What Britain should do if it was serious about taking on gender ideology
James Esses on Labour’s recent row back on gender ideology
In a rare moment of positive news from Keir Starmer’s Britain, last week, it was reported that the Labour government is planning to “quietly shelve” some proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act 2004.
The changes would have made what is already a radical piece of legislation even more radical and out-of-touch with the Forgotten Majority in this country.
The Gender Recognition Act, remember, has already introduced a highly dangerous notion into British society that there is a difference between ‘biological sex’ and ‘legal sex’, offering a route for people to legally change their sex markers.
The conflation of ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ was also one of the most nefarious aspects of gender ideology, having been used to justify the erasure of women’s spaces, as well as the indoctrination of children and the politicisation of our public services.
Before the last general election, however, Labour said it wanted to go even further, by bringing about changes to this legislation that would have removed what few safeguards remained and usher in a form of gender ‘self-identification’.
Labour, for example, was planning to abolish the requirement of a panel of independent and anonymous doctors to make decisions around the granting of Gender Recognition Certificates (GRC). This was to be replaced with the diagnosis of a single doctor, chosen by the applicant.
Other proposed changes included removing the requirement for somebody who wanted to ‘change their gender’ to have lived in their ‘chosen gender’ for two years prior to obtaining a certificate.
Labour even promised to remove the so-called ‘spousal exit route’, which protected women and children by requiring the consent of a spouse before a Gender Recognition Certificate could be issued (thereby allowing for the marriage to be brought to an end by annulment or divorce first).
Such changes, in short, would have made it even easier for those with nefarious motives to legally change their sex and would have further entrenched gender ideology into the very fabric of British society.
Which is why, on the surface at least, you might think the current rumour Labour is about to scrap these proposed changes is something to celebrate. But not so fast.
Rather than coming from a place of genuine contrition and re-evaluation, rather than reflecting a genuine change of heart, the word is now out that Labour’s change of position actually owes more to concerns about the rise of Nigel Farage and Reform, who have been trouncing them in the latest national polls.
Labour insiders, we’re told, are increasingly panicking about Reform’s potentially sweeping gains across a vast swathe of the Labour heartlands, including the northern Red Wall and Wales, where it can reach places the Tories and an increasingly unpopular Labour government cannot.
Which is why, rather than fall for the hype, I remain fervent in my belief that Labour simply cannot be trusted on upholding biological reality in British society.
The truth is that Labour remain hopelessly split on the issue of gender ideology (and woke ideology more broadly).
Labour Health minister Wes Streeting came out last week and, in a positive turn, appeared to criticise the woke Diversity Equality and Inclusion (DEI) agenda that has now completely captured the NHS. Streeting asked:
“How is it that the value of equality became so distorted that one member of NHS staff, tweeting a job ad, described part of her practice as ‘anti-whiteness’?” (This was a reference to a viral story I broke last year on X).
Whilst it’s positive that somebody like Wes Streeting has finally woken up from his slumber, he appeared to suggest this was an isolated incident, rather than something that has infected our entire National Health Service and has been this way for years.
Equally, even if Wes Streeting is a voice of common sense, he is a rare voice in the Labour Cabinet. Keir Starmer’s recent appointment as Health Minister, Ashley Dalton, believes that “transwomen are women”, that men should be allowed in women’s toilets, and that people who identify as llamas should be treated with “respect”.
Labour is being governed by a Prime Minister who has previously stated he believes that 1 in every 1000 women have a penis and that “transwomen are women”. Deputy Leader, Angela Rayner, previously told trans activists: “your fight is our fight”.
Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer, previously said that people should be able to identify as any sex “whatever their body parts are”. Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy Security, has said that he does not believe there should be a blanket ban on men competing in women’s sports.
Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, has referred to those concerned about infiltration of males into female spaces as “dinosaurs”. Yvette Cooper, Labour’s Home Secretary, has previously been unable to define what a woman is.
The list goes on and on.
Worse still is the fact that Labour is planning on ploughing ahead with a ban on ‘conversion therapy’. This legislation, which will formally introduce the notion of ‘gender identity’ into our legislative framework, will potentially criminalise parents who do not affirm their children to transition.
It may also end up robbing vulnerable children of a pathway towards self-acceptance, in the form of explorative therapy, given that it’s likely to mandate that therapists adopt an ‘affirmative’ approach to transitioning. This is to say nothing about the chilling impact it will have regarding conversations in a religious context.
Furthermore, and even more concerning, is the fact that Labour is still pushing forward with a clinical trial on puberty blockers. This means that potentially unlimited numbers of children will be able to access medication the government themselves have previously acknowledged carries an “unacceptable safety risk”
All the while, children in the UK continue to be able to avail of cross-sex hormones, which could render them infertile, and, as was reported last week, thousands of mentally unwell women are being given double mastectomies on the NHS every year.
The situation in Starmer’s Britain, in other words, could not be more different to what is currently unfolding in Donald Trump’s America, where a strong and sustained pushback to gender ideology and woke ideology more broadly is currently unfolding.
As I wrote here last week, the blunt reality is that Trump is doing more than liberals ever did to safeguard the rights of women and girls, having passed three Executive Orders protecting biological reality, women’s sports and child safeguarding.
Trump the ‘misogynist’ is doing more than liberals ever did to safeguard the rights of women and girls
Instead of tinkering around the edges by rowing back on a single piece of legislation, future UK governments that want to demonstrate their commitment to biological reality should go well beyond what the insincere Labour government is currently suggesting by presiding over a wholesale pushback to gender ideology.
What might this involve? Well, here four things that could be pursued were Britain to have the sense to follow Trump’s counter-revolution in America:
- Repeal the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and restore the notion of biological reality;
- Repeal the Equality Act 2010 and the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’;
- Shelve any notion of banning ‘conversion therapy’, to ensure children can get the help they need;
- and permanently ban puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and bodily mutilation. No exceptions.
I hope and pray that our next government sees sense on one of the most important issues of our time. For now, however, we are hopelessly stuck with Starmer’s Labour.
This article (What Britain should do if it was serious about taking on gender ideology) was created and published by James Esses and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply