Dear BBC Upper Management and Editorial Staff,
The day this open letter is being written (26th October 2022), you published an article on the BBC News website by Caroline Lowbridge titled 'We're being pressured into sex by some trans women'*¹.
The article headline may use the word “some”, but the clear implication of the article and its headline is that transgender women as a minority group pose a threat to cisgender lesbians, and should therefor have their rights restricted in the UK.
The implications proposed by this article suggest that transgender women generally pose a risk to cisgender lesbians in great enough numbers that it is newsworthy, and something the general public should consider as a common occurence rather than a matter of incredibly rare, isolated experiences.
The article uses a deeply flawed study that doesn’t meet BBC guidelines*², and anecdotal accounts from known transphobic hate groups who actively campaign for transgender people to lose their legal recognition as their gender.
The article is based on a single self selected study of 80 individuals sourced from Get The L Out*³, a group who, prior to the survey, were already united by anti-trans views. The group that was surveyed already believe transgender women are men, and should be prohibited from legal recognition as women / access to female gendered spaces out of fear that access will cause cis women to be sexually assaulted.
This study breaks the BBC’s own guidelines about using surveys as sources for claims in coverage, as it is self selected, with a small sample size and a clear bias held by those self selected to respond.
bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidance/surveys...
Additionally, the article itself acknowledges that outside of this small sample size self selected study there is basically no evidence for the claim that this is happening in any sort of numbers that would justify generalising this as a widespread experience.
The article dangerously frames this as a widespread issue, whilst simultaneously acknowledging that there is no actual evidence to that effect outside of isolated claims and cherry picked individual cases. You cite a more than 50% figure from Get the L Out’s survey result, with the implication being that most cis lesbians will have experienced coersion into sex by a trans woman, in the same article as the below quote.
“Ultimately, it has been difficult to determine the true scale of the problem because there has been little research on this topic - only one survey to my knowledge”.
And this quote comes directly from the perspective of the survey’s organiser:
“While acknowledging the sample may not be representative of the wider lesbian community, she believes it was important to capture their "points of view and stories".
The article itself routinely implies that transgender women are not women, uncritically quoting people who call transgender women men without at any point clarifying that this is ignoring their legal status as women in the UK.
The fact that the people cited in this article largely do not acknowledge that transgender women are women, by refering to them as men, should make it clear that they are not representative of the wider community of cisgender lesbians.
Most of the people that the articles cites do not talk about not wanting to sleep with transgender women with penises, they talk about not wanting to sleep with people they see as men, or see as having male genitals. This should make it very clear what view those interviewed have on the legal status of the gender of transgender women.
"I can hear their male vocal chords. I can see their male jawline. I know, under their clothes, there is male genitalia. These are physical realities, that, as a woman who likes women, you can't just ignore."
You do not have to be attracted to a woman, cisgender or transgender, who has a deep voice, or a square jaw, but to call those male physical attributes, or to suggest that anyone attracted to women can never be attracted to those attributes, not only implies that cisgender women with these attributes are not women, but also implies that any transgender people with those attributes are no longer women.
If someone is a transgender woman, you are not obligated to be attracted to her, to want to have sex with her, or to be with her in any way. You do not have to find attributes such as “a deep voice” or “a square jaw” attractive. If a transgender woman has a penis, you do not need to have sex with her, or interact with her genitals in any way, regardless of whether or not you are attracted to women.
However, to repeatedly insist that these attributes mean that the transgender woman is in fact a male is an act of transphobia, because in the UK she is recognised as a woman.
A transgender woman with a deep voice, a square jaw, and a penis that you do not want to have sex with is not a man. She is a woman that you don’t find attractive.
The above cited woman also notes she would feel the same if the transgender woman in question had lower surgery. So, she would still feel that a transgender woman is a man, even if said woman had a vagina rather than a penis.
