Could the conversion practices bill offer an opportunity for trans widows?

I think many of us naively thought that winning one final battle would eventually win the war against Self-ID. It might be on sport or the Equality Act, or Sandie Peggie’s trial, but there would be an end to the war and we’d all be able to do more enjoyable things with our time (I’ve always fancied calligraphy). It’s turned out not to be the case.

I’ve been at this since I started a thread on Mumsnet in 2017, but as somebody pointed out to me recently, I have to add on the time before that when I was actually fighting the battle in my own home. Continuing to live it all personally as well as politically probably makes the time count double.

The length of this war, and the realisation that like Terminator 2, the patriarchy keeps jumping back up when you think you’ve beaten it, contributed to me feeling burned out and without the energy for the Conversion Practices battle.

It began to occur to me that there might be two sides to this for trans widows

Several women contacted me about the Bin the Bill Campaign and it is truly gratifying that trans widows are on women’s radar now, and that thought is being given to the effects that proposed legislation might have on us. As I struggled to beat the burn out and formulate a response, it began to occur to me that there might be two sides to this for trans widows and that yet again, I looked to be facing potential disagreement with our allies.

I do share the concerns that activists were writing to me about regarding the potential negative effects on trans widows of the proposed legislation. Could it be used against trans widows who do not affirm our husbands’ gender identity? I remember begging my ex-husband not to destroy our family. Could doing similar criminalise trans widows now? Could refusing to allow all the household income to be spent on new clothes, lingerie and shoes, and refusing to call the father of your children by female pronouns, be categorised as an “abusive conversion practice”?

What will be considered in practice to be “abuse” is a particular concern. For a long time, groups such as Scottish Trans Alliance and Stonewall (who have to have some credit for playing a very long game indeed on this) have been trying to define domestic abuse against transgender people to include all non-affirming behaviours by a spouse. In addition to calling discouraging your children’s father from wearing make-up or attending trans social events abuse, Scottish Trans Alliance even includes in its list of emotionally abusive transphobic spousal behaviour whether a spouse has “drawn attention to, or focus[ed] on, parts of your body that you feel uncomfortable about.” What chance do trans widows have when not only any disagreement with our husband’s stunning and brave new adventure is categorised as abuse, but also even appreciation of his body?

I am not daft enough to think that this bill is really aimed at protecting women like us

So far, so standard in the war against self ID. But as I thought about the matter more it began to occur to me that if one group of people is to be protected by law from having their identity or sexual orientation converted, then surely this must also apply to the pressure to convert that trans widows are subjected to. After all, the government’s guidance on the bill states that it is “designed … to be symmetrical, which means it covers practices where the attempts aim to change a person from or to [our emphasis] LGBT+”.

What about the heterosexual trans widows who are subjected to attempts to convert them to identify as lesbians? Trans widows have told of how their husbands engage in coercive sexual behaviour aimed at making their sex life “lesbian”. This pressure does not just take place inside the home. Trans widows report therapists pressuring them to accept their partner’s behaviour, or telling them that they must really be a lesbian. There is a long-running campaign by activists to abolish the “Spousal Veto” and to force trans widows to be officially lesbians, by having their heterosexual marriage recategorised as a same sex marriage whether they agree or not.

I am not daft enough to think that this bill is really aimed at protecting women like us, or that we should have any expectation that the police or the CPS would necessarily interpret any new law in our favour, but it is important for trans widows that these questions are asked. Our sexuality, our identity and our rights are just as important as those of our trans-identifying partners and we deserve the same protection under the law. For this reason, Trans Widows Voices will provide our own response to the Joint Committee considering the bill, and I hope that our feminist allies can understand our reasons for doing this.

If you want to support Trans Widows Voices you can do so here.