Transgender transgression: how York reacted to GNTs
The LGBT welfare motions of the last UGM all reached quoracy and passed; perhaps highlighting that the university bubble is far more liberal than the big bad world. However, the most well-voiced reaction to the motions was disappointing.
To sweep aside one vein of argument: practically speaking, what was proposed was not ridiculous. Small changes to the “sex” section on university paperwork is a negligible undertaking. The provision of gender-neutral toilets “where possible” is also not unreasonable. Lest we forget, we’re in the middle of a huge campus extension, a perfect opportunity for change and development, and I’m certainly not persuaded that Heslington East is so well-planned and close to completion that the provision of gender neutral toilets would be a great difficulty.
Furthermore, when it comes to this campus the use of disabled toilets is an easy and perfectly acceptable temporary solution. It is blowing it out of proportion to see this as labelling trans-gender students as disabled: it is merely a matter of convenience.
But what about not practically speaking? What about those who stood up, if mainly behind a veil of Internet anonymity, and said “man up” and “grow a pair”? Their inconsiderate puns, not mine. The ignorance within the main body of opposition was astounding. It is one thing not to believe there is a distinction between gender and sex but it seems clear that most people simply didn’t understand the distinction between the two. Sex is, as Peter Warner-Medley suggested, biological; it is “asking what’s between our trousers”. The question of sex creates obvious issues for transgender students, who define against their sex, so gender seems the more appropriate question. However, it is not like “putting on a form what cock size are you or how big is your penis”, quote Warner-Medley again. Whilst the ignorance of the opposition has been astonishing, the heavy-handed attitude of some LGBT supporters has exacerbated the situation.
In general, including “T” in the LGBT umbrella is unhelpful in every way other than administrative convenience. By entering into the discussion on transgender we are separating out the issues of gender and sexuality. People are using this debate to take another swipe at the gay community when really it is totally irrelevant. Whilst the gay community are deservedly retaliating, it surely leaves non-gay trans students feeling isolated and misrepresented.
What needs to be taken into consideration is that this is a difficult debate because for the majority of people it is wholly unfamiliar. I was born a “girl” and I’ve always felt like a “girl”. It did not occur to me that one day I might not feel this way. Why would it? It had to be explained to me that someone might feel that their sex betrays their true gender. Even as someone who’s never felt any gender-sex confusion or disparity, I understand, and in a society where it is far from an accepted norm, to be honest, I don’t envy it.
Those who are in favour of welfare considerations for trans-gender students need to recognise the leap in understanding it takes for those who have never experienced gender issues. The misunderstanding of key terminology such as “sex” and “gender” is symptomatic of a wider confusion and it is going to take time and patience to educate and explain. On the whole, it’s not bigotry but ignorance that causes the arguments. Some people will of course remain in opposition, but more people would be won over if the main participants in this debate took a step back from all the anger and frustration.
Ignorance aside, it is astonishing that people feel the need to arbitrarily dismiss the welfare needs of a minority, even if it is a minority they do not understand. But with the motions passing, it proves once again that the most well-voiced opinions are the most angry, not the most prevalent. We should be proud to be part of an accepting and progressive community who uphold minority representation.
Loading ...
I may be wrong, and please do correct me if I am, but it seems to me that most, if not all, the articles on these motions have been written without any contact with members or representatives of the trans community here at the University of York. If I didn’t think this story has been over-reported and the “controversy” it caused possibly slightly exaggerated I would suggest that someone try interviewing some trans students and/or staff about their experiences of being trans at the University of York and how these new motions will help them.
Also, I’m not gay. I’m a man who likes women. Yet, as a trans man I know that i belong in the LGBT community. I cannot assume to speak for all trans people but here I am, I’m not gay but this is my community