I know things are bad in America (see "Trans in America"), but that doesn't mean it's trans sweetness and light in the UK. Trans people are often feared, hated and demonised over here too. For the latest example see the article in today's Guardian on a potential change to the Equality Act 2010.

Currently the Act provides legal protections on the ground of "legal sex", which means the protections apply to trans people with a Gender Recognition Certificate. For example allowing access to some single-sex spaces. Now it seems the government is considering changing the Act so as to define the protections by reference to "biological sex" which apparently means the sex you're born with. People with a GRC would no longer benefit.

Maybe this is part of a general anti-woke initiative to distract the electorate from other pressing issues such rising energy bills and chronic staff shortages in public services. The people who suffer are the ones that the government wants to demonise. Trans people, asylum seekers, ex-prisoners who can't get a job on the outside…

I accept that being trans does raise some serious and difficult issues. Not least in sport where there is a genuine debate about the extent to which trans athletes (former male physique) should be able to compete in, and win, women-only events. Very recently there was a policy announcement from Swimming England or whatever they're called saying that trans competitors would be allowed to compete in women's events, but only at the bottom level where swimming is about fun rather than competition and there are no prizes to be won. This does at least recognise that there issues to be debated. Although the outcome is limiting, it's better than a blanket ban.

The pressure group campaigning to restrict the Equality Act is called Sex Matters. Their website calls for clarity – and reality – about sex: they see it as male and female, and nothing in between. I'm not sure what lies behind the organisation but I would expect there to be a religion-based motive. The reality is of course rather different. Just as it was for gays and lesbians years ago: to show that sexual orientation is not a moral choice but something that's part of your very being.

I suppose I'm posting about these issues because I'm exploring – and rapidly developing – what it means for me to be Ariane. Trans issues have been around for a lot longer. I'm just becoming more aware of them.

Appalling. The suggestion is to overturn all the rights that have been given to trans people for the last 20 years. To render the GRC's and new birth certificates issued null and void. To make us non-persons. We would become a laughing stock, more than we ever were.
Will we have to start using men's bathrooms? How's that going to work? Urinals would be... tricky, for some of us.
And that would be the least of our problems.

One hopes this is not so easily doable, at least from a legal perspective. The current excuse for a tory party have nothing going for them, polls suggest they are likely to lose at the next election, big time.
But even if they are just dangling this as a carrot for voters, or if it's just a distraction for their current, sleazy mess, it's appalling.

"Appalling" is the right word. These people have absolutely no idea. Apparently the Labour Party are preparing for an election in May 2024 as that may represent the Conservatives' best chance of limiting the damage. If so, it can't come soon enough.

As it happens I posted something on a similar theme – hatred of trans people – on an American-based site where I am also a member. This followed the identification of the latest gun-toting serial killer as trans. I commented (negatively) on the Republican response. My post was taken down by the moderators within minutes. It seems the site does not do politics because of the trouble it causes. I understand that, but if trans-supporting sites don't stand up for trans people, who is going to stand up for us?

I say "us" because I am increasingly identifying as trans internally even there will be no physical consequences. I hope that's acceptable.

This letter in today's Guardian makes some important points. First, the policy will require trans women to use men's toilets, increasing the risk to them, and it will require trans men to use women's toilets, increasing the risk to women.

Second, how is the policy going to be enforced? Since biological rather than trans women constitute the great majority of people who look female, they're more likely to be turned away from women's toilets because they don't look female enough.

More bad news for the trans community. It seems the Girls' Day Schools Trust issued guidance last year that it would only admit pupils on the ground of sex rather than gender. Some schools are concerned that this might breach the Equality Act and are taking legal advice. So what does the government plan to do? Issue guidance to schools telling them that the law entitles them to restrict admission in this way.

Call me old-fashioned if you like, but I've always thought that the law is the law, regardless of any guidance that might be issued. What's more, interpreting the law is a matter for the judiciary rather than the executive. So I can't see that the government's idea is going to change anything. Maybe it's not designed to change anything but instead just to buy some headlines in the tabloid press.

See the report in today's Guardian.