On February 24th the Gender Identity (Protected Characteristic) Bill 2016-17 is expected to have its second reading debate in the House of Commons. The purpose of the Bill is “to make gender identity a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 in place of gender reassignment and to make associated provision for transgender and other persons; and for connected purposes.”
To enshrine gender identity in law would give any man legal status as a woman (or vice versa) based only on personal feelings, effectively establishing “gender identity” as the only legal distinction between men and women. “Gender identity” by definition, excludes and denies the existence of biological sex. The protected characteristic “sex” would therefore be replaced by “gender identity.”
This protected characteristic would also apply to children and adolescents whose identities are still immature, developing and highly susceptible to influence from adults. Its legal establishment would have serious implications for both parents and children as well as the safety of women and girls.
- Sex-segregated facilities designed for the protection of women and girls would become segregated by gender identity. Everyone, including children, would be legally bound to believe the gender identity of anyone else, child or adult. A young girl who finds herself in a public changing-room with a naked adult male would be legally forced to call him a woman if he identifies as such. She would no longer have any recourse to legal protection from any man entering her private spaces, the law would demand that she protect his “identity”
- Allowing boys and adult males into organisations for only girls would be legally enforced, as would the advertisement of these organisations as “for girls only” as Girlguiding UK already does. The deception of girls would become a legal requirement
- Legally, any child expressing a cross-sex identity would only be affirmed by professionals as the sex they identify as – activists have pressured professional bodies to fall into line in describing any other approach as “conversion therapy” and this political stance would be legally enshrined. Children would be denied normal duty of care standards in all counselling and therapy
- The incoherent ideology promoted by all transgender organisations such as Mermaids and Gendered Intelligence would be legally validated as truth
- More parents will believe they must take their child’s identity as proof of their sex, fewer parents will have the confidence to trust in their own judgments if the law protects their child’s immature identity as a fixed and unchanging reality
- In contravention of the advice of the Endocrine Society; more young children will be socially transitioned, more will progress to puberty blockers followed by cross-sex hormones, more will be sterilised. There will consequently be fewer gay and lesbian adults and more trans people on a lifetime of medication. The growing community of young adults who realise their transition was a mistake will inevitably increase further
- Parents in custody disputes may be penalised if they do not affirm a child’s “gender identity”; the law may favour the parent who honours the protected characteristic
- All teachers and professionals working with children and adolescents would be legally bound to affirm and validate a child’s “gender identity,” withhold any other model of understanding gender, and deny children any other means of understanding their feelings
- Teaching “gender identity” to children in schools would become sanctioned as part of the Equality and Human Rights PSHE curriculum and its integration into the teaching of biology must logically follow
- Freedom of speech would be denied to all on the subject of male and female biology, as “gender identity” depends on its erasure. Girls would not be allowed to express discomfort if a male classmate used their toilet or changing-room, or name him as male. Talking about female biological functions such as menstruation would be outlawed as hate speech; girls will be denied the language to talk about their bodies
- Sex-role stereotypes would be enshrined in law and children would be trained to believe that cultural ideas of “appropriate” behaviour and interests is what defines them as either boys or girls, and not biological sex
All of the above is already happening. There is still room, however, for potentially challenging a school policy for example, on the grounds of rights under the protected characteristic “sex” which institutions still have an obligation to consider. This right to challenge will be taken away if the protected characteristic is changed to “gender identity” because in the eyes of the law, if established, gender identity is sex.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
How far would the gender identity protected characteristic be in contravention of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? We would question it in regard to the following Articles:
Article 3 (best interests of the child)
The best interests of the child must be a top priority in all decisions and actions that affect children.
Is it in the best interests of the child to: teach them a belief in place of facts; affirm them in an identity which will leave them sterilised and medicalised for life; force girls to share spaces with males and take away their right to recognise or name them as males; take away all children’s right to name biological reality?
Article 13 (freedom of expression)
Every child must be free to express their thoughts and opinions and to access all kinds of information, as long as it is within the law.
Protection of “gender identity” ensures the denial of access to any other kind of information for children and forces schools and organisations to teach them exclusively an idea with no basis in science as “truth.” Children would be denied the freedom to express thoughts and opinions which contradict gender identity ideology, such as pointing out that someone is male or defining a girl as a member of the female sex. Teachers and youth leaders would be obliged to silence such “opinions”
Article 17 (access to information from the media)
Every child has the right to reliable information from a variety of sources, and governments should encourage the media to provide information that children can understand. Governments must help protect children from materials that could harm them.
No variety of sources is permitted if “gender identity” becomes legally protected; any challenge to this orthodoxy would be outlawed. “Gender identity” ideology is harmful to children as evidenced by the exponential rise in referrals to gender clinics, the doubling in the number of children contacting Childline with worries about their “gender” and the growth of the community of young adults who regret their decision to transition before they were mature enough to understand what they were really doing
Article 36 (other forms of exploitation)
Governments must protect children from all other forms of exploitation, for example the exploitation of children for political activities, by the media or for medical research.
Children are being exploited by adult activists with a political agenda to enshrine their invented “born in the wrong body” idea into law. Children who are experiencing cross-sex confusion and adolescents expressing normal gender and sexual exploration are being used as “evidence” of an incoherent, untested and unscientific belief. Children and adolescents are unknowingly being used in an unacknowledged medical experiment in an untested area for which there exist no long-term medical research trials
Please contact your Local MP and ask them to attend the second reading of the Bill and to oppose it on these grounds. A brief email would do, but we have also compiled more documents on the impact this legislation would have on children and adolescents which you can download if you would like more detailed information:
You can find your local MP here. Thank you!