If you were to look at his official portrait you would be forgiven if you thought he could be representing Reform UK. Or the erstwhile British National Party. The crew cut, the national flag, the sadistic eyes: weeping white nationalism and masculinity by design. But no, for some reason, here he is representing not only the Labour party, but also gay men. And what does he do with this power? Within a week of gaining it, he pushes through policy intended to punish and harm trans children. The complete ban of medical care for those who wish and need to transition. For tanssexual children and young people, it forces them into a position which decimates their hope. They will endure an unwanted cisgender puberty knowing it will drastically reduce their chances of integrating into a very binary and rigid gender structure that Streeting supports. One that punishes gender transgression with violence, pain, and a lifetime of emotional distress.
Transsexual women and girls might be lucky, if they reach 17 years old, to correct some of puberty's permanent changes, to pass as cis. But they will never sing. Many will continue in emotional pain for decades as they struggle to find the cash for the unnecessary expense of facial feminisation surgery, as a result of exposure to testosterone during puberty. All while trying to navigate university, stigma, and being forced into men's spaces, wards and toilets, with a big "transgender" sign over their heads. While Wes Streeting carries on unaffected with his political career, having the privilege of a Cambridge education, he will never know of the pain and suffering these children will carry through young adulthood, many of whom are likely to reach middle age before they physically and emotionally make some recovery.
And I'm quite sure of this. As a transsexual woman, I've had to negotiate that pain. As a child I had no idea why I felt the way I did. The pervasive feelings leading to self-hatred, fed by the psychiatric dialogue of the time dominated by Ray Blanchard. It was only some 40 years later that I realised that his heterosexual right-wing conservative now discredited "research" was nothing more than flexing his abuse of power: his fascistic desire to eliminate the trans feminine. He saw them only as "defective men". He sought to enforce the rigid structures of gender by shaming every part of being a transsexual woman through the most degrading lens he could.
" Blanchard:
Transsexual women aren't allowed a sexuality,
Apparently, everything is a perversion.
That's how you rob us of our love stories,
Shame our desires,
Break our will." - poem by a trans woman.
And how does Streeting fall into fascistic models? Well, we have to look at how far-right and Christian ideology appeals to gay social constructs in the UK. What you need to understand is that some of the same ideas about what constitutes beauty within the culture of gay men in the United Kingdom mirrors what is espoused by far-right figures. Of those traits, what is important to highlight is this: the belief in rigid (especially gendered) categories; belief that hierarchies are natural and justified; and aggression towards those seeking to transgress boundaries. Most gay men come to realize early on that there is premium placed on being white, young, physically fit, and attractive by Western European cultural standards. Those who deviate from those cultural expectations are treated as less than. Within gay men's dating profiles are still found statements like "I'm only attracted to people of [X] race," including worrying "preferences" like: "no fats, no femmes, no Asians" and "masc 4 masc."
And it is here that we find Streetings motivation: the destruction and exclusion of the feminine. Wes Streeting describes this as "normal". Of course, it would be normal for cisgender children, but for transsexual children, a "normal" puberty fills them with more confusion, terror and grief because their body defies their identity. Normal for Wes Streeting is viewed through the lens of young, masculine males.
Abigail Thorn, a popular YouTuber and trans woman who transitioned recently, but relatively later in life was quick to call this out on X.
Both Streeting and Blanchard seek to enforce rigid gender structures. Our recent blogs highlight that the removal of puberty blockers to assist in medical transition results in unacceptable harm to children. Indeed, the recent ban after the Bell case resulted in an increase of suicide in trans children of 2800%. Ironically, Wes Streeting opined on X that he thought that the "safety of the children must come first". But surely the 2800% increase in suicides of trans children who were faced with denial of care, and a life of hell to come does not equate to children coming first. Unless what is meant is "cisgender children" - then this statement would make sense. Cisgender children, of course, do not threaten masculine constructs in the same way that transsexual girls do.
Given that Wes Streeting met with the BMA recently, he must be aware of Dr Emma Runswick's criticism of his policy. Earlier this week, she said on X that banning puberty blockers altogether was a “terrible political decision which will cause incredible harm to trans people”. Dr Runswick's opinion reflects our recent appraisal by academic experts in transgender health criticising the Cass report for bias and poor methodology.
Footnote: (29/7/24)
Subsequently, following the whip being withdrawn of 7 Labour MP's, Wes Streeting was heard on good morning television describing this as "discipline". It is not without coincidence that discipline is one of the central tenets of fascism.
In his biography and discussion with "Times Radio" on You Tube, Wes Streeting describes his Christian ideology and how it took him a long time to resolve his issues with internalised Homophobia. It is not coincidence that he is yet to resolve his transphobia - they have the same root cause. On the 27th July Tommy Robinson organised a far right rally, promoting racism and Islamophobia which was followed by Novara Media. It was no surprise to find that many of those interviewed holding strong Christian views. The Christian Institute, to which many Christian creeds belong, actively seek to undermine the rights and dignity of transgender and transsexual people, describing people as an "ideology". It was not that long ago when homosexuality was illegal and pathologised in the United Kingdom, and again it was Christians who fought against the rights and protections for sexual minorities. Here, the Christian institute describe their desire to interfere with the healthcare of trans people, describing puberty blockers as "drastic". They have no expertise and no right to interfere with the medical treatment of minorities but have always sought to do so: "
".
(Above: excerpts from the "Christian Institute" website, retrieved 29/7/24).
Further reading: Is the far-right gay friendly? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhTq1IWlSLI
Comments