Caroline ffiske was a Conservative Councillor for 8 years. Published 1 November 2021

A recent news story from a regional newspaper illustrates the multiple layers of harm arising from gender ideology.

The Birmingham Mail reports that ‘Kali Gills, 61’ has been jailed after using ‘’considerable force’ to cause an irreversible life-changing injury, to a friend. Please read the article to get a clear picture of the extraordinary violence of Gill’s attack.

The Mail illustrates the story with a picture of Gills - who is clearly a man. But it tells us that Gills ‘identifies as female’. It uses ‘she’ to describe Gills. This use of language insults women. This is not our horrendous crime. 

The Birmingham Mail participates in undermining our language. Language only works because we share an understanding of the meaning of words. We have long understood the meaning of ‘female’ - a women or a girl. ‘She’ also refers to a women or a girl. You can’t ‘identify’ into being a woman or girl. That’s not how concrete nouns work - they are exclusive. 

Undermining our language in this way also undermines the safety of women and girls. Extremely violent crimes of this nature are overwhelmingly committed by men. Girls need to know that. Women need to act according to that. The drip drip drip from our press implying that women commit these crimes undermines the safety of women and girls. If your daughter finds herself walking alone through a park at dusk - should she speed up to trail the two women 100 yards ahead of her? Or perhaps not...? Should she hesitate until they, too, have left the park? No. Speed up!

Our trust in the press - which we must be able to rely upon to pursue and report the truth - is also undermined. Ipso - our press regulator - must step up to challenge our media when it misuses language and distorts truth.

According to the Birmingham Mail, Gills has requested a move to a female prison. While I can only assume that the request will be turned down, the fact that such a move is even a possibility shows up the absurdity of the Ministry of Justice’s transgender prison policy. The Equality Act makes clear that single sex spaces are legal where they are a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Separating vulnerable female prisoners, who have often been at the receiving end of male violence, from the daily, intimate, inescapable, proximity of violent males is the most obvious application of the legitimacy of single sex spaces. The Ministry of Justice last updated it transgender prison policy in 2020. The Conservative Minister who approved the policy could have invoked the Equality Act to confirm the legitimacy of single sex prisons and upheld the safety, dignity, and privacy of female prisoners. He or she chose not to. I wonder how they would defend that decision now. I wonder if Conservative MPs are happy defending it.

Whatever prison Gills goes to, prison staff will be required to refer to him according to his preferred pronouns. This hands power to violent prisoners who can ‘compel speech’ from prison staff. This part of the Ministry of Justice transgender prison policy needs urgent updating following the Maya Forstater case confirming that gender critical views are protected in the workplace. 

The Ministry of Justice policy also states that ‘All individuals in our care must be supported to express the gender with which they identify’. ‘All adults … who declare they are transgender must be permitted to present and express themselves in the gender with which they identify (or in a gender neutral way) and provided with access to the relevant facilities list’. ‘Clothing, hair, make-up, prostheses and other accessories may be subject to risk, security and operational assessments which will be discussed at a local transgender case board’. If Gill is entitled to access women’s clothing or accessories while in prison, I hope people can see this for the transgression, the insult to women, that it is. I hope no female prison staff are required to be a part of it. How did we get to here?

The Birmingham Mail states that Gill ‘has requested to move to a female prison, which will be dealt with in the near future as she does not yet have her recognised gender certificate’. If Gill obtains a gender recognition certificate he will be entitled to move to the female prison estate. Let that sink in... The prison service may find ways to deal with this, but by using the same mechanisms as for any other violent / difficult prisoner. Could this case, alongside the Maya Forstater decision, be the trigger that prompts Conservative MPs to demand a review of the Ministry of Justice’s transgender policy? After all, Stonewall has been thrown out of the Ministry so it is back to being democratically answerable... 

Finally, going back to Gill’s pursuit of a gender recognition certificate. There appears to be nothing in the Gender Recognition Act precluding someone with a violent past from obtaining a legal gender change. Such a person could ‘become’ female in law, with all the transgressions and demands that that implies. Evidence is surely mounting that the Gender Recognition Act needs to be reviewed and tightened.