This is what Reform should do on ‘trans‘

James Esses on what went wrong and how to fix it

Matt Goodwin’s newsletter goes to 82,900 subscribers from 181 countries. Like our stuff? Then for the equivalent of buying us a pint become a paying supporter. Help us while gaining access to exclusive posts, the archive, events, discounts, comments and know you’re supporting independent writers making a difference. You can also join us on YouTube, Insta, TikTok, X and Facebook

Stefan Rousseau/PA

---

This is a guest post by James Esses, Campaigner and Founder of Just Therapy

Over the past 5 years, the views of the British people on the ‘trans’ debate have shifted almost beyond recognition.

Once considered a fringe issue, in which most people seemed happy to ‘live and let live’, recent polling by YouGov has shown strong public concern about the impact of gender ideology on British society.

As someone who has been fighting this battle for many years now, this awakening is greatly welcomed but not surprising.

After all, just think about all we have seen in recent years, all the damage inflicted by gender ideology on individuals and society.

The children who have been left sterilised and mutilated by experimental puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

The schools teaching our children they may have been born in the wrong body.

The sub-standard male athletes who have infiltrated women’s sports and athletics.

The deviant men who have sought to gain access to women’s toilets, hospital wards and refuges.

The men and women who have lost their jobs and livelihoods for daring to express biological reality.

And the ‘non-crime hate incidents’ that have been recorded against people who have stood up against the compelled speech of ‘preferred pronouns’.

The list goes on and on.

---

---

Which is no doubt why the public mood in this country has fundamentally shifted.

Compare and contrast the polling on this issue between the years 2020 and 2024, shown above.

By the end of 2024, the majority of the British public had moved firmly against processes to enable the legal changing of sex, the erosion of same-sex spaces, and the medicalisation of vulnerable children.

And among people who are minded to vote Reform at the next general election, the results are even more conclusive. The vast majority of Reform voters are also firmly opposed to this gender dogma.

And of course, earlier this year, we also received the game-changing Supreme Court judgment, which ruled the concept of ‘sex’ under law is biological in nature.

So, all things considered, I believe it is now fair to say this issue is an election-winner (or, at the very least, that to go against the public mood could be an election-loser).

Which is why it has been disappointing to observe the confusion and lack of clarity within the Reform party in recent days as to whether men who identify as women should be placed in women’s prisons.

This is particularly so, given the fact that all of the main parties in British politics have been in agreement for some time on the issue —even Labour.

It had felt as if this debate had truly been put to bed. So, why were the fires re-ignited by Reform, given the clear view of its voters, coupled with its noble ambitions to eradicate ‘woke’ and DEI from the public sector?

---

The problem that could blow Reform apart

---

It began when Reform’s new prison spokeswoman, Vanessa Frake, appeared on Times Radio.

She was asked whether ‘transwomen’ (i.e. men) should be automatically removed from female prisons.  What should have been a one-word answer – ‘yes’ – was instead a call for “risk assessments” on a “case-by-case” basis, in the name of “humanity and decency”.

What then followed was uproar, including from high-profile supporters of Reform (again, this could have been foreseen).

The Conservatives, who in recent times have stood firm on this issue, were gifted an open goal by Reform and, unsurprisingly, sought to capitalise on it, with Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick turning their guns toward Reform.

Nigel Farage, meanwhile, was subsequently asked about Frake’s comments at a press conference and, once again, rather than taking a clear position against gender ideology, he said the following:

“When it comes to trans women in women’s prisons, I’ve never worked in a prison, so I can’t answer that. It should be based on risk assessment.”

What then followed was even more uncertainty as to where Reform really stand on this very important issue. 

Re-assuring comments were put out by senior figures in Reform —including Nigel Farage, Richard Tice and Zia Yusuf—who all stated that permitting men in women’s prisons will never be party policy. 

Yet, at the very same time, Ann Widdecome, who acts as a spokeswoman for Reform, stated in an interview that men who have had surgery (which she described as the “whole works”) and “lived as women” may be housed in female prisons on a case-by-case basis. This echoes Frake’s original comments regarding risk assessments.

There are a few issues with this. Firstly, the concerns regarding harm appear misplaced.

The sole focus seems to be on risk to the males involved. But what about the female prisoners expected to share with them?

Particularly when you consider that many of the male criminals who have sought to access female prisons, such as the infamous ‘Isla Bryson’, have been convicted of violent, sexual offences against women.

Secondly, the framing of men in women’s prisons (or indeed any other same-sex space) as solely being about ‘risk’ is a fallacy.

Even men who pose no risk to women should not be allowed in these spaces.

Why? Because it’s also about comfort, respect, decency, and, most importantly of all, upholding biological reality.

No man should ever be permitted to reside in a woman’s prison. No ifs. No buts.

So, in my view at least, the events of recent days have hurt Reform —especially among the large and influential gender-critical community and ‘small c’ conservatives who will no doubt be wondering what is the point of a national populist party that does not unequivocally and unashamedly oppose gender ideology?

However, this does now present Nigel Farage and Reform with a golden opportunity to re-assess and make clear their position and come out swinging with a demonstration of strength, commitment and unity to fighting back against gender ideology. 

What would such a fight back look like? Well, as somebody who has campaigned and worked in this area for a long time, my advice to Reform would be to make the following commitments and to do so sooner rather than later:

• Repeal the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and restore the notion of biological reality;

• Repeal the Equality Act 2010 and the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’;

• Shelve any notion of banning ‘conversion therapy’, to ensure children can get the therapeutic support they need;

• And commit to permanently banning puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and bodily mutilation. No exceptions.

Any party that is willing to champion child safeguarding, women’s rights, and biological reality, given the national mood on this issue, is surely onto a winner.

And, more fundamentally, clarifying its position in this way would also help Reform reassure and win back lots of people who might agree with the party on issues such as immigration and crime but who will now, after the events of recent days, be wavering in their support, wondering how committed the party really is to uprooting and overturning the ideological rot that has very nearly destroyed this country.

Those people are now looking for Reform to reassure them and my advice to the party would be to make moves on this sooner rather than later because right now some of the statements that are coming out of the party look fundamentally out of touch with the country they one day hope to govern …

---

---