Only 17% agreed with the 2015 law that allows someone to change their birth certificate as soon as they self-identify as the opposite sex. Rather more (34%) thought it should be permitted once a trans person has partially or fully transitioned through hormone treatment and/or genital surgery. But 28% felt that individuals should not be allowed to change the sex on their birth certificates at all.
Even younger people (aged 18-34) favoured no changes to birth certificates, as opposed to the laissez-faire approach that was pushed through parliament. Overall, men were more cautious than women — perhaps because they better understand what men can be like.
Birth certificates are the last line of defence for service providers trying to maintain single-sex provision for women. If these can be changed on demand, then the safeguards become worthless. We can probably safely assume that few men would ever seek a Gender Recognition Certificate but mixed in with those suffering from gender dysphoria — a diagnosable medical condition — would be those who women need to worry about most. There’s little point of locking a door if a potential abuser can cut his own key.
As the polls show, while Irish politicians were captured by the transgender activist lobbying, the Irish public understands the dangers. When asked about transgender people who had not been through gender reassignment surgery, more people than not opposed their inclusion in changing rooms, sports, refuges and prisons. Clearly, the naïve government policy that led to the outrage in Limerick women’s prison is not supported by the electorate.
Laoise Uí Aodha de Brún, founder of The Countess said, “This is the first time the public has been given a say on gender self-identification. When the government passed the Gender Recognition Act in 2015 it did so with little thought of the effect it would have on the wider community, let alone consultation with groups that would be most affected, particularly women.”
This does not mean that The Countess and the Irish public are transphobic. Rather they are pro-science, and supportive of the rights of women to defend their own boundaries. As a transgender person myself, I know transphobia when I see it and this is not it. It is not hateful to make factual claims such as “transwomen are not female and therefore not women”, nor is it transphobic to apply safeguarding procedures appropriate to an individual’s biological sex. That is necessary to protect everyone’s welfare. Accusations of transphobia are thrown around far too easily and they deflect attention from genuine hate.
Unfortunately, though, the Irish self-identification “success story” has been misrepresented and disseminated by activists who are desperate to extend it far and wide. On this side of the Irish sea, the Westminster government has, to their credit, thrown out self-identification, despite the howls of protest from some quarters — but gender recognition is a devolved matter. North of the border, Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP government seems determined to make the same mistakes as the Irish one, despite the furore surrounding the debate. Scotland has already cited alignment with “international best practice” as a rationale for introducing self-identification, using Ireland as an example.
All these leaders have been hoodwinked by a narrow group of self-interested activists who have seized the agenda and are loath to let go. I’m a teacher and my pupils are taught to think critically. Some of our politicians need to learn a similar lesson. Instead of following blindly, then need to start asking themselves some hard questions. I suggest they kick off with “Who told us that self-ID was international best practice and why did we believe them?” Because this polling suggests that their electorates would like some answers.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeTwo things are taking place here:
And Eurasmus+ funding.
Link? There’s a tendency to blame the EU for everything on this website. I doubt if funding for university places was the reason the entire Irish parliament across all parties voted for this.
Thanks Debbie for this piece – ever the calm, thoughtful, knowledgable voice on transgender issues. When the faults in radical trans policies are exposed by a widespread eruption of crimes, riots and violence there could be a backlash against all trans people and that is not what is wanted or needed.
By the way, I am not a cis-woman, I am a women. The outrage.
Thank you.
I don’t think birth certificates should be changeable at all. Gender Recognition, after due medical/therapeutic consideration, should be a sort of addendum. Not a rewriting of historical fact.
Also, a birth certificate is a legal document. I think the realm of law is key here for it does not mean that in the realm of reality or fact they have changed sex. ‘They will be treated in law as something that they are not in reality'[Prof Rosa Freedman], that is, by changing a person’s sex on their birth certificate a legal fiction is created in that they will be ‘treated in law as member of the sex that is not their biological sex'[Prof Freedman]
It seems to me that there might be a misunderstanding as to which domain – Law or reality, takes precedence in a given dispute?
Yes. The birth cert is a legal document. In law then the judges would have no choice but to accept the birth cert. in the Limerick case of the violent transwomen was removed to a male facility s/he could sue.
I agree. A medical certificate should be sufficient. Changing a birth certificate is rewriting history.
Sorry to hear of all the antagonism you are getting for being honest, Debbie. Glad it’s not happening here on UnHerd where candour seems to be respected.
Thank you. It is a robust debate, but I’m made of strong stuff.
“It is not hateful to make factual claims such as “transwomen are not female and therefore not women”, nor is it transphobic to apply safeguarding procedures appropriate to an individual’s biological sex.”
The problem of course is that we’re all too worried about transphobia itself. My position on this is that I think biological sex is real, and that it is nonsensical to expect the law to recognise a person’s sex on the basis of their own assertion as opposed to their immutable genetic characteristics. There are some people out there who will call me transphobic for saying this, to whom I say: “Fine, I’m transphobic. If that’s how we now describe people who put observable facts before politics, I’m proud to be transphobic.”
It’s time to recognise that accusations of transphobia are nothing more than cynical weaponising of charges of prejudice which are never substantive. Until this changes, we’re stuck with the tyranny of these cretinous activists.
When are people going to get it into their heads that some things just ARE? That just because you WANT to be the other sex doesn’t mean you are or can be? I WANT to be handsome, charismatic and devastatingly attractive to women, but on the best day of my life I was barely even presentable. I got over it. If you’ll pardon the expression, man up.
In my mind I’m all of those things you wanted to be. Reality is harsh sometimes, isn’t it?
Hah! In my mind, I’m all that, plus rich!
The destruction of birth certificates would be Orwellian – the memory-holing of truth.
I feel this article misses the point.
You don’t do these changes in legislation not because they could be misused or because the public may or may not be unhappy about them, but because they are wrong. The fact that in Ireland there have been incidents related to it, for me is neither here nor there. There could have been 0 incidents or 100, but incidents aren’t the point.
The fact that females and same sex attraction are erased is. The fact that statistics would be meaningless is. And the stereotypical way women end up being characterized most certainly is.
I agree with you. However, what statistics we make, what stereotypes we use, and who gets into which prisons is ultimately for us, collectively to decide. if gender self-certification had a clear majority support, we would have to grin and bear it. The majority might be wrong, but in a democratic society it would still have the right to decide laws and norms.
Yes and no.
People are all in favour of low taxations (for them) and big hand-outs (for them), but it is for the government to prioritise.
The government governs on our behalf and not by proxy. For such an epochal transformation to be allowed, you would need A LOT of soul searching, pondering and reflecting, not just a fleeting majority (which in this case doesn’t exist).
Say, a lot of people are for capital punishment, but you don’t see the government pushing that agenda.
The fact that females and same sex attraction are erased is.
I noticed a GRC is required in order change one’s legal sex. I presume a ‘legal fiction’ must be created in order for a GRC to be created? This is interesting for Irish Law may differ from English law in this regard and with the Equality Act 2010.
For example, in the case of Goodwin Vs UK “The European Court … did not rule that her biological sex had changed, nor did it challenge the UK definition of sex being about biology. As a direct result of that case, the UK passed the Gender Recognition Act. … a Gender Recognition Certificate that allows them to change the sex on their birth certificate. This creates what is known as a ‘legal fiction’ in that a person will be treated in law as something that they are not in reality (i.e. they will be treated as a member of the sex that is not their biological sex). … There are exemptions in the Equality Act that allow sex-segregated spaces where they are proportionate and legitimate. That also includes in some circumstances excluding trans individuals who hold a GRC. [Prof Rosa Freedman]
Does Irish Law not make similar exemptions?
The Irish law had no exemptions. Exemptions (sports etc) were put in at the first reading but were argued against by all parties during the process. I would like to know exactly who was advising them.
A review of the law in 2018 recommended reducing the age of self ID to 16 from 18. Nothing else was mentioned.
Good point, but tell that to the women who have been attacked and in some cases raped by transexuals in prison. It has happened in the UK too. There are some serious situations that arise from this.
Thank you. I take the point about right and wrong. What has happenned in Ireland is in my view wrong. The polling was central to this piece because it has just been poublished, and because we are told that there are no problems in Ireland, and the Irish population is happy with it all.
Debbie, thank you so much for posting this. As a transgender activist yourself you clearly see the damage which can be caused by bad legislation brought in with minimal (or no) debate. I am also concerned about the role and definition of women being displaced, not because I want any group marginalised or treated badly but to keep us all safe and included we need open and honest debate without manipulation or fear.
Debbie might want to correct me on this, but I don’t think she is (or sees herself as) a “transgender” activist.
Thanks! I’m transgender and I’m an activist so I claim the term transgender activist. But, my activism is rooted in science and reason so it is distinct from other transgender activism.
We will need a bigger asylum soon.
I’m coming to believe the entire world will be the asylum. Born pessimist, I guess.
I wonder if the law allows you to self-declare a different sex in the period of time between arrest and court case …..
I think it does. If self-declaration is sufficient to change an actual birth certificate, then there is a policy of acceptance of the claim, no ‘tests for truth’, as it were.
Very worrying ….
Yes it does. You can self declare whenever you like.
I watched a Parliamentary debate on this the other week. Anna Eagle (Lab) was complaining that because of delays in registering people’s newly self avowed ‘sex’ women (and by this she meant self declared women) were missing out on pension entitlements.
I looked this up and it appears to be true. If I declare myself to be a woman, being in my late 50s I will be able to claim my state pension a year earlier, as well as paying substantially less for life insurance. This is being kept very quiet, probably until retirement ages are fully equalised.
I haven’t decided whether to do this or not. It seems dishonest by why should I not receive my pension at the same age as women friends? It isn’t as if I need to tell any friends about my transition, and I could retransition when entitled to a male pension.
This may be a light hearted comment but is another example of what can happen when subjective truth (“my own truth”) is seen as being more valid than objective truth.
Interesting article. The truth is, that governments often do best is, unintended consequences. This is especially true if they’re trying to respond to trend or public pressure to create new laws.