Let’s talk about sex, baby.
Really?
Yes really.
Whilst I appreciate that many longstanding East Anglian folk, including me, are a bit queasy in discussing the topic, it’s time this particular libertarian had his say.
So, if this topic offends or bores you (surely not?), then please fast forward to my March column which will be on a different subject, but equally forthright!
I must admit that over the last few years I’ve felt like a helpless bystander as acronym-inflated arguments over issues of sexual activity and behaviour have become increasingly toxic.
I’ve also been variously bemused, and amused, as friends and business contacts’ email signatures have been embellished by a profusion of pronouns.
Whether that be the Church of England’s bizarre contortions over whether to allow same-sex couples to wed in its churches, or not, or the industrial-strength, bullying transgender lobby’s attacks on the likes of JK Rowling, for suggesting that biological women’s sex-based rights should be protected, thoughtful debate has been side-lined.
The latter ‘conflict’, I can think of no better term, has turned into a vicious witch hunt by a number of self-interested and illiberal organisations who have hounded and humiliated people, including academics, who have had the temerity to disagree with their narrow dogma.
Matters recently reached a new low with Nicola Sturgeon’s utterly opportunistic gender recognition legislation allowing people to identify with whatever gender they wish after a minimal period of time. Of course, she backtracked pretty smartish when faced with to the question of what to do with two violent prisoners with penises who now self-define as women.
Where do I stand, as a libertarian?
Firstly, biological sex is a fact. With a few exceptions - true hermaphroditism at birth is very rare – the biological sex you are born with is unchangeable and you will take it to the grave with you.
Gender on the other hand, is both a personal and cultural construct associated with identity and expression. Sometimes this is aligned to prevailing behaviours expected of biological men and women and sometimes not.
Most people are what is known as cisgender, meaning their gender identity corresponds to the sex they were assigned at birth.
As a libertarian, it is an absolute cornerstone principle for me that what consenting adults do to themselves, and/or with each other, is no-one else’s business, least of all the states.
I am equally adamant that adults – more on that later - who
are transgender, should be free to express their gender identity as they see
fit, as long as it does not harm or present a harm to others.
In other words, a rapist with a penis who self identifies as a woman should not be imprisoned in a women’s jail.
The associated issue as to whether transgender women should be allowed to compete in sports against biological women should be a matter for the individual associations and not the state.
That said, given the physiological advantages built up by transgender women during puberty, it seems demonstrably unfair to allow them to compete against biological women – even with arbitrary reductions in their testosterone levels. Perhaps transgender women should only be allowed to compete against other transgender women?
And as for the vexed issue of toilets, surely it’s not beyond the wit of facilities providers to offer a choice for biological men, biological women and unisex as well as disabled options.
As for the issue of the right pronouns, this is also a choice that any person should be able to make for himself, herself, or themselves. But unless one sets up as antagonistic to another person, surely it’s a simple case of addressing another person according to their preferences.
Consenting adults should be free to marry whomsoever they wish, wherever they wish. No faith system should have a veto.
In short, I agree with the commitment of the Libertarian Party of the USA which states that “sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the Government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.”
I do think, though, that the issue of adult consent is important. Many teenagers are rightly working out their attractions and identities and I think it is important to allow them time to reflect upon decisions with lifelong consequences.
There is a lot of evidence that certain parts of the transgender lobby, including the Tavistock and Portman Clinic's Gender Identity Development Service and its reckless use of puberty blockers, have gone too far in this regard. I certainly believe that Sturgeon’s reforms allowing 16-year-olds to self-identity in a particular gender after only three months and without any psychiatric diagnosis of gender dysphoria are plain wrong.
Because of my belief in equal treatment for all consenting adults, I also believe that taxpayers should not have to fund the costs of any medical treatments.
Equally, the concept of hate crimes, where punishments are increased for aggravating criteria, should be abolished.
There, that wasn’t too bad, was it?
How was it for you?
No comments:
Post a Comment