Category: LGBTQ+

  • “What the hell am I doing here? I don’t belong here”

    One of the weird things about being trans – and it’s one thing from a long list – is that if you’re male to female, you move from a life of great privilege to one where you’re among a minority. That’s not to say pre-transition you live a life of great power and glory, but in everything from career assumptions to how safe you feel walking home from the pub you inhabit a very different world from the one women do and the one you’ll come out into.

    That can cause dissonance sometimes, or at least it does for me.

    Here are two examples. One, a friend asked me to do a talk to some students. And two, I signed up for a mailing list dedicated to music.

    These are things I’ve done before, but this time they were different. In example one, the person organising the talks has a policy to always look for lecturers from minority groups (it’s a field dominated by straight white guys). And in example two, the group is for women in music.

    It’s very strange. In both cases I’ve been specifically included – my friend invited me partly because she knew I’d be up for it, and partly because as a trans person I’m part of a minority; the mailing list says it is for women and “people who identify as women” – but I still feel as if somebody’s wired my impostor syndrome to the National Grid. I’m worried that in the first case I’m taking the place of someone more deserving; in the second that I won’t have anything valuable to offer and that I’m going to be viewed with a certain degree of suspicion due to my previous life as a bloke.

    More than anything, I feel embarrassed by privilege I don’t have any more.

    A lot of this is internalised transphobia, I know: today, like every other day, national papers have run pieces suggesting that trans women are just men trying  to fraudulently gain access to women’s spaces. Even though I know it’s bullshit, four decades of that stuff means that a lot of it sticks.

    But I think it’s also that to be trans and transition as an adult can leave you in a strange place. It certainly did for me. I was never any good at being male, but I spent too long living in that identity for me to ever feel comfortable being female or to feel that I deserve to be included in anything affirmative. It may say Great Britain on my passport but I’m a citizen of nowhere.

  • God, save me from your idiot followers

    SNP MSP John Mason is outraged by plans to reform the Gender Recognition Act.

    In a letter to Glasgow’s Herald newspaper, Mr Mason says he is deeply concerned that Scotland is “trying to override science” by recognising that trans people exist.

    I’ll save you the scientific evidence, which I’ve linked to endlessly, and simply post this example of Mr Mason’s other robust pro-science views.

    Update: Just after I posted this, the following article from Tidsskriftet (the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association) appeared in my news feed.

    the ideas of purity that are partly rooted in national conservatism and partly in religious fundamentalism are not echoed by science.

    The timing amused me. Maybe that was part of God’s plan.

  • Scottish Government analysis of Gender Recognition Act reform

    A bit of light Friday reading for anybody interested in trans rights: the Scottish Government has published its analysis of its consultation over possible reforms to the Gender Recognition Act.

    It’s interesting for all kinds of reasons, including numbers: the anti-trans hysteria hadn’t really got into gear in time for this one, so there were just under 16,000 responses compared to more than 100,000 for the English consultation. Despite that, the (small) majority of responses were from people and organisations outside Scotland who would not be affected by any changes.

    Overall, 49% of respondents to the consultation are resident in Scotland, with 38% resident in the rest of the UK and the remaining 13% resident elsewhere in the world.

    A phrase that comes up again and again in the analysis is that a particular point of view – inevitably, an anti-trans one – was largely put forward by respondents from outside Scotland.

    Nevertheless, sober voices prevailed.

    The majority of respondents, 60% of those answering the question, agreed with the proposal to introduce a self-declaratory system for legal gender recognition.

  • Doing the right thing

    This is wonderful. The TIE Campaign on Twitter:

    It’s not perfect. Private schools are exempt. But if you aren’t LGBT and didn’t go to school in the era of Section 28, it’s hard to express just how incredibly big a deal this is.

    The Daily Record, Scotland’s favourite newspaper. This nonsense, which is bad enough, was over Section 28 repeal in 2000: things were even more toxic in the 1980s.

    When I went to school, 70% of people thought LGBT people were abominations. The Government, aided and abetted by the tabloids, deliberately fostered anti-gay prejudice of the “they are coming for your children” variety. I’ve written more about that era here.

    Section 28 made it illegal for local authorities – who ran state schools – to “promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.” By “promote”, the legislation meant “describe”. LGBT kids didn’t get proper sex and relationship education and many in-school support groups shut down fearing prosecution.

    And now, we have our government vowing to protect LGBT kids and putting measures in place to do just that.

    As David Jamieson reports for Commonspace: (the site’s been having some issues so it might not load)

    Tie Campaign co-founder Jordan Daly said: “After three years of campaigning, we are delighted that LGBT-inclusive education will now become a reality in all of Scotland’s state schools.

    “This means that all young people will learn about the LGBT community; their contributions to our society, the history of our equal rights movements, and the impact of homophobic, biphobic, and transphobic prejudice and bullying.

    “The implementation of LGBT-inclusive education across all state schools is a world first, and in a time of global uncertainty, this sends a strong and clear message to LGBT young people that they are valued here in Scotland.

    This will save lives. I love this country so much sometimes.

  • Oh lord, save me from sniggering bigotry

    Imagine this.

    It’s 2018 and a publicity-seeking entrepreneur embarks on a high-profile court case.

    “If it’s okay for black men to marry white women, then it should be OK for me to marry my pet pig,” he chuckles. Newspapers and radio make it their light-hearted story of the week.

    No? Let’s try this one.

    It’s 2018 and a publicity-seeking entrepreneur embarks on a high-profile court case.

    “If it’s okay for lesbian women to marry, then it should be OK for me to marry my dog,” he sniggers. Newspapers and radio make it their light-hearted story of the week.

    No?

    It’s 2018 and a publicity-seeking entrepreneur embarks on a high-profile court case.

    “If it’s okay for disabled people to get special parking spaces, then it should be OK for me to identify as disabled,” he snorts. Newspapers and radio make it their light-hearted story of the week.

    Still not with me?

    It’s 2018 and a publicity-seeking entrepreneur embarks on a high-profile court case.

    “If it’s okay for trans people to change their legal genders, then it should be OK for me to change my legal date of birth,” he snorts. Newspapers and radio make it their light-hearted story of the week.

    That one happened.

    The guy’s intent doesn’t matter; it’s irrelevant whether he genuinely feels hard done by or if he’s using this to promote something. There is no substantive difference between the coverage of this story and repeating the “I identify as an attack helicopter” abuse trans people get on social media. It reinforces the trope that trans people are tricksters or mentally ill, that legal gender is something people change on a whim.

    Meanwhile in news you probably didn’t see today, Reuters reports that UK doctors push one in five trans people to discredited “pray the gay away” conversion therapy and that LGBT patients experience “shockingly high levels of hostility and unfair treatment” in their dealings with healthcare professionals.

    That’s trans folks’ light-hearted story of the week, and every week.

  • How advertising regulation doesn’t work

    Last month, the extremely dodgy anti-trans group Fair Play For Women dropped a five-figure sum on a full page advert in the Metro claiming that reforms to the Gender Recognition Act would threaten women’s safety. It was cynical. It was designed to whip up hatred. And it was absolute bullshit.

    Some of us complained to the Advertising Standards Agency, which regulates print advertising. They’ve just sent me their verdict.

    With regards to the complaint you made, also along with several other complainants, we understand that you are concerned that the ad misleadingly implied that women will be at risk as a result of the Gender Recognition Act consultation. After assessing the ad in light of this concern, we think it may have broken the Advertising Rules on misleadingness and we have taken steps the address this.

    Unfortunately the verdict is irrelevant and the steps – telling the group not to make such claims again – are pointless. The advertisement ran, the government consultation is now closed. Trans people were silenced; unfortunately the bigots weren’t.

  • Trans kids aren’t being fast-tracked to anything

    I’ve written many times about the “detransition myth”, the oft-repeated and thoroughly debunked claim that most trans kids who go through medical transition then change their minds. The short version: anti-trans groups tell you that 80% of trans kids detransition; the actual numbers show that 80% of gender non-conforming kids aren’t trans. Those kids aren’t given any medical treatment whatsoever.

    It doesn’t stop the bullshit, unfortunately. The weekend papers were full of it once again this week, prioritising scaremongering nonsense from anonymous “concerned parents” over actual facts.

    Wouldn’t it be great if the newspapers had some real numbers to work with?

    Over the weekend, the various medical experts that comprise the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) had a conference. This is important, because it’s the WPATH guidelines that (eventually) inform the healthcare trans people are given. They’re a serious bunch.

    One presentation analysed detransition rates in the Nottingham gender clinic, a very large provider of trans-related assessment, counselling and healthcare. Of the 303 trans kids studied, how many do you think detransitioned?

    It should be easy. If there’s an 80% detransition rate, you’d expect to see 242 people detransitioning.

    The actual number?

    One.

    From the study:

    Only one person of the 303 reviewed made a detransition (0.33%). They later transitioned again.

    There were two other detransitioners, but they withdrew before ever attending the clinic. But even if you take them into account, the real world detransition rate was 0.99%.

    The “why” is as interesting as the “how many”. Detransition wasn’t because the patients realised they weren’t trans. The patients said they couldn’t continue because their families were unsupportive: things were just too difficult.

