(TW/CW: Discussion of transphobia, discussion of paedophilia, brief mention of rape counselling services.)

Today I want to do a quick (by my standards – only 2,000 words this time) blog post on the topic of what constitutes transphobia. It has come to my attention that not everyone is clear on what is and what is not transphobic, and so it is my hope that sharing some information on this would be beneficial.

I’m not going to be able to go into every detail of transphobia here. However, for a long, detailed, definition of transphobia, I recommend reading this page on the subject on the website of the trans activist group TransActual. (N.B. I am not personally connected to TransActual myself.)

Whilst I fully accept that trans men are men, and that non-binary people are real and valid, and that both trans men and non-binary people experience transphobia themselves, in this post I will be focussing mainly on transphobia experienced by trans women like myself.

I won’t be looking at every aspect of transphobia, so more blatant examples (such as direct physical assault of trans people simply because they are trans) won’t be covered here. But I will be looking at some examples that may be considered as less obvious.

And, the final point before we get into the main subject matter, in this blog post whenever I refer to the legal aspects of transgenderism and transphobia, I’ll be referring to the law as it stands in the UK, which where I reside.

So, first up, from a legal viewpoint, who officially count as transgender people? In the UK we have a Gender Recognition Act, where a person can go through a legal process, which, if successful, allows them to alter the sex on their birth certificate, which they can then use in other aspects of their life, such as altering the sex on their passport. Such people are, undoubtedly, transgender. However, a person does not have to go down this route in order to be legally considered as transgender.

A person can go through a physical transition process, which can involve them taking cross-sex hormones, and then possibly having gender reassignment surgery. Such people are also, undoubtedly, transgender. However, again, a person does not have to go down this route in order to be legally considered as transgender.

Under the Equalities Act it is illegal to discriminate against someone who has the protected characteristic of “gender reassignment”. The Equality and Human Rights Commission has this to say on the matter: “To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one. You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it.”

Therefore, a person does not have to have completed either a legal or physical process in order to be legally considered as transgender. As long as they are on a transition process, they are transgender, and are protected in law as such.

In regards to my personal circumstances, I haven’t undergone any physical transition process, nor have I gone down the legal route provided by the Gender Recognition Act. However, several years ago now, I did publicly announce that I was transgender, and that I would be living full time as a woman. I present as female at all times, and I changed my name in everyday life to one that I feel better reflects my gender identity. I am therefore legally recognised as transgender, and under the Equality Act I have the “gender reassignment” protected characteristic.

If a person accepts that someone who has gone down the legal and/or physical transition route is now the gender that they identify as, but does not accept that other transgender people are also the gender that they identify as, then that is a signal that the person concerned is transphobic.

Now, moving on, I’m going to look at a few examples of transphobic behaviour that I have witnessed.

One word that often pops up in debates on transgender issues is the word “TERF”, which is an acronym which stands for “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist”. Personally, I prefer not to use the word “TERF”, instead using words like “transphobe” or “transphobic”. However, it is necessary for me to use the word “TERF” specifically in this part of this blog post.

“TERF” is typically used by trans rights activists to describe women who consider themselves to be feminists, but who do not accept that all trans women (as defined earlier in this blog post) are women. Many such women do not like the word “TERF” as they consider it to be abusive in nature. But this is not true of all such women.

I have seen examples of some women embracing the word “TERF”, and being proud to be seen as a “TERF”. And I have also seen an example of someone who, on one hand, has self-identified as a “TERF”, but, on the other hand, has insisted that they are not transphobic.

If someone chooses to self-identify as a “TERF” then they are transphobic. There is no escaping that fact. By choosing to call themselves a “TERF” they are saying that they are “Trans Exclusionary”. If there are some aspects of what trans rights activists are calling for which they personally disagree with, and where they may have some genuine concerns they wish to raise (*), and wish to engage in debates on the matter, then there are better words that they can use to describe themselves than “TERF”. By consciously choosing to identify as a “TERF”, they are also identifying as transphobic.

(* I certainly acknowledge the fact that there areas of transgender issues which can be up for debate, such as the potential negative effects of puberty blockers on young children, or the participation of trans women in women’s sports, but these particular debates and their merits are beyond the scope of this blog post.)

