Protestors gathered in Glasgow this week (ANDY BUCHANAN/AFP via Getty Images)
The polarising effect of the transgender debate on public opinion in Scotland is revealed today in new research for “UnHerd Britain”. A poll of 5,000 people across Great Britain, conducted this month, put four different statements to voters about the trans issue and asked whether they agree or disagree:
The results have been analysed by FocalData to produce MRP estimates for each constituency.
For each issue, the most “trans-sceptical” constituencies in Britain are found in Scotland. In aggregate, Scottish people are also more trans-sceptical than English people, meaning that a higher proportion of them disagree and disagree strongly with the statements we put in front of them.
This result confounds political cliches about the new gender ideology being synonymous with “progressive” politics, given that Scottish people in aggregate self-describe as more Left-wing than the English, and are led by a leading proponent of the ideology, Nicola Sturgeon. It provides a glimpse of what may happen in other nations when the debate moves from a theoretical side-issue to a mainstream political argument with real-world consequences.
The first thing confirmed by the data is that there is a bedrock of goodwill and understanding towards transpeople. Asked whether “people should be able to identify as being of a different gender from the one they had recorded at birth”, 52% of British voters agree and only 24% disagree. Every single constituency in Britain agrees with the statement. Even voters aged 65+ tend to agree, as well as Conservative Party and Brexit Party voters.
When, in a separate poll for UnHerd Britain, respondents were presented with the more philosophical claim that “transwomen are women”, it resulted in an unusually high degree of confusion: 33% agreed, 33% disagreed and 34% were unsure. And when asked if they agreed with the statement that “it should be made easier for transgender people to change their legal gender”, voters are also undecided. Overall, 37% agree, 33% disagree, and 30% don’t know.
The map of constituencies across the country on this last question reveals a broad rural-urban divide, with urban areas, along with historically liberal rural areas such as the South West of England, agreeing with the statement. More than any other demographic factor it is age that drives opinion on this issue, with 50% of 18-24-year-olds agreeing compared to only 28% of those aged 65 or older.
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.
SubscribeYou can identify as a kangaroo for all the rest of the world cares. Dress like one, talk like one, have sex like one….you can even change into one for all I care.
Just stop expecting the rest of the world to cater to your insanity by changing laws and language.
Marissa I think you voice the concerns of many people. In my view, where the trans debate has left ordinary people behind is their refusal to even discuss the risks that are obvious to the rest of us.
There was Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘emperor has no clothes’ moment when after many months of accusing anyone who voiced a concern about her law, she then had to intervene to stop a convicted rapist being sent to a woman’s prison.
Further to that, the spectacle of a trial in a court of law where lawyers (describing the action of said rapist) kept referring to “her p***s”.
When common sense again prevails, the average person can maybe agree with some proposals to prevent discrimination, meanwhile trans activists need to rejoin the real world.
Third spaces, services and categories have always been the way forward. They still are.
The other issue though is with the imposition of Queer Theory and Gender Identity Theory onto young people. This can only be tackled at the root, and for that to happen the ideology has to be exposed and discussed, not taught as fact.
Third spaces, services and categories have always been the way forward. They still are.
The other issue though is with the imposition of Queer Theory and Gender Identity Theory onto young people. This can only be tackled at the root, and for that to happen the ideology has to be exposed and discussed, not taught as fact.
Succinctly and well put.
There are significant issues here that are smudged by those who cast the trans issue as an individual one. The whole concept of an ability to change one’s ‘gender’ (a meaningless term), is a fiction. A person is one of two sexes, something that goes into every cell, every aspect of DNA. The society is told to accede to a fiction – that is totalitarian- and the more ridiculous and patently wrong the fiction is, the more power the totalitarian ideology has over the individual. Effectively, you are told to ‘Not believe your lying eyes’ – that is what abusers say.
The second issue is that this is not about being empathetic to some poor individuals who possess this ‘distressing’ condition called gender dysphoria. Ten years ago no-one had heard of gender dysphoria . If you study Marxist/socialist techniques you will see that the issue is not the issue – it is a tool to achieve an objective (in this case the overthrow of our culture). There are two fronts to this: the first is focussing in children with a sexualisation and saturation of concepts which they are not able to emotionally process. And the second is a significant attack on women. It astounds me that frequently it is women who support the trans claims. The whole concept of a man claiming to be a woman because they wear make-up/a dress/have breasts , is such a parody and a distortion of what a woman is that all women should be outraged. It is also significant that when women challenge the degradation that accompanies these grotesque charades, they are viciously attacked in a very male way by men who obviously bear contempt for women. It is also significant that the media do not make any effort to point this out or to defend those women who are merely defending their own personhood. Some of the worst are those who call themselves ‘feminist’ (but then, who’s surprised at that betrayal?). The idea in past generations was that these people were in a form of fetishisation – and in such cases, the contempt for the woman is compounded by the fact that the man is able to force the women to say he is a woman by his physical dominance and the weight of social pressure. Every person who buys into this ideology even in small ways, (such as forced pronouns), is furthering a very sinister and totalitarian agenda.
Marissa I think you voice the concerns of many people. In my view, where the trans debate has left ordinary people behind is their refusal to even discuss the risks that are obvious to the rest of us.
There was Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘emperor has no clothes’ moment when after many months of accusing anyone who voiced a concern about her law, she then had to intervene to stop a convicted rapist being sent to a woman’s prison.
Further to that, the spectacle of a trial in a court of law where lawyers (describing the action of said rapist) kept referring to “her p***s”.
When common sense again prevails, the average person can maybe agree with some proposals to prevent discrimination, meanwhile trans activists need to rejoin the real world.
Succinctly and well put.