Again, this makes it clear that the person interviewed inherently feels that transgender women are not and can never be women. That is not someone who should be used as an unbiased source on the topic of transgender women’s existence. You do not have to be attracted to transgender people, finding us unattractive is fine, but to believe that we fundamentally are not and cannot ever be our legally recognised gender is both transphobic and factually incorrect*⁴.
The article also references the phrase Gold Star Lesbian in this piece, a term used to shame lesbians who have ever interacted with men sexually. The term implies a hierarchy of lesbianism, where someone who for example has slept with a man while trying to discover their identity and later recognises they are a lesbian is less of a lesbian than someone who never slept with a man. It’s an exclusionist badge of honour used to gatekeep people out of lesbian identity who took some time to get there.
In the context of this piece, the cited porn actress claims they do not want to sleep with a transgender woman, because they “have only ever slept with women”. In the context of the gold star nickname, this implies that they, again, inherently do not see transgender women as women. The issue is not posed as them not wanting to sleep with someone with a penis, but that they see the transgender woman as a man, and that they would be less of a lesbian for sleeping with them. This again reinforces the idea that “true lesbians” don’t sleep with transgender women, a fact which is not accurate.
Nowhere in this piece do you speak to any cisgender lesbians who are attracted to transgender women, giving readers the impression that all lesbians are of the opinion that transgender women are not women.
The article also cites LGB Alliance. This group has registered charity status in the UK, but appears to be breaking the charity commission’s rules for behaviour and conduct of a UK charity⁵. A UK charity can campaign for the rights of a single group, but cannot exist solely or predominantly to campaign against the rights of a minority group⁶.
The LGB Alliance has a proven track record of focusing primarily on gender identity and transgender issues, for example their recent LGB Alliance Conference on 21st October 2021 advertised a timetable of four panels, three of which focused on transgender topics and/or were being hosted by known anti-trans activists (the final fourth panel appeared to just be a closer).
The group does has not shown any evidence of campaigning for LGB (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual) issues such as halting LGB conversion therapy, addressing LGB hate crimes or tackling the high level of homelessness in the LGB community.
Rather, they have been known to be both actively biphobic⁷, homophobic⁸ and discriminatory towards the LGBTQ+ community as a whole*⁹.
At the aforementioned conference, an attendee claimed that transgender people are not real, that transgender people should not have legal recognition, and that transgender people should be eradicated from existence. That was met by cheers by conference attendees, and not criticised or countered by those on stage, or representatives of the charity itself.
Additionally, Jen Ives, a transgender woman, was the victim of a hate crime at the LGB Alliance conference:
pinknews.co.uk/2021/10/25/lgb-alliance-conference-...
LGB Alliance is an anti-trans hate group that you, the BBC, have represented as simply an LGB rights group, and uncritically platformed. When LGB Alliance told the journalist, Catherine Lowbridge, “We know a minority, but still a sizeable minority of trans women, do pressure lesbians to go out with them and have sex with them and it's a very disturbing phenomenon”, they again had no actual evidence.
"We don't have figures but we are frequently contacted by lesbians who relate their experience in LGBT groups and on dating sites."
Again, the one study that is cited is self selected, of a small sample size, and from a group with a clear bias. The other groups claiming this is an issue have not provided evidence. This does not meet your own BBC guidelines for evidence*².
Some of the people cited in this article who claim that they were called anti-trans for refusing to sleep with a transgender woman are actually very vocal online about wanting to see rights reversed and removed for the transgender community, showing a clear history of bias. In many cases, those interviewed in this article have deliberately misrepresented why people view them as anti-trans.
“Debbie Hayton has been accused of propagating hate speech against the trans community, despite being trans herself.”
The article does not elaborate further on this statement, but Debbie Hayton is one of the few transgender people you allow to speak for the piece. Debbie is a transgender person who is very well known for being willing to stand by the views of the anti-trans community, saying what they and those platforming them want to hear*¹⁰. Selecting a known anti-trans figure for this piece as one of your only transgender voices is very telling, as they’re in a very small minority of transgender voices who would use their position in this article not to dispute the piece’s biased claims.
