‘Logical solution’ for Marriage Equality Bill to use gender-neutral terms

As the government prepares to table in parliament the first reading of the Marriage Equality Bill, and after PN leader Simon Busuttil pledged that the Opposition would support the Bill, a number of PN MPs have expressed objections to the provisions of the Bill.

Mostly, the objections relate to some of the MPs insistence that “marriage and the family based on the complementary nature of man and woman and their natural vocation to parenthood is excluded” and that there no longer exists “the husband” and “the wife”, or “the mother” and “the father”.

Two weeks ago, the PN had already complained that it had not been given a copy of the draft bill ahead of the parliamentary debate.

On Sunday, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said that the 38-page long Bill would show that it is based on equality as a principle.

The Bill refers to legislation other than the Civil Union and the Marriage Acts, Malta Gay Rights Movement (MGRM) coordinator Gabi Calleja explained that, since reference to the status of marriage – and the rights and obligations pertaining to married couples and their children – permeates the Acts mentioned in the proposed Marriage Equality Bill, it follows that the changes being put forward are necessary to ensure that access to and recognition of rights that emanate from marital status can be enjoyed by all married couples. whether of the same or opposite sex.

Another objection relates to replacing gender specific terminology with gender neutral terms. “If the law is to reflect the fact that married couples can be composed of heterosexual, bisexual, gay, lesbian, cisgender, transgender, intersex or gender queer individuals or any combination of these then the use of gender neutral terms is the simplest and most logical solution,” Calleja said.

“It also removes the anomalies that could arise under the current legislation following the introduction of the Civil Union and Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics Acts came into force.”

The MGRM said that this in no way prevented any cisgender woman who gives birth from referring to herself as a mother, or a cisgender man who is the biological father of a child from referring to himself as father.

“It is however inclusive of the myriad variations already possible under current legislative provision such as a trans or intersex man giving birth to a child or a lesbian couple accessing reproductive health services abroad and giving birth to a child or a gay couple accessing surrogacy services legally available in some countries to father a child,” Calleja said.

The MGRM insisted that this wouldn’t pre-empt discussions or changes required to the Embryo Protection Act as claimed. “This is about recognising what is already possible and happening and ensuring that children, irrespective of their origin and the choices made by their parents, are able to have the legal protection that the recognition of both parents irrespective of the biological ties that may or may not exist provides,” Calleja said.

For those concerned by requirements to change textbooks, the MGRM noted that Malta’s Education Policy Framework already calls for an inclusive school environment that recognises diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, gender expressions and sex characteristics.

“Schools are already obliged to amend their practice to reflect current realities and the diversity of the school community. The introduction of marriage equality does not change this.

“There is no heterosexist, homophobic or transphobic bubble big enough to somehow isolate children from the world around them. A visible and empowered LGBTIQ community, a largely accepting Maltese society as well as the multiple sources of information that children have access to and the impossibility of policing them 24/7 makes sure of that.”

The MGRM said it would welcome “improvements” to the proposed bill that address oversights, but not proposals that “compromise on inclusion to maintain heterosexual and cisgender privilege”.