There are significant issues here that are smudged by those who cast the trans issue as an individual one. The whole concept of an ability to change one’s ‘gender’ (a meaningless term), is a fiction. A person is one of two sexes, something that goes into every cell, every aspect of DNA. The society is told to accede to a fiction – that is totalitarian- and the more ridiculous and patently wrong the fiction is, the more power the totalitarian ideology has over the individual. Effectively, you are told to ‘Not believe your lying eyes’ – that is what abusers say.
The second issue is that this is not about being empathetic to some poor individuals who possess this ‘distressing’ condition called gender dysphoria. Ten years ago no-one had heard of gender dysphoria . If you study Marxist/socialist techniques you will see that the issue is not the issue – it is a tool to achieve an objective (in this case the overthrow of our culture). There are two fronts to this: the first is focussing in children with a sexualisation and saturation of concepts which they are not able to emotionally process. And the second is a significant attack on women. It astounds me that frequently it is women who support the trans claims. The whole concept of a man claiming to be a woman because they wear make-up/a dress/have breasts , is such a parody and a distortion of what a woman is that all women should be outraged. It is also significant that when women challenge the degradation that accompanies these grotesque charades, they are viciously attacked in a very male way by men who obviously bear contempt for women. It is also significant that the media do not make any effort to point this out or to defend those women who are merely defending their own personhood. Some of the worst are those who call themselves ‘feminist’ (but then, who’s surprised at that betrayal?). The idea in past generations was that these people were in a form of fetishisation – and in such cases, the contempt for the woman is compounded by the fact that the man is able to force the women to say he is a woman by his physical dominance and the weight of social pressure. Every person who buys into this ideology even in small ways, (such as forced pronouns), is furthering a very sinister and totalitarian agenda.
You can identify as a kangaroo for all the rest of the world cares. Dress like one, talk like one, have sex like one….you can even change into one for all I care.
Just stop expecting the rest of the world to cater to your insanity by changing laws and language.
The problem with these questions is how do you define transgender? There’s a world of difference between somebody who has undergone a full sex change operation, and a bloke in a dress who still has his meat and two veg.
I think most would allow the first example entry to women’s toilets and the like (though prisons and refuges would still be different) but not many would want the second example anywhere near a women’s changing room for obvious reasons.
I think quite a lot of people have been assuming “transgender” must mean you have a medical diagnosis and are now “post-op” (had the chop). They are not aware that most trans-women are not “post-op” and that the activists decidedly do not think the term only applies to medically diagnosed and transitioned individuals. Of course, recent events may have made the penny drop with rather more members of the general public.
It’s been a deliberate muddying of the waters by various transgender groups. The term never existed until recently, you were either a transsexual or a transvestite. There was never any question of allowing transvestites into women’s space, but merging the two categories blurs the argument
Excellent clarification.
Billy, I think the root of this confusion is that the act is called the Gender Recognition Act and that people ‘reassign their gender.” Hence they are called transgender. However, the general public still harks back to a time before the act when terms like sex change and transexual were common currency for this matter. Caroline Cossey, the Bond Girl, used to refer to herself as a transsexual.
The unfortunate quality of this poll, that you refer to, is it conflates everything and so the answer given by those polled may have nothing to do with the question.
Women themselves were never consulted even then. The fact is a GRC does not give anyone the automatic right to access single sex spaces, though various lobby groups have done an excellent job of making people believe that Self Id already effectively exists.
The GRA needs to be repealed not reformed. It is no longer fit for purpose . It was designed for a different time to the one we are now in.
Sex must mean biological sex.
Excellent clarification.
Billy, I think the root of this confusion is that the act is called the Gender Recognition Act and that people ‘reassign their gender.” Hence they are called transgender. However, the general public still harks back to a time before the act when terms like sex change and transexual were common currency for this matter. Caroline Cossey, the Bond Girl, used to refer to herself as a transsexual.
The unfortunate quality of this poll, that you refer to, is it conflates everything and so the answer given by those polled may have nothing to do with the question.
Women themselves were never consulted even then. The fact is a GRC does not give anyone the automatic right to access single sex spaces, though various lobby groups have done an excellent job of making people believe that Self Id already effectively exists.
The GRA needs to be repealed not reformed. It is no longer fit for purpose . It was designed for a different time to the one we are now in.
Sex must mean biological sex.
No amount of surgery can change one’s DNA. And frankly, I’m utterly sick of this “issue”. It would have stayed in its kinky little corner if it hadn’t been given so much attention by the media, who love to create controversy for clicks. And now we’ve got credulous, incompetent, stupid parents “transitioning” their children, and teens undergoing horrific mutilations and chemical castrations, only to become freaks with life-long health problems. UnHerd, you are part of the problem.
It’s been a deliberate muddying of the waters by various transgender groups. The term never existed until recently, you were either a transsexual or a transvestite. There was never any question of allowing transvestites into women’s space, but merging the two categories blurs the argument
No amount of surgery can change one’s DNA. And frankly, I’m utterly sick of this “issue”. It would have stayed in its kinky little corner if it hadn’t been given so much attention by the media, who love to create controversy for clicks. And now we’ve got credulous, incompetent, stupid parents “transitioning” their children, and teens undergoing horrific mutilations and chemical castrations, only to become freaks with life-long health problems. UnHerd, you are part of the problem.
When I’ve discussed this with people they almost always assume a lot more care and time has been taken between a person deciding they are in the wrong body and them either embarking on medical treatment or getting a GRC than is often the case. They confuse the reality of what is happening with what they think should happen.
When I mention upcoming conversion therapy bans and how this could prevent people with gender dysphoria even being cross questioned, they just don’t believe me, as it seems so crazy.
I wouldn’t want to share female spaces with an obvious male even if they had full surgery. Women are not castrated men and having the chop doesn’t automatically turn you into someone who is indistinguishable from a female.
Most males would require tons of feminising plastic surgery to successfully pass as female, which is a completely different thing on top of gender surgery.
That’s fair enough and I’m sure many would feel the same as you, but I think it’s much more of a grey area legally and morally than if they’ve still got their tackle swinging between their legs
It’s not a grey area biologically.
