By Dr Victoria McCloud, British lawyer and former High Court judge
This piece is about one specific legal dramatic development for trans and LGBTQ people in the UK and the mass media context which led directly to it, and the civic fallout afterwards. I refer to the decision in April of the Supreme Court in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers, by judges who naturally cannot be immune from awareness of all the press coverage that had gone before. Transsexual people who have followed the UK court and medical process are, since For Women Scotland, in a ‘twilight zone’ of being two sexes at once, without rights to Equal Pay with men, for example.
The Court decided not to hear argument from any party authorised to represent trans people (the author herself was declined permission) and departed from two decades of law arising from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). They redefined ‘lesbian’ as being solely ‘biologically’ determined and decided that the law allowing diagnosed transsexual people to change sex after a strict court and medical process does not apply to sex discrimination law.
UK coverage overwhelmingly makes use of the term ‘trans’ as ‘one size fits all’ and accepts that anyone who asserts that they are trans or is asserted to be trans must be such. Paradoxically, a press unfavourable to ‘trans’ people has adopted the controversial practice of respecting “Self ID” in terms of gender when it suits. ‘Trans’ became a merged concept including people claiming to be ‘trans’ in bad faith, those genuine people who present as a different sex but who do not experience a medical condition, and others who live and work as the ‘opposite’ sex due to a well-known and fully treatable medical condition. Then, one has the recurring theme that even professional drag performers are a bad-faith threat to children.
Gender Critical Ideology Movement (GCIM)
Readers will not have missed USA and UK coverage of ‘trans’ or ‘transgender’ people since around 2016. The UK reporting and Government agenda is dominated by the ‘Gender Critical Ideology’ movement. Analysts observe that coverage shifted as GCIM came to prominence, a turning point being 2016 alongside the US 2016 election, ‘Brexit’, and resurgent nationalist conservatism born out of radical evangelical Christianity. Coverage shifted to almost universally negative or ‘culturally defamatory’ very quickly. Pink News in 2023 reported that:
“In January 2016, a leading British newspaper ran a series of articles… Virtually all … were overwhelmingly positive… the newspaper in question was the Daily Telegraph .. The Telegraph’s dramatic shift in attitude … reflects a general trend amongst Britain’s press. Coverage … has increased sizeably since 2015, and the overwhelming majority of articles have been negative.”
They have reported an average of 154 ‘trans’ articles monthly in the UK since 2015, over 13,000 articles, more than enough for at least one per known transsexual person.
EU Parliament research ‘Disinformation campaigns about LGBTI+ people in the EU and foreign influence’ suggests foreign actor interference, including from Russia. There are parallels with interference in democracy in 2016: “Russia used hundreds of fake accounts to tweet about Brexit, data shows”, “Russia and Iran may fuel violent post-election protests in the US, intelligence officials warn”.
The Media Monstering pre-match build-up
Coverage of Isla Bryson, who announced he was ‘transgender’ during his rape trial, had no known past gender issues and no diagnosis, but was reported by press as unequivocally ‘transgender’ on his own say-so, even briefly treated as such by officials. Bryson became the ‘trans’ archetype for campaigners. A notable instance of a sex-related conviction of a representative of Gender Critical Ideology by contrast had limited UK coverage, mentioning the conviction but not the involvement with GCIM: “West Lothian woman carried out shocking campaign of abuse against four children”, “Anti-abuse activist found guilty of vile sex crimes against children over 20 years”. It was the LGBTQ ‘niche’ press which reported on that aspect.
Trans people were labelled as ‘transgender cheats’ despite decades of no issues: “Transgender athletes in women’s sport are shameless cheats”, and there was coverage of apparently unwelcome use of sports changing rooms and making links with child abuse: “Safeguarding is a top priority in sport – except when it comes to transgender inclusion”. Blanket sports bans followed, including (of all things) chess.
The workplace was not immune: “Transgender doctor was ‘aggressor and bully’ in changing room row with nurse, tribunal told”, followed by coverage with personal intrusion, including the doctor ‘masked’ on a cold day by a scarf: This ‘masked meme’ was a topic-du-jour. “Masked mob demand trans row professor is sacked”, “Doctors at gender-critical conference ambushed by masked protesters”.
The UK’s only openly trans judge (this author) resigned in 2024, stating that it was no longer possible to serve with dignity as a UK trans person, though the press offered other views, blaming trans people for causing it.
Immediately after the Court decision, the press and State reaction was, thus, to enforce within just a few weeks. The media has reported bans on toilet use, rules requiring male police to strip-search trans women even with female anatomy, and a register of transsexual persons under consideration. “Passports cannot be used to check biological sex says peer as Lords stands off with Government. Isolation in hospitals remains planned to protect women from trans people, as it had been even before the decision: “Top Labour figure Wes Streeting comes under attack from his own party for saying trans patients should not stay in single-sex NHS wards”.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission of the UK advised that businesses can require proof of ‘biological’ sex before entering spaces such as washrooms or changing rooms if there is ‘concern’ (presumably due to perceived lack of femininity in the case of suspected trans women). Media coverage continues to push for greater and more radical forms of enforcement, and a legal fund has been created for taking court cases privately to that end, enforcing the new ‘sex-based rights’.
Be they rapist, cheat, so-called bully or anonymous masked attacker, “trans” at length has become synecdoche for “predation” and embodiment of the ‘Great Deceiver’, echoing the sentiment in an assertion by a campaigner in media that “… every one of those people is basically, you know, a huge problem to a sane world.”
Disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Media Diversity Institute. Any question or comment should be addressed to [email protected]