Debbie Hayton’s claim, for example, that most transgender women are attracted to women because they are actually just straight biological males is, again, based on zero evidence.
The inclusion of it here is clearly an attempt to have a transgender person parrot the article’s implication that transgender women are not just straight men, but rapists, a claim that this piece makes repeatedly and does not push back against.
By claiming that transgender women try to date women because they are actually straight men perpetuates the idea that transgender women are misleading sexual predators. The fact Debbie Hayton is willing to make unfounded claims, and insist that transgender women are truly men and not actually women, is an element of why they have been labelled transphobic amongst the LGBTQ+ community.
Get The L Out, the group behind the featured survey and a group that is cited in the piece as having “demonstrated” at London Pride 2018, actually jumped the barriers at the event*¹, refusing to let the march go ahead until they were allowed to lead at the front of the march, handing out fliers claiming that transgender women should be banned from women’s spaces and be stripped of legal recognition, because they are all potential rapists.
They also screamed transphobic obscenities at anyone holding a transgender flag watching the march, deliberately misgendered those with transgender pride flags, and threatened police involvement on any transgender people who were provoked by their bigotted actions.
This is an example of the kinds of groups that you, the BBC, are citing in this article. You are citing groups with an incredibly strong anti-trans bias. The survey results come from a group who believe transgender people should not feel safe at Pride, and should have to face misgendering, slurs, and claims that they are rapists. This is not an unbiased source.
We do not dispute the claim that there are likely isolated cases of cisgender lesbians who have been pressured in the past into sex by transgender women who viewed their genital preference as transphobic, however to paint this as a widespread occurrence, or the norm, is incredibly dangerous. It is obviously a tragedy any time any person is coerced into sex and their consent violated, but the answer to that is not to paint an entire minority group as potential rapists.
This article feels very reminiscent of media coverage of gay people using public bathrooms in decades past, suggesting that the experiences or fears of a small group of individuals should justify the media’s implication that gay people are a sexual assault risk in bathrooms (a claim that was, in fact, shown to be fearmongering based on lies*¹¹) That kind of coverage was bigotted in decades past, and it remains so today.
The article also feels reminiscent of the style of generalized fear-mongering used by far right news organisations against minority groups more broadly, beyond the LGBTQ+ community. This particularly reminded one of our signatories of Asian ethnicity of right wing attempts to paint all non white groups as dangerous based on fringe cases and anecdotal accounts.
Any person who wants to refuse, or withdraw consent to a relationship, romance, or sexual encounter is always entitled to do so and this is not up for debate. No matter the context, demanding that someone sleep with you without consent is a crime of the most vile order. Nobody should ever even attempt to force another person to have sex with them if they do not want to.
To find out that a transgender woman has a penis, and decide that you do not want to sleep with her, is your right. This is overwhelmingly the opinion of the transgender and LGBQ+ community as a whole.
Additionally, this article completely overlooks the massive rates of violence faced by transgender people*¹², and the huge risk they encounter when revealing their transgender status to partners. Most transgender women are genuinely terrified of violence if they reveal their transgender status and accidently anger their partner at that moment. Transgender women are not in the habit of revealing that they have a penis as a surprise, alone with a partner, at the last moment before intimacy, because that is something that is incredibly dangerous, and puts them at great risk of violence.
In a wider context, there is a broad history of LGBTQ+ people of various backgrounds being accused of being sexual predators that this article plays into. Gay and lesbian people were accused of being bathroom predators by the media in the 80’s, bisexual people were accused of being sexual predators in the 90’s and 2000’s, and transgender people are right now being targetted very strongly in that same manner.
Most groups campaigning to restrict transgender rights in the UK recycle homophobic talking points near verbatim without evidence. Bathroom bills were introduced in the US because of fears that transgender people in bathrooms could lead to sex offences, despite there being no evidence that years of transgender people in bathrooms had caused any such crimes.