That’s why I didn’t say biologically
That’s why I didn’t say biologically
I’m not sure why? Is it because rape is impossible without a tackle? Sure but sexual assault is still possible even without the appendage.
Is it possible that, as a man yourself, you don’t really see post-surgery males as “fully” male, and therefore more in the grey area? I can see why men might feel this way, but it shouldn’t dictate the way *female* spaces are managed.
It’s not a grey area biologically.
I’m not sure why? Is it because rape is impossible without a tackle? Sure but sexual assault is still possible even without the appendage.
Is it possible that, as a man yourself, you don’t really see post-surgery males as “fully” male, and therefore more in the grey area? I can see why men might feel this way, but it shouldn’t dictate the way *female* spaces are managed.
Trans-gender people need their own loos and changing rooms. Other (non-trans) people feel threatened, and governments cannot pass ridiculous and unworkable laws commanding people “not to feel threatened”, or to say so.
If we have reached a point where Govts think they can pass such laws about people’s feelings, then we are closer to 1984 than any of us thought!
That’s fair enough and I’m sure many would feel the same as you, but I think it’s much more of a grey area legally and morally than if they’ve still got their tackle swinging between their legs
Trans-gender people need their own loos and changing rooms. Other (non-trans) people feel threatened, and governments cannot pass ridiculous and unworkable laws commanding people “not to feel threatened”, or to say so.
If we have reached a point where Govts think they can pass such laws about people’s feelings, then we are closer to 1984 than any of us thought!
My dog still tries to copulate with other dogs (and cushions) despite being castrated.
Staffordshire Bull Terrier?
Probably transcushions.
Staffordshire Bull Terrier?
Probably transcushions.
The questions didn’t specify self identification. All questions on this should do that. Most people are ok with fully transitioned (or passing) transwomen in female toilets, not with self ID.
May I suggest that one reason that people are less concerned about men in frocks using female toilets is that they (generally) use separate cubicles, so nothing offensive or threatening is on display. That is not the same scenario as a shower, sauna or changing room.
I’m not so sure that “most people are ok with fully transitioned transwomen in female toilets”, much less “passing” ones.
May I suggest that one reason that people are less concerned about men in frocks using female toilets is that they (generally) use separate cubicles, so nothing offensive or threatening is on display. That is not the same scenario as a shower, sauna or changing room.
I’m not so sure that “most people are ok with fully transitioned transwomen in female toilets”, much less “passing” ones.
The problem is that the issue has gone well beyond the old, popular conceptions of fully re-assigned transsexuals, and has become an issue that concerns radical ideological imposition and social contagion.
Even with a GRC there has always been the right to maintain single sex spaces, services and categories. A GRC confers legal sex, not biological sex, which, of course, cannot be changed.
The issue is not just one of the presence of male genitalia, but also about the privacy and dignity of one’s sex. Males remain male, even after surgery.
Correct – I would have no issue with a trans woman who had gone through full gender reassignment surgery sharing women’s spaces. The rest can keep out – as we have seen by recent cases, far too many are a serious danger to women and girls. 60% of the trans prison population being sex offenders is a very worrying statistic and I have no idea why Sturgeon stubbornly continues to ignore this fact.
Even having had the meat and veg removed, the biological male can easily overpower almost any woman. Having your bits removed only removes the possibility of penetration with a p*nis, it doesn’t preven’t other sexual assault or violence against women and children.
Biological men are biological men and they should not be in women’s spaces.
I think quite a lot of people have been assuming “transgender” must mean you have a medical diagnosis and are now “post-op” (had the chop). They are not aware that most trans-women are not “post-op” and that the activists decidedly do not think the term only applies to medically diagnosed and transitioned individuals. Of course, recent events may have made the penny drop with rather more members of the general public.
When I’ve discussed this with people they almost always assume a lot more care and time has been taken between a person deciding they are in the wrong body and them either embarking on medical treatment or getting a GRC than is often the case. They confuse the reality of what is happening with what they think should happen.
When I mention upcoming conversion therapy bans and how this could prevent people with gender dysphoria even being cross questioned, they just don’t believe me, as it seems so crazy.
I wouldn’t want to share female spaces with an obvious male even if they had full surgery. Women are not castrated men and having the chop doesn’t automatically turn you into someone who is indistinguishable from a female.
Most males would require tons of feminising plastic surgery to successfully pass as female, which is a completely different thing on top of gender surgery.
My dog still tries to copulate with other dogs (and cushions) despite being castrated.
The questions didn’t specify self identification. All questions on this should do that. Most people are ok with fully transitioned (or passing) transwomen in female toilets, not with self ID.
The problem is that the issue has gone well beyond the old, popular conceptions of fully re-assigned transsexuals, and has become an issue that concerns radical ideological imposition and social contagion.
Even with a GRC there has always been the right to maintain single sex spaces, services and categories. A GRC confers legal sex, not biological sex, which, of course, cannot be changed.
The issue is not just one of the presence of male genitalia, but also about the privacy and dignity of one’s sex. Males remain male, even after surgery.
Correct – I would have no issue with a trans woman who had gone through full gender reassignment surgery sharing women’s spaces. The rest can keep out – as we have seen by recent cases, far too many are a serious danger to women and girls. 60% of the trans prison population being sex offenders is a very worrying statistic and I have no idea why Sturgeon stubbornly continues to ignore this fact.
Even having had the meat and veg removed, the biological male can easily overpower almost any woman. Having your bits removed only removes the possibility of penetration with a p*nis, it doesn’t preven’t other sexual assault or violence against women and children.
Biological men are biological men and they should not be in women’s spaces.
The problem with these questions is how do you define transgender? There’s a world of difference between somebody who has undergone a full sex change operation, and a bloke in a dress who still has his meat and two veg.
I think most would allow the first example entry to women’s toilets and the like (though prisons and refuges would still be different) but not many would want the second example anywhere near a women’s changing room for obvious reasons.
