Brazil has launched an AI platform that continually scans the internet and collects statements that it considers disinformation or hate speech against the LGBTQ+ community, which can then be used to prosecute offenders, Brazilian news site GP1 reported.
The offense falls under Brazil’s hate crime law, which in 2019 expanded to include homophobia and transphobia, and threatens prison time for the convicted. With blowback from conservative circles, it tests what governments and the public consider acceptable use of the technology.
The independent left-winger secured 63 per cent of the first-preference votes last week, and will become the Republic of Ireland’s 10th head of state, succeeding Michael D Higgins, who has served the maximum-allowed two terms in office. The result was announced from Dublin Castle.
Speaking in Irish and English, Connolly said: “I will be a voice for peace, a voice that builds on our policy of neutrality, a voice that articulates the existential threat posed by climate change.”
She also promised to advocate for those who have no voice. “Our public and democracy needs constructive questioning. Together, we can shape a new republic that values everybody, that values and champions diversity and that takes confidence in our own identity.”
Catherine Connolly supported LGBTQ+ marriage equality
Although the president’s post is mainly ceremonial, Connolly has been an advocate for reproductive rights, social justice and neutrality and pledged to fight “racism, bigotry and violence”, which, she said, had “no place in our society”.
A statement on her website said: “I campaigned for marriage equality in Galway and have spoken out in Dáil [the lower house of the Irish parliament] for LGBTQ+ rights abroad and at home, including in support of the Gender Recognition Act and against conversion therapy. Inciting fear and hatred towards the LGBTQIA community is abhorrent.”
Talking about the legislation, she said: “It aims to provide for the disregarding of certain criminal convictions that arose… all through the 19th century and, indeed, one act going back to the 17th century, as well as the Common Law. It had nothing to do with justice or fairness. It was homophobia at its worst and a set of values that had nothing to do with love between two people.
“It is high time we got rid of it. We are not only recognising the injustice but actually setting up a process that will allow us to undo that injustice and to finally bring fairness.”
You may like to watch
“We need an inclusive society”
The new president has also voiced her support for the trans and non-binary community.
Asked where she stands on “gender ideology”, she responded: “We need an inclusive society. We don’t need division, we don’t need language to divide.
“I worked as a clinical psychologist, and trained in England. I know the pain and suffering someone goes through when they feel that they’re not in the right gender. I know that’s a painful, painful process and it’s something that I won’t comment on lightly.
“But I will say that, prior to my time and it was a good act, the government passed the Gender Recognition Act, and it’s law that someone can decide to change their gender and register accordingly, over 18 years of age.”
King Charles III has unveiled a memorial to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender military personnel after a decades-long campaign against a ban on being gay in the armed forces. In his first official engagement in support of the LGBT+ community, the King visited the sculpture, named “an opened letter”, at the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire.
The memorial is dedicated to those from the LGBT+ community now serving in the forces, as well as those who served at a time when it was illegal to be gay in the military. During the ban, which lasted until the year 2000, those who were gay – or were perceived to be – faced intrusive investigations, dismissal and in some cases imprisonment.
Affected veterans, many of whom attended the ceremony on Monday, said the monument signified “closure” after years of campaigning first to change the law, and then to push the government to make reparations.
Last month, Hong Kong’s opposition-free Legislative Council overwhelmingly voted down a government-sponsored bill that would have partially recognized same-sex unions in the Chinese territory.
The bill, which would have granted limited rights to same-sex couples, was a response to a 2023 order by Hong Kong’s top court that gave the government until Oct. 27, 2025, to establish an alternative framework for legal recognition of same-sex partnerships, such as registered civil partnerships or civil unions.
Marriage equality remains a work in progress in Asia, with only three jurisdictions — Taiwan, Nepal and Thailand — having fully legalized same-sex marriage. A 2023 survey of Hong Kong residents by the Chinese University of Hong Kong found that same-sex marriage was supported by about 60% of respondents.
Though the Hong Kong legislation fell far short of fully recognizing same-sex marriage, equality campaigners said it still would have been a step forward for the international financial hub, whose global image has suffered greatly after mass anti-government protests, severe pandemic restrictions and a crackdown on dissent.
However, 71 out of 86 lawmakers opposed the bill, with some blasting it as an attack on marriage and traditional Chinese values.
The veto marked the legislature’s first big split with the government since Beijing’s “patriots-only” electoral reform in 2021, which aimed to ensure “consistent” and “strong” legislative support for the executive after the 2019 protests. The changes have essentially shut out the pro-democracy lawmakers who traditionally challenged the government.
