Why John Swinney must learn from National Library of Scotland’s U-turn on gender critical book
The National Library has now decided that the gender critical book, The Women Who Wouldn’t Wheesht, should be included in its ‘Dear Library’ exhibition
When my co-editor Lucy Hunter Blackburn and I were escorted through the hallowed chambers of the National Library of Scotland on Wednesday, past the busy public areas and into its elegant back rooms, we had no idea what to expect.
Our book, The Women Who Wouldn’t Wheesht, had been the subject of a very public controversy during August, arguably the month when Edinburgh is the capital of the world’s literary scene. A few weeks previously, the leadership of the National Library had decided to exclude our book from its centenary exhibition, Dear Library, despite it winning a place in the public display as a book that had shaped people’s lives.
It was deemed “harmful” by some of the library’s staff, and a risk to its reputation by the National Librarian, Amina Shah. But we only found out about the reasons behind the decision after a Freedom of Information request.
We had barely sat down at the meeting, but the library’s chair, Sir Drummond Bone, one of the UK’s leading academics, said they were “minded” to put the book into the exhibition and he and Shah apologised for not engaging with us before reaching their fateful decision.
Talking better than shouting
What ensued was a conversation, first about the book, then a wider discussion about the importance of rational debate and freedom of expression. We all agreed that a healthy, pluralistic society could only function if there was the space for finding ways through disagreements. That it was better to talk than to shout at each other across a divide.
Less than 24 hours later, I was outside the Scottish Parliament where hundreds of women – most of whom would never have dreamt of protesting until recent years – were shouting “women won't wait” at a First Minister who refuses to listen to them – the third since 2015. The divide between women and their parliament seemed as wide and deep as ever.
The rally, organised by For Women Scotland (FWS), was prompted by the Scottish Government’s stubborn refusal to implement April’s Supreme Court judgment which states, unequivocally, that for the purposes of UK equalities law, sex is defined by biology, regardless of a person’s gender identity.
Some public bodies, such as the Scottish Parliament and Police Scotland, have already complied with the law. Only this week, Edinburgh City Council’s head of legal services told councillors that they had no choice but to comply with the law on this issue. Yet John Swinney’s government refuses to budge, preferring to continue with its policy of self-ID, which means trans-identified men remain in women’s prisons and many schools still have mixed-sex toilets.
Swinney fears own party activists
Swinney insists that he will wait for the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) to issue formal guidance, which will then have to be approved by Westminster. Seasoned observers of the SNP suggest that Swinney is so fearful of a backlash from some of his party activists that, even after the updated guidance is agreed, as it will be, he may demand further consultations in Scotland in an effort to push the issue beyond next May’s elections.
FWS, which brought the Supreme Court case, argue rightly that there is no need for delay and say they will go back to court next week if the Scottish Government continues to ignore the law. And they have the support of a growing number of MSPs and an army of women behind them.
Six months ago, outside an SNP event to celebrate International Women’s Day, Swinney promised to meet FWS following the Supreme Court ruling. Speaking at the time, FWS director Marion Calder said: “… he understood that there were differing views, and he agreed to meet with us after the verdict of the court. He was at pains to say whatever the result, he would support the rule of law.”
The Supreme Court ruling was on 16 April – 143 days ago. Swinney has neither supported the rule of law, nor kept his promise to meet with FWS. Little wonder that on Thursday, women told him that they were not prepared to wait any longer.
Library’s courage and humility
Leading a national institution, whether it is the government of the day or a country’s national library, is a not an easy job. Reaching consensus through rational debate is tough, particularly when there are strong feelings on every side, and especially when there are hidden political motives at play.
The National Library of Scotland made the wrong decision when it decided to exclude our book. But instead of doubling down, its leaders listened to the many, many people who criticised their decision as “anti-democratic” and “Orwellian”.
It could not have been easy for Sir Drummond Bone and Amina Shah to very publicly reverse a decision that they had made only weeks before. It took courage and a degree of humility, qualities that are sadly lacking at the top of many of our institutions.
The National Library’s U-turn is an example of what citizens, living in a mature country at ease with itself, should expect from its leaders. As Lucy and I said in our statement on Thursday, we hope this decision can be a turning point in public discourse in Scotland, particularly around sex and gender identity, but also other issues.
We should be able to talk about the scandal of drug deaths, about educational attainment, about our economic future in a rational way, rather than shouting at each other. It may have taken a month of negative headlines and a deluge of criticism from patrons and sponsors, but the National Library stepped up to its role as the guardian of Scotland’s written culture with grace.
John Swinney has a clear choice. Meet with For Women Scotland and obey the rule of law, as you promised. Or continue to treat the women of Scotland and the highest court in the land with contempt.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.