There seems to be an interesting dichotomy here. It appears that many people are quite non-judgmental when asked if a person can identify as another gender, but suddenly become skeptical when this impacts on society (women’s spaces, sports, etc).
It’s OK to say ‘identify how you want, just don’t expect us to go along with it’ – I take that view myself – but this will never be enough for these people, especially the fetishists who get off by thinking of themselves as women, given the ‘rights’ culture we find ourselves in (that we didn’t necessarily vote for either). This will always impact society and we must be *made* to go along with it.
Transwomen are men.
Absolutely correct. “Transwomen” are indeed men.
Actually no. Many transwomen are men : some used to be men. The only safe thing to say is ‘trans women are trans women.’
Transwomen are men.
Do you think they are still men if they get their bits cut off and behave in an unmanly way? At the genetic level I agree they are always men, but that is only one measure – that’s why I say some ‘used to be’ men. I don’t realy know what they are now. Are eunuchs men?
My view is that both trans women (post op or otherwise) and eunuchs are mutilated men.
And it’s not unknown from history that eunuchs penetrated women
Absolutely correct.
And it’s not unknown from history that eunuchs penetrated women
Absolutely correct.
A man who has had genital-removing surgery is a man who has had genital-removing surgery. Some of those men would like society to consider them women. They aren’t. Transwomen – I prefer the term trans-identified males – are a subset of men. How that population is treated in law, in circumstances in which sex matters, is an important Q, but as to material definitions there should be no controversy.
Presumably you think a man who gets his bits blown off by an IED is a woman. What rot. And do you also believe a woman with s fake phallus is as much of a man as you? Women are not a p***s-free subcategory of male.
Of course eunuchs are men. And so are all transwomen, who should really be called ‘trans-identifying males’ so that everyone is clear what is meant.
The trouble with polls like this is that it is not even clear what the people asked for their views understand by the term ‘transwomen’. Many – entirely reasonably – think it refers to women who wish to pass as men, rather than the other way around. That would make more sense after all, for why would you call men ‘women’? Everyone knows that men are not women, and cannot become women. And vice versa. It is true that some people pretend to think they can: these people must either have never heard of The Emperor’s New Clothes, or else have entirely missed the point of that highly relevant fable: the power of conformity and cowardice.
Eunuchs are men, by virtue of genetics. That is the end of it.
My view is that both trans women (post op or otherwise) and eunuchs are mutilated men.
A man who has had genital-removing surgery is a man who has had genital-removing surgery. Some of those men would like society to consider them women. They aren’t. Transwomen – I prefer the term trans-identified males – are a subset of men. How that population is treated in law, in circumstances in which sex matters, is an important Q, but as to material definitions there should be no controversy.
Presumably you think a man who gets his bits blown off by an IED is a woman. What rot. And do you also believe a woman with s fake phallus is as much of a man as you? Women are not a p***s-free subcategory of male.
Of course eunuchs are men. And so are all transwomen, who should really be called ‘trans-identifying males’ so that everyone is clear what is meant.
The trouble with polls like this is that it is not even clear what the people asked for their views understand by the term ‘transwomen’. Many – entirely reasonably – think it refers to women who wish to pass as men, rather than the other way around. That would make more sense after all, for why would you call men ‘women’? Everyone knows that men are not women, and cannot become women. And vice versa. It is true that some people pretend to think they can: these people must either have never heard of The Emperor’s New Clothes, or else have entirely missed the point of that highly relevant fable: the power of conformity and cowardice.
Eunuchs are men, by virtue of genetics. That is the end of it.
Do you think they are still men if they get their bits cut off and behave in an unmanly way? At the genetic level I agree they are always men, but that is only one measure – that’s why I say some ‘used to be’ men. I don’t realy know what they are now. Are eunuchs men?
There can be no such thing as a ‘transwoman’. You can mess with the container all you like but the contents remain the same.
(Or indeed ‘transmen’ – where are all of those, clamouring to be included in men’s sports & fighting to go in the men’s loos?)
Gender id seems more about changing your outward appearance to conform to a stereotype opposite that which is stereotypically applied to your biological sex, whatever that may be.
In other words – a binary decision..?
I quite agree men are men ,women are women and neither are by definition freaks. About time the western world came to its senses and put this irrelevant gender discussion back in its box .There are enough problems in this world for politicians to resolve without being distracted by irrational activists seeking to overturn the blatantly obvious.
I quite agree men are mem ,women are women and neither are by definition freaks. About time the western world came to its senses and put this irrelevant gender discussion back in its box .There are enough problems in this world for politicians to resolve without being distracted by irrational activists seeking to overturn the blatantly obvious.
I quite agree men are men ,women are women and neither are by definition freaks. About time the western world came to its senses and put this irrelevant gender discussion back in its box .There are enough problems in this world for politicians to resolve without being distracted by irrational activists seeking to overturn the blatantly obvious.
I quite agree men are mem ,women are women and neither are by definition freaks. About time the western world came to its senses and put this irrelevant gender discussion back in its box .There are enough problems in this world for politicians to resolve without being distracted by irrational activists seeking to overturn the blatantly obvious.
You don’t actually yourself believe your own comment.
Transwomen are men.
There can be no such thing as a ‘transwoman’. You can mess with the container all you like but the contents remain the same.
(Or indeed ‘transmen’ – where are all of those, clamouring to be included in men’s sports & fighting to go in the men’s loos?)
Gender id seems more about changing your outward appearance to conform to a stereotype opposite that which is stereotypically applied to your biological sex, whatever that may be.
In other words – a binary decision..?
You don’t actually yourself believe your own comment.
Actually no. Many transwomen are men : some used to be men. The only safe thing to say is ‘trans women are trans women.’
Absolutely correct. “Transwomen” are indeed men.
Transwomen are men.
