. They’re about changing your birth certificate’s gender marker and nothing else. That is relevant to me should I remarry, and it changes what it says on HMRC’s computer and may impact my eligibility for certain benefits in the future. It used to affect the state pension but I’m too old for it to have any effect on mine.

    Here’s what impact my GRC will have on the toilets I use and the single-sex spaces I access:

    • None.

    It’s got nothing to do with any of that. That’s all covered by the Equality Act, which is not going to change.

    Whether it’s reformed or not, the Gender Recognition Act has no connection with what toilet I use, which spaces I’m permitted to access or the legal definition of men, women or anything else. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either misinformed or malicious.

    Unfortunately the misinformed and the malicious are currently flooding the Scottish government with submissions demanding a halt to any reform of the Gender Recognition Act. It’s an odd thing to target, but it’s enabled them to flood mainstream and social media with increasingly outlandish claims about the supposed dangers of trans women (never trans men) as part of a wedge strategy to weaken the wider LGBT+ community.

    You can help battle the bigots by completing the gender recognition consultation. Feminist group Sisters Scotland have produced a really good guide for anybody who wants to be an ally to trans people, and you’ll find it here.

    Trans and non-binary people are being targeted in mainstream and social media with inaccurate information and campaigns to deny their human rights.  In solidarity with our trans and non-binary siblings, we urge trans allies to respond to this consultation.

    …the main Scottish feminist charities already implement policies that are inclusive of trans women and they agree with the joint declaration of support for GRA reform issued by several Scottish women’s charities.

    It’s a good guide to what the current law actually is, and what minor changes are being proposed.

    Incidentally, if you’re wondering why I’m not waiting for reform before applying for my own GRC, it’s because I’m not confident that any reform is going to happen any time soon. In England, the government ran a consultation on GRA reform in 2018 and still hasn’t published the results; in Scotland, we’re now in the middle of the second consultation on the same issue because a bunch of bigots didn’t get the result they wanted. With pretty much the entire mainstream media happily demonising trans people and demonstrating complete ignorance of the law, I’m not feeling very optimistic right now.

  • This is the future bastards want

    And so it begins. South Dakota has made the first step towards making evidence-based medicine illegal. Doctors who try to help trans teenagers face a year in prison. Another seven US states are set to follow suit; anti-trans groups in the UK want similar bans here.

    As Christine Burns MBE put it:

    Can we all agree now that trans people and our allies aren’t “overreacting”, “misunderstanding” or “making stuff up” about the true intentions of those ranged against us? Making laws to prohibit doctors from providing evidence-based treatment is not normal and people will die.

  • They are coming for your children

    Katelyn Burns reports on the coordinated assault on trans kids’ healthcare by right-wing US lawmakers.

    eight state legislatures — including Missouri, Florida, Illinois, Oklahoma, Colorado, South Carolina, Kentucky, and South Dakota — have already introduced bills this year that would criminally punish doctors who follow best practices for treating adolescents with gender dysphoria. In South Dakota, for example, doctors who prescribe puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones could face a $2,000 fine and a year in prison under the proposed law. South Dakota’s version of the bill was even prioritized and became the very first bill of the decade to pass out of committee… should any of the bills become law, they would effectively cut off many adolescents from medically necessary and, often, life-saving treatment for gender dysphoria.

    …Bills banning trans care for kids are the new bathroom bills, part of conservatives’ larger culture war against trans people. Conservative media and politicians have been fanning the flames for this fight for years in hopes of rallying the base over a non-existent threat — a threat that only puts trans lives in danger.

    Whenever the religious right realises a tactic isn’t working, it finds a new one. When it lost its war on equal marriage, it changed tactics and started attacking trans people – it’s no coincidence that the current media obsession with trans people began after 2017, when various evangelical groups agreed and began to implement their new focus on demonising trans women.

    At first, they tried to make people scared of trans women in public places, but the public is well aware that you’re more likely to be sexually assaulted by a Republican politician or evangelical rabble-rouser than a trans person. So they refined that one and started to say that predatory men would pretend to be trans so that they could start acting like Republican politicians.

    That didn’t fly either, so it’s time to kill some kids.