    Unlike the newspapers, I’m going to point out the flaws in the numbers I’m using to make my point. It was a study over one year, it’s just one gender clinic, and over time you’d expect more people to revert to their original gender presentation because as I’m the first to admit, this shit is hard. Forums are full of stories of people who came out and attempted transition only to retreat because their lives were so spectacularly shit due to lack of familial acceptance and the prejudice of others. Eventually they re-transition, but it’s often many years later.

    I would expect the actual numbers over a longer period to be higher than 0.99%.

    However, the numbers do correlate with others: the numbers from private trans health providers, many of whom can’t name a single case of permanent detransition; the surgical regret rate of 2% among gender confirmation surgery patients (that’s the kind of regret rate many surgeons can only dream of. It’s much higher among, say, cosmetic surgery providers); the many studies that show trans kids with supportive families living happier lives and the ones with unsupportive families living miserable ones.

    One of the reasons detransition rates are so low is because we already have a cruel but effective way of weeding out people who aren’t serious or who aren’t strong enough to cope. It’s called the NHS. The system is so overloaded and waiting lists are so long that the supposed “fast tracking” you read about in the papers is a process that can take two or three years just to get to an initial assessment, with another couple of years of assessments.

    What’s fast about that?

  • Even The Guardian reckons The Guardian is scaremongering

    In the final days of the Gender Recognition Act consultation, the (UK) Guardian newspaper published a one-sided string of anti-trans pieces culminating in an editorial regurgitating a lot of bigots’ tropes about dangerous predators. The latest criticism of it comes from an unlikely source: most of the US edition’s writers and editors. For journalists to openly criticise their colleagues in such a fashion is incredibly unusual.

    The piece, published yesterday, is credited to three writers but is apparently representative of almost all the US editorial team’s opinion. Reporter Sam Levin on Twitter:

    The @Guardian published an editorial about trans rights that many @GuardianUS staff felt was transphobic. Nearly all reporters and editors from our US offices wrote to UK editors with our concerns.

    Senior reporter Lois Beckett:

    Nearly all reporters and editors on @GuardianUS staff wrote our UK editors with concerns about a recent @guardian editorial on trans rights, which we believe promoted transphobic viewpoints.

    The article has also been shared approvingly on social media by a number of women journalists, some of whom are Guardian contributors.

    It doesn’t pull its punches.

    The editorial’s unsubstantiated argument only serves to dehumanize and stigmatize trans people. Numerous academic studies have confirmed that trans-inclusive policies do not endanger cis people. On the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence that trans people, particularly women of color, are victimized at disproportionately high rates and suffer abuse in places of public accommodations. Levels of HIV and depression are at crisis levels, all brought about through extreme prejudice and social and economic marginalization.

    …Cis women’s intolerance should not be a legitimate reason for limiting the rights of trans women. The idea that all trans women should be denied civil rights because a trans woman might someday commit a crime is the essence of bigotry and goes against feminist values.

    The UK edition has occasionally featured positive trans voices, albeit sparingly: Juliet Jacques’ transition diaries in 2012, for example, or one-off pieces by trans writers such as Shon Faye more recently. But the editorial appears to be the final straw for many of those voices.

    It’s a final straw because there’s a difference between having a columnist put forward a point of view and having the newspaper’s leader column do it. The former is “this is what one individual thinks”. The latter, “this is what the newspaper stands for.” By nailing anti-trans colours to its mast, the UK edition has told its trans contributors as well as its trans readers that it doesn’t value them, that it doesn’t respect them, and that it has no interest in speaking for them.

    The Guardian likes to quote its former owner and editor, CP Scott. It’s less keen on mentioning that he was on the wrong side of history on several issues, most notably the “misguided fanaticism” of the suffragettes. The Manchester Guardian was on the wrong side then, and the UK edition of The Guardian is on the wrong side now.

  • The right side of history, and of science


    Law.com:

    Dozens of companies, including Microsoft Corp., Google Inc. and The Coca-Cola Co., pushed back against recent attempts by the Trump administration to reduce protections for transgender people under federal civil rights laws. They instead stressed the importance of equality in a public statement released Thursday.

    The 56 companies include major financial institutions, tech companies and retail giants, among other household names, such as JPMorgan Chase & Co., Deutsche Bank, IBM Corp. and American Airlines.

    It’s notable that Twitter and Facebook are on the list: their support doesn’t seem to extend to doing anything about the widespread, vicious abuse of trans people on their services.

    Still, it’s good to see such important organisations making such public support – although in the long term, we’ll see it as a “well, of course they did” thing because despite what you might read online, the science is firmly on our side.

