Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has launched yet another attack at the trans community by saying that people “can’t be any sex they want to be.”
He made the remarks during his closing speech at the 2023 Conservative Party conference on Wednesday (4 October) afternoon.
At one point, Sunak said that people shouldn’t be “bullied into believing people can be any sex they want to be” as he made clear his stance on trans people.
“We are going to change this country and that means, life means life. That shouldn’t be a controversial position. The vast majority of hard-working people agree with it,” he began. “We shouldn’t get bullied into believing people can be any sex they want to be. They can’t,” – Rishi Sunak
“It also shouldn’t be controversial for parents to know what their children are learning in school about relationships.
“Patients should know when hospitals are talking about men or women,” which was met with a large applause.
He went on: “We shouldn’t get bullied into believing people can be any sex they want to be. They can’t.”
“A man, is a man, and a woman, is a woman, that is just common sense,” he added, to yet more noise from Tories in attendance.
Many on social media site X (formerly known as Twitter) reacted to the comments, accusing Sunak of making “persistent attacks” and labelling him “disgraceful”. “A man, is a man, and a woman, is a woman”
One wrote in response: “Trying to distract people from his government’s corruption and incompetence by attacking some of the most vulnerable people in society. Vile.”
Needlessly stirring up hatred where it is unjustified to make a cheap political dig, before going on to claim the country is wonderful because of its tolerance. Disgraceful excuse for a PM,” another went on to add.
Sunak can go and do one. Pandering to middle class transphobes isn’t the election winner you think it is,” someone else echoed.
“The persistent attacks on not only one of the smallest but most at risk communities is vile. Absolutely disgusting party through and through including anyone who supports them,” a social media user weighed in.
It comes after Health Secretary Steve Barclay outlined plans yesterday (3 October) to ban trans women from accessing female NHS wards.
This has since been backed by other senior Tories such as Home Secretary Suella Braverman.
LGBTQ+ charity Stonewall criticised the announcement, labelling it a “cynical attempt to look busy” instead of actually improving women’s healthcare.
Addressing party members in Manchester, Mr Barclay said: “We need a common-sense approach to sex and equality issues in the NHS – that is why today I am announcing proposals for clearer rights for patients.
“And I can today confirm that sex-specific language has now been fully restored to online health advice pages about cervical and ovarian cancer and the menopause.
“It is vital that women’s voices are heard in the NHS and the privacy, dignity and safety of all patients are protected.”
The post Rishi Sunak says people ‘can’t be any sex they want to be’ in new swipe at trans community appeared first on Attitude.
Maybe I'm not understanding your comment, but in certain contexts, gender identity is not relevant but biological sex IS, such as in treatment or early diagnosis of cancers that are specific to one sex or the other. Hospitals need to be able to communicate verbally and in email or written correspondence about these things, but if language is obfuscated to the point where it is not clear what that individual's risks are (based on their sex), then it is only that individual who will be worse off for it. This point doesn't need to be extrapolated to larger contexts for political power, but it should also not be ignored because of possible implications to larger gender identity questions.
To be honest, it might not hurt for them to do some of those tests anyways in some circumstances. Some people might go through their entire life without knowing that they have both types of internal reproductive organs. Hell, some people don't know that a majority their organs are inversed from the normal positioning. (Uncommon but not unheard of.)
Aside from that, I would argue that at the medical care level, it could/should be considered private medical information. Let's say hypothetically that someone has severe PCOS. Having PCOS increases the risks for certain cancers, but it's still unnecessary for anyone other than their doctor to know about it.
If you're in the emergency room, they're probably going to be doing various tests on you if you have severe symptoms. If you have severe abdominal pain, you're probably going to get an ultrasound. You'll probably get bloodwork tests that look at various hormone levels. (Pregnancy and a certain testicular cancer share some of the same flags. Certain hormone levels can also indicate thyroid issues.)
If someone goes to their doctor with complaints about their own reproductive system, I would hope that their doctor tests and treats them for that problem. Again, intersex people DO exist, so proper investigation should be a thing already. Even with CIS people, not everyone looks the same, and I think that it would be a shameful reason to let a person die.
Yes, everyone is unique to some degree. For instance my wife's uterus is slightly tilted. It rarely matters, but every once in a while it causes discomfort. Knowing this, doctors don't need to over react to additional and unexpected discomfort during pregnancy. But this isn't relevant most of the time, so hospitals focus on factors that help quickly and efficiently diagnose the issue. Age and sex are probably the biggest of these factors, along with medical history. Gender identity is usually not important, though in some cases it could help identify someone who is intersex. But these cases are rare enough not to warrant their own check box, much like a tilted uterus.
Gender identity is important in all contexts because it helps you to make someone feel comfortable. This is critical in providing medical care.
The terms AFAB and AMAB serve perfectly well for this medical purpose. Equally, an extra column for gender. Gender: M, Sex: F.
Not that tricky really. Doesn't need to go any further than that.