The Hong Kong government said it was “disappointed” by the veto but that it would respect the legislature’s decision and turn to administrative means to protect the rights of gay couples. The details of its next steps are not immediately clear.
‘No enthusiasm’
Hong Kong, a city of 7.5 million people, had been making some progress on LGBTQ rights through a string of court victories.
In 2023, Hong Kong’s top court ruled that transgender people could change their gender on their official identity cards without undergoing full sex reassignment surgery. In July, a Hong Kong court ruled that transgender people have the right to use public toilets in line with their affirmed genders.
And last month, a Hong Kong judge ruled in favor of a lesbian couple who wanted to include both mothers’ names on their son’s birth certificate.
But there have also been setbacks as the space for activism in Hong Kong has diminished. Pink Dot, the city’s largest LGBTQ event, said last month that it was holding its 2025 edition online after losing its usual venue with no explanation.
The case that prompted the same-sex marriage legislation was brought in 2018 by Jimmy Sham, a leading local gay rights activist who took the government to the Court of Final Appeal to have his overseas same-sex marriage recognized.
Gay rights activist Jimmy Sham in front of the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong in August.Chan Long Hei / AP
The 2023 court ruling in his favor came while Sham, 38, one of 47 pro-democracy figures arrested in 2021 under a Beijing-imposed national security law, was on trial on subversion charges. Sham, who like most of the defendants pleaded guilty, was released from prison in May after serving more than four years.
To comply with the landmark ruling, the Hong Kong government proposed a mechanism in July by which gay couples could visit their partners in the hospital, access their medical records and make decisions about organ donation and funeral arrangements. It did not address parental or adoption rights.
The protections also would have applied only to same-sex couples who had registered their partnerships outside Hong Kong, a provision that advocacy groups criticized as discriminatory.
Yet the proposal met with strong objections from lawmakers, who cited a “lack of social consensus” in Hong Kong on the “highly controversial” subject of same-sex partnership.
They argued that the bill, even though it did not legalize gay marriage, would still lead to a “collapse of traditional family ethics and values” if passed.
LGBTQ couples at a mass wedding in Hong Kong in 2024, which a U.S. pastor performed online.Peter Parks / AFP via Getty Images file
“Why stir up trouble and break tradition for a small group, throwing the whole society into turmoil?” said lawmaker Junius Ho, a vocal opponent of LGBTQ rights.
Sham said that although the veto was a “great pity,” he hoped authorities would relaunch the legislative process.
“The question is whether those in power have the courage and wisdom to resolve differences and seek consensus,” he wrote in a Facebook post.
Hong Kong officials said the government had made its “best effort” to secure support from the legislature, basing the proposal on what they deemed “societal common ground.”
However, John Burns, an emeritus professor at the University of Hong Kong who specializes in the city’s politics and governance, said he saw “no enthusiasm” from the government to create an alternative framework for recognizing same-sex partnerships.
After being forced into action by the court, Burns said, the Hong Kong government “waited until virtually the last possible moment” before proposing a “minimalist bill.”
“They had many opportunities to fix this, and they sat on their hands and looked at the sky,” he added.
What’s next
The Chinese central government and pro-Beijing lawmakers, who have denied any erosion of freedoms in Hong Kong, said the veto would not create a constitutional crisis but rather showcased the checks and balances of Hong Kong’s governance.
But legal experts said the government still has to find a way to comply with the court order.
“The legislature rushed through this decision,” said Azan Marwah, a Hong Kong barrister specializing in public law and family litigation.
He said lawmakers should have proposed and debated amendments to the bill if they had concerns.
“But instead of doing that, they simply abdicated their responsibility,” Marwah said. “Now, what will the court do? To be really frank with you, I don’t know.”
The Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, which proposed the failed legislation, did not respond to a request for comment.
The lack of legal protections for same-sex couples may lead to a “big loss” of local or foreign talent in Hong Kong, as many multinational companies value diversity and equality, said Marie Pang, deputy secretary-general of the centrist political party Third Side.
“It would directly undermine Hong Kong’s competitiveness as an international city, especially when other regions in Asia already have relevant systems in place,” Pang said.
Amid the uncertainty, many people in Hong Kong’s LGBTQ community are continuing to look forward.
The campaign for equality and inclusion is more than legal victories, said Louis Ng, a law student and gay rights advocate.
“Real change requires open communication and engagement with all sides. Only then may we persuade the strong opponents,” Ng said. “It all takes time and effort.”