    It’s hard to see many positives to the Trump administration’s war on trans people, but one little bit of sunlight is the horrified response from the scientific community.

    At the time of writing some 1,642 scientists, including 8 Nobel laureates, have written an open letter to politicians about Trump’s anti-trans plans. The list includes “Biologists, Geneticists, Psychologists, Anthropologists, Physicians, Neuroscientists, Social Scientists, Biochemists, [and] Mental Health Service Providers”.

    They are not a lunatic fringe. More:

    Scientific American: The Trump Administration’s Proposed “Redefinition” of Gender Is Scientifically Absurd
    Nature: US proposal for defining gender has no basis in science
    Wired: Trump’s plan to redefine gender makes no scientific sense
    The Union of Concerned Scientists: Trump Administration Proposal on Gender is Discrimination, Not Science
    Center for Biological Diversity: Statement on Reported Trump Memo Targeting Transgender People
    STAT: Scientists see a problem with Trump plan on defining sex: biology
    STAT: CDC’s Redfield on Trump’s transgender proposal: Stigma is ‘not in the interest of public health’
    New Yorker: The Trump administration’s plan to redefine gender recalls an earlier rejection of science
    TIME: The Idea of a ‘DNA Test’ for Transgender People Is Part of a Long, Dark History
    TIME: If the Government Redefines Gender to Exclude Trans People, It Could Worsen an Urgent Public Health Crisis
    NYT: Anatomy does not determine gender, experts say
    The Scientist: Trump Administration’s Definitions of Sex Defy Science
    Mashable: The Trump administration says there are two sexes. The science says they’re wrong
    Psychology Today: Trump administration’s definition of gender is not science
    Healio: Rolling back transgender protections would endanger patients, experts say
    Washington Post: The Trump administration is trying to tell people they aren’t who they are
    Washington Post: Powerful gay rights groups excluded trans people for decades — leaving them vulnerable to Trump’s attack
    Kaiser Health News: Defining A Person’s Sex At Birth And Making It Unchangeable Would Be ‘An Insult To Science,’ Biologists Say
    Truthout: Right-wing fantasies about gender are killing trans people
    Esquire: Trump’s new attack on transgender people is another sign it’s about the cruelty itself
    Philly.com: With lie-filled ‘nationalist’ war on caravan, transgender people, Trump moves US toward tyranny

    It’s interesting to compare the UK and the US. In the US, the politicians are scaremongering about trans people and the press is largely pro-science. In the UK, the politicians are largely pro-science and the press is doing the scaremongering.

  • Out

    Image from Reddit.

    Two years ago today, I began coming out as trans. I say “began” because while the initial announcement is an event, it’s merely the beginning of a process. I come out all over again every time I walk out the door, every time I pick up the phone, every time I meet someone new.

    Not everybody chooses to come out. On a forum I frequent, one trans woman has decided not to come out. She fears losing her relationship with her family, fears her ex making it hard to see her kids, works in an environment where she has reason to believe coming out would cost her her job.

    “It really feels like a step too far,” she says, “especially with attitudes towards trans people being what they are in the UK at the minute. I’m not sure I could take the abuse if it came.”

    Her decision is the opposite of mine: better to live a miserable life than to lose family, friends, job and everything else. And for her it’s clearly the right decision.

    I can understand that. In very many ways the last two years have been the worst two years of my life. They’ve definitely been the hardest. I lost my marriage, moved out of the family home and see much less of my children. I lost most of my friends and have had many close relationships stretched to breaking point. Maybe beyond breaking point. I spend two hours a week getting stubble torn from my face in an ultimately futile attempt to make me appear more feminine, my face sore and swollen for days afterwards, while the hormones that make me feel better have made me put on so much weight I can’t bear to see myself in photographs. People stare, and talk about me. Some days I’m so sad I can’t function. I have no doubts that I’ll die alone.

    I was asked the other day: was it worth it?

    And I honestly can’t answer that, because I don’t feel it was a choice. I didn’t come out because I wanted to. I came out because I had to. I’m certain that if I hadn’t, I wouldn’t be here. And sometimes I wish I’d taken that option instead.

    Don’t worry. I’m fine. I have good friends now, reasons to be cheerful. But sometimes I think we need to stop fixing a smile for just a little while and say: you know what? Being trans is incredibly, unbelievably shit sometimes. I’m amazed that so few people detransition (that is, go back to living in the gender they were assigned at birth): to be looked at and often stared at every time you go anywhere, to be constantly misgendered, to be attacked by politicians and pundits, to see a body you didn’t want in the mirror, to spend a significant amount of your time feeling scared… who would choose that?

    I chose that. But it wasn’t really a choice.