Tories to 'End Confusion' Over Gender

Summary

このインタビューでは、保守党が平等法を改正し、性別を生物学的性別と定義する予定であると語りました。女性と平等の大臣は、選挙戦争中にこの問題に焦点を当てる理由について説明し、法律が創設された際の目的を再確認する必要があると主張しています。彼らは、性別という言葉が誤って解釈され、裁判所の判断により法的性別と同義視されることがあると指摘しています。彼らは、公共機関や民間機関が法律が何を規定しているかを理解できるように、混乱を解消し、女性と子供を守るために法律の明確さを求めています。また、彼らは、単なる自己認識に基づく人々を排除するのではなく、単性別空間を保護し、法律を明確にすることを目的としています。

Takeaways

• 🔊 コンサベティブ党は平等法を改正し、性別を生物学的性別と定義する予定です。
• 🗣️ 女性と平等の大臣は、選挙キャンペーンの一環としてこの問題に焦点を当てています。
• 👥 この問題は多くの人々にとっては主要な問題ではありませんが、特定の人々にとっては重要な問題です。
• 📚 平等法は生物学的性別を保護する特性として定義しており、単一性別サービスのための免除も提供しています。
• 🤔 裁判所の判断により性別という言葉が曖昧になり、性的自己認識と同義として使われているとされています。
• 🏥 政府は単一性別空間が単一性別であることを確認し、また性的自己認識に関する明確さを提供することを目指しています。
• 👗 性的自己認識を持つ人々が単一性別空間にアクセスする権利があるとされていますが、その定義には混乱があります。
• 🏳️‍🌈 性的自己認識は保護された特性ですが、自己認識に基づく単一性別空間へのアクセスには制約があります。
• 👶 政府は女性と子供を守るだけでなく、性的自己認識を抱く人々も守ることを重視しています。
• 🆚 労働党との対比を強調し、彼らの立場がコンサベティブ党と異なることを示す意図があります。
• 📉 性的自己認識と生物学的性別を明確に区別し、法律上の混乱を解消する改正が求められています。

Q & A

保守党が平等法を改正することを約束する目的は何ですか？

保守党は、性別を生物学的性別と定義することで、平等法の保護された特性を明確にしようとしています。これは人々が法律の目的を再確認し、法のもとでの行動を理解しやすくすることを目的としています。

平等法2010が問題になるのはなぜですか？

平等法2010自体は問題ではありませんが、人々がその中の「性別」という言葉を誤って解釈し、曖昧な使用が裁判や雇用裁判で問題になっているためです。

保守党はどのようにして単性別空間を保護する予定ですか？

保守党は単性別空間が単性別であることを保証し、また、法律の曖昧さを解消することで、人々が訴訟の恐れなしに行動できるようにする予定です。

性別変更された人々が女性専用空間にアクセスできるのはどのような状況ですか？

生物学的に男性であるが性別変更を経て証明書を取得している場合、彼らは女性専用空間にアクセスできます。

自己認識に基づくジェンダーアイデンティティを持つ人々はどのように扱われますか？

自己認識に基づくジェンダーアイデンティティを持つ人々については、法律の明確化が必要な場面で混乱が生じる可能性があるとしています。

労働党と保守党はこの問題に対する姿勢はどのように異なりますか？

労働党は性別と生物学的性別を同じ視する傾向があるとされる一方で、保守党は法律の明確化を通じてその違いを強調する予定です。

性別変更とはどのような意味を持っていますか？

性別変更は、法律上の性別を変更することを指しており、手術を必要とするわけではありません。これは混乱を招く要因の一つです。

保守党は法律の明確化を通じて何を達成しようとしていますか？

保守党は、性別とジェンダーの間の混乱を解消し、法律の適用と理解を容易にすることで、保護されたグループだけでなく、性別不一致を経験する人々も守れるようにしようとしています。

