Ok, I'm not going to answer the poll because none of the options corresponds to my view, which is complex, as you might expect. Indeed Zenda I have to say that if, as you claim, you did not intend to stir things up then the use of inflammatory language like "I don't give a toss," rather than the less potentially offensive "Other – please explain" was, in my view somewhat unwise.
If people read this post I would ask you please read ALL of it IN DETAIL and don't just skim it or you will not understand my view properly and may end up getting needlessly upset because you think I am saying something that I am not. I repeat, my view is complex and subtle and has been developing over a long period of time.
Firstly let me clearly state that I believe that everyone deserves legal recognition and protection appropriate to their full needs, BUT that does not mean that this recognition has to be identical for two slightly differing sets of needs. Indeed to try to apply the exact same rules when there are hard physical differences may actually risk making the legislation ineffective and therefore serving the needs of neither group particularly well.
To give you an analogy apples and strawberries are both fruit. They both require cold storage but there are still subtle differences in the exact nature of the storage that they require. Any supplier who ignored this inconvenient truth would soon have a lot of spoiled fruit.
Anyone reading the briefing notes submitted to the drafting team for the UK gender recognition act will find a submission from Jenny D. & Alison B. in which we argued that the act should indeed be at least partly predicated on genital surgery.
By this we did not mean to imply that non ops should be completely unrecognised or protected, but that perhaps there should be separate categories of recognition created appropriate to the exact situation of the person applying.To save you googling it you can read the full text of our submission here
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200203/jtselect/jtrights/188/188we27.htm however I would ask you to bear in mind that our views have altered slightly in the eight years that have passed since that submission was drafted.
Our basis for saying what we did at that time was that we felt that the wider population might not accept an act founded on a different basis, and therefore the law might become unworkable. Happily those concerns have proved incorrect, and insofar as that is the case I am happy to say that my view has changed somewhat.
That said, as I feared, there have been some difficulties caused by the act's inclusiveness, for example in the provision of certain services, where, thanks to the doubt about the genital status of a gender recognized person, the law against discrimination has been amended to remove certain protections the absence of which are particularly important to postop people. Likewise the criteria used to support the inclusive nature of the act themselves ironically sometimes discriminate against intersex people who now cannot get their documents amended because they do not fit the diagnostic selection criteria laid down.
So my view now is that that all three categories deserve separate tailor-made protections and recognition. None is more deserving than the others, but as they present different legal issues and indeed are likely to face slightly different social challenges the law would actually serve ALL groups better by a more profiled approach. That is in an ideal world.
HOWEVER – the bottom line is that we don't live in an ideal world, and if the choice is between the flawed but inclusive act that we have, and leaving non op community out in the cold entirely then the inclusive approach is clearly the more compassionate course to take.
Finally I hereby give notice that there are those of us who find the hurt, hatred, and anger, that surrounds this whole debate, to be profoundly unsettling and upsetting. I have been giving serious thought to whether my presence in this community serves any useful purpose other than to needlessly upset me when I read some of the mistrust and vitriol that surrounds topics like this.
I am not yet at a point where I am about to announce my departure, but I would appeal to you ALL to debate this with mutual respect please. I hold certain views. That does not mean that I do not value and respect others who hold differing views. My views may be wrong, so may theirs, but each of us can only speak from our own experience. By all means disagree with me but PLEASE – no hate – because it will achieve nothing but further destruction and weakening of all of us.
