Showing posts with label human rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human rights. Show all posts

Oct 22, 2012

Demonstrating against Finland's lunatic trans sterilization law

Like some other European countries, Finland has a law in place that requires transgender people to be sterilized as a prerequisite for changing their gender legally. I wrote about this at greater length in Finnish earlier, but suffice to say that there are no medical grounds for this requirement, or indeed any reasonable grounds whatsoever. Although the law seems like a relic of the mid-twentieth century, when Finland forcibly sterilized some ten thousand people, it was in fact passed by the Finnish parliament in 2002 and signed by our then-president Tarja Halonen, supposedly an advocate of LGBT rights.

Thankfully, not everyone is okay with this, and there have been some noises made to try to get this senseless, inhuman requirement removed from the law. The World Health Organization has stated that the right to reproduction is a fundamental human right, and the EU Commissioner for Human Rights has petitioned all member states to remove sterilization requirements from their laws on sex reassignment. Sure enough, after the last parliamentary elections, we were told that the law would be re-examined and the sterilization requirement removed.

Just last week, Henripekka Kallio wrote a story for Pohjolan Sanomat on the state of the project to revoke the sterilization requirement. The answer he got was stunning. (Finnish summary here) According to Päivi Sillanaukee, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, they have no plans to set a committee to change the law. According to her, the ministry is short of resources, and may not be able to look into this question during this Parliament. So until then, trans people will be required to be sterilized, because the ministry has better things to do.

To be fair to Ms. Sillanaukee, that's almost certainly just an excuse. A card-carrying member of the conservative National Coalition Party, she went on to question not only whether the law would be changed, but whether sex reassignment surgery would continue to be legal in Finland at all. She gave the following bizarre statement:

Sillanaukee muistuttaa, että työryhmä on tarkoitus koota pohtimaan lakiuudistusta, eikä tekemään sitä. Pakkosteriloinnin poistaminen translaista olisi teknisesti yksinkertaista, mutta kansliapäällikön mielestä sillä olisi kauaskantoiset vaikutukset.

– Meillä on lähdetty siitä, että on kaksi sukupuolta. Nyt on kyse siitä, että lainsäädäntöön haluttaisiin niin sanottu kolmas sukupuoli.

Sillanaukeen mukaan sukupuolijaon hämärtyminen johtaisi siihen, että osa sukupuolen korjaamiseen liittyvistä prosesseista menettäisi merkityksensä.

- Eihän silloin voida kysellä ihmiseltä, että etkö haluakaan olla mies ja haluatko olla nainen. Eikä meillä silloin olisi esimerkiksi oikeutta ottaa kohtua pois, jos henkilö haluaa vaihtaa sukupuolta, Sillanaukee tulkitsee.

My translation below. As the statement is frankly confusing, I've sacrificed English idiom to try to translate it as directly as possible.

"Sillanaukee points out that the committee will be assembled to examine changing the law, not to change it. Removing mandatory sterilization from the trans law would be technically simple, but the permanent secretary feels it would have far-reaching implications.

- Our premise is that there are two genders. What we are dealing with here is that people want to introduce a third gender into legislation.

According to Sillanaukee, this blurring of the gender divide would lead to some sexual reassignment procedures losing their meaning.

- We couldn't then ask a person if they don't want to be a man any more and do they want to be a woman. We also wouldn't have the right, for example, to remove someone's uterus if they want to undergo sex reassignment, Sillanaukee interprets."

In my opinion, this is crazy talk. Sillanaukee's logic seems to be that if people who undergo sex reassignment surgery are not forcibly sterilized, then a "third gender" will come into being and the state will no longer have the "right" to perform surgery. So instead of removing the sterilization requirement, Sillanaukee is not only delaying the process but actually questioning the very availability of SRS.

This is madness, but it's the usual kind of madness. Sillanaukee's warped reasoning makes it clear that anything threatening the sacred male/female gender binary is seen by our political class of professional politicians and civil servants as something to be ridiculed and fought; to the extent that a senior civil servant will engage in sardonic, MRA-esque wordplay and try to twist a question of people's right to their own bodies into a question of whether the state has "a right" to perform surgery that they themselves want. And she's in charge of the Ministry of Health.

**

Thankfully, this made quite a few people very angry, so there was a demonstration. We went.


I'd estimate that around a hundred people turned up. Here are some of the signs people brought:


"Sillanaukee, hands off my uterus"


"Organ rights", because the Finnish for organ ("elin") is just one letter away from animal ("eläin").


"Gender is in your head", and "the civilized don't forcibly sterilize".


A picture of Finland's minister for health, former MTV Europe VJ Maria Guzenina-Richardson, and the text "not enough balls to defend human rights". Yeah, I know. He means well.


"Gender identity is not a disease". The man with the refreshments stopped by to debate some of the demonstrators.


"Gender doesn't live in the organ". Loving the attitude. And finally:


My thanks to everyone who agreed to be photographed with their signs, and to everyone who came. Pictures are by me, licensed under the same license as the text.

**

I swear, if they don't get rid of this idiot law and quick, I'm coming to the next demonstration with a giant Die cis scum sign. It's a complete and utter national disgrace that we still have such an inhuman law on the books in what is supposed to be a civilized country. What makes me optimistic is how sincerely shocked many people have been when they've heard of this law. What makes me pessimistic is pretty much everything else. Within an hour of getting home and going online after this, I had people attacking the demonstration for being "against family values" or just plain mocking it. Because obviously the people having their reproductive rights taken away from them aren't really people.

Still, I hope our little demonstration did at least something to make people aware of this horrible legislation and the brutal cynicism with which it's defended. I'm appalled that I live in a country where people are sterilized against their will, and just plain depressed that there's nothing I can sensibly do about it except stand around with some folks holding signs and post photos on the Internet.

Feb 11, 2009

Refuse/Resist

Today the Civilian Service Center in Lapinjärvi should be receiving my letter.

According to 127 § of the Finnish constitution, every Finnish citizen is obliged to participate in the defense of their country, as decreed by law. The law in question states that every male Finnish citizen is required to perform military service. However, male citizens living in Ahvenanmaa or belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses religious movement are exempt.

The Finnish constitution guarantees every citizen the right to not be discriminated against on basis of, among other things, their gender or convictions. The current laws on conscription in Finland do both of these things. I refuse to serve in the armed forces or in the "alternative" civilian service because I do not believe the government has any right to force me to do so. Jehovah's Witnesses in Finland also hold a conviction that makes them refuse compulsory service. However, under Finnish law they are exempt from service because of their convictions, while I am not.

Also, rather obviously I'm subject to compulsory service in the first place because of my gender.

Both of these things are in clear violation of the Finnish constitution, and also of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights:
Article 20
Equality before the law

Everyone is equal before the law.

Article 21
Non-discrimination

1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.

I maintain that the current Finnish legistlation on conscription is, in fact, itself illegal. I have therefore refused to serve either in the army or in the "alternate" civilian service, which is the normal punishment for those who refuse armed service. This means I'll be going to prison within maybe the next year or so as a conscientious objector.

For the benefit of Finnish readers, I've posted most of my letter over on my Finnish-language blag, which is linked on the sidebar.

**

I have no illusions as to what will happen. In Europe in general, and in Finland in particular, the justice system is always secondary to the political system. I intend to take my case to court, because I will have to go to court for refusing to serve, but I am 100% convinced that no argument I make will have any bearing on the end result. Hundreds of people have made these same arguments before me, and they've all ended up in prison as conscientious objectors. I have no doubt in my mind that I, too, will be sentenced to prison and be forced to serve my term.

However, I will use every legal option to fight this. After the initial court case, I can appeal to the Apellate Court, and possibly to the Finnish Supreme Court. At the very least I hope I can force someone to actually put on paper what the supposed "acceptable reasons" for forcing only certain men to serve are. I don't believe there are any, but I know most of the people in this country are convinced otherwise.

Overall I don't believe what I'm doing will achieve anything. I may be able to demonstrate that the Finnish constitution doesn't mean anything, but I think everyone knows that already. I expect to be sentenced in court and the sentence to be upheld in the Apellate Court, and then to be refused appeal to either the Finnish Supreme Court or the European Court of Human Rights.

The fact that this is futile is exactly the reason why I want to do it. If the only thing I can demonstrate is that the pretty words about non-discrimination and equality in our constitutions and charters don't actually mean anything, then so be it.

I believe that we only have those rights that we're willing to fight for. If we all meekly submit, we'll have no freedoms at all. The government can put me in prison for refusing to serve. I certainly expect it to. But I refuse to submit quietly to a law that I believe is unjust and illegal. I feel this is my only choice, both as a libertarian and as a feminist. This is by no means a popular choice. I've already suffered for originally refusing armed service, and refusing alternate service as well is not going to make me any friends. On the contrary. At the very least I'm going to lose my job, and I'll likely lose friends and several opportunities in life.

That doesn't really matter to me. If I don't stand up for what I believe in, I'll lose myself. We all have to sacrifice some of our personal integrity to get by in this world, but we also need to draw the line somewhere. I've drawn mine, and I'm going to prison for it.

Mar 5, 2008

A successful demonstration

It's nice that my 50th blog post can be the chronicle of a succesful demonstration.


 
Picture from yle.fi.


Original photo from http://torax.pp.fi/images/album/Mielenosoitus/


Original photo from http://torax.pp.fi/images/album/Mielenosoitus/


Picture from http://tukijaverkosto.org/sensuurimiekkari/DSC_1015.html, copyright Tuomas Venhola 2008, reproduced under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.

Some 500 people showed up, which in this country is a huge success. We made the news, too:

TV news:
YLE TV news (YouTube)
MTV3 news at seven (YouTube)
Nelonen (YouTube)

You can actually spot us in both clips. Hooray! I've been on television!

Online:
Tietokone: Mielenosoittajat muistuttivat eduskuntaa sananvapaudesta
Tietokone: Videokooste sensuurimielenosoituksesta
YLE: Internetin ennakkosensuurin vastustajat osoittivat mieltään

In related news, Suvi Lindén still has absolutely no idea what's going on.

Viestintäministeri puolustaa yhä estoa lapsipornosivuille (YouTube)
A-studio 27.2.08 (YouTube)

We heard several politicians speak, and no-one seems to have the slightest clue what the problem is. Not one mention was made of the Constitution of Finland, which the law flagrantly violates.

Meanwhile, the police are straightforwardly lying about their censorship. In the A-studio program I linked to above, the now infamous inspector Henriksson has the nerve to claim that all the blocked sites contain child pornography. Apparently he can't distinguish between a domain and a website, and makes a complete fool of himself in claiming that all blocked sites contain child pornography.

He also has absolutely no problem with the fact that the police have used a law that allows for the blocking of foreign sites to block a Finnish website. Henriksson says this is because the site owner is suspected of a crime, but that doesn't give the police any authority to block his website.

What have we learned? The Finnish Constitution isn't worth the paper it's written on, and the police have zero respect for the law and our human rights.

Welcome to Finland!