Why Beth Upton and Sandie Peggie are victims of militant trans activists who harm own cause and help far-right

However, they are actually both victims. In using the changing room, they were doing what they were supposed to. Both were placed in a difficult situation by the apparent procedure laid down by NHS Fife.

The conflict occurred because Peggie objected to Upton’s presence, but it was entirely predictable that such a situation would occur at some point. It could and should have been anticipated and the argument necessary to work out a practical compromise should have been had long before it got to a real-world situation.

Ignored and insulted

Instead, rules and guidance passed down from on high were drawn up with insufficient regard for the views of those who disagree that someone born male can self-identify as a woman, and vice versa, or who feel uncomfortable undressing in the same room.

This followed the example set by the powers-that-be – with former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon chief among them – who bought into the idea that those opposed to trans rights should be ignored, belittled and insulted.

The failure to engage with the opposite side of the trans debate is one reason why Peggie and Upton are going through what must be a highly unpleasant experience. Such is the toxicity of the debate many people attempt to shy away from it. Neither of these two people has really had that option.

According to the most militant trans rights campaigners, a man simply has to say the words “I am a woman” and they should be treated as such in all circumstances. The reliably unwise Scottish Green MSP Maggie Chapman even thought convicted double-rapist Adam Graham should have been allowed to legally change his gender to female.

A mainstream trans rights view

However, it is important to realise that Scotland’s mainstream trans rights movement does not think Graham should have been sent to a women’s prison, as he was initially. Writing in The Scotsman in 2023, Vic Valentine, manager of Scottish Trans, said: “It’s our view that anyone who has committed sexually violent crimes, and who poses a risk to women, should not be housed with women on the female [prison] estate.”

Valentine argued that there should not be a blanket ban on trans women in female prisons, but that each case should be assessed individually. “For the approach to work, it is essential that everyone’s safety is considered,” they added.

This is a key point from someone who holds Valentine’s views about gender. It accepts that gender self-identification does not create an absolute right, but a qualified one – ie, there are circumstances in which a trans woman’s right to be treated as a woman does not apply. They may be limited and rare but they do exist.

If a proper discussion had been had about the boundaries of those qualifications, then Bryson would not have been initially sent to a women’s prison until the public outcry that prompted his transfer to a men’s one. And it might have meant Upton, Peggie and NHS Fife would not now be involved in a fractious industrial tribunal.

Metaphorical struggle to the death

I’m not exactly sure what the solution to this particular clash of differing viewpoints should be, but we surely cannot contemplate a situation in which the NHS is purged of either trans staff or nurses who don’t accept trans women are women, on the basis of nothing more than a dispute about where they get changed. There has to be some kind of pragmatic workaround that may not be ideologically pure from one standpoint or another, but which enables people to work together.

However, instead of trying to focus on practical compromises and areas of common ground, the most militant people on both sides of the gender debate approach it as a form of war in which they must destroy their opponents entirely.

And while they have been locked in this metaphorical struggle to the death, they have failed to notice the political landscape around them has been shifting. Or perhaps they are so far gone that they just don’t care.

The hard-right and far-right don’t exactly have a long track record in fighting for women’s rights but they have noticed there are votes to be had in forcefully opposing trans rights in the name – and only in the name – of women’s rights. Politicians who think a double rapist should be able to demand to be jailed in a women’s prison are an absolute gift to such people.

A tool to destroy democracy

When claiming liberalism is dead, Vladimir Putin and his Western apologists use gender ideology as a supporting argument. It has become a tool for those who want to destroy democracy.

I confess I have no understanding of why people change gender. However, there are many things beyond my understanding so that doesn’t really matter. What matters is not someone’s gender but that they are a human being with the same rights as anyone else. Therefore, it is beholden upon society to try to ensure that there is a place within it for trans people.

That said, there can be clashes of rights. In such cases, there has to be a civil, respectful debate to work out an acceptable compromise. Effectively telling people that ‘a man can become a woman simply by saying so and that if you don’t accept this then you are a bigot and you could lose your job’ was always going to cause an enormous backlash.

And, right now, that backlash is not only threatening to derail the cause of trans rights but is also helping to persuade hearts and minds that hard-right Trumpian populists are not so bad after all. The potential consequences of such conversions hardly bear thinking about.