FOR those following the debate around trans lives in Scotland, three very interesting things happened last Thursday – a rally, an announcement and the long-awaited publication of Scotland’s second consultation on reforming the Gender Recognition Act. Each tells a part of a broader story.
Firstly, the consultation results. There’s no denying that the announcement of a second consultation on GRA reform caused serious unease in Scotland’s LGBT+ community. At that time, the process of moving toward a system of self-declaration had already been so painfully drawn out that it was an act of political weakness to kick the issue into the future in the face of a small, but loud, minority in opposition to it – particularly given that the first consultation had shown a significant majority of Scots backed the proposed changes.
Yet in the face of a press so hostile to trans equality that not so long ago, The Economist tweeted the question “Should transgender people be sterilised before they are recognised?” (it later apologised, saying it had been wrong to use the line out of its context), the second consultation has found that a majority of organisations are still in favour of reform.
And while human rights issues should never come with the caveat that they are more popular than morally necessary, it will at least help to dispel the wilful delusion that opposition to trans liberation is anything more than a minority position within Scotland.
READ MORE: Scottish Government to press ahead with gender recognition reform
Secondly, the announcement. Like the proverbial butterfly awaiting the time to press its coloured splendour into the world, GRA reform is back on the cards – but it won’t come without a struggle.
Reforming the act remains such a miniscule step toward trans liberation as to be wholly irrelevant to the vast majority of Scots – a change to the process by which transgender people can update their legal documents and nothing more. Yet having become such a lynchpin for middle-class Scotland’s backlash against equalities legislation, it has in turn taken on more cultural significance than simple bureaucracy has any right to.
In passing, it will be the downfall of the many myths and unfounded warnings against transgender people that have come to make up the bulwark of so-called gender-critical discourse, placing Scotland alongside its many European neighbours which have already introduced a process of gender self-declaration without issue.
And finally, the rally outside the Scottish Parliament. When people began organising against GRA reform, it was hard to breathe with all the dust being brushed off the old homophobic arguments of the 1980s – and while those rehashed arguments may have maintained their polished gleam these past few years, the similarities between today’s opposition to trans equality and the backward reactionary politics of the past are becoming increasingly clear.
The rally outside the Scottish Parliament was a fascinating mix of "gender critical" activists alongside the anti-LGBT Scottish Family Party and various Conservative MSPs who came out to show their support.
Most concerningly, however, a call also appeared to go out on the Telegram channel for members of the neo-Nazi group Patriotic Alternative to join the rally after noon.
A quick glance at a snapshot of the gathering and I suspect you would struggle to place what year this had taken place – and not just because several attendees had come cosplaying as Suffragettes.
Judging from images shared online, it looked like an outright parade of the greatest hits of homophobia – dire warnings for the future of our children alongside calls for Nicola Sturgeon to “leave our kids alone”.
I wouldn’t want to play the guilt-by-association game, but I do wonder at what point gender-critical activists will look around and wonder if they have perhaps planted themselves on the wrong side of history.
PERHAPS when you find yourself allied with the party that introduced the rape clause, whose austerity policies and benefit cuts disproportionately hurt women, it is maybe not the case that you are standing up for women at all.
When I started writing this column, I had intended for it to serve as a warning of sorts; a reminder that it is said the darkest hour comes just before the dawn. It came off the back of news that actor David Paisley, an outspoken gay rights activist and supporter of trans rights, would be leaving Scotland after receiving threats from a man who also claimed to know his home address.
READ MORE: Trans people in Scotland tell of workplace bullying and harassment
A co-founder of the Woman’s Place organisation responded to the news by tweeting mocked-up a “David Paisley Threat Level” meter suggesting it was time to leave the country when “women won’t wheesht”, rather than acknowledge the impact of the harmful rhetoric that has come to define any discussion around trans equality. This, alongside the return of slogans painfully used against Scotland’s LGBT+ community in the past, led me to despair but instead I want to leave on a note of hope.
Haud fast. The end of this chapter is in sight. It will take pressure on the Scottish Government to follow through. It will take a community coming together, still, to look after one another. It will take strength and humour and resilience.
And then it will pass – and with it, these slogans and placards will find themselves once again in the dustbin of history.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel