The spectre of Section 28 still lingers on but there's hope for better LGBTQIA+ equality in the UK...

Today marks 30 years since Margaret Thatcher decided to enact Section 28, a draconian and discriminatory piece of legislation designed to stop education professionals in schools across the UK from discussing non-heteronormative sexual orientations in the classroom (with a specific focus on stopping gay and lesbian people, including teachers from talking about their sexual orientation and life experiences with students) with the ultimate aim of reducing the “promotion” of LGBTQIA+ lifestyles. Local authorities were also prevented from such “promoting”, with libraries being forced into not stocking literature or films that contained primarily gay, bi or lesbian themes, although Jeanette Winterson's Oranges are Not the Only Fruit (1985) was a notable novel read by students and studied for GCSE and A-Level exams which allowed young people to read about the life experiences of a young lesbian growing up in a deeply religious (Pentecostal) community.

I feel I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the LGBTQIA+ campaigners who fought against the introduction of this despicable clause from the off. For example, Joe Summerlad in his article for the Independent mentions the three amazing lesbian activists, calling themselves the “Lesbian Avengers” managed to gain access to the public gallery of the House of Lords and abseiled down to the chamber, an act which gained them and the anti-Section 28 cause national attention (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/section-28-explained-lgbt-education-schools-homosexuality-gay-queer-margaret-thatcher-a8366741.html) Mancunians also made their feelings towards the legislation clear with the “Never Going Underground” demo which took place on the 20^th February 1988, and which attracted at least 20,000 demonstrators from around the UK and had speakers including Jimmy Somerville (http://www.gayinthe80s.com/2018/02/section-28-feb-20th-1988-never-going-underground-demo/).

Thatcher used her Christian conservatism to attack openly gay and lesbian people. She never acknowledged publicly (to my knowledge) the existence of bisexual people and I don't even want to contemplate what her views towards openly non-binary trans people like me would have been. The Tories pretty much backed her all the way, claiming that it was Labour who were determined to bring pro-LGBTQIA+ books into school to challenge “traditional values”. The Tories capitalised on

on the fear rhetoric perpetuated by the right-wing press, just like the social conservatives and trans-exclusionary radical feminists do today with regards to their attitudes towards trans activists and further trans equality. As Ruth Hunt points out in her very pertinent article, “shocking levels of misinformation and scaremongering are cruelly attacking trans people's right to exist, as well as publicly questioning their identities. Deeply misleading headlines about the GRA (Gender Recognition Act 2004) and young people “being turned trans” echoes exactly the way LGB people were talked about under Section 28” (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/section-28-school-sexuality-education-gay-lgbt-trans-rights-thatcher-a8366751.html). Editorial teams based at The Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Express, New Statesman and The Spectator in particular need to look very carefully at the way they choose articles to include in their newspapers but I'm guessing they probably won't reform their processes given their desire to provide clickbait for the right-wing masses.

I went to primary school, junior school and the first 3 years of secondary school with Section 28 still being in place in England. It's no wonder that teachers, teaching assistants and pastoral staff were reluctant to talk about being gay, bi or lesbian to students like me in front of other students because they had not had the freedom to do so in the years before I entered the state education system.

Homophobic and biphobic language was commonplace in the junior school playground and I never heard such language challenged by the playground assistants. I have no doubt that young people I knew in my classes at secondary school internalised feelings of fear and believed the stereotypes being perpetuated and it made them feel they could not be proud of their sexuality, even after they decided to come out.

LGBTQIA+ rights have improved somewhat since the repeal of Section 28 under Tony Blair's Labour Government in 2003, not least with the introduction of the Equality Act in 2010 and the Same Sex Marriage Act 2013. However, the legacy of Section 28 still lingers on today. Just Like Us, an organisation who recruit LGBTQIA+ students to go into schools to champion LGBTQIA+ equality and that has created Schools Diversity Week to “empower schools across the UK to tackle homophobia, biphobia and transphobia” have recently reported that “almost 90% of young LGBTQ people still hear homophobic language in schools and 50% self-harm” (http://www.gaytimes.co.uk/news/106845/school-diversity-week-2018/). The Stonewall School Report 2017 found that 45% of LGBT respondents (and 65% of trans respondents) have experienced bullying at school and the statistics highlight that LGBTQIA+ people of faith and people of colour are more likely to experience bullying and hate incidents whilst at school (https://www.stonewall.org.uk/school-report-2017). Meanwhile we have radical feminist dominated organisations such as Transgender Trend who claim they are “gender critical” advocating for trans people not being given the opportunity to talk about their life experiences in school for fear of “turning children trans” (an out and out lie on their part) and we have some education professionals who have a socially conservative mindset still fiercely resisting calls to introduce LGBTQIA+ Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) into all schools in England. They cite freedom of conscience, religion and expression as a legitimate basis for their objections. Yet in their efforts to defend “traditional British values”, they fail to acknowledge the liberal, modern values that we should all possess, either as British Citizens or residents of the UK or as I like to think, as Citizens of the World. Compassion and love of diversity are values central to a liberal, progressive outlook. So are tolerance and reverence for the Rule of Law. Any programme that can reduce instances of hate incidents and hate crime motivated by homophobia, biphobia and transphobia should be endorsed wholeheartedly. Any programme that promotes love and understanding for one another over misinformation and mistrust is one that I cannot help endorse as a Lutheran Christian. Yet worrying evidence collated by Dr Laura Watt and Professor Mark Elliot from the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles carried out by 1990 and 2010 have shown that acceptance of same-sex relationships percentages has slowed down since 2000, with 60% of 16-44 year olds who attended at least 1 religious service a week viewing homosexuality as always wrong when asked in 2010 (only down by 8% from 1990 figures) (http://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/peak-acceptance-of-homosexuality/).

Demonstrating freedom of conscience and expression, the things that religious conservatives bang on about so often means that every student has the right to explore diverse life experiences through finding out about LGBTQIA+ role models. Students of all ages have the right to explore their own feelings towards sexuality and gender through access to age-appropriate RSE sources. Just as students should have the opportunity to find out about multiple faiths in their Religious Education lessons, free from teacher judgment/bias. To me therefore it is illiberal for social conservatives to even object on the grounds of conscience or religion to LGBTQIA+ people being encouraged to come into local schools and talk about their life experiences, just as it would be illiberal to object to faith representatives coming into schools to talk about their experiences.

Numerous organisations have highlighted the lack of LGBTQIA+ RSE within the PSHE curriculum post the repeal of Section 28. A survey by Stonewall found that only 13% of respondents had learned about healthy same-sex relationships, 1 in 5 had learned about consent law in relation to same-sex relationships and 20% have learnt about keeping themselves safe in same-sex experiences. Fewer students have learned about trans people's experiences of sex. As for exploring asexual (ace) experiences in the classroom, very few teachers have the awareness necessary to facilitate discussions, despite more young people coming out openly as ace whilst at secondary school (although much more research needs to be conducted to highlight this).

There are increasing numbers of LGBTQIA+ graduates entering the teaching profession and education sector as a whole and an increasing number of teachers coming out. Teach First has collated data on the number of LGBT+ teachers between 2014 and 2018 and found there had been a 4% increase. The Independent (who has really led the way on coverage of LGBTQIA+ issues I think) has an article where several LGBT teachers who have been part of the Teach First programme talk about what actions they have taken to improve awareness inside the classroom. For example Laura, a teacher based in London decided to hold LGBT+ assemblies, run clubs, and taken her sixth form students to London Pride to march. I love Laura's passion for empowering her students to be positive about their own sexuality and gender identity and agree with her that her students “will continue to strive for a more accepting and equal society (https://www.indy100.com/article/lgbt-teachers-section-28-sexuality-education-schools-8363746).

It's great that we now have more role models like Laura for students to look up-to but there still needs to be changes to attitudes in the workplace to ensure that trans, non-binary, genderqueer, gender-fluid, and agender people feel they can enter and thrive in the teaching profession. A real-time poll, carried out by the NASUWT of attendees at their LGBTI Teachers' Consultation Conference, held in Birmingham (https://www.nasuwt.org.uk/article-listing/not-doing-enough-to-promote-lgbti-equality-.html) found that:

• 43% of respondents have experienced discrimination, bullying, harassment, or victimisation in the last 12 months because of their LGBTI identity
• 29% of respondents stated that levels of anti LGBTI bullying and language have increased or stayed the same in their school in recent years
• 86% of respondents said they do not believe that the Government is doing enough to communicate the importance of LGBTI equality to schools and colleges
• 56% of respondents said their school wasn't committed to LGBTI equality for staff and pupils
• 4% of respondents said their school had a programme of activities to mark LGBT month
• 1/3 of respondents said their school or college wasn't a safe space for LGBT teachers
• 49% of attendees said they wouldn't recommend teaching as a career to families or friends.

In the same vein, a 2018 British Social Attitudes survey found that whilst over 8 in 10 British people described themselves as not being “prejudiced at all” towards trans people, only 4 in 10 had said that trans people who had the qualifications needed to become a primary school teacher should “definitely be” employed in that role (http://www.natcen.ac.uk/blog/how-do-british-people-feel-about-transphobia-and-transgender-issues). This is concerning and highlights the work that needs to be done to debunk stereotypes that have pervaded about trans people and the interactions they may have through positive engagement work with governors and parents in schools.

It must be remembered that schools and colleges (and local authorities for that matter) are bound under the Equality Act to help improve LGBT+ equality. Under the Public Sector Equality Duty, schools must ensure they pay “due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any conduct that is prohibited under the Act; to advance equality or opportunity between those who share a protected characteristic and those who do not and to foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not” (https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/Valuing%20All%20God%27s%20Children%27s%20Report_0.pdf). If schools and colleges do not adhere to this Duty, they can face enforcement action brought by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. So what more could be done by schools to further fulfill the Public Sector Equality Duty? Well for starters, every school needs to check their Equal Opportunities/Equality and Diversity policy to ensure they are trans-inclusive. A specific commitment to tackling homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying should be contained within the Anti-Bullying policy. Forms should be reviewed to ensure students can reflect their identity openly but only information that is absolutely necessary should be collected. An Equality and Diversity steering group with student representatives would be a great way of reviewing and amending such policies.

Teachers should feel empowered to follow clearly defined procedures in the event of students using persistant transphobic language in the classroom and address that language as soon as they hear it. There should be LGBTQIA+ clubs available to students to attend at lunchtime or after school with activities, support and advice being offered.

Access to training on trans awareness should be available to all members of staff and volunteers as part of their Continuing Professional Development, with that training being delivered by qualified and experienced people. Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence are examples of organisations that have offered very effective training but there are a diverse range of trainers located across the UK, including those who are trans, non-binary, genderqueer, gender-fluid or agender who could be counted upon to deliver appropriate training. Members of the community who are LGBTQIA+ should be invited to deliver assemblies, attend RSE/PSHE lessons and/or work with students on Pride celebrations.

RSE and PSHE leads should have the opportunity to attend LGBTQIA+ specific conferences and network with organisations so they can have access to the research and support network they need to deliver truly LGBTQIA+ inclusive RSE. I hope more conferences will be created for RSE professionals as the subject is made a statutory part of the curriculum from next September.

Making provisions to celebrate key awareness days and awareness weeks would also help to raise the profile of LGBTQIA+ people in schools (aside from LGBT month in February).

A list of key dates that I'm aware of are listed below:

• Zero Discrimination Day: March 1^st
• International Transgender Day of Visibility: March 31^st
• Lesbian Visibility Day: 26^th April
• International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia: May 17^th
• School Diversity Week: July 2nd-8^th
• Bisexual Visibility Day: September 23^rd
• Asexual Awareness Week:
• National Coming Out Day: October 11^th
• Hate Crime Awareness Week: October 15^th- 22^nd
• Intersex Awareness Day: October 26^th
• Intersex Day of Remembrance/Intersex Solidarity Day: November 8^th
• Transgender Awareness Week: (Second week of November)

The results of the LGBT survey, commissioned by the Government last year and which has had over 100,000 responses is due to be released in a few weeks time. PM Theresa May has promised to create a strategy designed to reduce the prevalence of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia and advance LGBTQIA+ rights. I hope that such a strategy will include more funding for trans awareness training in schools, statutory LGBTQIA+ inclusive RSE guidance and a move towards self-identification of legal gender. A bold approach is needed if society is to continue the fight to improve LGBTQIA+ rights and equality in the UK. Let's hope those changes I've highlighted above will spearhead that bold approach.

"Pride, Not Prejudice": A Trans and Non-Binary Anthology For Our Time

Trans and non-binary people in the UK have become more visible over the past few years. Whilst we've always existed (look at the example of eunuchs as gender non-conformists), there's been an attempt to erase our identities out of history, mainly because we dare to challenge the traditional social norms governing gender identity. Most historians have been adherents to a rock solid socialised belief that "God made man and woman only" even though the actual Genesis 1:27 quote is that "God created mankind in his own Image, in the Image of God he created them; male and female he created them"...he never went on to define what masculinity or femininity entailed in the Garden of Eden because acts such as childbirth didn't happen until after the "Fall of Man" incident.....you know the one where Eve got blamed for wanting to find out more about the world from a seductive snake....still have no idea how that story can be proved! For the past thousand years or so most Christian (Catholic and Protestant) denominational interpretations of gender which see gender wedded indiscriminately to biological sex characteristics alone has dominated the socio-historical narrative. It's been preached in every pulpit across the country, along with the idea that adultery was a sin and love of money was "the root of all evil" (1 Timothy 6:10) and yet wealthy male parishioners got away with indulging in adulterous affairs and became incredibly materialistic. At the same time, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that there were parishioners who innately felt they were a man rather than a woman or didn't believe they belonged to one gender or the other. Working class parishioners especially would have faced many barriers towards openly expressing their beliefs and because most weren't given the tools to write "in an academic manner" (because they didn't get access to the grammar school/public school education they needed to be able to attend university), their stories were very rarely recorded.

In fact, there are few biographies of historical gender non-conformists around. One of the most interesting historical figures that received contemporary attention was the enigmatic Chevalier D' Eon, a solider who fought in the Seven Years War and who spent time working as a spy for the French court, having successfully infiltrated the court of Empress Elizabeth of Russia dressed and presenting as a maid of honour. The Chevalier spent the last 33 years of their life presenting and identifying solely as a woman. D'Eon actually insisted at the time they were assigned female at birth, and were forced to dress as a man in order for their father to inherit money from their relations. King Louis XVI granted D'Eon their request to be recognised as a woman, on the condition that they wear women's clothing for the rest of their lives. There was no real fairytale ending for the Chevalier; they ended up impoverished and living in London following the French Revolution.

Very few students in state schools in the UK, let alone trans and non-binary ones know of D'Eon's fascinating story. I've always felt that the lack of trans and non-binary role models being taught about as part of the National Curriculum has meant that it's been difficult to encourage acceptance and empathy for gender non-conforming identities which would help to tackle instances of street harassment and transphobic hate crime. LGBTQIA+ inclusive Sex and Relationships Education (SRE) will help to introduce Key Stage 3 and 4 students to the basics of trans and non-binary identities (i.e. definitions), but exploring biographies and ideas that have originated from trans and non-binary people would help challenge the narrative that trans people are "a trend" or that non-binary people didn't exist until Judith Butler's Queer Theory came along. Judith Butler may have challenged traditional gender stereotyping head-on academically but the view that gender identity is something that can be changed or is fluid has existed far longer than Queer Theory has been taught in A-Level English Literature.

Here are a few examples of historical trans and non-binary people who could be discussed in schools:

• Elagabalus, a Roman Emperor who was known to be outrageously bohemian, having been married 5 times to both men and women. Elagabalus does seem to have been gender-fluid, as it was documented by contemporary historians that they wore women's cosmetics and dressed in the latest female fashions of the era. It's also recorded that Elagabalus offered a huge reward for any doctor who could give them female genitalia
• Albert Cashier, a trans man who served in the Union army during the American Civil War and took part in 40 battles; he was so dedicated to the Unionist cause that he overpowered a prison guard so he could return to his regiment
• Laurence Michael Dillon was the first trans man to undergo a phalloplasty and wrote the first book about transitioning and trans identity: "Self: A Study in Endocrinology and Ethics"in 1946. Dillon believed gender identity was innate and unaffected by conversion therapies or psychotherapy and concluded that hormone therapy and surgery was the best way to help trans people. Dillon took part in the first gender reassignment surgery (GRS) in the UK, an orchidectomy (removal of the testes) operating on Roberta Cowell, a trans woman.
• Roberta was a British fighter pilot during WWII who was taken prisoner by the Germans after crash landing in Bochtolt, Germany. She was kept in solitary confinement for weeks at an interrogation centre before being imprisoned at Stalag Luft I. She had a vaginaplasty on the 15th May 1951, after presenting as intersex to a private gynecologist following her secret orchidectomy. Her story was published in Picture Post and her biography was published soon afterwards, which brought her attention from international media, especially in the US. Cowell did continue stating she was intersex for the rest of her life and unfortunately spoke out derogatorily against trans people who had XY chromosomes in a 1972 interview with Michael Bateman of The Sunday Times, calling them "freaks".
• Alan L. Hart was one of the first Americans to undergo a hysterectomy in order to have GRS. Hart was an X-ray technology pioneer, having developed techniques for tuberculosis screening and his research helped to save thousands of lives.

It's important that trans, non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer people know that there were people before them who dared to challenge the dual gender binary norms. That's why an Unbound anthology "Trans: A British History", was crowdfunded. Unbound, are an innovative publishing team that allows books of all types to be published with the help of Crowdfunding campaigns.  Over 113,658 people have supported an Unbound project and the company has published 218 books to date (https://unbound.com/about) including the groundbreaking and timely anthology of 21st century authentic voices from the British BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) community, edited by Nikesh Shukla, author of the 2010 Costa First Novel Award shortlisted "Coconut Unlimited". "Trans: A British History is being edited by  Christine Burns MBE who helped to build up the trans activist organisation "Press For Change" and took part in the process to create the Gender Recognition Act 2004 will be important to read. I actually suggested Philip Davies and Richard Littlejohn go and get themselves a copy of the anthology to help inform their understanding of the history of trans activism in the UK and read the words of trans activists who have fought hard to allow people like me to be protected from discrimination in the workplace (protected characteristic in the Equality Act).

However, it's imperative that we challenge the assumption made by those on the right who adhere to conservative doctrines on gender identity that trans and non-binary people think, believe or act in the same way. Trans people do not all believe that SRE should be LGBTQIA+ inclusive (unfortunately) and there are activists who believe that trans people are judged too much on how "alike" they look to "normal" cis men and women and are accepted the more "aesthetically pleasing" they appear. Representation in the mainstream media has been rather tokenistic, with trans people being required to offer their view "as a trans person" on controversial topics in a debate structure that's designed to look for stark differences in opinion than focusing on similarities. Destructive rather than constructive. Trans and non-binary people aren't always prepared to just sit there and wait to be cordially invited onto another diversity panel where they can give their opinion to those who may already be allies. Wouldn't it be nice for a trans person to present a BBC politics or debate programme or a non-binary person to win a prize for their photography or painting or play based on the merit of their work, not just because they'd be the "first" to do it? Wouldn't it be nice for a trans non-binary person to be to contribute their view on any topic, regardless of their own gender identity?

You might think therefore that it would be counterproductive to be excited at being asked to contribute an essay to a new Unbound anthology project that features trans and non-binary voices. However the anthology is extremely ambitious and aims to explore the intersectional issues that affect trans and non-binary and cis peoples' lives in the UK. The anthology will contain essays covering a wide range of issues that affect trans and non-binary people, from the nature of passing (and the unnecessary amount of gatekeeping that takes place based on superficial aesthetic definitions), trans feminism and feminism within the trans community (whether trans people can really take their place advocating for gender equality within an inclusive, intersectional feminist movement and why it's important to allow non-binary people their space to advocate freely too) and the relationship between gender identity and religious faith (the challenge of being a believer and defying denominational interpretations of gender and why religious texts help in this respect). The essays will also touch on issues that are debated by the population at large from a trans and non-binary standpoint, including mental health, education, disability, socialisation/class and representation in the mainstream media. Because you know trans and non-binary people like me talk about a lot more in their daily lives than just their gender identity or sexuality. We have multiple interests and multiple types and levels of expertise which should hopefully be laid bare in this comprehensive, challenging set of essays. Plus, there's also going to be an essay which shall be exploring the "origin of trans identities in Victorian London" which I must personally say I'm looking forward to reading. So yes, you can probably tell that I am excited as trans non-binary satirist to be contributing to the anthology!

"Pride, Not Prejudice" will be edited by Helen Belcher, current Lib Dem Parliamentary Party Candidate for Chippenham, businesswoman and author who has been "recognised by the Independent on Sunday as one of the most influential British LGBT people three years in a row"(.https://unbound.com/books/pride-not-prejudice).  Helen is also co-founder and co-director of Trans Media Watch, which campaigns for a change in mainstream press attitudes towards trans, non-binary, gender-fluid and genderqueer people. 

"Pride, Not Prejudice", will contain essays from 21 trans and non-binary people from across the UK who come from all walks of life. Some contributors you'll have heard of before whilst others are writing professionally and/or being published for the very first time.
Contributors include:

• awesome Maria Munir who has the envious brag that they came out first to President Barack O B A M A who has written for the Huffington Post (equally enviable)
• superb writer, (I adored the 2015 "Tiny Pieces of Skull") writer, critic and founding member of Feminists Against Censorship, Roz Kaveney who appeared in a 1988 After Dark episode featuring radical feminist Andrea Dworkin
• talented photographer J Jackson (see their non-binary photo project on Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/nonbinaryportraits/) 
• author of the powerful and incredible moving "Trans: A Memoir", Juliet Jacques who began chronicling her transition on her blog in 2010
• roving reporter and all round funkster Sarah O'Connell, who has produced a YouTube show introducing novices to trans issues: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHjm1cByr7oYs15Z9dOzWcA
• passionate writer, founder of https://aetherandichor.wordpress.com/ a publisher of short fantasy stories and future critic to watch out for Eris Young (you can access Eris's blog here: https://apiomancy.wordpress.com/)
• the phenomenal Surat-Shaan Knan who founded and manages Rainbow Jews, Twilight People (a project exploring faith and gender beyond the dual binary distinction) and Rainbow Pilgrims (a project that aims to uncover the "hidden history" of LGBTI migrants of faith who settled in the UK, from the Jewish Kindergarten Transport (1938-1940) to the present Syrian refugee crisis)
• trans role model and IT engineer Justine Smithies who attended Jeremy Corbyn's (and one of my fav MPs, Shadow Secretary for Equalities Sarah Champion's) LGBT History Month reception: http://justine.smithies.me.uk/
• diversity guru for Sainsbury's and fellow dyslexic Leng Montgomery 
• amazing musician and campaigner Kate Hutchinson, currently director of Wipe Out Transphobia, co-founder of TELI and working with Pathways Training  (you can access her insightful blog here: http://katiekhaos.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1) 
• then of course there's someone like me....a working class, dyspraxic, non-denominational blogger just grateful to be in such esteemed company!

The trans and non-binary voices you'll be reading will be authentic and from the heart. They will be explaining how they see 21st century British society and how 21st century British society perceives and evaluates them as individuals and as part of the LGBTQIA+ community. The words that you'll read may make you uncomfortable at times but only because those words may be exposing examples of blatant hypocrisy that exists at every level of British society when it comes to discussing gender, especially the eagerness of some who claim to be critical of gender stereotyping to resort to trans-misogyny and cissexism to justify their separation arguments. There's no doubt there will be essays critiquing viewpoints such as "trans people are seeking to erase homosexuality" or "trans women are wanting to invade the ladies loos" or "non-binary people are a threat to the traditional family unit" or as the current supposedly "diversity friendly" Catholic Pope Francis puts it, trans and non-binary people like me are declaring "global war on marriage". These viewpoints do need to be questioned and stereotypes need to be broken down, not reinforced.

At the same time, I hope the essays will explore the similarities in views between those critical of gender (not just radical feminists) and trans and non-binary people who want to be seen authentically as themselves and be valued for who they are. Challenging outdated gender stereotypes and roles should be a common goal. Do gender critical radical feminists like Germaine Greer really think trans people transition so they adopt the role of homemaker or want to be subservient as part of some weird "fetish" that some far-right Conservative men would love to see come back into the mainstream? Because that's something I've never heard uttered by trans friends! Why do we want to live in a world where we're all het up about insisting on men wearing suits to work and women having to wear high heeled shoes to stand at reception just to "make a good impression to clients?" Surely it's better to question those gender norm policies and change mindsets, so we get to the point where we don't batter an eyelid when even a cisgender  guy comes into work wearing a dress!!

When I engage with people I don't particularly care what make-up they are wearing or what shoes they have on their feet. I care about their ideas, their opinions and views and also about empowering people whose voices are rarely heard to share them with the world. I want to hear their views on how to make HR policies fairer to trans and non-binary employees or to help disabled people who are losing access to benefits that they need to maintain a dignified and healthy life. I care about listening to people who have ideas about how to engage our young people in the political system or folks who just want to extend the hand of compassion to Syrian refugees fleeing the horrendous conflict between dictator President Assad, rebel forces and ISIS. Trans and non-binary people across the UK have such ideas yet they hardly get the chance to discuss them. Instead, the mainstream media outlets want to rehash discussions that stagnate, salivating over which trans women will deny they are real women and which non-binary people will be shouted at by those who engage in hate discourse rather than offering constructive criticism. I can't believe we're still at the stage where we are debating the very existence of trans and non-binary identities. Could you imagine constant mainstream debating of homosexual identity on a weekly basis in 2017 in the UK? It's bad enough watching the disturbing events unfolding in Chechyna, where a radical Muslim authoritarian President has publicly declared he's going to massacre innocent people before Ramadan on the basis of their sexuality.

Trans and non-binary activists, politicians, journalists, painters, architects, musicians, lawyers, healthcare professionals, aid workers, teachers and yes, even satirists are using their platforms to debate, discuss and critique issues that affect all of us in 21st century UK albeit with their unique perspective gained through individual life experiences . The "Pride, Not Prejudice" anthology will offer a valuable, vital window into such debate, discussion and critique. For that reason alone I believe that it deserves to be published. So if you want to help get it printed, published, promoted and disseminated and if you want your own copy, you can pledge your donation on the Unbound website here:
https://unbound.com/books/pride-not-prejudice. Every pledge counts and will be appreciated!

(Thanks to Eris for designing this!!!) 

Is the term "Cisgender" now a super slur weapon for the Trans community?

Ot-Oh Wot-Oh! There's a super slur doing its rounds in the trans community. This time it doesn't seem to be aimed at trans people! Phew what a relief. Yet what turns out to be deemed a new "slur" is only really the semantic shifting by some right wing academics of a term that's been used by transfeminist and queer academics for decades. I always thought "cisgender" just meant someone who identifies with the gender which fits their biological organ status; i.e. a man who was born with a penis/testicles who self-identifies as a man is a cisgender man. Thus a rather posh way of saying "non-trans". It's strange to see that "cisgender" and "cissexism" are terms which are now easily deemed worthy of alienation, to be thrown in that super mega full trash can of antiquated terminology that litters old editions of OEDs that reside on dust filled bookshelves the world over. What IS so controversial about calling someone "cis"? Does it play into a deliberate alienation narrative being "perpetrated" by some in the transfeminist discourse community? Are some trans people denying others the "happiness" gained through gender assimilation? Or is this just
another pointless semantic battle that has the intention of undermining genuine discussions about the differences between non-binary trans and other trans people masquerading as a form of gender binary assimilation fetish being egged on by non-trans critics?

Arguments against using the term cisgender:

• What happens if a man is born without fully functioning sexual organs -e.g. a eunuch still self-identifies as a "macho man"? Should he still be termed cisgender by transfeminists? 
• Cisgender isn't used in everyday speech and not many "ordinary people" would understand it outside of academic discourse. "Non trans" sounds more colloquial and what "real people" use.
• Cisgender wasn't a term created by non-trans people to describe themselves. The label is being "forced" upon them by transfeminists and queer theorists. It's not fair.
• Cisgender "sounds" offensive; trans activists only use the term when they want to denigrate/berate those who they consider to be bigoted/prejudiced.
• Twitter Trolls who are trans use the term "cis" to be nasty towards hetero people.

Arguments for using the term cisgender:

• Cisgender is a neutral term; it's etymology matches that of transgender: "cis" in Latin means "on the same side" and trans means "on the other side".
• Who is to determine which words are "real" and which are "fictional"? If critics are using the word with the meaning they ascribe to it, which seems to be an agreed meaning, it must logically be a "real word", even if its usage is selective!
• Straight people never collectively agreed on whether they wanted to be called "heterosexual" or not; most never bother using the term except when answering official surveys so why suggest all non-trans people should have to agree on the "cisgender term".
• To some transgender "sounds" offensive because it doesn't describe their gender identity in its entirety. Sometimes labels can only draw attention to differing identities; cisgender is not considered either to be a panacea or a demonising label.
• Social media is a smouldering cauldron of different views, of which trans slurring cis people is a component. Yes some trans people are trolls. Some get provoked whereas others do it for the sheer hellraising. We should all condemn the use of the term "cis" to be negative but don't blame everyone using the term for the mistakes caused by a few miscreants.

Conclusion:
There will always be activists, academics and "ordinary people" who find certain terminology that is used by others (especially detractors) to describe them as ineffective, inappropriate or slanderous. I can understand a man who has a vested interest in maintaining a false dual gender-binary because of his "macho" identity can feel he is being wrongly defined. To him, he is a "man", plain and simple.
However, to say that calling this man "cisgender" should be regarded in the same vein of slander as outwardly calling a trans person a "pussy" or "she-male" is to slightly blow the semantic debate out of proportion. Those on the alt-right, defenders of the "gender binary" as immutable claim there is an imbalance when it comes to classification of terminology as obsolete or useful. They ask why "tranny" or "transsexual" is getting replaced by "transgender" when it defines trans people "well enough" whilst bitching about an opposing label used to separate them. They also question why using the term "cisgender" cannot be interpreted as a hate incident on the same level as "tranny". Is it part of our free speech policy to allow such terms to be banded about without being challenged- i.e. why are "she-male" and "tranny" considered elements of verbal abuse that can be reported as a hate crime when "cisgender" isn't? Despite this line of thought, I've rarely heard many non-trans people be offended by the "cisgender" term because it isn't in everyday discourse. The level of harm caused by uttering "tranny" on the street as opposed to "cisgender" is incalculable because of its frequency of usage in daily discourse. Some trans people here "tranny" every day in their working class neighbourhoods full of misunderstanding about gender identity. Perhaps it is better to focus on eradicating semantic prejudices that actually affect people emotionally than spending time on trying to dismiss a perfectly acceptable term grounded in academic integrity!
 

Hate Crime- What Do Trans People Think About It?: A UK Analysis

Compassion is one of the buzzwords I have been using rather a lot during my blog's existence. It's one of the qualities I look for in a Bessie buddy, work colleague or employer. More often than not we are wrapped up in trying to satisfy our own egos that we forget to demonstrate compassion to our opponents/enemies as well as to our friends. It can be difficult to be level headed when someone hurls a "you look like Mrs Brown but in Norwegian troll form" insult down the local bar but how you respond I believe shows your true nature. Yes, most people wouldn't batter an eyelid if you only heard this insult once in your life, being uttered by an ill dressed stranger who's probably on his way to get absolutely bladdered to try and forget his own reprobate life back home. Yet what happens if you suffer from daily systematic bursts of name-calling from your so-called "friendly" neighbours? What happens if the name-calling leads to vicious emails, deliberate social media trolling and shaming, veiled death threats or wild paedophilic accusations? Heaven forbid, what would happen if that name calling that you ignored from neighbours lead to actual physical and sexual abuse, such as oral rape by those neighbours concerned? If you had only spoken up and reported the name-calling to the police, surely it would have put the local beat PCSO/PC on notice to check up on you to make sure you were alright and warn the neighbours about their poisonous, vile behaviour? You'd think any rational police officer/PCSO would do this for any of his/her/their residents? After all his/her/their duty is to "protect and serve" the local population. So why are so many trans people afraid to report hate incidents? Why don't they understand the nature of hate crime means some hate incidents will be classified as an actual crime? Why don't PCSOs encourage more trans people to report hate incidents/crimes?

What IS the difference between a hate incident and a hate crime?
Luckily for "hate crime" deniers there is a common, relatively easy to understand set of definitions that have been agreed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and UK Policing bodies:

Hate incidents:
Something is a hate incident if the victim or anyone else thinks it was motivated by hostility or prejudice based on one of these characteristics:

• disability
• race
• religion
• transgender identity (as opposed to Gender Reassignment protected characteristic in the Equality Act)
• sexual orientation.

If you feel that something is a hate incident it must be recorded as such by the person you are speaking to. All police forces report hate crime based on these five characteristics.

Hate Crimes:
Any incident which leads to breaking the law which has been motivated by prejudice/discrimination based on one or more of the five characteristics stated above will be classified as a hate crime.

Here's a simplified table to show some links between hate incidents and hate crimes:

Type of Hate Offence	Can it be recorded as a Hate Incident?	Can it be recorded as a Hate Crime?
Verbal abuse- e.g. name calling	Yes
Harassment (as defined under the Equality Act – see my post on HR- trans people protected under transsexual label within Gender Reassignment protected characteristic)	Yes	Yes
Bullying/Intimidation in public- (e.g. Section 4-Fear or Provocation of Violence, Public Order Act, 1988)	Yes	Yes
Physical Abuse-hitting/punching/spitting (e.g. Section 3, Affray under Public Order Act, 1988)	Yes	Yes
Sexual assault	Yes	Yes
Damage to home/car- e.g. transphobic graffiti	Yes	Yes
Burglary	Yes	Yes
Hate Mail (as defined under the Malicious Communications Act, 1988)	Yes	Yes
Online Trolling/Abuse- e.g. on Twitter/Facebook social media platforms	Yes
Fraud	Yes	Yes
Coercion and Control by a partner because of trans status (covered under the new DVA regulations which came into effect from Dec, 2015)	Yes	Yes

There are no specific transphobic crimes currently identified under the law, but certain incidents will be considered hate crimes if they break an existing law- e.g. if there is a sustained level of verbal abuse by a number of individuals who are local to you (neighbours) and they do not desist from these activities when asked to do so by the police, they could be given an ASBO (Anti Social Behaviour Order) where they have to abide by a set of rules for 2 years or face a fine of £1,000 if they are a young offender or up to £5,000 and 5 years in prison if they are an adult offender).
or end up being prosecuted under the Public Order Act, 1988 or for breaching the Equality Act, 2010, dependent on the nature of the offence and evidence provided by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). As well as reporting the abuse to the police, you can get your local authority/landlord to take action against the neighbours concerned using their anti-social behaviour powers. You can also take the perpetrators to civil court to be compensated for your experience and to get them to desist from carrying on their behaviour using the Protection from Harassment Act, 1997 (which can led to ASBOs being awarded too).

It's interesting to note that according to the Citizen's Advice Bureau (CAB website, "when someone is charged with a homophobic or transphobic hate crime, the judge can impose a tougher sentence on the offender under the Criminal Justice Act 2003." However, regardless of how the incident may look within the prism of LGBT hostility/prejudice/discrimination, the offence may still be seen as a crime even if it was not motivated by your transgender identity.

With so much legislation and guidance in place, why have there been so few public prosecutions reported by the mainstream media? Why do victims who report hate crime feel unsupported?

My Survey:
According to The Independent article written by Peter Yeung in July 2016, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/transphobic-hate-crime-statistics-violence-transgender-uk-police-a7159026.html
there has been a 170% rise in transphobic hate crimes being reported to police, yet there were only 582 offences reported in total in the year and reports only came from 26/45 UK police forces. Yeung concluded that the "low prosecution rates  (19 in 2015, falling from 22 in 2014 according to 15/26 UK forces) and "lack of police training on trans issues" were to blame for such low levels of reporting.

So I wanted to see how a small group of trans respondents (not assorted by gender or sexuality preference) reacted to a series of hate offences being offered as potential hate crimes to see whether they would report such crimes to the local police force if they became a victim themselves of that crime. I carried out a poll with Facebook Trans-Rights group to see what trans people thought about denotations of hate crime. Some examples I gave are currently perceived as hate incidents whilst others are firm examples of hate crime. I reprint the poll results below: (conducted 13-14th September 2016).

Which of the following would you say needs to be reported to your local police force as a hate crime? (feel free to add any suggestions- no suggestions were added):

Type of Hate Offence	Number of respondents
Receiving daily targeted, hate emails/letters from a TERF (a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist)	54
Being called "tranny" or "shemale" in the street by a stranger	49
Being told you cannot use the bathroom that corresponds to your chosen gender	47
Distribution of discriminatory trans literature by a Christian group- e.g. Westboro Baptist Church	45
Having a drink thrown over you in a (cisgender) nightclub	33
Trans on Trans Insults -e.g. lookism/passability related.	7

Analysis:
Most respondents believed hate emails/letters from feminists who identify openly as being anti-trans should be classified as a hate crime, along with stranger verbal abuse and employers/colleagues/strangers blocking bathroom access. The high response rate tallies with common views espoused by the trans community irrespective of transition status, gender preference or sexual orientation.

However trans-on-trans insults/verbal abuse doesn't seem to figure as a hate crime towards trans people, which is rather shocking considering the recent Body Positive and anti-lookism movements within transfeminism aimed at helping trans people be proud of their bodies and appearance. With this being such a contentious issue and needs covering in its own right (after further investigation) I shall deal with it in my next blogpost.

It came to my attention that some respondents felt the current police quality standards system were ineffective. For example, Colin, a trans- guy in Guildford, Surrey contacted me to say that he'd reported more than 20 examples of hate crime to his local police station but received no responses; they had "disappeared into silent bureaucracy". Strangely, Colin was only following advice given on the Citizen's Advice Bureau (CAB) page to report all hate crime/incidents in an attempt to prevent them escalating into more serious incidents. It transpired that he'd met with the local chief of police to discuss his experiences, yet nothing actually changed as a result of that meeting. All buzzwords and compliments but no concrete action to address the direct concerns that he had outlined in the hate crime reports that he had submitted. The fact no action had been taken has led to him deciding not to "go out" anymore. We often forget that victims of hate crime can become reclusive as a result of receiving sustained abuse from local residents. Colin even linked his experience to that of social class: "I have a saying about surrey ive lived here most of my life born here its a saying 'the poorer you are the more acid is going to be thrown at you' seems true around here!" This seems to have been compounded by the fact that Colin informed me that there had been no LAGLO (Lesbian and Gay Liaison Officer who is designated by a force to help LGBTQIA people) representation at Croydon Pride; you see them in abundance in Manchester and at the main London pride events so I shall be seeing whether a Lincs LAGLO turns up to Lincoln Pride on the 24th September so I can ask them specifically about hate crime prevention and prosecution in Lincolnshire.

Joanne, a trans lady told me she was so afraid of the police as a result of her experience of hate crime that she can't bring herself to report it (she has now been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and is now recovering slowly). Ryan, a trans male teenager told me he gets called "tranny" on a daily basis by his neighbours but he feels there is no point reporting them to the police because his concerns wouldn't get taken seriously. His family are equally unsupportive so he can't wait to move out and attend college where he hopes he will be valued and treated with compassion.

Jacqueline told me that she was trying to find out who had send hate mail to her estranged parents about her because of her transgender status. The perpetrator was successfully prosecuted but she never found out who they were because her parents refused to tell her (despite "taking great delight" in revealing the contents of the letter) and the police refused to tell her, citing "confidentiality" as the main reason. This shows that trans hate crimes may end up with a perpetrator being prosecuted but without the intended victim ever finding out about it. Could this be considered a miscarriage of justice?

Finally there were trans people who wanted to reduce the hate crime label down to specific areas. Sophie suggested that most of the verbal abuse reports would be "petty", including any relating to trans-trans insulting. Toilet/bathroom wise Sophie said it depended on "whether they were public or private"; I'd say most respondents were thinking about being barred from public bathroom use but if their parents/siblings prevented them from using a bathroom in the house once they reveal their transgender status it could be perceived as a form of abuse and thus a hate crime. Interestingly Sophie didn't mention malicious communication, which could indicate either non-interest or unsure of her answer. With this mix of understanding on what constitutes hate offences, hate crimes and whether to report them, it is clear to see the police, LGBT charities and support services have a lot more to do raise awareness. But why would some trans people think even reporting an act of physical abuse as a trans hate crime might be a "waste of time"? 

Some suggestions offered as to why transgender hate crime legislation seems so ineffective:

• Belief that there is "no such thing as hate crime"- that it has been created by "Luvvie Lefties" to hamper freedom of speech using "Political Correctness" banner. (That may be true when it comes to verbal abuse/online abuse but what about intimidation/sustained harassment/physical violence?)
• Lack of education within the police force about hate incidents and hate crime generally-e.g. police and victims may not even see any hate incidents as "crimes", especially if they involve online abuse through emails/social media or is perpetrated by parents/siblings/family members.
• Lack of awareness of how hate crime legislation can be seen through the transgender identity prism.
• Is a PCSO equipped to deal with resolving hate crime alone? Should there always be a PC or senior PCSO with them to make sure they record the crime thoroughly and classify it correctly?
• Innate prejudice of police officers/support services derived from environmental factors-e.g. religious preference/sexual orientation/political ideologies. Has the police officer/PCSO ever spoken to a trans person for any length of time before? Do they know how to handle a case sensitively-e.g. making sure to use correct pronouns, talk in an appropriate tone, be reassuring?
• Not enough resources to deal with resolving hate crimes; police departments are overstretched due to budget cuts being implemented by Whitehall so there may be reductions in specialist front-line staff who are trained in dealing with LGBTQIA community issues.
• Do the CPS ultimately believe they can take the perpetrator to court to be charged in the first place?
• Will the CPS be able to secure any level of prosecution for the victim; if only 22 people were convicted under hate crime legislation, is it effective enough?
• What if one person views it as hate crime even after a successful prosecution but 99 others don't- who will the public end up believing Will they ever believe the hate crime victim?

Conclusion:
At first glance, it appears that transphobic hate crimes are starting to be taken seriously by the police.  Peter Yeung's article has shown reporting rates have increased, especially among trans female victims. There appears to be a commitment from senior political and policing figures such as Angela Rayner, Shadow Women and Equalities Sec and Jane Sawyers, the National Police Chiefs lead for LGBT issues to increase training opportunities for police officers to give them the knowledge to "challenge hate and reduce the harm that it causes". However, as my survey and personal responses to hate incidents being categorised as transphobic hate crime have shown, public confidence in the police to deal with trans hate crime is dented at grassroots level. Successful criminal prosecutions have fallen,  hate crime reports are knowingly being filed under "cannot be bothered to investigate" and trans awareness of hate incidents and hate crime hasn't necessarily led to an increase in reporting amongst trans men. The progress has been satisfactory but there is no gold rosette in sight yet. I look forward to exploring ways of improving the reporting experience for trans people, talking to individuals such as my local LAGLO about what they believe will help reduce offending rates and increase reporting rates and working with charities such as Gender Free DV to address links between trans hate crime and trans domestic violence.

Ending the Silence: Addressing Domestic Violence in the Trans/ Non-Binary/ Queer Community

This month I've been very fortunate through my Twitter trans activism to connect with a rather fabulous group of volunteers (Gender Free DV) who have something really valid and important to say about domestic violence within the LGBTQIA community: trans, non-binary, queer and gender-fluid people feel completely locked out when trying to access domestic violence support services and local charities because of their chosen gender status. This has been made worse with the closure of Broken Rainbow, a UK national LGBT domestic abuse charity that provided telephone support and online chat service for victims which recently went into liquidation. Sean, one of the amazing volunteers at Gender Free DV who has reached out to provide a way for trans/non-binary/queer domestic abuse victims and survivors to voice their concerns and fears regarding UK domestic abuse support provision recently told me the closure of Broken Rainbow has led to a crisis which they are trying to address at grassroots level by engaging with local police and NHS service providers to help LGBTQIA people to get over their physical and emotional scars and to try and prosecute their persecutors in court. Gender DV aims to get providers to see beyond gender differences to allow every victim of domestic violence to access the support they need in a non-judgemental, appropriate way.

Just think about this: if you are a middle aged trans woman who has been abused for years by a female partner/ wife before, during and after your transition process either through financial blackmailing, physical/sexual assault or even attempted murder, you will feel helpless, unable to speak out for fear of being ridiculed. A trans woman should feel that they have a place to turn to where you will be offered a sympathetic ear by passionate, caring advisors. We have to remember that trans women may not have a strong support network out of their partnership/marriage, so who else can they turn to who understands their plight and  can reassure them it isn't their fault that they had to suffer such horrendous abuse?

A common slur that's used to delegitimise trans women's domestic abuse stories in particular is that their right to choose to change their bodies to align with their expressed gender choice makes them rightly open to abuse: "they should never have transitioned...they were asking for it" or that "they should have left their wife prior to making the decision transition...she didn't deserve the grief". Such opinions are outdated, referring to a dual binary system based purely on the biological sex organs that you just happen to have been unlucky to have be born with. Nobody deserves to be punished for exercising their rights as enshrined under the Human Rights Act (1998) under Article 10 - Right to freedom of expression and Article 14- Protection from Discrimination as guaranteed under the
Equality Act (2010) protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment. How you choose to identify gender wise is your own affair. Unfortunately trans people who are married can still be subject to a "spousal veto"- i.e. a partner can choose to deny you the right to transition or even to apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) unless you gain a divorce from them. Even worse you have to be unmarried to gain a GRC anyways. Partners can use this fact against trans husbands/wives to coerce them to stay within an abusive relationship.  You can read more about the history behind the "spousal veto" in Sarah Brown's blogpost here: http://www.sarahlizzy.com/blog/?p=154.

Identifying Key Statistics:

Gender DV's  blogpost Evidencing the need for diverse DVA provision (July 2016) highlights the disappointing fact that trans survivor statistics are "not accurately recorded because the incidents are aggregated with reports relating to sexual orientation" - i.e. the organisations involved in recording stats for UK police forces/ Crown Prosecution Service/Home Office push trans stats in with LGB stats which can lead to a level of distortion which precludes specific reasons for trans domestic abuse. Gender DV decided to quote qualitative research conducted by LGBT Youth Scotland and Equality Network (2010) that has been collated from a range of trans DVA survivors to try and show the extent of the issue. Here are a few stats from that report:

• 80% of trans respondents stated that they had experienced emotionally, sexually or physically abusive behaviour by a partner or ex-partner.
•  18% felt that the most recent domestic abuse they experienced was "just something that happened".
• 51% felt that the most recent domestic abuse they experienced was "wrong but not a crime."
• 73% experienced abusive behaviours from partners or ex-partners which specifically aimed to oppress or invalidate the trans person's gender identity, undermine their ability to transition or to influence their decision about coming out to others.
• 60% experienced threatening behaviour of some description.
• 25% experienced a partner threatening suicide or self harm.
• 32% were threatened with violence.

With such startling figures about UK trans domestic abuse being revealed by just two qualitative research bodies, it shows that domestic violence campaigners need to understand more about the dynamics of trans and non-binary relationships to help victims become survivors. What's more we need to conduct updated research to see whether the Equality Act has helped to increase the number of trans abuse victims and survivors speaking out about their experiences or whether the situation has remained depressingly static. Charities such as Gender Free DV can help to collate and deliver such information to show an accurate picture of trans/non-binary experience of DV and perhaps even extend to other underrepresented groups.

Exploring The Current Findings:

Gender Free DV have identified that trans people who are queer/non-binary are particularly at risk of gender invalidation because of  mainstream societal attitudes towards gender. Not knowing which support services you can turn to when you go are trying to escape an abusive relationship when you are non-binary only increases feelings of insecurity. All DV campaigners and providers should be aware of modern gender identity theory and act with respect, dignity and compassion when supporting trans, non-binary, queer and gender-fluid survivors.

Equally if a person hasn't yet transitioned in public and has only been able to express their chosen identity preference with their partner because they validated them, they may find it hard to talk about the abuse they are suffering because they don't want to lose this level of validation. Pre-transition abuse victims therefore may not talk to others about their transgender status and not attempt to seek any help and support outside the relationship.

It's certainly true that some people decide to date and be with trans people to "satisfy their curiosity". This may include seeing whether they can exercise a level of control over a trans partner to coerce them into performing sex acts for their own pleasure which is against a trans person's will- e.g. by penetrating their mouths to force them to provide oral sex relief or to place their mouths on a trans woman's penis (prior to transition) to enact oral sex. They may say that "they're doing a trans person a favour" by educating them on how to perform sexually in their new gender" or that "they're lucky anyone wants to have sex with them". This deliberate shaming tactic makes it less likely a trans person will speak out about being forced into unwanted sexual behaviour and rape.

Acts of domestic abuse can also stall a trans person's transition process; being bruised/full of cuts prior to meeting a GP for baseline tests may stop trans people from being referred to a Gender Identity Clinic (GIC) because the GP may suspect self-harm and an instable state of mind as opposed to evidence of domestic abuse by a partner. Equally victims reporting domestic abuse openly may lead to advisors/GPs/clinicians arguing they are not in the "right frame of mind" to continue transitioning until they have recovered from the abuse they suffered. Sometimes the worst thing that can be done to a trans person who has survived domestic violence is to tell them they cannot continue using the hormones/attending the GIC they attended whilst in the relationship. It may make them ask "what reporting the abuse was all for" if it prevents them trying to identify fully with their chosen gender or non-gender .

What is most important for trans victims of domestic violence to understand is that it is a genderless crime, even under the UK definition of DV:“any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 and over who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality. This can encompass, but is not limited to, the following types of abuse: – psychological – physical – sexual – financial – and emotional.” Coercive or controlling behaviour is now punishable as an offence (December 2015) which can be committed by anyone, regardless of gender or sexuality and carries a maximum sentence of 5 years if found guilty. Any victim who experiences serious psychological and emotional abuse which falls short of physical abuse can now bring a case against their partner for this offence. Trans, non-binary and queer domestic abuse victims should be made aware of this change in the law.

How the LGBTQIA can help reduce trans/non-binary/gender-fluid/queer DV:

LGBTQIA people need to understand that:

• "Outing" is a form of control- trans people may get threatened with being "outed" to their family/friends/colleagues/online before they are ready to reveal that they are changing their gender. The partner/ex partner may use the fact that the LGBTQIA community is relatively "close-knit" and propagate a sense of a lack of support for trans people outside the community to keep the trans person fearful of being "exposed".
• Same sex financial blackmailing, sexual or physical assault within the home is domestic violence and can be reported to local police in the same way as heterosexual domestic violence.
• It is essential to know how to respond if they believe a LGBTQIA friend is being abused by a partner and to try and spot warning signs of this- e.g. if their friend is eager to hide bruises/make excuses for cuts/emotional mood.
• Don't encourage trans domestic abuse victims to stay "longer" in an abusive relationship in the vain hope their partner's behaviour will change as they continue through their transition process. Support them to leave by offering them a place or stay, reporting the abuse to the police ASAP and getting them in touch with a local DV charity or Genderfree DV who would be more than happy to help. You can find out more about the charity and their work here: https://genderfreedv.wordpress.com/ and contact them via Twitter here https://twitter.com/genderfreeDV

Men can Menstruate: The Importance of Understanding the story behind the #IfMenHadPeriods hashtag

So a Twitter ruckus has been created, supposedly within the "left wing" diversity centric side of the social media platform. It's been said that a liberal feminist Dr Jennifer Gunter created the #IfMenHadPeriods hashtag to imagine what it'd be like for cisgender men if they had a period. Her tweet said "#IfMenHadPeriods pads would be free". Which is a fair comment within the context of the debate surrounding access to sanitary products in allowing them to be readily available to all women regardless of social class, nationality and geographical location. It is realistic to suggest that if all men went through periods, there would be government funded sanitary product programmes in place to provide them with the necessary relief from embarrassment. Since the Establishment remains mostly patriarchal, even in the West, it would still hold true that part of the reason why government subsidised tampons are opposed by men is because male taxpayers are affronted by the idea of paying for basic hygiene measures even if it might make their wives/girlfriends feel better.

After the initial tweet, mockery then ensued after there were calls for Dr Gunter's tweets to be promoted. Many feminists thought that pictures of men pissing up walls with blood and writing their name (rather stereotypical of masculine "laddish" behaviour) were fine to disseminate across Twitter. As a satirist I do find such images rather reflective of societal attitudes, at least for a portion of Western society where men do tend to piss in the street despite being told not to. Then it was that time in the tweeting cycle when notorious Conservative Alt-Righter Steven Crowther just had to get involved and blame feminists for "wanting free stuff" and that this was "embarrassing"- the usual garbage you get when there's a battle between left and right over women's bodies. What Mr Crowther doesn't understand is that menstruation does get stigmatised in many countries across the world, especially in Africa, where women can often have very little access to toilet facilities and running water, let alone sanitary products. WaterAid actually ran a series of vids entitled If Men Had Periods to highlight this very issue. They then ran a survey which found that 70% of woman believe menstruation would not be stigmatised if men went through the menstrual cycle. This is no laughing matter: it demonstrates just how misogynistic society remains when they discriminate on the basis of biological difference. I believe the UK government should fund sanitary products for all women but that they should definitely be free of tax. This should now happen thanks to an online petition campaign created by Laura Coryton a 22 year old activist in May 2014 called "Stop Taxing Tampons, Period" to end 5% VAT on tampons which gained over 320,000 signatures, and which despite being initially opposed by EU bureaucrats is likely to be scrapped because we are leaving the EU. Manjit K Gill, founder of menstrual dignity charity Binti International said that if the Tory Govt carries out their proposal to scrap the tax it will mean that "homeless women in the UK may no longer have to use socks, rag or newspaper" to soak up blood discharge. Even male MPs such as Labour's Paul Sherriff believe that the tax cut should be passed onto female consumers (which means seeing a reduction in tampon costs overall) and that if the tax cut isn't passed on, he would propose amendments to the Finance Bill to provide for a windfall tax for female consumers. A progressive measure proposed by a cisgender men! Who can believe it?? Yet none of the tweets on the #IfMenHadPeriods hashtag seem to refer to such discussion, which is a great shame!

I guess what Dr Gunter and Mr Crowther didn't expect to happen next was for trans activists to take so much offence at the hashtag. They were quick to point out the major flaw with this hashtag when you take it seriously: some men do have periods because trans men who are only at the start of their transition journey will continue to have periods. But let's go one step further: non-binary/queer/gender-fluid people have biological organs which mean they end up going through the menstruation cycle bleed too. And not every trans man is comfortable with the idea of going through hormone therapy or gender reassignment surgery. So they will continue to have periods for the rest of their lives. Let's go even further: What about intersex people? What about cisgender women who can't have periods due to medical reasons? Does that make them any less of a woman? Not if they identify as a woman. Yet these people never get mentioned within the debate by trans and feminist tweeters. It seems to be an Either/Or binary that gets created: you have to be trans to be defended from attack and trans exclusory feminists (TERFs) can't help but be derisory towards trans people but only those who have gone through surgery! TERFs are ultra-critical of trans women, accusing them of being "panto dames" who mutilate themselves to create their own fantasy woman image by using their own body to do it. Essentially they fetishize trans women and make transition a mostly sexual based decision. However TERFs tend to be rather quiet when it comes to trans men and their need for sanitary products. Indeed I've seen several tweeters who have damned trans men for daring to change their gender and tell them if they're so bothered about their periods they can get sanitary products readily because they'll "automatically gain more money" due to their change in gender which very rarely happens till the person has at least produced a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) and changed jobs anyways!

What is important for trans activists and intersectional feminists who happen to be trans to see is that the Alt Righters and Conservatives couldn't wait to get stuck in and use the hashtag as a way of delegitimising feminism and SJWs as well as discriminating against the trans male community as a whole, accusing them of "lying" because they refuse to adhere to an immutable dual gender binary and they go against "doctors" because of this. Most TERFs happen to be conservative minded so it's no surprise they are ready to back Alt-Righters to enforce bigotry and prejudice. Yet trans activists need to see the whole picture with regards to the hashtag; that it wasn't initially created to cause offense to the LGBTQIA community but to highlight awareness of sanitary product provisions. Alt-Righting TERFs expected trans activists to be immediately dismissive of this. They wanted to see that trans activists don't have a sense of humour. So the best trans activists can do is to try and shake off the criticism, highlight the follies that are brought out by such a hashtag and perhaps get people to realise the importance of seeing beyond the dual binary system. Some men do menstruate, they care about sanitary provisions being available for all women. TERFs have to accept their caring attitude and accept that even cisgender men like Paul Sherriff can care about women's issues. Then maybe we can all have a laugh at blood spurting up the wall satirical pictures. Maybe.

Working With Transgender Employees: The HR Basics (UK)

Whenever I speak to employers and HR professionals I always seem to hear the same thing: "I wouldn't know how to act around a trans person in the workplace because I've never worked with one; what happens if a colleague tells me they wish to transition?...I'm not prepared ?" From the sidelines it can look like a daunting HR challenge. You don't know how colleagues might react to a trans "coming out" story, especially if they happen to be the first person going on this journey in the company's history. Pre trans employees have also heard the horror stories of trans people being openly harassed and abused in the workplace. The figures out there are startling; for example, when the UK Government announced its long awaited Transgender Action Plan, in 2011, it was stated that 88% of transgender employees experience discrimination and harassment in the workplace. It is clearly unacceptable that so many trans employees are experiencing unsavory behaviour just because they have decided to make legal changes to their gender identity and be open about it. HR professionals need to take a reasoned compassionate approach to dealing with trans employees before, during and after the transition process. I try and outline the basics of such an inclusive approach to inform and educate potential trans employees as well as line management and HR professions below:

Legislation relating to transgender employees/ gender reassignment surgery (a recap):

• Equality Act (2010):
• Outlaws discrimination in employment and vocational training on the grounds of gender reassignment (as a protected characteristic).
• Trans people are referred to in law as transsexual as opposed to transgender. A transsexual is "a person who has proposed to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone gender reassignment surgery". It is advisable not to refer to trans people as transsexual except within the confines of the law as it is considered by the LGBTQIA community as an outdated term.
• Protects : actual and prospective employees, former employees, apprentices, contract workers and people seeking or undertaking vocational training. Some self-employed people are also covered.
• There is no legal requirement for an employee to tell their employer about their gender reassignment status, but it is unusual for people to undergo a level of social transition within their employment without notifying their employer. This does not mean you can force them to disclose their status.
• It is unlawful for employees/customers/line management to refuse to work with an employee on the basis of their gender reassignment, even if they refuse on grounds of religious belief.
• Types of unlawful discrimination include:
• Direct - Explicitly stating someone cannot be transsexual/transgender to perform their job role within a company.= Direct Discrimination
• Thinking someone is transsexual without any evidence/assertion from the individual concerned = Direct discrimination by perception (ACAS)
• Telling someone they are wrong to work with transsexual/transgender employee = Direct discrimination by association (ACAS)
• Indirect- Where an employer/HR department creates a workplace rule, practice or procedure that applies to everyone but particularly disadvantages those who wish to go through/ are going through/ have been through gender reassignment surgery. ACAS states an example would be if all employees had to disclose whether they have undergone gender reassignment (which is unlawful anyways).
• Harassment - Unwanted conduct which leads to violation of a transsexual/transgender person's dignity or creates a degrading, humiliating or offensive environment because of their gender reassignment status. For example, sexual harassment of a trans employee is unlawful under the EA.
• Victimisation- An employer/HR professional cannot discriminate against a transsexual/transgender person for using the provisions of the legislation to protect themselves. Equally someone who has helped a trans person to defend themselves using the Act provisions cannot be victimised.
• Exceptions to the Equality Act:
• Occupation requirement for the employee not to be transsexual/transgender: this might be enacted if a social worker had to be male because the client involved had suffered abuse/violence from a trans perpetrator.
• Organisation may indirectly discriminate if that discrimination is a proportionate way to achieve a legitimate aim (will be very hard to prove in law!)
• Gender Reassignment Act (2004):
• Allows transsexuals to change their gender legally through obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).
• It is not necessary for a trans person to gain a GRC to be protected under the EA.
• Once a GRC is issued however, a trans person is considered legally to be his/her required gender which allows them to:
• acquire a substitute birth certificate which recognises their gender change,
• marry in the new gender or form a Civil Partnership with someone of the same gender as allowed under the Civil Partnership Act,
• retire and receive a pension at an age that is appropriate to their acquired gender (that means reviewing changes to pensions by the Payroll team to ensure accuracy).
• HR staff can only identify a person's trans status if you have been given permission to do so. "Outing" a trans person is considered direct discrimination under the EA.
• Disclosure of a person's GRC is a criminal act  and is subject to a fine.

The process of "coming out" as trans at work:

1. Employee informs line management of their wish to transition.
2. Line manager informs HR department of employee's wish to transition.
3. HR facilitates discussion with line management and employee, draws up Memorandum of Understanding. (See below).
4. Line manager manages any absence that may result from the transitioning process, including unpaid sick leave. Informs HR department of any discrepancies so they can follow up.
5. HR finds out when the employee is due to transition and how- for example if they are going to dress according to their expressed gender or changing their name.
6. On the day of transition, HR checks with line management to ensure they are fully prepared, including informing all members of the department/company of the nature of the employee's transition. Reiterate Equality and Diversity policies and consequences of breaching those policies and that employees can refer back to these documents at any time.
7. Line management makes sure email addresses are updated, workload has been agreed, monitoring/mentoring in place to help the transition happen smoothly at work.
8. If there is an issue that is raised by the trans employee, line management and HR must make sure that issue has been fully investigated in accordance with Equality and Diversity policies and disciplinary procedures.
9. If a trans employee wants to leave the organisation, HR must ensure the reference given is fair and complies with legislation (i.e. doesn't blame quality of work on the employee going through gender reassignment surgery, for example). Keep all documentation relating to trans an employee according to guidelines in case of a discrimination case being brought against the organisation on grounds of gender reassignment.
10. If a trans employee wishes to change jobs within the organisation during their transition process on a temporary/permanent full or part time basis (between hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery), line managers and HR professionals must be as helpful as possible in facilitating this; so if a role is mainly customer facing but they wish to do more backroom administration and there is enough work hours available to do this, it should happen. Make sure the trans employee is aware of changes to their hours/pay/working conditions if applicable and get them to sign an updated contract to state they consent to the changes made.

A compassionate HR approach:

• Treat trans employees with respect, dignity and compassion. All employees within the organisation must demonstrate a positive approach to dealing with trans customers, both internal (fellow colleagues from other departments) and external. Make sure your HR department creates an Equality and Diversity policy that refers to gender reassignment/ identity as specified under the Equality Act (2010).
• Consider creating an individual Memorandum of Understanding between line management, the trans employee concerned and a HR department member. Essentially a Memorandum of Understanding is an agreement between an employer and employee which summarises discussions about how the employer or employee might take certain actions, including:
• time off from work to attend Gender Identity Clinics (GICs), GP surgery appointments or when going through a major operation -e.g. breast enhancement.
• communication between different stakeholders within the organisation, including colleagues, management, customers, Govt. officials etc.
• equipment changes - e.g. organising a new name badge, changing email addresses, scheduling photography sessions etc.
• Allowing for dress code change
• Use of toilet/bathroom facilities.
• Any specific issues affecting the individual trans employee or employer.
• The memorandum should be signed by the line manager, HR manager and employee and witnessed by a HR team member. It should be available to be accessed in case of updating and copies distributed to line management and the trans employee for them to keep hold of.
• Data Protection Act (1998) record keeping wise, it is important to remember that a person's gender status and transition history is considered confidential and must not be disclosed without expressed permission (which should be given in writing). When a trans employee obtains a Gender Recognition Certificate, personnel records must be updated to reflect their expressed gender, unless they relate to pension/insurance details. Old details must be stored confidentially and according to the principles outlined in the DPA.
• When arranging social events, such as Christmas parties, meal nights out or team building days, consideration must be shown for trans employees. For example, a trans man should not be shunned for deciding not to attend a shopping trip that's only been organised for female employees and a trans woman should not be expected to dress in black tie to attend a ball just because they haven't yet fully transitioned. Care must be taken by HR staff to explain the situation to all employees involved with the social event as to why a trans person may or may not choose to attend so that they do not assume it's not a case of showing an unwillingness to support the team.
• If an employee discloses to you that they have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and the condition has a substantial and long term adverse impact on their ability to carry out daily activities, they may also be protected under the Equality Act 2010 protected characteristic of disability. This means reasonable adjustments will have to be considered to ensure the company cannot be accused of discrimination on this basis. However it is appropriate to ask for medical information including the diagnosis letter from the GIC.
• HR professionals must remember that it is unlawful to instruct someone to discriminate against a trans person on you or your firm's behalf; for example you cannot ask an agency you work with to reject a candidate on the basis of them being trans.
• Dress code should be negotiable; trans employees should be able to wear clothing associated with their gender choice ASAP. HR professionals and line management must be aware that the employee may have a definite view on what they wish to wear and they should be allowed to wear what they want provided it falls into accepted  practice- e.g. if a trans woman wants to wear jewellery you should allow them to do this provided it isn't against Health and Safety practices (if a trans woman is becoming a nurse then it is acceptable to insist on them wearing stud earrings and a plain gold band because this reduces the possibility of infection and you would say the same to any female nurse working in a hospital, so it is not unlawful.)
• Trans people usually express a binary gender preference when they refer to their gender identity- they want to be known as male or female rather than being trans. So it is generally advised that during appraisal/monitoring sessions, HR professionals avoid reference to gender categorisation and any links either assumed, perceived or given to their sexual orientation.

Why you SHOULD care about trans employees as a HR Professional:
Most HR professionals who study with the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) will be familiar with the need to demonstrate a positive approach as defined under the Behaviours linked to the CIPD Profession Map as created by CIPD to guide HR professionals through their career. You can access the page here: http://www.cipd.co.uk/cipd-hr-profession/profession-map/behaviours/default.aspx.

As you can see, there are a number of behaviour buzz words that indicate why HR professionals should care about treating trans employees with respect, dignity and compassion:

• HR professionals should have the "courage to challenge" those who are wishing to discriminate against trans employees within the business. This includes using facts to challenge ideology that may be espoused by senior management- e.g. that "transmen cannot be men if they still have periods or don't have a penis" or "trans women can't use the female bathroom because they still haven't lobbed off their dick."
• HR professionals must be "curious" to learn more about trans issues; they should ask appropriate questions and show interest in trans employees as individuals rather than as a homogenous grouping. HR professionals should be inquisitive enough to carry out their own research and perhaps expand their knowledge to include finding out about all gender differences that aren't binary-based too. If HR professionals do this research, it may make it easier to create Equality and Diversity policies that truly protect trans employees and it may be easier to inform/educate all employees within the business about trans issues so they do not feel uncomfortable speaking to trans employees. This may even lead to better customer service standards as customer facing staff may find it easier to deal with trans/non-binary customers.
• Perhaps most importantly of all, HR professionals must be "role models" and be perceived as beyond reproach on all Equality and Diversity based issues. Be "personally credible" and authentic by challenging your own biases. If you don't agree with the notion of "transgender", make sure you put those feelings to one side and treat your trans employee with respect, dignity and compassion. They are still human beings. They can still function enough to carry out their previous job. Treat them in the same way as you would have done before but be mindful of pronoun preferences, dress codes etc.

It's not rocket science to equip HR professionals, line managers, colleagues and customers to be able to deal with trans employees, whether the company is in the public, private or third sector. Provided you are at the forefront of acceptance and inclusion and are prepared to be curious enough to learn more about trans issues whilst treating the employee concerned as an individual, you'll be on the right track. So be mindful of your own approach, be prepared to adapt but most importantly, be compassionate.