Those in the UK who campaign against Self-ID for transgender people use the argument that it will lead to an increase in sexual assaults, despite nothing of the such happening in any other country where Self-ID had been implemented.
Rare examples of sexual assaults by transgender people are held up as “evidence” against every transgender person, to promote a clearly anti-trans agenda. This article plays into the idea that LGBTQ+ people are sexual predators, and that a handful of anecdotes is enough to paint an entire community with that brush.
Additionally, this article doesn’t only contain anti-trans disinformation and bigotry, but it also contains biphobic sentiments. The only Bisexual woman referenced in this piece, who is not named, is held up as the scary villain forcing a lesbian into sex that they do not want to consent to. Considering that Get The L Out and LGB Alliance were heavily cited in this piece, this does not come as a surprise, as both groups have a history of disrespecting bisexual individuals*⁷, particularly any who see transgender people as their legal gender.
The BBC has been continually platforming anti-trans hate groups, and anti-trans perspectives, without covering the perspectives of the transgender community themselves. This is a particularly egregious example, but it’s certainly not an isolated incident.
Platforming bigotry is not impartiality, and the BBC needs to recognise that. Painting an entire group as potentially dangerous based on anecdotes is a deeply dangerous act.
It is vital that the BBC, which is a government-endorsed public service that claims to be committed to achieving impartiality with the output of it’s content, rectifies this act with a sincere apology, amendment of the article to clarify the falsehoods and damage within, and commits to realigning with their original mission statement*¹³.
*¹https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385
*²bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidelines/accuracy/gu...
*³bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-44757403...
*⁴blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-pho...
*⁵drive.google.com/file/d/12q_P2aIvcf00_8T9QXq2ZR3M8... & gov.uk/government/publications/speaking-out-guidan...
*⁶gov.uk/government/publications/equality-act-guidan...
*⁷pinknews.co.uk/2020/01/20/lgb-alliance-t-shirt-bis...
*⁸pinknews.co.uk/2020/06/19/lgb-alliance-same-sex-ma...
*⁹pinknews.co.uk/2021/08/19/lgb-alliance-charity-com...
*¹⁰ inews.co.uk/news/neu-teacher-union-trans-lgbt-comm...
*¹¹lgbtqnation.com/2017/10/fake-news-1949-painted-gay...
An update of two halves, firstly progress on the open letter itself followed by advice on how to file your own complaint to the BBC.
RE The Open Letter Itself
Thank you so much to the 14,000 of you who have so far signed this open letter. We appreciate your perseverance through our tech issues.
We are aware of a few small issues in this open letter, including the year in the first sentence being listed as 2022, and an incorrect name used in the title of the letter. As open letters are signed with people's names attached, changing details on the letter is not easily done. We're doing our best on that front. We do not feel these impact the overall statement of the letter, but are aware of them.
The final open letter, which we will send to the BBC, will have these errors corrected.
We are working to keep on top of and remove hateful and trolling signatories. When we were recommended this site to publish our open letter we were not aware that the site was run by a very small team, and the limitations that would have on the speed at which we can remove signatories. We are aware and sorting these over time.
Additionally, we are aware of some users having difficulty receiving emails to verify their signatures. For now, the best advice is try a different email address (some have found Gmail to work), check spam and promotions folders, or try putting N/A in any empty entry fields. We are aware and working on this.
We are also aware that for several hours today users were not able to verify their signatures on the open letter, which killed much of the letter's momentum with regard to name additions. We apologize for this issue.
We are aware of the issues users have faced, and will do our best to keep on top of them. We can't do much to speed up this process, but we are working on the issues raised.
Complaining to the BBC
The time has come for all members of the LGBTQ+ community, as well as their allies, to let the BBC know that its low standards and baseless incitement of hate and fear has gone too far.