病院での治療において、トランスジェンダー女性はどのように扱われますか？

病院は、プライベート空間を提供するなど、個人の状況に応じた専門サービスを確保する必要があります。

現在の法律の混乱がもたらす問題とはどのようなものですか？

現在の法律の混乱は、人々が病院での治療やサービスの提供において正確な行動をとるのを困難にさせるだけでなく、権利の侵害を招く恐れもあります。

保守党はどのようにして法律を明確化する予定ですか？

保守党は、平等法における「性別」という言葉を生物学的性別と定義し、性別変更と生物学的性別を明確に区別することで法律を明確化する予定です。

Outlines

00:00

😐 法律における性別とジェンダーの定義

保守党は平等法を改正し、性別を生物学的性別と定義する約束をする。女性と平等大臣は、選挙戦中にもその取り組みを強調する。しかし、これは多くの人々にとってheadline issueではないと語る。大臣は、経済、健康、国家サービスなど様々な分野での発表と同様に、この法の目的を再確認することの重要性を説明する。性別は生物学的性別であり、誤った解釈がなされており、裁判所判断により性别と同義とされているため、その定義を明確にする必要があると主張する。また、単性別サービスのための例外も提供されているが、曖昧な用語が原因で多くの裁判や疑問が生じていると指摘する。大臣は、法律を明確にし、人々が訴訟の恐れなしに生活できるようにするという目的を持っている。

05:01

😕 性別とジェンダーの混乱を解消する取り組み

大臣は、性別とジェンダーの間の混乱を解消し、法律を明確にしようとしている。性別は生物学的なものであり、変更できないが、法律上の性別は変更可能であると説明する。ただし、性別変更には、性別認識証書が必要であると強調する。さらに、単性別サービスの提供者には、生物学的性別に基づくサービス提供が可能で、誤解を招く可能性のある用語の使用を避けるよう求める。大臣は、労働党の立場との違いを強調し、彼らはこの問題を理解していると主張する。しかし、複雑さと混乱が依然として存在し、法律の明確化が必要な状況であると語る。

10:02

😟 法律の明確化がもたらす課題

インタビューの最後、視聴者が混乱を表現し、インタビュアーも混乱していると謝罪する。トランスジェンダーの女性が病院での治療に関する問題を持ち出され、性別に基づくサービス提供における複雑さを示す。大臣は、法律の明確化がすべての人々にとって生活を容易にするためであり、特に特殊なサービスが必要とされる人々のためにも例外が作られると答える。しかし、病院での対応が複雑であり、性別に基づくサービス提供における混乱が依然として存在するという点を強調する。

Keywords

💡平等法案

平等法案とは、人々の差別を禁止する法律です。このビデオでは、保守党が平等法案を改正し、性別を生物学的性別と定義する旨の約束をするという主題に関連しています。ビデオの中では、法案がどのように誤解され、曖昧な解釈に使われているかについて議論されています。

💡生物学的性別

生物学的性別は、個体の生殖器官や染色体など生物学的な特徴に基づく性別を指します。ビデオでは、保守党が平等法案において性別を生物学的性別と明確に定義する予定について触れられています。

💡性別再任定

性別再任定は、法律上の性別を変更するプロセスを指し、性别同一性障害を持つ人々が自己認識する性別に合わせて法律文書を更新する権利を与えるものです。ビデオでは、性別再任定と生物学的性別の違いについて議論されており、その曖昧さについても触れられています。

💡単性サービス

単性サービスとは、特定の性別のみが利用できるサービスを指します。ビデオでは、保守党が単性サービスにおいても性別を明確に定義することで、混乱を解消し、サービス提供者と利用者の権利を保護する旨の主張をしています。

💡性別同一性障害

性別同一性障害は、自己認識する性別と生物学的性別が一致しない状態を指します。ビデオでは、保守党が性別再任定の保護的特徴を維持し、性別同一性障害を持つ人々を保護する一方で、混乱を解消しようとする取り組みについて説明しています。

