The NUS and the transgenderism debate that wasn't

Overall, the psychological or societal benefits of transgenderism may be treated as foregone conclusions by some, but these judgements are arrived at without informed discussion or debate in the wider society.

(A few split screen head-to-head yes/no segments on news shows hardly constitute wide-ranging and fully informed debates.)

As is often the case with ultra-liberal positions, advocates of gender realignment seem to have reached the puzzling conclusion that if only a relatively few people are taking up the option of gender surgery, it must be because there are thousands more who feel repressed by societal norms and need to be liberated.

This might suit a particular drive within ultra-liberalism to recast society in its own image, but it is hardly the basis for a social policy which will affect generations to come.

The NUS, which is a national network of student union groups, does some fine work among students across the UK. At its best, it seeks to give a collective voice to the concerns of students and issues affecting them. At its worst, perhaps its internal politics sometimes cause it to behave as a lobby group for broader liberal agendas.

However, on issues like transgenderism, organisations like the NUS, which ought to be broad-church, should at the very least acknowledge that no consensus has been reached and allow honest, though not intemperate, discussion.

To disallow open debate is to practice intellectual fascism, the core doctrine of which is to deny others a right that one demands for oneself – the right of freedom of expression and belief.