A shocking but entirely unsurprising development has emerged in the ongoing rollback of transgender people’s rights in the UK.

The City of London Corporation (CLC) has launched a consultation on transgender swimmers’ access to Hampstead Heath swimming ponds, which could result in them being banned from using the ponds designated for their gender. It appears to have come as a response to Sex Matters, a group of anti-trans activists, threatening legal action on the basis that the service is not, in their view, applying to the recent Supreme Court ruling on gender. Currently, trans men and women are allowed to use the pond that aligns with their gender identity under existing policy. The consultation presents six possible models, some of which would restrict or remove trans-inclusive access.

In addition to preventing trans people from using the ponds in the way they are currently permitted, another degrading possibility laid out by the CLC is to allocate times during which the ponds will be trans-inclusive. I couldn’t help but find this approach – its perverse, half-acceptance of our presence – to be particularly distressing. I felt this way because I know policies such as this are designed to make blatant transphobia seem fair and reasonable.

Should the vote result in trans people being banned, it would clearly enforce and justify segregation – a policy that should concern anyone who wants to live in a society that does not dehumanise minorities, particularly by law. On my social media feed and in group chats, I have seen many other trans women, friends and allies share the consultation, pleading to keep the ponds trans-inclusive, and for us all to resist dehumanising practices. This is crucial: in a time of such hostility towards my community, it is more important than ever that we rally the troops to genuinely Protect The Dolls whenever we witness their rights being stripped back, and this consultation is a clear indication of precisely that. I also can’t help but feel complex about the method we are using in this instance to protect the trans community.

The consultation itself is dehumanising. Trans people are degraded the moment there is a vote or open debate about whether or not we deserve the same rights as other members of society. Any conversation that poses the possibility of excluding trans people from public spaces, even if both sides of the argument are heard, entrenches the idea that segregation is a respectable, fair and justified approach. The consultation does worse than suggest the potential of trans people’s legal separation, it normalises public displays of violence as a solution to cisgender peoples’ discomfort with our mere existence.

The consultation uses the mission of Sex Matters as a serious framework to develop a discussion about trans and women’s rights. Sex Matters claims that their goal is to protect women on the basis that “sex is real, binary, immutable and important”. Their crowdfunding to sue the CLC is a direct contradiction. In March 2024, over 200 members of the Kenwood Ladies Pond Association (KLPA) attended a meeting during which they rejected a motion proposing that their spaces were for cisgender women only. The report read: “A resolution to change the definition of ‘woman’ in our constitution, in a way which would have excluded transgender women, was resoundingly defeated.” This was a democratic vote that relied on the freedom of women to meaningfully share their perspectives.

Sex Matters didn’t like this. That the organisation responded by threatening legal action would be laughable if it weren’t such a depressing reflection of our culture’s confused, misogynist lens on trans people and our allies. As a group, they are the clearest example we have of how anti-trans policy requires the silencing of cisgender women and the homogenisation of their voices. What about the women who wish to exercise their right to sit side by side with trans women – with their trans friends, family, or partners? It is infantilising to tell them they cannot make the decision themselves. Enjoying a trans person’s presence should not be an illegal act, but by caving to the muddied logic of anti-trans activists, the CLC could make it so.

Some may be compelled to boycott the ponds for the vote on trans people’s exclusion. However, I think this would be a shame. Trans people deserve to experience the pleasure of swimming just as much as cisgender people, and I want this enjoyment to continue in our lives for as long as possible. This type of pleasure is a huge and important part of the trans experience. In water, our surgery scars are visible, our transformations are uncovered; it is often where we feel most free and finally comfortable in our skin. For centuries, the ponds in Hampstead have been sites of physical and social pleasure for everyone. It is deeply sad to consider how its legacy might change.