    Puberty blockers are rarely prescribed. When they are, they save lives.

    Study after study have shown that affirming trans and gender-diverse kids in their self-exploration improves mental health and lowers suicide risk. The affirming model, which allows children to explore their own gender identities at their own pace and can include puberty blockers, has been recommended by nearly every major American medical association, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the Endocrine Society, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and many others.

    But of course, bigots don’t really do facts – especially when there are votes to be won.  “Your children are under threat from minority X and only I can protect them” may be one of the oldest and most despicable political tactics in the book, but it works so it’s being rolled out again. Under the pretence of protecting children, these yahoos are quite happy at the prospect of killing quite a few of them. What’s a few more dead trans kids to people who wish trans people didn’t exist at all?

    We’re starting to see exactly the same thing shift in strategy happening here in the UK, although not from openly evangelical and/or right-wing groups: from the same anti-trans activists who previously parroted the evangelical right’s previous attack lines and whose suspiciously well funded pressure groups didn’t exist before the evangelicals started their war on trans people in 2017. Many of those groups have overt or covert links to the US evangelical group The Heritage Foundation, which plays a key role in the US bills.

    What conservative lawmakers are doing with their legislation is removing parents’ and kids’ choices altogether, forcing their own political ideology on the medical choices of private citizens.

    This is a murderous ideology that chants “think of the children!” while trying to ban healthcare that keeps some of them alive.

  • “If I don’t stand up for the rights of others, how can my own rights ever be defended?”

    There’s a really good interview in today’s Guardian with Michael Cashman, whose many achievements include founding the Stonewall charity.

    Remember the tabloid outrage about the first gay kiss in EastEnders? Cashman was the man they were demonising. The clipping above, incidentally, is by Piers Morgan. Morgan would also write article such as “the poofs of pop”, a regular feature speculating on whether particular pop stars were gay in which he called up stars’ agents and demanded to know what their sexual orientation was.

    Cashman was nervous at the thought of the press scrutiny that could follow, but agreed. Even before his character was announced, the Sun ran a story about the role under the headline “Eastbenders”.

    “What made it worse,” says Cashman, now 69 and sitting in his fourth-floor Limehouse apartment overlooking the Thames, “was the information was leaked from inside.” The Sunday Mirror, meanwhile, claimed that he had had an HIV test in the US and was dying. The News of the World ran a double-page spread, headlined “Secret Gay Love of Aids Scare EastEnder”, which outed his partner and printed the couple’s photos and address.

    There was even an attempt to orchestrate “sinister” stories about him.

    …When news broke that Cashman’s character would share the first gay kiss in a British soap (a peck on the forehead), the backlash only intensified. Campaigners such as Mary Whitehouse railed against it; the BBC was besieged by angry letters and phone calls; on more than one occasion a brick was thrown through Cashman’s window.

    It’s a fascinating read and I’m sure Cashman’s autobiography is even more so. It’s a powerful reminder of how far we’ve come in a relatively short period of time as well as a shocking story of how badly and sometimes violently gay men have been treated in this country.

    Stonewall, the charity Cashman founded, was created in response to the hateful Section 28 legislation and the lack of action to battle HIV, then routinely described as a “gay plague” and dismissed as a fiction by the Sunday Times under the editorship of Andrew Neil. The Sun ran one editorial claiming that “Straight Sex Cannot Give You AIDS – Official”.

    Stonewall didn’t initially include trans people in its campaigning – that changed in 2015 when then-chief Ruth Hunt described that lack of inclusion as a mistake – but Cashman can see the parallels between how trans people are treated now and how gay men and women were treated in Stonewall’s early days.

    “To bring in section 28 against a group of people who should have been supported and nurtured and loved. To do that was viciousness beyond imagining.”

    Throughout the 80s and 90s, gay people were often portrayed as predators by media organisations supportive of section 28. Cashman sees similarities in the way the trans community is treated today. And he is concerned that some lesbian, gay and bisexual people are joining in.

    “If I don’t stand up for the rights of others, how can my own rights ever be defended?” he says. “The fact that lesbian and gay people are willing to sacrifice trans people …we’re rolling back the clock.”

    Cashman’s autobiography, One of Them, will be published in February.