This month, the European Commission released its LGBTIQ+ Equality Strategy 2026–2030, a renewed and ambitious step in the European Union’s commitment to equality, inclusion, and human rights. Building on the 2020–2025 framework, it reaffirms the goal of making “a Union of Equality” a lived reality, while confronting the surge in anti-LGBTIQ rhetoric and violence across Europe and beyond.
The strategy aims to strengthen the EU’s legal and policy framework against discrimination, calling for the full implementation of the Equal Treatment Directive and stronger safeguards against hate speech, hate crimes, and “conversion practices.” It also reinforces commitments to inclusive education, equitable health care, and recognition of diverse families across member states.
The strategy comes at another critical juncture: Within the EU, crackdowns on LGBTIQ+ rights in countries including Hungary,Slovakia, and Bulgaria highlight the EU’s mixed record and the need for more concerted action by the commission to hold member states accountable. These trends mirror a global backlash marked by the spread of anti-LGBTIQ+ and anti-gender narratives, the criminalization of same-sex relations, and the targeting of transgender people. The new EU strategy seeks to anchor LGBTIQ+ equality as essential to democratic resilience, linking internal coherence with external credibility.
Nonetheless, challenges persist. Implementation will depend heavily on member states’ political will, and enforcement mechanisms remain limited. Moreover, while external funding is vital, ensuring that it reaches grassroots actors in repressive contexts will require greater flexibility and direct-access mechanisms.
Overall, the LGBTIQ+ Equality Strategy 2026–2030 is a reaffirmation of the EU’s aspiration to be a global human rights leader. It sends a clear message: protecting LGBTIQ+ rights is central to democracy, social justice, and the EU’s identity at home and abroad. The EU and its member states should honor the ambitions articulated in the strategy in political and financial decisions both domestically and internationally.
Japan’s parliament elected ultraconservative Sanae Takaichi as the country’s first female prime minister Tuesday, a day after her struggling party struck a coalition deal with a new partner expected to pull her governing bloc further to the right.
Takaichi replaces Shigeru Ishiba, ending a three-month political vacuum and wrangling since the Liberal Democratic Party’s disastrous election loss in July. While she is the first woman serving as Japan’s prime minister, she is in no rush to promote gender equality or diversity.
Takaichi is among Japanese politicians who have stonewalled measures for women’s advancement. Takaichi supports the imperial family’s male-only succession and opposes same-sex marriage and allowing separate surnames for married couples.
An estimated 1.2 billion people could be forced to migrate by 2050 due to extreme weather and natural disasters related to climate change. The hardships of relocating and sharing limited survival resources will fall hardest on LGBTQ+ climate refugees, numerous experts say.
In 2023, London’s Pride parade was briefly halted by a small group of LGBTQ+ activists with U.K.-based climate justice coalition Just Stop Oil protesting the event’s inclusion of floats and sponsorships from high polluting industries.
Ahead of their demonstration, the LGBTQ+ supporters of Just Stop Oil released a statement explaining that they would take action to oppose the government’s continued development of new fossil fuel projects in the face of scientific consensus that such projects threaten “the collapse of our food systems and the breakdown of ordered society.”
The climate crisis, they wrote, “has already killed, and made homeless, millions of people including many LGBTQ+ people.”
“Due to their position at the margins of society, LGBTQI+ people are especially vulnerable.”Climate campaigner, Lily O’Mara
“In the coming decades, hundreds of millions of people are likely to be forced from their homes as conditions become unsuitable for human survival,” the statement continued. “It is queer people, and particularly queer people of colour in the global south, who are suffering first in this accelerating social breakdown.”
The activists at the 2023 London Pride parade were just a handful of voices in a growing chorus raising the alarm about climate displacement and the unique impact it will have on LGBTQ+ people.
In 2020, the Institute for Economics & Peace’s inaugural Ecological Threat Register estimated that by 2050, 1.2 billion people could be displaced around the world due to the effects of rising global temperatures and resultant environmental disasters and political upheaval.
Already, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR), an annual average of 21.5 million people around the world were displaced from their homes by floods, storms, wildfires, extreme temperature, and other weather-related catastrophes between 2008 and 2016.
As the Center for Climate and Security notes, climate change has been widely described, including by the UNHCR, as a “threat multiplier,” exacerbating risk both for people in already unstable regions and for the socio-economically disadvantaged.
LGBTQ+ people who are forced to migrate from climate-vulnerable areas are similarly likely to face discrimination and harassment on their journey to and in refugee camps.