There seems to be an interesting dichotomy here. It appears that many people are quite non-judgmental when asked if a person can identify as another gender, but suddenly become skeptical when this impacts on society (women’s spaces, sports, etc).
It’s OK to say ‘identify how you want, just don’t expect us to go along with it’ – I take that view myself – but this will never be enough for these people, especially the fetishists who get off by thinking of themselves as women, given the ‘rights’ culture we find ourselves in (that we didn’t necessarily vote for either). This will always impact society and we must be *made* to go along with it.
Good article. “On the evidence of Scotland, the more they are exposed to the arguments the clearer that view becomes”
Which is of course why trans activists want to shut down debate, bulky and cancel.opponents and drive through changes through institution capture, appealling to vastly exaggerated and emotive language (your child will commit suicide unless ‘their’ new identity which they adopted a few months ago, is confirmed.
Otherwise I agree with other comments that the term ‘transgender’ is itself (deliberately?) unclear. It is unfortunate that the survey could not emphasise that the demanded self- identification applies just as much to those who never physically transition (and may not have any intention to) as to those who do. It would have been interesting to see if the answers would then have been even more ‘trans sceptical’.
The good news about this is that the more they win the more they are exposed and they eventually lose.
The good news about this is that the more they win the more they are exposed and they eventually lose.
Good article. “On the evidence of Scotland, the more they are exposed to the arguments the clearer that view becomes”
Which is of course why trans activists want to shut down debate, bulky and cancel.opponents and drive through changes through institution capture, appealling to vastly exaggerated and emotive language (your child will commit suicide unless ‘their’ new identity which they adopted a few months ago, is confirmed.
Otherwise I agree with other comments that the term ‘transgender’ is itself (deliberately?) unclear. It is unfortunate that the survey could not emphasise that the demanded self- identification applies just as much to those who never physically transition (and may not have any intention to) as to those who do. It would have been interesting to see if the answers would then have been even more ‘trans sceptical’.
What a depressing survey. While there clearly is a difference between a ‘medically transitioned’ trans identifying male (aka transwoman) and a ‘normal’ male they are both still, and always will be, males/men. Nothing will ever make either of them a woman and so they should not try to pretend to be one or expect, let alone demand, others treat them as one.
I don’t care what a person feels like but it is unclear what ‘identify as’ means. How crazy have people become.
If wishes were horses transgender people wouldn’t exist; they would just be what they would like to be. They don’t and aren’t.
I think it’s ok for these men to pretend to be women, as long as they stay the fk out of women-only spaces.
Pretend to themselves? Sure. Pretend to others? NO.
Pretend to themselves? Sure. Pretend to others? NO.
I think it’s ok for these men to pretend to be women, as long as they stay the fk out of women-only spaces.
What a depressing survey. While there clearly is a difference between a ‘medically transitioned’ trans identifying male (aka transwoman) and a ‘normal’ male they are both still, and always will be, males/men. Nothing will ever make either of them a woman and so they should not try to pretend to be one or expect, let alone demand, others treat them as one.
I don’t care what a person feels like but it is unclear what ‘identify as’ means. How crazy have people become.
If wishes were horses transgender people wouldn’t exist; they would just be what they would like to be. They don’t and aren’t.
Trans people don’t change their legal gender; those with a GRC change their legal SEX, and the majority, with or without a certificate, change their socially performed gender. The Equality Act needs amending to make the difference between the two – the difference between fact and fantasy – clear, and the GRA needs to be amended to stop the falsification of what should be factually accurate documents.
The recently invented fiction of gender and sex being different things is at the core of the madness.
The Equality Act does not need amending. It needs to go entirely. It is the political basis for our ‘asymmetric multiculturalism’ as Eric Kaufman puts it. Ostensibly to protect minorities, it weaponises their interests over against those of the majority.
The recently invented fiction of gender and sex being different things is at the core of the madness.
The Equality Act does not need amending. It needs to go entirely. It is the political basis for our ‘asymmetric multiculturalism’ as Eric Kaufman puts it. Ostensibly to protect minorities, it weaponises their interests over against those of the majority.
Trans people don’t change their legal gender; those with a GRC change their legal SEX, and the majority, with or without a certificate, change their socially performed gender. The Equality Act needs amending to make the difference between the two – the difference between fact and fantasy – clear, and the GRA needs to be amended to stop the falsification of what should be factually accurate documents.
Now do the poll without using activist language. So use “men who call themselves transgender” instead of “transgender women”. Or ask whether “men who call themselves transgender should be able to change the sex on their birth certificates to say woman”. You will get very different results.
Now do the poll without using activist language. So use “men who call themselves transgender” instead of “transgender women”. Or ask whether “men who call themselves transgender should be able to change the sex on their birth certificates to say woman”. You will get very different results.
A nation that has lost its sense deserves the ill that will soon come upon it. Sorry to say it, but it’s true.
A nation that has lost its sense deserves the ill that will soon come upon it. Sorry to say it, but it’s true.
I don’t know how convinced I am by this poll. The main problem is that the meaning of words is vague. What does “transgender” mean? What does “identify” in the first question mean?
If we don’t agree on a term if reference how can we consider the results valid?
Even “transgender woman” is what, a man it a woman?
I regularly have to explain to people that a ‘transwoman’ is a man. A lot of people think it means a biological woman who is assuming a male transgender identity.
‘Transgender woman’ confuses even more people.
Far safer to say ‘trans identifying man/male’ – people seem more able to understand that.
But of course, this confusion is a feature of the coerced language mangling rather than a bug.
I regularly have to explain to people that a ‘transwoman’ is a man. A lot of people think it means a biological woman who is assuming a male transgender identity.
‘Transgender woman’ confuses even more people.
Far safer to say ‘trans identifying man/male’ – people seem more able to understand that.
But of course, this confusion is a feature of the coerced language mangling rather than a bug.