The next point I wish to raise is the issue of paedophilia. For many years there was a common misconception that all gay men were also paedophiles, who wished to have sex with young boys. Whilst it is true that there are some gay men who have committed sexual offences against young boys, such men are a tiny minority of gay men. It is now widely (although, sadly, not universally) accepted that the vast majority of gay men are not paedophiles, and have no wish to engage in sexual activities with children, or otherwise harm them.

Today, trans women are also having to deal with misconceptions regarding paedophilia, where some people presume that trans women seek access to women’s only spaces in order to abuse young girls.

One example I saw on Twitter stated the following: “I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Any male-bodied person who advocates for the abolition of single-sex spaces for women should offer to have his hard drive checked by police on a regular basis.”

This tweet is clearly transphobic. The term “male-bodied person” is a term that transphobic people will sometimes use to refer to trans women who have not undergone a physical transition process – remember, such women are recognised in law as being transgender, and are protected as such under the Equality Act.

“Advocat[ing] for the abolition of single-sex spaces for women” is clearly implying that the author of this tweet believes that there are trans women who haven’t physically transitioned who wish to be in the same places such as toilets and changing rooms as other women and girls. (N.B. My personal view on single-sex spaces is that I don’t call for their abolition. However, I do use the ladies toilets, for example, always without issue. I understand and accept that there will be some circumstances where it is legitimate to exclude trans women from women-only spaces where there is a legitimate aim, as provided for under the Equality Act, such as a rape counselling service where it can be shown that the presence of trans women may dissuade other women who may require the service from attending.)

The tweet’s author then goes on to say that such people “should offer to have [their] hard drive checked by police on a regular basis”. A common reason why the Police would seek to check someone’s hard drive would be to see whether or not the person concerned has committed the serious offence of downloading child pornography. The author of the tweet is clearly implying that trans women who haven’t physically transitioned who wish to be in the same places such as toilets and changing rooms as other women and girls wish to be in those places because they are likely to be paedophiles who wish to abuse young girls.

It is wrong to presume that trans women are paedophiles. Yes, I am aware that there have been some cases where trans women have committed sexual offences against young girls, but such trans women are a tiny minority of all trans women. The vast majority of trans women, like myself, have no desire to abuse anyone, and certainly not young girls.

The final issue that I’m going to cover in this blog post is the issue of social media itself. How one conducts themselves on social media offers a window onto their own personal views.

Focussing on Twitter, sometimes people will put some disclaimers in their biographical section stating that any retweets or likes are not necessarily endorsements, or reflective of their own views. However, such disclaimers are not sufficient on their own to protect account owners from criticism or judgement based on their actions.

Take the tweet that I have just discussed in this blog post. It is clear that the tweet is transphobic, and expresses a transphobic viewpoint. What are we to make if someone were to retweet such a tweet?

Regardless of any disclaimers, the retweet must be taken in context, both in the specific context it was retweeted in, and in the context of what content normally appears on the account of the retweeter.

If the retweeter added a comment to the effect of “I think this tweet is disgusting and I thoroughly disagree with the point it makes – trans women are not paedophiles” then that is fine. The retweeter here is clearly not being transphobic.

If it were to appear in a thread, where the opening tweet is something like “There now follows a thread of examples of transphobic content – please don’t be like the people here” again, that would fine as the retweeter is not being transphobic.

But, if it is just retweeted on its own, with no commentary, how do we view it in that context? In this case we can look to the rest of the tweets on the account of the retweeter. This tweet is clearly transphobic. If we can find other examples of transphobia on the account (e.g. the account owner self-identifying as a “TERF”, as described earlier), then it would be reasonable to conclude that the retweeter retweeted it because they agreed with the views that it expressed. It would be reasonable to conclude that the person concerned is transphobic. If they wish to claim that they are not transphobic, then we have to ask why they didn’t add any context to their retweet to explain why they were retweeting it.

Part of the problem why there is a serious problem with transphobia in the UK at the moment is that too many people fail to recognise transphobia when they see it. It is important that people educate themselves as to what constitutes transphobia, and then be prepared to take the appropriate action when they see transphobia. In exactly the same way that people should be challenged and sanctioned if they express hateful or discriminatory views regarding other minority or under-represented groups, people can and must be challenged and sanctioned if they express hateful or discriminatory views regarding people who are transgender. Only then can we build a society that is truly welcoming of all of the people that are within it.