As writer and researcher Lily O’Mara noted in a 2023 piece for Earth.org, “Due to their position at the margins of society, LGBTQI+ people are especially vulnerable” to the widening inequalities that will inevitably result from increased climate catastrophe, with queer women and LGBTQ+ people of color bearing the brunt.
The risks for LGBTQ+ people are manifold and intersectional
A 2024 report from the Williams Institute found that gay and bi couples in the United States are more likely to live in coastal areas and cities, as well as in counties with an increased risk of adverse climate change effects, including extreme cold, heat waves, excessive precipitation, and dry conditions.
These couples are also more likely to live in areas with poorer infrastructure and access to resources, which means they’re “less prepared to respond and adapt to natural hazards and other climate disruptions,” the report said.
As Eoin Jackson explained in a 2023 piece for the Harvard International Law Journal, many countries in regions that will likely see the most immediate impact of climate change — Northern Africa, Southeast Asia, the Middle East — already have poor track records on LGBTQ+ rights.
Both Jackson and O’Mara warn that in these regions, religious leaders could likely blame LGBTQ+ people for climate-related crises. Jackson cites LGBTQ+ people being blamed for outbreaks of COVID-19 in Nigeria, Liberia, and Zimbabwe, while O’Mara cites religious leaders in New Zealand, Malaysia, Israel, Haiti, and even the U.S. blaming sexual minorities for earthquakes and hurricanes. As climate catastrophes increase, LGBTQ+ people will likely be forced to flee their homes due to increased persecution as well as natural disasters.
Flooded homes along a coastline. | Shutterstock
As countries grapple with the economic effects of climate change, Jackson notes, LGBTQ+ people, and particularly transgender people, will also likely be some of the first to be denied resources, like access to jobs and affordable housing.
When disaster does strike, queer and trans people are likely to face discrimination when trying to access aid. Even in the U.S., O’Mara notes, research has shown that LGBTQ+ people “experience barriers to proper healthcare, difficulty accessing food and water rations, and securing emergency shelters after being displaced by environmental disasters.”
We must reject the view that climate change affects people indiscriminately and recognize the specific ways it affects LGBTQ+ and other marginalized people.
Those who are forced to migrate from climate-vulnerable areas are similarly likely to face discrimination and harassment on their journey to and in refugee camps, according to O’Mara. They will also face barriers to claiming refugee status under existing international law.
Jackson cites Teitiota v. New Zealand, a case in which the UN Human Rights Committee upheld New Zealand’s Immigration and Protection Tribunal’s decision to deny Ioene Teitiota’s application for refugee status due to the effects of climate change on his home country, Kiribati in the Pacific Ocean region of Micronesia.
“In doing so, the Court did not acknowledge the particular vulnerabilities that marginalized people experience because of climate change,” Jackson notes. “If courts view climate change as affecting everyone equally it is more difficult to justify why LGBTQI+ people are uniquely vulnerable to its effects.”
A refugee camp | Shutterstock
O’Mara, meanwhile, notes that other routes to climate asylum, like family reunification, pose unique difficulties for LGBTQ+ people, many of whom may be estranged or disowned by their families of origin.
Given current anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe and the U.S., these hurdles are unlikely to become easier, even as the worsening effects of the climate crisis force more people to flee their homes.
The future is not yet written — the time to act is now
Beyond immediate action to mitigate the effects of climate change, both Jackson and O’Mara call for a broader understanding of the intersectional nature of the climate crisis’ impact on LGBTQ+ people around the world.
Jackson writes that the international community must recognize “how and why the effects of climate change are human-oriented, and therefore in line with our perception of persecution,” thus broadening the interpretation of persecution under the UN Refugee Convention. We must also reject the view that climate change affects people indiscriminately and recognize the specific ways it affects LGBTQ+ and other marginalized people.
O’Mara also stresses the necessity of LGBTQ+ specific research on the impacts of the climate crisis and the importance of LGBTQ+ voices leading the way in developing policy.
There’s hard work ahead, but both O’Mara and Jackson stress that there is a way forward. From reforming the UN Refugee Convention to better reflect the specific circumstances of LGBTQ+ people to working to reduce the effects of climate change, the time to act is now.
The number of anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes recorded by police in England and Wales have marginally decreased, but they are still not figures to celebrate.
Home Office figures published on Thursday (9 October) show in the year ending March 2025 there were a total of 115,990 hate crime offences, up from 113,166 the year previous year, which marks a two per cent increase.
