Mick Hartley

Is the tide finally turning against trans mania? asks Jo Bartosch:

It was 2015 when I first sat down with my former MP and told him that transgenderism was a threat to civil society. He eyed me with the sort of benevolent scepticism usually reserved for people who claim Jesus sends them messages through car number plates. At the time there were just a handful of people warning that men were marching in size-10 stilettos into women-only hospital wards and on to female-only shortlists by identifying as trans. We were smeared as hysterical haters targeting a vulnerable group who just wanted to be accepted as women.

But today many others are coming round to the view that trans ideology really does pose a problem.

And no wonder. After all, the news is punctuated with stories of violent male offenders being sent into women’s prisons because they claim they are ‘women on the inside’. Over the past five years alone, the number of those who identify as transgender in the prison population has increased by approximately 175 per cent. It seems reasonable to surmise that in earlier decades physically intact men who dress as women would have been labelled run-of-the-mill transvestites, and not a vulnerable minority in need of legal protection.

And then there are the detransitioners. These are people who were told that their mental distress could be solved by changing sex. They are now exposing this as a lie, sold to them by ideologically blinkered clinicians.

Perhaps views about trans activism began to change in 2017, when trans activist Tara Wolf punched women’s rights campaigner Maria Maclachlan at Speakers’ Corner. Maclachlan was reprimanded in court by the judge for failing to refer to her attacker with female pronouns.

In the intervening years the national conversation has moved on. There is now widespread public awareness of a clash between the desire of a minority to self-identify their gender and the existing sex-based rights of the majority….

There is a certain dark satisfaction to watching the world catch up. But the ‘I told you so’ would be sweeter were there not so many victims of the trans mania that has gripped our political and cultural elites, and if ordinary people weren’t still being persecuted for telling the truth. Indeed, it would be easier to laugh at the obvious absurdity of trans mania if women weren’t still locked in prisons and on hospital wards with delusional and dangerous men. We still have a long way to go before women’s rights are fully secured.

A long way to go indeed.

At an Oxford City Council meeting on Monday, a motion entitled “Becoming a Trans Inclusive Council” was approved. The BBC reported that it was ‘backed overwhelmingly‘, which, given that it passed almost unanimously in the chamber, might seem like a fair account. But the story isn’t that simple.

Some of us expressed serious concern that hidden among the statements — such as “the council will seek to better support transgender and non-binary people to live happy, healthy and fulfilling lives” — were commitments with enormous ramifications for the legal protections of sex-based rights. The motion itself, which didn’t include a legally necessary Equality Impact Assessment, promised that sweeping changes to policies, services and procedures, would be made.

In the agenda documents, planned statements from a member of the public compared critics of trans-inclusivity to Evangelical Christians and even Nazis (removed when delivered, without apology). A number of claims were posited as scientific fact. Gender identity, for example, was referred to as “neurological” and “genetically determined”.

Many residents first heard about the motion in a news article released after the deadline to request to speak or for questions. One anonymous resident told us that she had not heard back after contacting the council with her concerns. Another resident asked to speak and was told she could not as the deadline had passed. Recent motions on subjects like electric scooters were given wide public consultation, but it seems no effort was made by the council to solicit alternative perspectives in this case.

‘Debate’ speeches during the proposal’s twenty minute slot were unanimously in favour of the ruling. Submitted concerns were not mentioned once. And with that, a well-meaning motion was passed, starting a path of uncertain consequences for women served by the council. By passing a motion including statements such as “trans women are women”, councillors had almost unanimously indirectly pledged to prioritise gender over biological sex. Acting on the basis of this statement (with its implications upon sex-based rights), is likely to bring the council’s future policies into conflict with existing laws.

It is not yet clear what the impact of this motion will be for women in Oxford. However, there is a feeling among some that they can no longer expect their voices to be heard or valued, with the council’s position now firmly sealed. Steadily the number of places willing to support its female residents is falling across the city. Numerous local organisations including the Council and Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust continue to be members of the controversial Stonewall scheme, despite the recent public scrutiny of its practices.

This year, the Oxford Student Union has introduced a seven page definition of transphobia, which includes forbidding “claims” that women’s rights and trans rights may ever conflict. Academics are hounded to the point where, in the case of Professor Selina Todd, they require security at their work. Not a single councillor across four political factions was willing to publicly discuss their residents’ concerns. As a city many across the world look to lead the way, it may concern them which direction they may be heading.