💡自己認識

自己認識は、個人が自己を認識し、特定の性別として自己を定義するプロセスを指します。ビデオでは、自己認識に基づく性別と生物学的性別との間に混乱が生じることについて触れられており、法律がそれを明確に定義する必要があると主張しています。

💡保護的特徴

保護的特徴とは、法律によって差別が禁止される特定の属性を指します。ビデオでは、保守党が平等法案において性別を保護的特徴として定義し、その解釈を明確にする予定について話されています。

💡曖昧さ

曖昧さは、言葉や概念がはっきりしていない状態を指します。ビデオでは、平等法案における性別についての曖昧な解釈が、裁判所の判断や組織のガイドラインに基づく誤った使用につながっていると指摘されています。

💡選挙キャンペーン

選挙キャンペーンは、選挙に臨む政党が選挙に向けた宣伝活動を指します。ビデオでは、保守党が選挙キャンペーンの一環として平等法案の改正を約束し、その取り組みを他の政党と差別化する戦略として使用していると示唆されています。

💡権利の保護

権利の保護とは、法律によって人々の基本的権利が守られることを指します。ビデオでは、保守党が平等法案の改正を通じて、女性と子供、または性別再任定を持つ人々などの権利を保護する旨の主張をしています。

Highlights

The conservatives promise to amend the Equality Act to define 'sex' as biological sex.

Minister for Women and Equalities Kim Bok discusses the issue on a general election campaign.

The amendment aims to clarify the purpose of the law and prevent misinterpretation of 'sex' as 'gender'.

There have been employment tribunals and court cases due to ambiguous use of 'sex'.

The government wants to provide clarity so public and private institutions understand the law.

The protected characteristic of gender reassignment is for many trans people, but not for those self-identifying without legal recognition.

The government aims to ensure single-sex spaces remain single-sex while providing clarity on legal terms.

Trans women with gender reassignment and a certificate can access women-only spaces.

The distinction between 'sex' and 'gender' is being clarified to avoid confusion.

The government is against forcing service providers to act against the law due to misinterpretation.

Minister Bok emphasizes the difference between their approach and the Labor approach to the issue.

The current law allows for legal sex change with a gender recognition certificate, not biological sex change.

The government seeks to clarify that biological sex is immutable, regardless of legal status.

The Equality Act refers to biological sex, not legal sex, which is often confused.

The proposed changes aim to resolve confusion and provide clear guidelines for service providers.

Minister Bok addresses the complexity of the issue and the need for clarity in law and society.

The government plans to stop mixed-sex wards in the NHS to simplify the situation.