Notably, these figures exclude the Met Police due to a change in the way in which the force’s data is recorded, hence its numbers are excluded from year-on-year comparisons. Because the Met Police covers the UK’s largest LGBTQ+ population (London), its exclusion likely under-represents national totals for LGBTQ+ hate crime.
It’s also important to note that recorded hate crimes reflect police‐recorded / reported incidents only and not necessarily the true prevalence of hate crime. Many hate crimes go unreported and changes in reporting practices, public awareness and police recording practices etc. all influence the numbers.
So, with these caveats out of the way, what do the 2024/2025 figures actually say?
LGBTQ+ hate crime figures in England and Wales ‘deeply worrying’ despite slight drop (Vuk Valcic/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Well, in terms of LGBTQ+ hate crime, there was a 2 per cent decrease in offences related to sexual orientation and an 11 per cent decrease in offences related to transgender identity.
In 2023/24 there were 19,127 hate crimes recorded related to sexual orientation which dropped two per cent to 18,702 in 2024/25, while there was an 11 per cent drop in anti-trans hate crime from 4,258 to 3,809.
Despite the decrease, both sets of 2024/25 data are still higher than they were five years ago. In the year ending March 2020, there were 105,090 hate crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales,
As has been seen in previous years, race hate crimes accounted for the majority of police recorded hate crimes, with 82,490 offences recorded. This was up six per cent on the previous year but still remains below the peak of 87,905 offences seen in March 2022.
You may like to watch
This year’s religious hate crime data shows a three per cent rise from 6,973 to 7,164 offences.
Religious hate crime targeted specifically at Muslims rose by 19 per cent, from 2,690 to 3,199 offences.
Hate crime targeted at members of the Jewish community went down from 2,093 to 1,715 offences, or 18 per cent, during the same period. However, the Home Office urged caution as such figures exclude Metropolitan Police data which recorded 40 per cent of all religious hate crimes targeted at Jewish people the previous year.
Stonewall’s statement:
Issuing a statement following the release of the statistics, CEO of Stonewall Simon Blake said: “Unsurprisingly, the Home Office statistics released today show that overall hate crime continues to rise, which is damaging for our neighbourhoods, communities and society.”
“Yet, these numbers don’t tell the full story for the LGBTQ+ community,” Blake continued. “Today’s headline data focuses on hate crimes reported outside of London and excludes the Met Police numbers due to reporting changes, which will inevitably affect LGBTQ+ data because of where many LGBTQ+ people live.
“Trust in the Police has also fallen more widely, compounding what we already know – that LGBTQ+ people often don’t report hate crimes.
“No one should have to live somewhere where they don’t feel safe.
“The stories we hear every day tell us that LGBTQ+ people are experiencing more hate and are living in fear, especially following the April Supreme Court judgment, a period that doesn’t fall within these statistics.
LGBTQ+ refugees may face outing in their home countries before being dragged through an archaic asylum system that forces them to ‘prove’ their identities to complete strangers, case studies from a refugee charity shared for National Coming Out Day show.
National Coming Out Day takes place every year on 11 October and was first celebrated in 1988, with the date marking the one year anniversary of the the National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights. It was created to honour LGBTQ+ people who decided to come out and live their lives openly as queer people.
Coming out is a deeply personal and individual experience for LGBTQ+ folks and people can ‘come out’ at any age.
For some, it won’t be a big deal at all and might something they do off-hand or causally – such as explaining what their identity is or introducing their partner to friends or family – but for others it can be very challenging, especially if they come from communities where anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination is commonplace.
For LGBTQ+ refugees, the coming out process can be a dangerous and upsetting one, with queer people facing rejection from family and friends, abuse, criminal charges or even the death penalty.
For National Coming Out Day 2025, PinkNews heard case studies from two people who are supported by LGBTQ+ refugee charity Rainbow Migration about their experiences with coming out.
Jalal, a gay man from Morocco, explained he lived his whole life there until he moved to the UK at the start of 2021 to undertake a higher degree.
“You’ll have to leave or he’s going to kill you”
“In one of my visits home, I had a huge confrontation with my family,” he explained. “I brought a lot of clothes and other items, knowing my family normally would not touch any of my stuff, like my phone.
“But this time, I was really surprised when my mum took the opportunity to go through my stuff when I wasn’t looking.
You may like to watch
“Thinking back on it, I think she was very suspicious about my lifestyle in the UK. Every time we video called, I would keep it short and always say the same things, so she wanted to know more.
