***
The following is a slightly edited copy of the key part of my submission to the Victorian LGBTIQ Strategy. I had hoped to write that up nicely, but I ran out of time and energy, so just responded online. This section is responding to a question about whether there is more to consider than what has been outlined in a discussion paper.
***
No, there is more to
consider. I wish to refer you to https://politicalmusingsofkayleen.blogspot.com/2020/07/a-draft-proposal-for-gold-standard-for.html
and https://politicalmusingsofkayleen.blogspot.com/2020/06/a-partial-preview-from-my-submission-on.html,
which have more of my thoughts had I had the time and energy to write this up
properly.
The issue of human
rights for any group is a progressive development: when slavery was abolished
in the USA, voting rights was revealed as the next issue; when voting was
granted to women, being in Parliament and workplace discrimination was revealed
as the next issue. I am PROUD of the changes that have been made in Victoria,
but that does not mean there isn't a need for more.
The main issue is
that of misgendering - i.e., using the wrong pronouns. I've explained my
thoughts and rationale on that at the second link above.
There are also risks
of forced deadnaming for all requirements for proof of identity /
qualifications / police checks. Such requirements are an active block for TGD
people seeking employment - and are often unnecessary (e.g., police checks
cover an entire life - is that really necessary? Consider, for instance, someone who transitioned 30 years ago
and has a new birth certificate from ~15 years ago: why do they have to give
pre-transition names, which exposes them to risk of assault or abuse - as HAS
happened in one Australia Post office for a close friend of mine). It is VITAL
that such requirements be updated - especially in view of recent developments
around expunging past convictions, and always be framed knowing that some
people come from interstate in our more mobile modern world.
My final point here
is around employment - not protecting and increasing numbers of LGBTIQ+ people,
although that is also necessary, but ensuring that everyone else is at least
aware of their personal biases. I suggest everyone who reaches the stage of
interviews and cannot - or will not (friends have a right to privacy) - prove
they have friends who are LGBTIQ+ or in other minority groups, be required to
undertake a test of unconscious biases around LGBTIQ+ people (and race, gender,
etc) and commit to dealing (through an annually monitored plan) with those
biases.
Fourth point: there
is more of a need to contradict common myths - for instance, that M2F women's
voices changes after surgery. That is based on the higher voice of
"castrati", but they have higher pitched voices because they were -
brutally - denied male hormones during puberty. After puberty, there are no
changes.
Fifth point: just
because a magnificent change has been made, does not mean the damage done
before that will disappear overnight. It takes years - but not only for the
victim to heal (and survival is often a successful outcome from counselling,
even if that leaves other trauma), for the active causation that was addressed
by the change to be stamped out.
As an example,
discrimination against women was banned in the 70s, I think, but we've still
got misogynists. In those cases, the solution is addressing the bigots, not
telling the victims to get healed, and not necessarily coming up with new laws.
Sixth point:
activists tend to focus on where they are at, and what will enable better
survival for them. Thus, TGD people at transition are often happy to provide
pronouns - but when you've had to do it for decades, and have often encountered
situations where such requests are passive-aggressive, you know there are limits
that should be imposed (refer to linked post above).
