I log on to the BBC website on Thursday and, alerted by a garish red background, I see
“Breaking News”
.
The breaking news is this: "rapist Isla Bryson will not be incarcerated in a women's prison."
I read the sentence two, three times.
I'm still stumped.
What?
A woman convicted of rape?
Turns out yes.
And what
not
We live in confusing times.
The fake news on social networks, leaders of nuclear powers that inhabit alternative worlds, the chilling advances of Artificial Intelligence… I sometimes feel that I am in a race against an army of robots that in a short time will write much better than me, and a thousand times faster.
Exceptionally, I wouldn't mind if this particular column was written by a robot since by touching on the trans issue one
risks being subjected to a witch hunt
, like the feminist JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books.
But let's get to it.
Isla Bryson, 31, was called Adam Graham until 2019. He decided to
change his name, and gender, after being arrested
for two alleged cases of rape in 2016 and 2019. The judicial system respected his decision.
Pretrial detention, prior to the trial, was served in a women's prison.
On Tuesday of this week a court found her guilty of both charges.
A heated controversy broke out in the media.
It was not possible, many said, that Isla Bryson was still in a women's prison
;
she had to serve the long sentence that awaited her in a men's prison.
Scottish Government First Minister Nicola Sturgeon was forced to intervene.
She declared that, indeed, Bryson would be transferred to a men's prison.
This was the BBC
"Breaking News"
that caught my eye on Thursday.
Sturgeon has complicated his life with the trans issue.
His mission had been one:
fight for Scottish independence.
Suddenly, late last year, it occurred to him to propose a new trans law that
would lower the age at which a person can legally change their gender from 18 to 16
in Scotland .
The Scottish Parliament passed the law just before Christmas, sparking a dispute with the UK central government in London which will challenge the Scottish decision in court.
Whereupon
the implementation of Scottish law has been suspended.
Currently throughout the United Kingdom, Scotland included, not only do you have to wait until you are 18 to change your gender, but people who apply to do so must first undergo a rigorous medical and legal procedure.
The law proposed by Sturgeon ends these measures.
You are 16 years old, you announce that you change your gender and that's it: the government recognizes your new status as a man or a woman, according to your own and sovereign choice.
The Isla Bryson case has served as proof of how wrong Surgeon is, according to opponents of his proposed law, including Rosie Duffield, a Labor MP in Westminster.
The Labor party is mostly in favor of what Sturgeon is proposing.
As has been seen in other parts of the world,
the left is to the death with the trans cause;
the right suspects her
.
Duffield declared in parliament this week against his party, against Sturgeon, whose Scottish nationalism leans to the left.
Duffield's argument focused precisely on the possibilities, according to her, that men who decide to become women will cynically abuse their new condition, for example that they will do so with
the aim of serving their prison sentences with women
.
Or to enter women's locker rooms or toilets for lewd purposes, or to enjoy the competitive physical advantage of playing rugby or boxing against women.
The many feminists who think like Duffield make it clear that they have no problem with people wanting to change their gender per se;
their problem is with those or those who
could do it with abusive intentions
.
And that is why they ask that the law be strict when it comes to determining who can and cannot legally change gender.
Isla Bryson, who has dressed as a woman since she was arrested for rape, has reinforced Duffield's position.
Especially in those cases where the person who was a man but claims to be a woman chooses not to have surgery, and continues to wear the male genitalia with which she was born, which is the case for Bryson for now.
Aware that today it is almost as easy to be accused of being a transphobic as being a racist and that the debate around the issue confuses me, I am trying to keep my words right here.
I risk, however, to ask some questions.
Is gender a feeling or a fact?
Do trans rights clash with women's rights?
Was pioneering feminist Germaine Greer right when she said eight years ago, causing enormous controversy, that "cutting off your dick and putting on a dress doesn't make you a woman"?
Perplexed, I will not propose answers.
I will only mention the only case I know of of a person who has changed gender.
The daughter of a New York friend of mine decided eight years ago, when she was a teenager, that she really was a boy.
I saw my friend last year.
She told me that her 22-year-old daughter was now her son, that she had changed her name and was about to have her breasts amputated.
My friend, the mother, was trying to adapt to the new reality.
The father - I could see it by his silence - did not take it so well.
I, also a father, am thankful that I did not have to face such a dilemma.
But yes, to this girl-turned-boy, like all bona fide transgenders, I wish them all the best.
And may in time all the confusion and noise that accompanies the issue be replaced with clarity and sanity, may all settle down and may there be peace.
But it will take time.
look too
The real world upside down
Requiem for molecular cuisine