Direct complaints to the BBC are currently needed so that the company cannot ignore legitimate criticism and pretend that what it’s doing is at all acceptable.
You can complain to the BBC using the following link: bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint/#/Co...
Complaints should be clear, concise, and direct. They should be kept under 1,000 words and consist of a factual account of the falsehoods, misinformation, and dishonesty found within the article. The BBC’s own reporting guidelines should be referenced, as the article in question directly contravenes them.
bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidance/surveys...
Please do not copy and paste your complaint from others, as they will be filtered and ignored.
Expect a generic and dismissive response from the BBC in return, and once received, reply by restating your complaint and select “Contacting us about a previous complaint” from the list of available options.
Do not add additional information to your complaint in between resubmissions.
Escalate your complaint to Ofcom once the BBC has dismissed you. Escalation is key - the BBC will hope to ignore you and the thousands of others who have voiced concern over its reporting. They will hope you get disheartened by the boiler plate dismissals and give up on escalating. Keep complaining until the issue has been raised to Ofcom.
While it is possible to issue a complaint directly to Ofcom, by complaining to the BBC, and escalating up to Ofcom from there, you demonstrate that you attempted to raise the complaint directly to the BBC without success first, increasing the chance of Ofcom intervention.
In all correspondence, require a response. Upon receiving a response, escalate the complaint.
If you require any talking points when writing your complaint, you may find the citations and links provided at the end of the open letter, or the open letter’s contents, useful in working out points that would be useful to discuss.
Take the time to read the BBC guidelines, and where possible cite which BBC guidelines you feel are being broken.
Hello again everyone.
Some of you may have seen, but PinkNews published an article yesterday discussing out open letter, the complaints levied against the piece on social media, and seeking a statement from the BBC.
Link: pinknews.co.uk/2021/10/27/bbc-trans-transphobia-op...
To say their response is dissapointing is an understatement.
"Rejecting this criticism, the BBC told PinkNews that the article was about a “complex subject”, “went through our rigorous editorial process” before being published and “provides appropriate context”."
"In response, a BBC spokesperson said: “The article looks at a complex subject from different perspectives and acknowledges it is difficult to assess the extent of the issue.
“It includes testimony from a range of different sources and provides appropriate context. It went through our rigorous editorial processes.
“It is important that journalism looks at issues – even where there are strongly held positions. The BBC is here to ensure debate and to make sure a wide a range of voices are heard.”"
If you've signed this open letter, it's safe to assume you disagree with the BBC's assessment that the article did enough to avoid painting trans people broadly as dangerous, failed to use varied sources, and failed to provide accurate context on its claims and sources.
Additionally, we think you will likely agree this piece was not "necessary debate". The essay was a one sided piece presenting isolated incidents as though they're a widespread issue, speaking exclusively to people who think trans women are and always be men. This is not debate, and even if it had been, trans people's rights should not be debated using the isoplated experiences of individuals.
If you want to see the BBC take these complaints seriously, please consider seeing the instructions in out previous update and send the BBC a formal copmplaint. We cannot overstate how important formal complaints are going to be if we want to see anything done about this.
We plan to send our open letter formally to the BBC on Friday afternoon, so if you'd like to encourage anyone else to sign, you've got around 24 hours to do so.
Thank you again everyone for caring, and standing beside us on this.
Hello all.
So, this is likely to be our final update here for a while.
As of tonight we have 20,000 signatories on our open letter, 12,000 of whom are verified.
We have put together a finalised version of the letter with some minor errors corrected, a cover page, and a list of verified signatories minus troll and hate comments.
You can see the version we are sending to the BBC tomorrow morning here: laurakbuzz.com/2021/10/29/trans-activism-uks-final...
Thank you so much everyone. We've had contact with BBC staff who have assured us the pressure we have placed on the BBC this week has made a real difference to attitudes within the company, so thank you for all of your support.
We will update here if we recieve a response that's more than "no, we think it's fine".
Thank you all for your support.