As the U.K. snap elections take place, a British-American trans woman reflects on the painful and lasting impact of the anti-trans movement in the country.
Although you can’t technically genocide trans people because they’re not one of the special groups outlined in the definition, you don’t actually need to kill people to commit a genocide. I would argue that there is “intent to destroy, in whole or in part” trans people by “Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group” and “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. By taking away healthcare and other accommodations, serious harm is caused to trans people. Couple this with the high suicide rates of bullied and marginalised trans people, one could argue that the lawmakers are intending to kill trans people (although I personally wouldn’t go that far)
UN definition of genocide: https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
Although you can’t technically genocide trans people because they’re not one of the special groups outlined in the definition, you don’t actually need to kill people to commit a genocide. I would argue that there is “intent to destroy, in whole or in part” trans people by “Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group” and “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. By taking away healthcare and other accommodations, serious harm is caused to trans people. Couple this with the high suicide rates of bullied and marginalised trans people, one could argue that the lawmakers are intending to kill trans people (although I personally wouldn’t go that far)
It’s not genocide for the same reason that straight-up euthanising, say, schizophrenics isn’t: Neither are a people, but a subset of every people.
I’d lump it in with eugenics but genocide is catchy so I’ll permit it despite better semantic judgement.
EDIT: What, y’all disagreeing with me about the use of “genocide” being politically opportune?