Transcripts

the conservatives today will promise to

amend the equality act to ensure the

protected characteristic of sex is

defined as biological sex Minister for

women and equalities Kim Bok joins us

now very good morning to you good

morning I I'm not sure this is a

headline issue for many people we asked

this morning uh what they were most

concerned about this this wasn't the

issue that came up but it is a headline

in the daily mail this morning sex is a

fact of biology um what are you doing on

this issue and why are you focusing on

it at this stage in your general

election

campaign well this may not be a headline

issue but for some people it is a very

important issue and we're able to do

more than one thing at a time we've come

out with all sorts of different uh

announcements on the economy on health

uh national service and this is yet

another one we have a whole we have a

whole package of policies which we are

talking about but this is one which I'd

actually been working on before the

election was called it was delayed

because of the case uh against the

Scottish government but the the real

purpose is about reemphasizing the

purpose of the law when it was created

sex as is written in the equality act uh

is biological sex uh people have been

reinterpreting it to mean other things

we've had some Court judgments that say

it might be legal sex so we just want to

clarify what the status quo is so that

people understand what to do and don't

need to worry about being sued for

example so so so the equalities act

2010 um is not the problem the problem

is that people have been wrongly

interpreting it since is that right so

the equality the the equality act uh has

sex as a protected characteristic and it

also uh provides exemptions for single

sex uh services but we've seen lots of

employment tribunals lots of court cases

where the the word is being used

Ambiguously being used to be synonymous

with gender so we are providing

clarification about what it means so

that public authorities private

institutions know what the law states

there's been much confusion because

organizations like Stonewall have put

out guidance people have been measuring

themselves against other people's

guidance other people's interpretation

of the law we are uh emphasizing what

the law is to make sure that we can

protect women and children you're pres

but I mean to this boldly you

are trying to stop trans women accessing

women only spaces no that is not what

we're trying to do we are trying to make

sure that Single Sex spaces are single

sex spaces but also making sure it is

clear what trans means there is a

protected characteristic of gender uh

gender reassignment uh many trans people

fall under that characteristic but there

are also people who are self-identifying

as trans if Ed decided to put on women's

clothes uh uh should he be able to

access a women's space many people are

confused about what all those things

mean and we are uh creating that Clarity

in the law and also making it reserved

so the devolved governments don't change

things we need to have one law for all

of the United Kingdom not different

things in different stes so if you've

had gender reassignment as a transwoman

so biologically born in a male body but

having had gender reassignment and have

a certificate then you can access women

only spaces because I think the one of

the couple of the examples used female

toilets and Rape Crisis

refugees you saying that if you are born

in a biologically male body but you have

been through gender reassignment you

will be able to access those spaces

under this new proposal but if you

identify as a different gender you will

not uh broadly that is what we are

trying to do even things like gender

reassignments people are trying to claim

it to mean something else that it

doesn't mean there is a lot of confusion

in this space but remember it'll be

about the service uh it'll be about the

service provider so if you as an

organization say this is the service we

provide it is only for biological women

you can't be sued by someone with a

gender recognition certificate there are

many service providers who will provide

services for women and trans women it is

about making sure that people can do

what they want to provide rather than

being forced to do something different

because other people are abusing the law

and of course um Minister we're in an

election campaign so part of the purpose

here is to say that there is a

difference in your approach and the

labor approach so just to go back to

what K starma said in March 2022 he said

a woman is a female adult and in in

addition to that trans women are women

and that is not just my view that is

actually the law what you're saying is

that he is

right if trans women have gone through

gender reassignment then they are women

in the eyes of the law but he's wrong if

he says um that applies to people who

choose to identify as a trans women is

that the distinction you're wanting to

clarify legally um it it's it it's

something like that is a very complex uh

is a very complex issue gender

reassignment now doesn't even mean

people who are uh going through surgery

so that's something that I I I need to

make clear so even as you use that

protective characteristic term of gender

reassignment it doesn't mean surgery

this is why there is so much confusion

I'm afraid K starmer I don't think

really understands the issue he said all

sorts of different things he said it's

not right to say only women can have a

cervix he's flip-flopped on the issue uh

I think labor are all over the place on

this we are the only party who

understand the issue and we're trying to

bring Clarity we don't like the way that

this issue keeps coming coming up again

and again it's being exploited by all

sorts of um of actors and campaign

groups and activists we want to bring

more light and less heat we want to make

sure that not just women and children

are protected but also those people who

do suffer from gender dysphoria who have

had their protected characteristic being

used and abused by all sorts of Bad

actors to do things that the law never

intended but but the point of the thing

I just read out to you just kind of as

you said it's confusing and kind of

