New article: Misuse of Evidence in Sex and Gender Policy

The UK is currently sweltering through the hottest June on record. The Met Office has issued a “red warning” for much of England and Wales, highlighting an active danger to life. Trains have been cancelled, roads are melting, and we will likely see more deaths in coming days. Yet the media is talking little about climate change. Instead, one of the big stories of the week is that businesses and unions are uniting in opposition to the proposed appointment of Ed Milliband as Chancellor of the Exchequer, due to the belief that he is too committed to “net zero” emission targets.

How did we get here? And why are trans people once again to blame?

I have a new short article out in the International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics. It is co-authored with a range of international colleagues, variously originating from and/or based in Australia, Canada, Chile, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and the USA, as well as the UK. You can read it here:

Official, paywalled version (typeset and hosted by the publisher, University of Toronto Press)
Misuse of Evidence in Sex and Gender Policy

“Accepted” version (free access)
Misuse of Evidence in Sex and Gender Policy

In the article, we examine how evidence is being misused in debates and policy relating to sex and gender. Our authorship team holds expertise in a range of topics and disciplines, including figures such as clinical psychologist Dr Tomás Ojeda, neuroscientist Dr Dori Grijseels, criminologist Professor Sarah Lamble, and the sociologist and former Olympic athlete Dr Madeleine Pape (to name just a few!) We met at last year’s workshop on sex and gender policy at the University of Lausanne, and have been collaborating ever since.

Drawing on examples such as the UK’s Cass Review and Sullivan Review, US state hearings, and the global exclusion of trans women from sports competitions, we collectively identify six common pitfalls in the use of evidence:

  • presenting “expert” opinion as authoritative
  • excluding relevant expertise, especially from trans people
  • discrediting scientific consensus
  • setting unattainable standards
  • deploying decontextualized claims
  • positioning disinformation as science

We focus especially on how this misuse of evidence in sex and gender policy is causing direct harm to trans people. However, we also note the dangers for other contexts. Given the typical misogyny of anti-trans discourse, this of course includes all women, plus intersex people.

We further highlight how the strategies developed for undermining and misusing evidence in sex and gender policy can also inform a more general distrust of scientific endeavour. In the USA, this can be seen in the mass defunding of scientific programmes and institutions, which we note in the article. Here in the UK, examples include widespread disinformation about immigration, which is being used both to fuel and excuse racist policies and fascist riots… and of course, also public attitudes and policies on climate change.

I hope our new article will be a helpful tool for people wishing to identify and understand how evidence is misused and ideology prioritised – in sex and gender policy of course, but also in wider public debates.

Cover image of the International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics.


Did you appreciate this post? Want to read more?

Subscribe now to receive new posts for free whenever I write them.

13 days to defend trans and queer kids

On 12 March 2024, the UK Department of Education consultation on draft guidance on “gender questioning children” for schools and colleges will close. Until that date, we have our best possible chance to fight for the safety and wellbeing of young people.

Last month I wrote a long blog post and zine about this draft guidance: New Year’s Resolution: Smash the New Section 28. I argued that the guidance resembles the notorious anti-gay law Section 28, in that it aims to both directly oppress LGBTIQ+ young people, and create an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty around supporting them. This is to be done by reinforcing a strict sex binary. The guidance directly targets young trans people, but also threatens to enforce sexist and homophobic standards on all students, e.g. through stating that school uniforms should be allocated on the basis of “biological sex”.

I also argued that there are important reasons for hope, and many routes to resistance. One possible option is to take part in the consultation itself, but there are other approaches too, including noncompliance and resistance in schools, contacting politicians and unions to raise the alarm, supporting trans youth groups, and creative forms of protest.

Since I wrote Smash the New Section 28, the situation for young trans people has continued to deteriorate. In the UK, the Government has very quietly introduced a second consultation on proposals to segregate trans college students who are on trips or who would otherwise be sharing accommodation with other students. In the US, the murder of trans student Nex Benedict in a school bathroom shows just how dangerous the UK proposals would be in practice. I have updated my original post to reflect both of these events. Moreover, it’s emerged that the Royal College of GPs are hosting a conference for conversion therapy advocates in London, and the British public are more openly prejudiced towards trans people than they were just five years ago.

However, it’s also been really heartening to see how many people have read the blog post and shared the zine over the last month. I have particularly appreciated the support from the amazing independent Leeds book shop The Bookish Type, who have been giving away loads of free copies of the zine. I have heard from parents and bureaucrats who say they are using what I have written to argue for independent guidance that actually supports trans and gender non-conforming young people in schools and college.

Importantly, my writing is just one piece among many. Important critiques and consultation guides have been published by people and groups including The Diversity Trust, Just Like Us, Nancy Kelley, Gendered Intelligence, LGBT Foundation, Mermaids, Stonewall, and the Trans Learning Partnership. If you’re aware of any good writing or resources, please share in the comments and I will add it to this post.

You and the people you know have the resources to take action against the new Section 28. If the guidance is implemented, this will not be our only opportunity to fight back, but it is the best opportunity. Think about what you can do before 12 March: whether it’s writing to school governors or an MP, agitating in your workplace or union, or sharing information with others.

As ever, we can never win freedom alone, but have so much power when we act with others.

Photograph of a women holding a zine titled Smash The New Section 28. The woman is white and has shoulder-length brown hair, and is wearing glasses and a grey t-shirt. She stands in front of a large book shelf.