Is the UK government’s new RSE guidance a return to Section 28?

Words: QUINN RHODES

The word ‘transgender’ appears exactly twice in the government’s new Relationships Education, Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) guidance. Once in the heading ‘Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender content’ – and once more in the same heading in the contents page.

In fact, the anti-trans aspects of the new statutory guidance, published on 15 July, aren’t necessarily obvious at first glance. Especially as they are sandwiched between positive updates that have been long fought for by activists – such as the explicit mentions of HIV-prevention medications PrEP and PEP. 

Yet deep in the 46-page PDF, there are bullet points revealing an attitude towards trans people that – as Ellen Jones, author of Outrage: Why The Fight for LGBTQ+ Equality Is Not Yet Won And What We Can Do About It puts it – “is straight from the fascist playbook.”

Reading the new RSE guidance as a trans person raises several questions. It states that schools “should not teach as fact that all people have a gender identity.” (What?) That “schools should be mindful to avoid any suggestion that social transition is a simple solution to feelings of distress or discomfort.” (What?!) And that “where schools decide to use external resources, they should avoid materials that use cartoons or diagrams [...] that encourage pupils to question their gender.” (WHAT?!)

"After years of researching and studying Section 28 and the impact it has had on people, it's clear that it left a scar on our community" - Kestral Gaian, editor of 'Twenty-Eight: Stories from the Section 28 Generation'

For many LGBTQIA+ people, this approach to talking about trans people – that schools should not acknowledge that trans people exist – feels worryingly familiar. In effect from 1988 to 2003, Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 stated that: “a local authority shall not promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretend family relationship.” This legislation basically made it so that schools could not acknowledge the existence of gay and bisexual people, and deeply impacted the generation of queer people who grew up under its long shadow of silence.

Like Section 28, this new RSE guidance has the potential to do unspeakable harm. Author Kestral Gaian, who edited Twenty-Eight: Stories from the Section 28 Generation, explains that while the language is different, the sentiment behind it is the same: “After years of researching and studying Section 28 and the impact it has had on people, it's clear that it left a scar on our community – a shadow – that is still very visible now more than twenty years after its repeal. [...] The shadow it will cast across the otherwise bright futures of young trans people is deeply troubling.”

Dr Emma Chan, a doctor who specialises in mental health and works in RSE, agrees that the new guidance “contains several points which are potentially really damaging to trans youth.” They point out that the guidance uses language that is: “in contradiction to both trans youth's lived experiences and also the way in which educators are generally approaching discussions about gender identity in the classroom.”

“If I didn’t have access to that language I would have come to the conclusion that I was broken. I’m not broken" - Arlo

Let’s take the instruction that schools should not “teach as a fact that all people have a gender identity.” Dr Chan feels this doesn’t “relate to a strong commitment to the concept of 'agender' identities, but rather feeds into the idea that if you are a cis man or woman you don't have a 'gender identity', even though you generally do in any meaningful (academic or common-use) sense of that phrase.” 

Jones agrees, expressing how bizarre it is when the UK Government “is so scared of trans people that they’re insisting on their perspective as the objective truth, when the entire history of the world says that there have always been gender diverse and trans people .” She points out that – outside of this guidance – most parts of the education system already acknowledge the role gender identities play in life. (See: the essays many of us wrote in English classes at school about gender in Shakespeare.) 

What about the government’s insistence that schools should “avoid any suggestion that social transition is a simple solution”? Dr Chan says this statement is “an absolute dog-whistle, suggesting that trans supporting educators were almost actively converting young people into becoming trans.” It’s also simply incorrect to say that social transition isn’t a solution to “feelings of distress or discomfort” – if a young trans or non-binary person is experiencing gender dysphoria, allowing them to use the name and pronouns they want and dress how they want to would logically decrease some of that discomfort. 

For a document that barely mentions us, the guidance has sparked immense fear among trans people, who feel that it will ultimately lead to queer and trans children feeling as though something is wrong with them. As a lesbian who grew up with short hair, Jones is worried about the potential for harm and gender policing of all students – cis and trans. Arlo, who is twenty-six and trans non-binary, explains that they realised they weren’t cis when they were a teenager, and it was agonising for them not to know who they were until they found the term ‘non-binary’: “If I didn’t have access to that language I would have come to the conclusion that I was broken. I’m not broken.”

As RSE practitioners, I think we need to be really clear and confident that it is not possible to uphold the dignity and human rights of trans youth without talking honestly, accurately and openly about gender identity in a trans inclusive way" - Dr Emma Chan

Trans people are not broken, but does a government forbidding schools from "encouraging pupils to question their gender” know that? What even counts as “encouraging pupils to question their gender”? Using a trans pupil's name and pronouns? Admitting that trans people exist? 

This lack of clarity is another similarity with Section 28. Jones highlights that no one was ever prosecuted under Section 28, but the legislation created fear and confusion, with teachers unsure exactly what they were and weren’t allowed to say. And while it’s true that the new RSE guidance isn’t a law, that doesn’t necessarily make it less insidious. As Jones points out, the guidance has come in without any democratic process, with no opportunity for scrutiny or debate. 

To Jones, what makes the new RSE guidance especially horrific is how many out trans and non-binary youth there are right now, who the guidance entirely ignores. Jones notes that: “When Section 28 came into place there were fewer out gay, bisexual and queer people due to the prevailing social attitudes [in 1988]. Whereas there are loads of trans kids in schools and they're going to suddenly find themselves in this place of, ‘teachers aren't allowed to discuss this. My identity doesn't exist and yet I'm here.’”

Dr Chan also acknowledges how contradictory this aspect of the guidance is, pointing out that it “continues to reaffirm the importance of upholding principles and laws around equality – including for protected characteristics, including gender reassignment. As RSE practitioners, I think we need to be really clear and confident that it is not possible to uphold the dignity and human rights of trans youth without talking honestly, accurately and openly about gender identity in a trans-inclusive way.”

“There are very organised groups of transphobic parents who want to pull their children out of education that includes any mention of queer people" - Ellen Jones

Additionally, while they understand the legitimate worries people have, Dr Chan urges people to be cautious with describing the new guidance as a ‘new Section 28’. They explain that: “Despite the unhelpful language and phrasing that could lead to educators being cautious about talking about trans identities in a positive and honest way, I do think it is possible to be trans-inclusive and affirming and not contravene the literal word of the guidance.”

While Dr Chan and many other educators will undoubtedly continue to provide inclusive education to queer and trans young people, the new guidance can still be an effective tool in the hands of anti-trans groups. (Such as the Bayswater Support Group, who we know the government has been listening to.) Jones points out that, “There are very organised, militant groups of transphobic parents who go to schools and try to get resources removed from libraries in the UK, who want to pull their children out of education that includes any mention of queer people. It essentially emboldens them and it emboldens teachers who hold those beliefs to act in a way that would potentially endanger trans children in the classroom.”

It’s those groups who will be inclined to search for the anti-trans biases deep in a PDF document, and use the new guidance to challenge schools and teachers who are attempting to create an inclusive environment for trans and non-binary youth. 

For now, trans people like Arlo are terrified, and the parallels between the new RSE guidance and Section 28 should remind us how easy it is for our hard-fought rights to be rolled back, quietly and overnight. It’s a reminder that, as Gaian puts it: “The comfort and safety we thought we had won was temporary.”