complicated when k s said a woman is a

female um adult and in addition to that

trans women are women and that's not

just my view that is actually the law I

mean he's right isn't he if he's talking

about people who've gone through gender

reassignment well the law as it stands

uh the last thing that that's been

stated is the howan Judgment that says

legal sex uh is the uh can be used for

the purposes of the equality act that

doesn't mean somebody uh who is a trans

woman because not all trans women have

changed their legal sex this is why we

are clarifying the law in this area is a

mess uh the gender recognition act 2004

equality Act of 2010 were written at a

time when people use words differently

the grra uh uses the word transexual

some people find that term offensive

today so we are bringing Clarity to it

there is so much confusion and what you

just read out Ed is a classic example of

some of the confusion that the changes

that we will bring in will help help to

clear up but but this is really

important and I think think actually

it's important to say this about you

because there'll be some people who will

mischaracterize your position you are

saying that somebody can legally change

their

sex what I'm at at the moment the law

says a legal sex is changed with a

gender recognition certificate but legal

sex is not biological sex we are trying

to emphasize that the the equality Act

is talking about biological sex it's

what you were born as your body part you

may change your legal sex at the mement

with a certificate and how that applies

in different scenarios there's a lot of

confusion there's confusion about the

terminology even the conversation we're

having shows that you want saying that

somebody can legally change their sex

aren't you you you can you cannot change

you cannot change your sex you can

change your legal sex that's what the

courts have said um so you are saying

you're happy with people changing their

legal sex yes people can people can

change their legal sex of course I think

some people think that you're saying the

opposite that your sex is what you're

born with with but you're actually

saying no I want to clarify in law that

somebody can change their legal sex it's

not the case if you're a woman you're

always a woman you want to change the

law to be clear that somebody can change

their legal sex that people well when we

do this we will be able to properly

distinguish between sex and gender which

are words that have been used

interchangeably in the law but which now

today they're used to mean two different

things I think it really interesting

though because I read the newspapers and

I assumed you were saying the opposite I

thought you were going to to legislate

to say that people cannot change their

sex at Birth where you're actually

telling us you're going to clarify the

law to say that somebody can change

their legal sex which is very different

from what the newspap no I'm sorry Ed

that's not that's not what I said we

clarifying the law to say that the

equality act where it refers to sex is

talking about biological sex yeah a

gender recognition we I I actually think

we need to move away from the term legal

sex and talk about gender we have a

gender recognition use that term me yeah

yeah yes because that's what the law is

now so I'm I'm talking about what the

law is and how we're trying to clarify

it to make it clearer for the future you

can change your gender uh of course you

can that is why we have uh transgender

people but we want transgender to mean

transgender uh sex is immutable

biological sex is immutable doesn't

matter what a piece of paper uh says you

cannot change your sex but of course we

as Society want people who want to

change their gender to be able to do so

uh without fear of discrimin

or we also want those who are providing

sex Based Services to understand what

the law is okay just finally because I

am really no clearer than I was when I

started this interview and I can only

apologize to viewers for that so I'm

going to put a viewer's comment to you I

am a transwoman my GP wants me to go

into hospital for a test which could be

cancer I have anxiety when going near

hospitals as the thought of being on a

male Ward scares me more than cancer

I've been attacked by men so my fear is

Justified now as a transwoman that is

somebody who has been born into a

biological male body but now is a

transwoman should that transwoman go

onto a male Ward where they feel

threatened and intimidated or should

they go onto a female Ward where some

women might not want to be on a ward

with somebody who was born into a

biological male

body yes Susanna what you've described

is uh exactly uh the scenario that shows

how difficult the space is and you don't

need to apologize for being confused

this is the point we're making that the

law itself is confused and people don't

really understand what to do but I'm

worried about this viewer where do they

go I will come to I will come to that

I'll come to that in a moment we are

trying to make life easier for everybody

including uh this person who has written

to you this is a transwoman who says

that they've been attacked by men we

have women who afraid of trans women we

want to make sure that the exceptions

can be made for those people who need

specialized services but even the

scenario you described uh is something

that hospitals are having to deal with

they sending letters about prate they're

sending letters about prostate cancer to

people who are women because they are

trans which do they go on to as I said

this this is something which the

hospitals be able to provide private

spaces at the moment we have a scenario

where different people in both Wards are

saying that they don't want to be in

them this is very complex this is very

complex and this will create Clarity but

uh we don't we have stopped mix sex

Wards um in the NHS this is something

that we have already announced so that's

not um that's not an issue KY B thanks

very much thank you very much indeed um

complicated it's very complicated and at

the and this morning we have nurses

saying that they're treating people in

corridors so the idea of sort of private

spaces for people I'm not sure this

legislation clears up