“She found my letters and a picture of me and my ex.
“When I got back, she was holding all the things I was hiding, and we had a fight.
“I had to go back to my room for safety because it was getting really violent. Eventually my parents told me to leave, or my dad was going to kill me. ”
Jalal explain his father “left the house to cool off” and his mum told him: “Once he’s back, you’ll have to leave or he’s going to kill you.”
“So that’s what I did. I took my passport, my luggage and anything that I could grab.
“I went to stay in the cheapest hotel, waiting for the cheapest flight ticket [back to London]. Eventually, I took the flight. I needed three days before I applied for asylum to just process everything. I was so tired from the flight.”
Once queer people reach the UK, the system can itself be discriminatory in the way it asks LGBTQ+ folks to ‘prove’ their identities to officials through evidence in order to be granted asylum.
As research from Rainbow Migration has previously shown, the UK governmentfrequently does not believe LGBTQ+ people seeking asylum and disregards testimony from friends and family which attests to an individual’s sexual or gender identity.
A bisexual woman from Pakistan who receives support from Rainbow Migration said of the system: “In my main interview, I had to talk about parts of my life I had buried deep.
“I had to explain trauma, abuse, and fear to strangers — and try to stay composed, because I knew they were watching closely to see if I was “credible enough.”
Nate Rae had always felt secure living openly since coming out as a transgender man in his late 20s — until a recent U.K. Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of biological sex changed everything.
Now, Rae — a PhD student and science communicator who grew up in a small Scottish town before moving to London — says he finds himself constantly weighing risks and assessing where it is safe — or unsafe — for him to be.
In April, the court affirmed that under equality laws, the term “sex” refers to biological sex, meaning a transgender woman is legally considered male, and a transgender man is considered female.
Equality watchdog EHRC stated in its interim guidance on the ruling’s practical implications that transgender people should be barred from facilities and services, from toilets to hospital wards and refuges, designed for the gender they live as.
“It’s almost like it’s been made legal to harass trans people,” Rae, 33, told Reuters in an interview at Gay’s The Word, Britain’s oldest LGBTQ bookshop, saying he was now “hyper aware” of people noticing him.
“I’ve got to factor in things that I’d never had to factor in before,” he said. “Where can I go? Where am I safe?”
Transgender rights flashpoint
Rae, who only started to medically transition last year, often uses the women’s bathroom as he feels he is still largely perceived as female.
Since the ruling, Rae has been told several times that he cannot use a certain bathroom and has been called “disgusting” when using a female toilet. On one occasion, someone approached him to ask: “Do you know there are kids here?”
Transgender rights have become a political flashpoint in Britain and elsewhere. In the U.S., President Donald Trump has targeted the rights of transgender people in a series of executive orders.
Some critics of the policies say the conservative right has weaponized identity politics to attack minority groups.
But others argue that support for transgender people has infringed on the rights of biological women and their safety in spaces such as hospitals, prisons and domestic violence refuges.
Britain’s government said the judgement brought clarity and a clear position to underpin gender policies, but for many transgender people, including Rae, it has left them feeling excluded from parts of society.
A report released in August by transgender rights group TransActual highlighted how, since the ruling, some trans people have planned to leave the country, concealed their identities, avoided public spaces like hospitals, felt outed at work, or have withdrawn from social life altogether.
Asked about the detrimental impacts of the ruling cited by transgender people, a government spokesperson said laws were in place to protect trans individuals from discrimination and harassment.
Young trans people ‘terrified’
Following a consultation, the EHRC, which is responsible for enforcing equality laws, submitted its updated draft guidance to the government at the start of September and parliament is expected to consider it by the end of the year.
Keyne Walker, strategy director for TransActual, said the interim guidance is already having a “dire effect” and said the EHRC’s interpretation of the judgement could have been far less “extreme”.
Some organizations have already updated their transgender policies. The Football Association has barred transgender women from competing in women’s soccer in England, and the British Transport Police now requires same-sex searches in custody to be conducted according to a detainee’s biological sex.
A spokesperson for the EHRC said everything they had done since the judgement was grounded in the law, and the guidance shared with the government was both legally accurate and clear.
Rae fears the court’s decision will discourage people from living freely in their chosen gender and threatens their safety if they do, as it has shifted public perceptions of transgender people.
“Every young trans person I’ve spoken to is terrified,” said Rae, who teaches science to young people as part of his job, adding that many were now questioning: “Am I going to be able to live the life I want to live as the person I want to be?”