I don’t know how convinced I am by this poll. The main problem is that the meaning of words is vague. What does “transgender” mean? What does “identify” in the first question mean?
If we don’t agree on a term if reference how can we consider the results valid?
Even “transgender woman” is what, a man it a woman?
Hat tip to the 25% of people who strongly agree that people should legally change gender on a whim, only half of whom believe that trans people should compete in sports. These people neither know their own ideology (transwomen are women) nor understand what a legal change of sex means in practice.
Also hats off to the slightly larger number of people who are ok with biological men in female prisons, but not men in women’s sports. Neither is good of course, but there’s an obvious class bias there. “My daughter might be hurt on the field, but only the female criminal classes get raped”
Yes. I think there’s a very strong current of ‘this doesn’t affect me personally, so I’m OK with it’ going on here.
Yes. I think there’s a very strong current of ‘this doesn’t affect me personally, so I’m OK with it’ going on here.
Hat tip to the 25% of people who strongly agree that people should legally change gender on a whim, only half of whom believe that trans people should compete in sports. These people neither know their own ideology (transwomen are women) nor understand what a legal change of sex means in practice.
Also hats off to the slightly larger number of people who are ok with biological men in female prisons, but not men in women’s sports. Neither is good of course, but there’s an obvious class bias there. “My daughter might be hurt on the field, but only the female criminal classes get raped”
It was disappointing to see so many ‘don’t knows’.
Are these actually don’t know, don’t care, don’t understand the question, don’t want to answer?
Even depending on which is true, there is a lot of unawareness out there.
I think many don’t understand (some of) the questions.
I wouldn’t be sure how to answer the first one as I am not clear what I am being asked, so I may end up in the “don’t know” category.
Remember that most older people, in particular, still get their news the old fashioned way, through print media and TV/Radio, and, until this latest farrago in Scotland, very little was said in these media. I also suspect that many younger people, who are out in the work-place rather than swanning around at universities, can’t be bothered with this stuff; I don’t blame them, but it will affect people eventually even if you are unaware of what is going on at the moment, Furthermore, I think that the questions should have been more clear about what constitutes a trans-gender, as most people that I speak to are conflating trans-gender with trans-sexual. It would also have been interesting to have broken the responses down by the sex of the respondent. My final point is that this seems to have been a small sample size; but I suppose that survey designers know the necessary size to get a statistically significant answer.
In politics people become sort of static once they choose either side. The “don’t knows” are still up for grabs in the culture war and political theatre. Some of these battles are already won/lost because they’ve reached a majority
I think many don’t understand (some of) the questions.
I wouldn’t be sure how to answer the first one as I am not clear what I am being asked, so I may end up in the “don’t know” category.
Remember that most older people, in particular, still get their news the old fashioned way, through print media and TV/Radio, and, until this latest farrago in Scotland, very little was said in these media. I also suspect that many younger people, who are out in the work-place rather than swanning around at universities, can’t be bothered with this stuff; I don’t blame them, but it will affect people eventually even if you are unaware of what is going on at the moment, Furthermore, I think that the questions should have been more clear about what constitutes a trans-gender, as most people that I speak to are conflating trans-gender with trans-sexual. It would also have been interesting to have broken the responses down by the sex of the respondent. My final point is that this seems to have been a small sample size; but I suppose that survey designers know the necessary size to get a statistically significant answer.
In politics people become sort of static once they choose either side. The “don’t knows” are still up for grabs in the culture war and political theatre. Some of these battles are already won/lost because they’ve reached a majority
It was disappointing to see so many ‘don’t knows’.
Are these actually don’t know, don’t care, don’t understand the question, don’t want to answer?
Even depending on which is true, there is a lot of unawareness out there.
I am hoping that these results are partly due to badly phrased questions. For a long time, at the start of this cult, I thought a transwoman was a woman who wanted to be a man. And I expect many still do.
That would explain why so many think a transwoman (much better termed a trans identifying male) is a woman. The only other reasonable cause is a complete loss of sanity.
Generally when I first hear someone mention “T” something I mentally just go “oh” and they get in the “special” box and know I have to walk on eggshells.
Generally when I first hear someone mention “T” something I mentally just go “oh” and they get in the “special” box and know I have to walk on eggshells.
I am hoping that these results are partly due to badly phrased questions. For a long time, at the start of this cult, I thought a transwoman was a woman who wanted to be a man. And I expect many still do.
That would explain why so many think a transwoman (much better termed a trans identifying male) is a woman. The only other reasonable cause is a complete loss of sanity.
Just try taking a muslim Lady to Hospital to have her examined by a trans women with a P-nis . See how far that gets.
and then charge her for gender hate crime against a woman…
Charge her? Seriously? Islamophobia, or summat..
Charge her? Seriously? Islamophobia, or summat..
“female presenting p***s” The kind of backwards language they invent all the time.
and then charge her for gender hate crime against a woman…
“female presenting p***s” The kind of backwards language they invent all the time.
Just try taking a muslim Lady to Hospital to have her examined by a trans women with a P-nis . See how far that gets.
As others have said, part of the confusion here is the (partly deliberate) blurring of the lines between someone fully transitioned, in the process of fully transitioning, or just deciding that they’re another gender, possibly on a whim or for ulterior motives. And yet we asked (or told) to agree that the term “trans” should cover all those very different categories and grant the same rights to all. Activists may desire that situation, but the law and wider society cannot afford to.
Another point is – why should becoming trans be made easier? Why self-ID? Anyone with true gender dysphoria, or who wants enough to transition, can do so already. And people already have the freedom to dress and call themselves what they want to, under existing law. But to change your legal gender should not be too easy, surely, just like getting married or getting a passport or a driver’s license should not be too easy. Some things are major life decisions and/or have a legal dimension and implications for other people, so it’s right and proper that there should be important questions asked and some legal hoops to jump through. It’s not just about the individual’s rights, and nor should it be.
