Describing reality is not “harassment”

You’ve probably seen pictures of Sandie Peggie, the nurse taking on her employer at court after she was forced to share a changing room with a trans-identified male colleague. Her face has been splashed across the papers and social media, and shockingly misleading headlines have claimed that she “harassed” the trans identified doctor. Meanwhile, Dr Upton, the man who insisted on inserting himself in the women’s changing room, has been afforded the dignity of privacy. 

Peggie was suspended and investigated by her employer after she objected to Upton’s presence in female changing rooms at Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy. She is now suing both NHS Fife and Dr Upton.

During the hearing, which commenced on Monday, Peggie has been repeatedly forced to justify why as a woman she doesn’t want to undress in front of a man, and why she was distressed by the idea of him taking his clothes off in front of her. Under hostile questioning, paid for by the taxpayer, the nurse has been forced to disclose everything from a childhood abuse by a general practitioner to details of her menstruation. She has even been quizzed about her husband’s Facebook posts.

The hearing has been a showcase of male power

During an acrimonious exchange on Tuesday, NHS Fife’s lawyer, Jane Russell, told Peggie that she “could’ve chosen not to say anything” when she was confronted three times by a man in the women’s changing room. The barrister went on to add that calling the male doctor “a man” was “likely to cause immense distress” and was “offensive.” In response, after explaining that she had been feeling “intimidated and embarrassed”, Peggie dismissed the suggestion that it was rude to refer to Upton as a man, answering simply “It’s the truth.”

Russell then went on to point out that according to NHS Fife policies, Peggie was guilty of harassment. The nurse conceded this point, and in doing so wrote the headlines for the Press Association. As such, Sky News ran with “Nurse who objected to transgender doctor in changing room admits ‘harassment’”. LBC opted for “Nurse who objected to transgender woman in changing room admits harassment” and The National plumped for the disgraceful “Nurse admits harassing transgender doctor before employment tribunal”. This small technical point was deemed more newsworthy than the fact that women are being forced to change in front of men at work. Dr Upton’s reasons for wishing to undress with women have yet to be explored. 

You probably won’t have seen a picture of the doctor at the centre of the dispute in any of the coverage, and ultimately, the fact that he is a man ought to be enough to bar him from a female-only space. But for clarity, Dr Upton is a bloke who looks like a bloke. That he enjoys dressing as a woman and wants to compel the outside world to refer to him as such is undisputed. The boner of contention is whether it is legal to compel others to play along with his fantasy, and to what extent institutions ought to facilitate it.

As the case shows, far from being vulnerable or “minoritised”, men like Upton have the extraordinary power to use institutions to bully colleagues and patients into submission. NHS Fife records have the doctor recorded as a woman, which in itself raises serious concerns about safeguarding and the consent of patients.

Moreover, Upton and his legal team tried to force the court to keep him anonymous and even pushed for the hearing to be held in private. When that failed, Russell urged the judge to impose an order that would require both Peggie and her legal team to refer to Upton in “neutral” terms in future hearings (such as “the respondent” and “Dr Upton”) and for the tribunal to refer to Upton as “she”. 

Russell claimed that allowing Ms Peggie, her lawyers and witnesses to continue to “misgender” Dr Upton would amount to “state-sanctioned harassment”. Although Judge Kemp rejected this, he suggested that not using female pronouns for Dr Upton could cause “pain and distress,” advising Ms Peggie and her representatives to “reflect” on whether it was “necessary or appropriate” to use male terms to refer to Dr Upton.

The hearing has been a showcase of male power. A woman, herself a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of a male, has been forced to justify why stripping in front of a man is an affront to her dignity. Attempts have been made to compel her speech, and she has found herself fighting not only her employer, but an ideology in order to protect the most basic principles of human rights.