The leopard-print dress, earrings, and lipstick are quintessentially feminine. The thick handlebar moustache and neck tattoos, somewhat less so. The man in court is Sven Liebich, a right-wing extremist who has been photographed wearing a Nazi-style uniform at rallies. In 2023 he was sentenced to 18 months in prison for incitement, slander, and insult. This year his final appeal was rejected and he is now due to be sent to prison. Due to Germany’s comically woke laws on transgenderism, it is a women’s prison that he will be sent to.
The new law has also had a chilling effect on freedom of speech in Germany
Last year, the last German government passed the Self-Determination Act (‘Selbstbestimmungsgesetz’). Presented by former justice minister Marco Buschmann (of the liberal FDP) and Family Minister Lisa Paus (of the Green party), it liberalised German law on transgenderism. Prior to that, the Transsexual Act (TSG) mandated two psychological evaluations and a court ruling in order to ‘change sex’. The new law allows individuals to change their legal gender on all official documents, including changing their birth certificate, without even requiring a medical certificate of surgical sex reassignment. In other words, if you say you’re a woman, then in the eyes of the German law you are one.
But as a result, they’ve ended up with the comical sight of a right-wing extremist in drag and the very much less comical reality that he will serve his sentence in a woman’s prison. Having changed his name to Marla-Svenja and followed the correct procedures, there is nothing the authorities can do now. Even though he has stated that he only did it to ‘fuck with the system’ and grew a thick moustache to make it even more absurd, he will still be sent to a women’s prison in Chemnitz, Saxony. This probably wasn’t what Paus meant when she hailed the law as a ‘socio-political advance’ that would protect long-discriminated-against minorities.
This isn’t an isolated incident either. Two years ago, a violent transgender inmate in the same Chemnitz prison sexually assaulted female inmates and guards. Similar cases have occurred elsewhere: in Lower Saxony, a transgender convicted paedophile assaulted female inmates, and in North Rhine-Westphalia, another violent assault by a transgender inmate was reported.
Meanwhile, Berlin’s prisons have adopted gender-neutral cell door signs to avoid discriminating against transgender inmates. Despite doubts about Liebich’s transgender identity, Prosecutor Benedikt Bernzen stated, ‘we follow a legally prescribed standard based on two criteria: the registered gender, in this case female, and the place of residence’. Thankfully, prisons are allowed to move the transgender male-to-female prisoners to a male prison if there are incidents with inmates. Perhaps they should be housed in those to begin with?
The new law has also had a chilling effect on freedom of speech in Germany. When journalist Julian Reichelt, former editor of the Bild newspaper and head of the right-wing outlet NIUS, referred to Liebich as a man and by his original name, he was sued by Liebich for violating his personal rights. Reichelt’s defence attorney, the prominent media lawyer Joachim Steinhöfel, argued that ‘those who seek to legally prohibit naming biological reality oppose open discourse and freedom of expression. They exploit individual cases for ideological crusades’. Similar to cases in Britain, the Self-Determination Act has been used to censor gender-critical voices in the media and academia. Thankfully, this was an absurdity too far for the German law and Reichelt won.
Another example of how the law has been easily abused is Alina S., a transgender individual who has won 240 lawsuits against companies over their job advertisements. Under the law, these ads now have to feature male, female, and gender-neutral language. Many small companies have failed or forgotten to do this, something Alina exploited by suing them for gender discrimination. Even though nobody thinks these were deliberate attempts to discriminate, the courts have awarded Aline over €240,000 (£208,000) in damages. In another case last year, a transgender male-to-female was denied membership to a women-only fitness studio. The studio owner’s refusal led to a complaint with the governmental anti-discrimination agency, which proposed a €1,000 (£865) settlement. The case is now headed to court.
Although the ruling CDU party has pledged to reevaluate the law by 2026, prioritising child protection, their government coalition partners in the SPD remain committed to preserving the law. That means there is unlikely to be a change anytime soon, as the CDU is reliant on the SPD to stay in government. If there is any hope, it is that lawsuits like the one between Liebich and Reichelt will clip the wings of some of the most abusive practices brought about by the law. Thanks to this case, it is now possible to include someone’s birth name and sex in news reports, provided they are not derogatory or harmful in tone.
The broader question remains: how much harm will this law cause to women, children, and businesses before it is reformed? It is deeply irresponsible to let it continue this way.
Comments