There is no difference in the sex/gender of a man who has fully or partly or not at all ‘transitioned’. They are all just men who have mutilated their bodies to differing degrees.
There is no difference in the sex/gender of a man who has fully or partly or not at all ‘transitioned’. They are all just men who have mutilated their bodies to differing degrees.
As others have said, part of the confusion here is the (partly deliberate) blurring of the lines between someone fully transitioned, in the process of fully transitioning, or just deciding that they’re another gender, possibly on a whim or for ulterior motives. And yet we asked (or told) to agree that the term “trans” should cover all those very different categories and grant the same rights to all. Activists may desire that situation, but the law and wider society cannot afford to.
Another point is – why should becoming trans be made easier? Why self-ID? Anyone with true gender dysphoria, or who wants enough to transition, can do so already. And people already have the freedom to dress and call themselves what they want to, under existing law. But to change your legal gender should not be too easy, surely, just like getting married or getting a passport or a driver’s license should not be too easy. Some things are major life decisions and/or have a legal dimension and implications for other people, so it’s right and proper that there should be important questions asked and some legal hoops to jump through. It’s not just about the individual’s rights, and nor should it be.
The left is involved ina gigantic misinformation campaign. Who will forget the failure of the UK to go into recession despite the endless attempts to talk and strike us into one. Let’s also remember how NHS waiting times have dramatically improved DURING the strikes. And now the alphabet soup of grifters has been spilled all over the pavement and resembles nothing more than a puddle of sick. Can they keep the misinformation going long enough to win the next general election and change all the rules to guarantee themselves long-term power?
The left is involved ina gigantic misinformation campaign. Who will forget the failure of the UK to go into recession despite the endless attempts to talk and strike us into one. Let’s also remember how NHS waiting times have dramatically improved DURING the strikes. And now the alphabet soup of grifters has been spilled all over the pavement and resembles nothing more than a puddle of sick. Can they keep the misinformation going long enough to win the next general election and change all the rules to guarantee themselves long-term power?
I live in the constituency of Bristol West so am completely unsurprised by your results. Bristol is the home of woke, its a massive student city so no surprise there. As you say, these questions need to be better framed in order to drill down to what the genuine beliefs of the populace are when it comes to trans people. I believe they deserve equal rights, to be treated with compassion – but not to encroach on women’s spaces or to participate in women’s sport. I have less of an issue with transwomen who have gone through full gender reassignment as they are unlikely to be a danger to anyone other than themselves. I also do not believe someone should be able to change the sex on their birth certificate – change gender by all means with a Gender Recognition Certificate, but altering a birth certificate is a denial of biological reality.
I live in the constituency of Bristol West so am completely unsurprised by your results. Bristol is the home of woke, its a massive student city so no surprise there. As you say, these questions need to be better framed in order to drill down to what the genuine beliefs of the populace are when it comes to trans people. I believe they deserve equal rights, to be treated with compassion – but not to encroach on women’s spaces or to participate in women’s sport. I have less of an issue with transwomen who have gone through full gender reassignment as they are unlikely to be a danger to anyone other than themselves. I also do not believe someone should be able to change the sex on their birth certificate – change gender by all means with a Gender Recognition Certificate, but altering a birth certificate is a denial of biological reality.
At least the men wear skirts…
Do you mean the Scotch by any chance?
Hello Charles. I suspect he wants to sell the Scots and keep the Scotch.
Hello Charles. I suspect he wants to sell the Scots and keep the Scotch.
Do you mean the Scotch by any chance?
At least the men wear skirts…
From an American perspective these results are so jarringly at-odds with the support for Sturgeon and SNP, until one surmises that the anti-union sentiment generally outweighs the feelings against gender mania?
From an American perspective these results are so jarringly at-odds with the support for Sturgeon and SNP, until one surmises that the anti-union sentiment generally outweighs the feelings against gender mania?
As a poll, the first question is ridiculous. “People should be able to identify …” etc. (The other three questions are fine.) How could anyone possibly be prevented from being ‘able to identify’? By law? By how they act, dress, speak? By preventing their transgenderish thoughts?
I think this is referring to how gay people used to be prevented from being ‘out’ back in the day; by social pressure, by being beaten up on the streets, by being discriminated against, by being harassed, by not being protected by the law, etc. etc.
I think this is referring to how gay people used to be prevented from being ‘out’ back in the day; by social pressure, by being beaten up on the streets, by being discriminated against, by being harassed, by not being protected by the law, etc. etc.
As a poll, the first question is ridiculous. “People should be able to identify …” etc. (The other three questions are fine.) How could anyone possibly be prevented from being ‘able to identify’? By law? By how they act, dress, speak? By preventing their transgenderish thoughts?
I have some left-wing viewpoints and some right-wing viewpoints – I’ve never fitted neatly into one camp or the other – happily, as it doubles the amount of arguments I can have lol.
Generally though, show me a genuinely-embattled minority anywhere, and I will have an instinctive sympathy for an underdog.
Re trans however, for me, it’s not even a question of being intolerant.
It’s more that I still have not read an intellectually-coherent definition of what trans actually is.
How am I supposed to lend my support to something which does not even make sense in the first place?
This is extraordinary. It’s very straightforward to understand what any other minority person is, whether gay or ethnic minority.
However, with trans, the more you study it, and the more you study their arguments, the sillier it becomes.
Trans piggybacks on a rational and understandable tolerance and sense of fair-mindedness that informs a civilised society’s approach to e.g., gay people, ethnic minorities etc.
For people who have not thought too deeply about it, extending that sympathy to so-called trans people seems, on the face of it, reasonable.
However, the more you read critically about trans, the more you are confronted with its fundamental contradictions, with its baked-in sexism, with its gay-denialism, with its sheer illogicality.
Good article here:
“Whilst Mermaids is currently engaged in ensuring their messaging is compliant with the new DfE guidance, the sexist pseudoscience of “gender identity” is still written into their literature. This is of course inevitable, because without “gendered stereotypes” there would be no markers by which to identify anyone as transgender.
