Dear Keir Starmer
Dear Keir Starmer,
I hear you want to have a discussion about moving forward in a positive way. Assuming that is something you are genuinely interested in doing, I’ve got some advice for you: talk to trans people. Just talk to us. It’s much better to talk with us than about us, hon. Come meet us and have a discussion. Learn about us, hear our stories, and maybe take onboard what we’re saying. If you really are interested in treating everyone with respect and dignity, as you say, then that begins with listening to us as people. Our experiences are as valid as anyone else’s, and when it comes to discussions around us specifically, they are arguably the only experiences that matter.
In February of this year, you stood at the dispatch box during a session at PMQs and called out Rishi Sunak for making an anti-trans ‘joke’ while Brianna Ghey’s mother sat in the chamber watching. You stated that the Prime Minister was “parading as a man of integrity,” and, to your credit, seemed genuinely outraged by the sheer lack of empathy Sunak showed. In that moment it seemed that you understood just how harmful the rhetoric is, and that treating us not as people but as a political device with which to wage a culture war is dehumanizing, upsetting, and dangerous. Since then, however, it seems you’ve backpedaled, and your Party has proceeded to treat us in the exact same manner.
I’d like to ask you, were the Prime Minister’s words wrong, or were they only wrong because they were said in the same room as someone personally impacted by them? I only ask because today you sat in the studio at Good Morning Britain and claimed that Rosie Duffield was right to have stated that “only women have a cervix,” despite the fact that, no, they don’t… because trans men exist.
One of the reasons I really do think you’d benefit from having a conversation with a trans person is that I think it might help you to understand what is actually transphobic about all of this. So, let’s clear this up before we move forward: if you deny trans people are the gender they say they are, you are being transphobic. If you refer to trans men as women or trans women as men, you are being transphobic. If you make broad statements about how “only women have a cervix,” then, yes, you are being transphobic. Because, you see, transphobia is rooted in the denial of trans people’s existence, and if you deny that trans people are who they say they are, then you are being transphobic. If a trans woman is actually a man, then she ceases to be a trans woman, doesn’t she? This shouldn’t be hard to understand, but for so many, it seems that it is; to claim that trans people are a gender other than the one they identify as is to claim that they don’t exist. And if you’re claiming that trans people don’t exist then — say it with me — you’re being transphobic.
This is why Duffield herself so often comes under attack for her views. Rosie Duffield’s views are transphobic. Rosie Duffield is a transphobic bigot. When she says things like she would rather be arrested than call a trans person by their correct pronouns, then she’s being transphobic. She is denying the existence of trans people as who they are, and that is transphobic. But I’m sure Duffield won’t mind you talking with trans people; after all, she said that cis women “have the right to at least debate or talk about whether people in a male body are allowed into single-sex spaces,” so, presumably, she agrees with me that the subjects of the discussion should be involved in the discussion. After all, I think trans people have the right to at least debate or talk about whether or not we get to exist.
And yeah, before you ask, referring to trans women as “people in a male body” is being transphobic.
Your recent appearance on Good Morning Britain comes in the wake of the government’s announcement that they plan to update the NHS constitution, something that will effectively bar trans people from single-sex wards and force us to be treated in single rooms in hospitals in England. I’m sure for Duffield, this move will be considered a win, but as we’ve already outlined, denying that we are who we say we are is transphobic. Perhaps you could speak to a trans person about the impact this policy will have on them? Perhaps you could come talk to me? I have thoughts.
For one, how will this be policed without a gross invasion of privacy? What happens if there are no rooms available? I mean, that’s a very legitimate possibility, is it not? Quite famously, the NHS is having issues with space. Are we then to be placed in the ward that aligns not with our gender but with our genitalia? Will the staff at NHS hospitals be expected to check my genitalia to decide which ward I’m supposed to be placed in? Not sure how I feel about that, if I’m being honest. Are you often asked to present your genitalia for inspection? Are we really saying here that trans people are to be outed constantly everywhere we go? Or, are we instead to be denied healthcare if there’s no room? And look, these are just the questions I have off the top of my head. If we sat down and talked, there would be more.
I’ll be totally honest with you here, I don’t think I’ll be going voluntarily to a hospital anytime soon. I would rather sit at home and die than be humiliated in this way. Perhaps that’s the point? I’m curious why my health and the health of trans people in general are considered somehow lesser in this regard? Positioning such a thing as a women’s rights issue is a problem because our rights do not infringe upon the rights of others. Trans women are women, and women’s rights are our rights. This isn’t an either/or situation, that just doesn’t make sense. As the saying goes, rights are not a pie. So, what purpose does this policy serve other than to force trans people into difficult, humiliating, and even potentially dangerous situations? Perhaps if you sat down with a trans person, you could explain all of this to their face. If you truly believe it’s right, that wouldn’t be an issue, would it?
Had she survived, should Brianna Ghey have been treated for her stab wounds on the men’s ward? Maybe you could ask her mum, or would that be inappropriate?
As attacks on trans people grow more frequent and more serious, you have a responsibility as a politician — and as our soon-to-be Prime Minister — to actually sit down and have conversations with us. We are people; we are not some abstract idea that can be debated back and forth without our input. Your refusal to listen to us, to hear us and speak with us, is dehumanizing in and of itself. Come to my home, have a cup of tea, go to a support group… I don’t care. Just speak with us. The real people whose lives are impacted by all of this.
Shortly after the publication of the Cass Review, one of your MPs, Wes Streeting, claimed he had been wrong to say that “trans women are women.” I don’t think we need to outline why this is a problem. What it probably would be worth speaking to a trans person about, however, is the Cass Review itself. In my experience, a lot of us in the community have issues with it. Streeting says the Review created an opportunity to move beyond “some of the toxicity” around the issue to a “more thoughtful, careful, and considered” approach. Could this approach include talking to us? Wild notion, I know, but the fact that even Cass herself more or less ignored trans voices when putting together the Review would suggest to me that there is, at the least, a little more to be done there.
I’m honestly at a loss as to what you think you’re trying to achieve here, other than to alienate trans people and our allies and pander to a voter base that has ties to far-right hate groups and neo-nazis. What purpose does such a stance serve on your part? Why should I, a trans woman, actually vote for you? Why should any of us vote for you? And given how willing you’ve shown yourself to be to throw a marginalized group so utterly and completely under the bus, why, pray tell, should anyone else actually vote for you either? What do you offer us in real terms? Because as it currently stands, it’s looking a lot like you offer us much the same as the Tories. And for trans people specifically, it’s looking a lot like you offer us even more hate and bigotry.
Your words and the words of your MPs here embolden a certain group within society that does wish very real harm upon us. Is that who the Labour Party wishes to align itself with? Are the Labour Party actively and openly hostile toward trans people, or do you simply just not care about us enough to worry either way? It’s got to be one of those two options because saying you support us and understand us when you and your MPs say these things, when you and your MPs won’t even speak to us, isn’t cutting it.
I would hope that the ‘outrage’ we saw from you back in February was more than just a performative point-scoring tactic. It did seem like you are more than capable of understanding the impact this rhetoric and these policies can have on the lives of the people you hope to lead. But if this is only the case when those people are there in the room with you, then it’s just not good enough. Please show us that this is not a case of ‘out of sight, out of mind.’ The way things look at the moment, you’re pretty much guaranteed to be taking up residence in number 10 whenever a General Election is held, so what harm can it really do to just talk with us? To just hear what we have to say? So, consider this an open invitation. Come chat with me.
You never know, you might learn something.
Regards, Lexi (a trans woman).
