Conservative campaigners Binary and the RMIT Fact Checking group have got themselves in a tangle about what “gender transition” means. Arguably the mess was set off by the Victorian education department.
The dispute centres on public school policies in the progressive state, which may not be as progressive as they seem at first glance. The Other Cheek in giving Binary a hearing is not endorsing them. They have a history of attacking other groups, taking some extreme positions – and are not exemplars of “turning the other cheek.”
But let’s give the first round to Binary who started this debate when they widely distributed a pamphlet expressing a strong view. “GENDER TRANSITION WITHOUT PARENTAL ASSENT – Daniel Andrew’s Labor Policy” is the headline on their election leaflet- we’ve preserved the CAPS to give a flavour of the handout. Over page it points to an extract from the Education Department’s LGBTIQ support policy with the heading Your Right To Parent Your Child Is Being Threatened.”
The policy extract is genuine and reads “Parental consent
“There may be circumstances in which students wish or need to undertake gender transition without the consent of their parent/s (or carer/s), and/or without consulting medical practitioners.
“If no agreement can be reached between the student and the parent/s regarding the student’s gender identity, or if the parent/s will not consent to the contents of a student support plan, it will be necessary for the school to consider whether the student is a mature minor.
“If a student is considered a mature minor they can make decisions for themselves without parental consent and should be affirmed in their gender identity at school without a family representative/carer participating in formulating the school management plan.”
RMIT Factcheck accused Binary of getting it badly wrong “Anti-trans group raises false alarm on Victorian policy for gender diverse students”
What was claimed
The Victorian Government can give permission for school children to undergo “gender transition” without parental knowledge or consent.
The verdict
False. The Victorian Government cannot give permission for a student to undergo medical gender transition. People under the age of 18 can only access gender-affirming medical treatment with consent from their parents or carers, or, failing that, by seeking a court order.
A difficulty with the RMIT assessment is present in their opening par “Anti-trans group Binary Australia claims it is Victorian government policy to allow school children to access gender-affirming treatments without parental consent.” It is not clear what the fact checkers mean by “treatments” – just as it was not clear what Binary mean by gender transition in their leaflet.
“A flyer produced by the pressure group depicts a photo of an adult and a young child with the text, “Gender Transition Without Parental Consent? Daniel Andrews Labor Policy”. The flyer implies that a child can undergo a medical transition without parental consent.”
The Binary leaflet does not mention medical treatment. In talking about gender transition one might mean
- Social transition (pronouns, uniforms, toilets)
- Medical transition (puberty blockers, surgery) or
- A process that includes a) and b)
In their investigation, RMIT provides helpful clarification that says social transition can occur in public schools without parental knowledge but not medical transition.
“The Victorian Department of Education cannot give permission for an individual under 18 years of age to access medical gender transition services such as puberty suppression, gender affirming hormones or surgical interventions. These must be accessed through a medical professional with consent from both parents or carers.”
It is possible that Binary was talking about a) social transition which does occur in schools.
RMIT treated their leaflet assuming they meant b) medical transition and refuted that.
However, the definition in the Education Department is closer to c) the idea of Gender transition as a process.
Gender transition/affirmation
“Gender transition/affirmation refers to the process whereby a transgender or gender diverse person socially and/or medically affirms their gender identity. There is no single moment of gender affirmation; it is an ongoing and individual process which may or may not involve medical support.”
Conclusion
Binary was making the point that social transition in school can occur without parental consent. They point out in a response to RMIT “” Nowhere on the flyer do we mention anything about “medical treatments.”
Binary could have been more precise in specifying what sort of gender transition was happening in schools without parental permission. It would have helped the public debate to have done so.
RMIT could have examined the possibility that Binary was discussing social transition. Their point that the leaflet could – and probably has been read by some – to be talking about medical transition stands.
However Binary do use the term “gender transition” which can mean 1), 2) or 3) in the way the Government suggests is correct – not breaking out the various types of transition.
Did Binary use the imprecise term “gender transition” to discuss a social transition to generate maximum impact? It is hard to know. They claim to have been gaslighted by RMIT. It is also hard to gauge whether RMIT was influenced by Binary founder Kirrillie Smith’s history of extreme statements. When she has occasion to make a good point, she often presents it in an over-simplified way. Binary should have made it clear they were discussing social transition. In this case, perhaps RMIT has also oversimplified the issue.
The verdict on the RMIT fact check: not proven. This means we need to return a verdict on Binary “Not guilty.” But not innocent, either.