The whole history of transgenderism is born of social unease around homosexuality and the early attempts at sex reassignment surgery were grisly attempts to surgically create heterosexuals. Whilst it is good to see the DfE force lobby groups to backtrack, how such regressive pseudoscience ever came to be promoted in schools in 2020 is a question that begs a governmental answer.
In my chapter of the book I interviewed five lesbian adults, all of whom felt that they might have identified as boys had the education now embedded thanks to charities like Mermaids, been in place whilst they were at school. Indeed, research shows that adopting the stereotypes associated with the other sex is an early sign of developing same-sex attraction as an adult.”
See:
https://thecritic.co.uk/the-sexist-pseudoscience-of-gender-identity/
And another good article:
“Slowly it seems the sexist reality behind the transgender narrative is being exposed. Far from being progressive, to believe that there can be a mismatch between mind and body is to assume that certain behaviours and personality traits cannot be shared by both sexes.
They say there are no meaningful differences between man and woman, yet they rely on rigid sex stereotypes to argue that “gender identity” is real, while human embodiment is not. They claim that truth is whatever a person says it is, yet they believe there’s a real self to be discovered inside that person.”
https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/transgender-ideology-riddled-contradictions-here-are-the-big-ones
I have some left-wing viewpoints and some right-wing viewpoints – I’ve never fitted neatly into one camp or the other – happily, as it doubles the amount of arguments I can have lol.
Generally though, show me a genuinely-embattled minority anywhere, and I will have an instinctive sympathy for an underdog.
Re trans however, for me, it’s not even a question of being intolerant.
It’s more that I still have not read an intellectually-coherent definition of what trans actually is.
How am I supposed to lend my support to something which does not even make sense in the first place?
This is extraordinary. It’s very straightforward to understand what any other minority person is, whether gay or ethnic minority.
However, with trans, the more you study it, and the more you study their arguments, the sillier it becomes.
Trans piggybacks on a rational and understandable tolerance and sense of fair-mindedness that informs a civilised society’s approach to e.g., gay people, ethnic minorities etc.
For people who have not thought too deeply about it, extending that sympathy to so-called trans people seems, on the face of it, reasonable.
However, the more you read critically about trans, the more you are confronted with its fundamental contradictions, with its baked-in sexism, with its gay-denialism, with its sheer illogicality.
Good article here:
“Whilst Mermaids is currently engaged in ensuring their messaging is compliant with the new DfE guidance, the sexist pseudoscience of “gender identity” is still written into their literature. This is of course inevitable, because without “gendered stereotypes” there would be no markers by which to identify anyone as transgender.
The whole history of transgenderism is born of social unease around homosexuality and the early attempts at sex reassignment surgery were grisly attempts to surgically create heterosexuals. Whilst it is good to see the DfE force lobby groups to backtrack, how such regressive pseudoscience ever came to be promoted in schools in 2020 is a question that begs a governmental answer.
In my chapter of the book I interviewed five lesbian adults, all of whom felt that they might have identified as boys had the education now embedded thanks to charities like Mermaids, been in place whilst they were at school. Indeed, research shows that adopting the stereotypes associated with the other sex is an early sign of developing same-sex attraction as an adult.”
See:
https://thecritic.co.uk/the-sexist-pseudoscience-of-gender-identity/
And another good article:
“Slowly it seems the sexist reality behind the transgender narrative is being exposed. Far from being progressive, to believe that there can be a mismatch between mind and body is to assume that certain behaviours and personality traits cannot be shared by both sexes.
They say there are no meaningful differences between man and woman, yet they rely on rigid sex stereotypes to argue that “gender identity” is real, while human embodiment is not. They claim that truth is whatever a person says it is, yet they believe there’s a real self to be discovered inside that person.”
https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/transgender-ideology-riddled-contradictions-here-are-the-big-ones
We should sell Scotland and Northern Ireland to Canada.. their Presbyterians would lobe ot!
We should sell Scotland and Northern Ireland to Canada.. their Presbyterians would lobe ot!
Once again, a plea to Unherd to publish a detailed statistical methodology and breakdown of the way in which the sampling was done for these surveys and the confidence levels at the national and constituency level. Thank you.
Once again, a plea to Unherd to publish a detailed statistical methodology and breakdown of the way in which the sampling was done for these surveys and the confidence levels at the national and constituency level. Thank you.
It is still bewildering why intersexed individuals are not being acknowledged. Perhaps the hidden nature of such people in society speaks to this.
They are the lynchpin for the now famous spectrum.
When you look at the “I” category, then some of these puzzle pieces will make sense.
Douglas Murray makes exactly this point in his book ‘The Madness of Crowds’, and wonders why there was not an emphasis on ‘intersex’ before ‘trans’.
Thank you!
Finally… someone gets it.
Thank you!
Finally… someone gets it.
Yes, more letters is what we need to fix this situation..
No, letters will never suffice to fix anything.
Somehow, some way society has found it within its grasp to acknowledge that not all individuals are heteronormative. And if you think it merely applies to secular, progressive libertarians, give C.S. Lewis a read as he addresses this very topic.
No, letters will never suffice to fix anything.
Somehow, some way society has found it within its grasp to acknowledge that not all individuals are heteronormative. And if you think it merely applies to secular, progressive libertarians, give C.S. Lewis a read as he addresses this very topic.
Douglas Murray makes exactly this point in his book ‘The Madness of Crowds’, and wonders why there was not an emphasis on ‘intersex’ before ‘trans’.
Yes, more letters is what we need to fix this situation..
It is still bewildering why intersexed individuals are not being acknowledged. Perhaps the hidden nature of such people in society speaks to this.
They are the lynchpin for the now famous spectrum.
When you look at the “I” category, then some of these puzzle pieces will make sense.