Summary
Paul Embery's blog (21st February 2025) post raises concerns about the trade union movement's stance on sex-based rights and transgender issues. While Paul positions himself as a defender of women's rights, a closer look at his arguments may reveal potential transphobic undertones.
Trade Unions Have A Woman Problem – A Response to Paul Embery’s Blog
OPINION by Steph.
Paul Embery’s blog post raises concerns about the trade union movement’s stance on sex-based rights and transgender issues. While Paul positions himself as a defender of women’s rights, a closer look at his arguments may reveal potential transphobic undertones.
Paul highlights two cases: the Darlington nurses who formed their own union (DNU) after facing discomfort with a transgender woman in their changing room, and Sandie Peggie, who was disciplined for challenging a trans woman using female changing facilities as instructed by her managers.
It is essential to note that the Sandie Peggie case is sub-judiciary, and in my opinion, it is unwise to make conclusions before a judgment is made. It is also important that I stress that TransLucent agrees with the need for Single Sex spaces, as per the Equality Act 2010.
Paul criticises Unison and the Royal College of Nursing for allegedly failing to support these women.
However, Paul’s portrayal may oversimplify a complex issue.
The Amery and Mondon peer-reviewed study examining organised transphobia, “Othering, peaking, populism and moral panics: The reactionary strategies of organised transphobia,” provides a framework for analysing such situations. They argue that organised transphobia often relies on “othering” trans people, constructing them as a threat to society and exploiting moral panics to justify discriminatory measures.
Several aspects of Paul’s blog could be interpreted through this lens:
Focus on single-sex spaces: Embery emphasises the discomfort of cisgender women sharing facilities with transgender women, echoing concerns about “crossed thresholds” discussed by Amery and Mondon. These concerns often frame trans women as potential threats to cisgender women’s safety and privacy.
Criticism of “hyper-progressivism”: Embery attributes the alleged abandonment of women’s rights to the influence of “hyper-progressivism” within trade unions. This rhetoric aligns with the idea that defending trans rights necessarily undermines women’s rights, a notion challenged by trans advocates and some feminists.
Downplaying the Forstater ruling: Embery criticises the TUC’s cautious response to the Forstater ruling, which protected “gender-critical” views. Amery and Mondon note how far-right and reactionary movements often present themselves as defenders of free speech while simultaneously marginalising and attacking minority groups.
Solidarity with gender-critical individuals: Embery explicitly states his solidarity with the Darlington nurses and Sandie Peggie. While expressing support is not inherently transphobic, it is worth noting that these individuals have been accused of transphobia by some.
It is essential to acknowledge that expressing concerns about women’s rights and single-sex spaces does not automatically constitute transphobia. However, the way these concerns are framed and the broader context in which they are presented can contribute to a climate of fear and hostility towards transgender people who have suffered a massive increase in hate crime over the years.
Paul’s blog, while ostensibly focused on trade unionism, may inadvertently perpetuate transphobic narratives by:
- Reinforcing the idea that trans rights and women’s rights are inherently in conflict
- Promoting the “othering” of transgender people by exaggerating potential risks and harms.
- Ignoring the discrimination and violence faced by transgender individuals, particularly transgender women – indeed, I have suffered four death threats because I am trans, and today, I received an email (which I posted on X) suggesting that I killed myself.
Does Paul have any idea what trans people, especially trans women, go through?
What perhaps Paul doesn’t realise is the gender-critical movement is a global hate movement invariably funded by evangelical far-right groups, several of which are SPLC-named hate groups.
Indeed, the Christian Legal Centre is funding the Darlington Nurses Campaign, and they are associated with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a named SPLC hate group with an income in the UK of over £1m.
Professor Sally Hines responded to Paul’s X’s post promoting his blog by replying:
“Are you aware of who is funding this group Paul? Do you know about the position on women’s rights and same-sex marriage/relationships of the evangelical Christian Legal Centre?”
While another replied to Sally Hines:
Sally he knows. Embery has over years repeatedly tried to introduce reactionary views on LGBTQLGBTQ LGBTQIA+ is an inclusive term that includes people of all genders and sexualities, such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, intersex, asexual, pansexual, and allies. While each letter in LGBTQIA+ stands for a specific group of people, the term encompasses the entire spectrum of gender fluidity and sexual identities. https://abbreviations.yourdictionary.com/what-does-lgbtqia-stand-for-full-acronym-explained.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT ppl, women’s rights, into the left“
While Paul Embery does not explicitly express hatred or animosity towards transgender people, his rhetoric may contribute to a climate in which transphobia can flourish. As a fellow trade unionist, I sincerely hope we can work things out.
Opinion – Steph Richards 21/02/25
