Freedom of Speech

Baroness Jenkin of Kennington Excerpts
Friday 10th December 2021

(2 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Jenkin of Kennington Portrait Baroness Jenkin of Kennington (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the past year or so has seen a troubling increase in intolerance and the so-called cancel culture. Many of us have been, at best, naive about what is happening at universities and among activist groups. A number of recent cases have focused on attempting to silence those who are gender-critical or biological realists. Many of them are women, from MPs Rosie Duffield and Joanna Cherry to academics Raquel Rosario Sánchez and Professor Jo Phoenix, barrister Allison Bailey and tax expert Maya Forstater, all forced to take legal action to protect their reputations and livelihoods. They also include artists, such as Jess de Wahls; only this week, dancer Rosie Kay was forced out of the charity that she set up for daring to express her view that biological sex is real.

These women have been intimidated, harassed and bullied for simply expressing opinions that everyone once took for granted: that women are adult human females, and that biological sex matters. Professor Kathleen Stock has been hounded out of her job at Sussex University for her belief that biological sex is binary and immutable—a belief that I would call a scientific fact and a fact of life. Professor Stock was accused of making trans people feel unsafe. Why should scientific facts make anyone feel unsafe?

Trans people do not all think alike. What about those who agree with Professor Stock, such as Dr Debbie Hayton? How do they feel? Debbie Hayton is a transsexual who transitioned in 2012. She has written extensively in the press, and I find her perspective rather refreshing. She has defended Professor Stock and written in support of JK Rowling. She has little time for what she calls “gender identity ideology”. Her views could be summarised in a line from one of her own articles: that

“gender identity is bollocks; you either have them or you don’t.”

It is fair to say that Hayton divides opinion with such views, but should she not have the right to express them? No, according to what she called the “transgender thought police”. She may have a point but, while they may police thoughts, they are not necessarily transgender themselves. They use transgender rights to attack and cancel others.

You do not need to search too far on social media to observe the hate directed at Hayton, presumably for being the wrong sort of trans person:

“Lord Haw-Haw Hayton, the quisling wannabe … Debbie Hayton is a monster, a completely twisted human being”.


Sadly, such abuse is all too frequent, as are death threats. She gets those too:

“Debbie Hayton is a traitor to her community and should be afforded the proper respect as such.”


That tweet continued with images of three large knives. However, while her attackers hide behind anonymous profiles, Hayton campaigns under her own name. She is a science teacher, and it is not difficult to identify the school where she teaches. She is therefore vulnerable to being cancelled, not only on social media but in her employment. The chatter on Twitter shows that pressure is being applied:

“It amazes me that Hayton’s employer still employs her in any capacity in education and that the relevant anti-terrorist policing department hasn’t acted.”


Someone else then added:

“They’re as transphobic as she is. I’ve tried to complain a few times, they just said, ‘She’s just concerned.’”


Earlier this year, Hayton added her name to a letter criticising the decision by the Women’s Prize for Fiction to longlist a book written by a trans woman. One of her opponents tweeted the school where she teaches directly:

“How do you continue to endorse Debbie Hayton when she is happy to sign a truly transphobic letter? Your continued support for her is transphobia.”


I commend Hayton’s courage for being prepared to say what she thinks. I also praise her school for standing firm.

In many cases, employers have responded to such criticism rather differently. When we ask ourselves why more people—and, indeed, more trans people—do not speak out in support of those such as JK Rowling and Kathleen Stock and defend the rights of women, maybe we have an answer. Campaigning might be part and parcel of a democratic society, but it rarely pays the bills or puts food on the table. This debate is not a dispute between women on one side and trans people on the other. Stock and Hayton appear to be on the same side, and are both attacked for making rational arguments. It is not just abuse on social media, as if that were not bad enough. Their freedom of speech is threatened in part because their livelihoods are threatened. That is wrong. Professor Stock was hounded out of her job at Sussex University. Hayton hangs on to hers, but what are we doing as a society to protect their right to speak and not be punished for it?

Criticism of gender identity ideology is not an attack on trans people. It is not transphobic to support women’s rights. Trans people such as Debbie Hayton make this very clear. Hayton has described it as an authoritarian, quasi-religious cult—one where you must believe or be thrown out. As she rightly points out, I am an apostate. We must do better for Dr Hayton, Professor Stock and anyone willing to stand against an ideology. The rights of women and the safeguarding of children may depend on it.