Luis Theroux jumping on misgendering regret bandwagon

[Namechangetoavoidmra]

Friday’s independent.
This stuff is now so common it’s boring. Really boring. But I’m posting it here because I think it’s also revealing. The whole TWAW nonsense is now very much a bandwagon and a “hook”. The reason Theroux is bringing it up is because he and his PR agency have a new series to promote. Giving a trans angle is a guaranteed way to get the journalists to bite. (Doubtless he’ll also be including this trans inmate in the follow up series. I wonder if he’ll cover the numerous trans women who have gone on to assault female inmates in prison?).
In a way it reminds me of how a few years ago every 2nd rate celeb had their “me too” story when it came to flogging whatever they needed to flog. Oh how the experiences of being a woman have been forgot just a few years later! But of course with the TWAW navel gazing the apparently injured parties are poor men, so perhaps this particular bandwagon will continue rolling.
I’m pleased though that the transracial stuff is now also being discussed. I think for most people that shows up much of the TWAW guff for what it is, so perhaps we should be grateful that the newspapers keep lapping it up?


www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/louis-theroux-behind-bars-deborah-trans-woman-jail-a9704431.html

[TheQueef]

Louis covered trans topics several times it's hardly new wagon jumping.

[CranberriesChoccy]

If LT were to film it in today's climate, I suspect he would have to be careful, even though historically he rarely shies away from difficult truths. If the topic at hand was transwomen in prisons, I would hope he would look at it from all sides, ie. there are bound to be TW who are at risk being housed with male prisoners but equally women are at risk from male-bodied prisoners who may be claiming TW status to get access to women.

The solution seems obvious to me, to have separate wings for TW felons, and NOT to house them with women.

I am, however, sadly becoming accustomed to disappointment when it comes to supposedly intelligent people on trans issues.

[deydododatdodontdeydo]

In a way it reminds me of how a few years ago every 2nd rate celeb had their “me too” story when it came to flogging whatever they needed to flog.

That seems very harsh, and dismissive, when women finally had the bravery to speak about their bad experiences.

[RufustheSniggeringReindeer]

A few things

A) did he honestly think he was going to find a transman when he turned up?

B) even if he did there was absolutely nothing wrong with his questions, they were very respectful as he is all the time

C) i liked Debbie in the interview, very hopeful but knew the realities of relationships In prison.

The article didn’t say particularly how louis would do it differently...other than maybe asking that initial question in a different way

[LockdownLump]

I don't really see anything wrong with what he has said to be honest.

I do find your comment regarding me too, rather disdainful though.

I don't believe twaw, but I certainly would use someone's preferred pronouns to their face.

[Cwenthryth]

did he honestly think he was going to find a transman when he turned up?
The article says he was expecting a “cisgender male”, it gives the impression he was pointed to a cell and told that inmate was about to be released (the topic of the interview) and only when he got to the cell it was “this is Debbie” and out Debbie comes - as Louis describes “with long hair and with a kind of traditional feminine affect”. He now says that he wouldn’t ask “so you consider yourself a woman” but would ask how Debbie identified. That’s all LT says (quoted in the linked article at least) about sensitivity of language used.

OP your post and title are misleading - nowhere in this article does LT say he regrets misgendering anyone. The article points out something he says in the voiceover but there is no comment from LT on that. Perhaps you could ask MNHQ to alter your title?

[Falleninwiththewrongcrowd]

I haven't watched the interview, but puzzled by the article. He regrets asking "Do you consider yourself a woman?", and says he should have asked "Do you identify as a woman?". I don't understand what is wrong with the former or how the latter is better (or even significantly different). I suspect that many trans ideologues will object to the revised form of the question, as it can be taken to imply that trans women are men who identify as women (TWAMWIAW), which contradicts TWAW and is therefore heresy.

[Cwenthryth]

I think it’s possibly that with “do you consider yourself a woman?” the speaker makes it more clear they are asking about the person’s belief about themselves (and therefore implying that the asker’s belief may be different) whereas “do you identify as a woman?” is more friendly to an identity=reality type belief, if sounds as though the asker may be accepting the person’s identity as fact rather than hold any different belief themselves. It doesn’t, ofc. I can (and do) believe & accept that someone sincerely identifies as the opposite sex, whilst also not believing that they actually are the opposite sex. Same as I can accept someone’s religious beliefs without sharing them myself.

I think to the gender critical mindset “do you consider yourself to be” and “do you identify as” are basically synonymous, but to the gender identity mindset they are not, because genderists place so much emphasis and importance on individual identity.

[RufustheSniggeringReindeer]

@Cwenthryth

I think it’s possibly that with “do you consider yourself a woman?” the speaker makes it more clear they are asking about the person’s belief about themselves (and therefore implying that the asker’s belief may be different) whereas “do you identify as a woman?” is more friendly to an identity=reality type belief, if sounds as though the asker may be accepting the person’s identity as fact rather than hold any different belief themselves. It doesn’t, ofc. I can (and do) believe & accept that someone sincerely identifies as the opposite sex, whilst also not believing that they actually are the opposite sex. Same as I can accept someone’s religious beliefs without sharing them myself.

I think to the gender critical mindset “do you consider yourself to be” and “do you identify as” are basically synonymous, but to the gender identity mindset they are not, because genderists place so much emphasis and importance on individual identity.

Yes

I think youre right he would just ask the question using identify

[Namechangetoavoidmra]

sorry if my comment about "me too" came over as disdainful. What I'm talking about here is not women feeling brave enough to speak out, but rather the media having a fleeting interest in that, and then moving onto the next thing. That's what I DO feel disdainful about. It seems to me that right now, what the media have a fleeting interest in is the whole TWAW/"I identify as a woman" thing, which is why, out of all the subjects that could have been used to promote what looks like a new series or a new documentary, THIS is the one issue that gets picked up on. Same as how during the "me too" period, any celeb that wanted to get interviewed, male or female, came out with their "me too" story. I'm sorry if that again sounds disdainful. My feelings on the me too thing is that while initially it did act to help increase awareness of what ALL women experience ALL the time (I lost count of the number of decent men I know who expressed shock at what women know to be an every day reality) here we still are today: literally at a point where most of the political class and media are very happy to have women's places on political party shortlists, grants/scholarships for STEM subjects, bla bla, taken by male people who ID as women with zero "gate keeping" (oh the horror) over who gets to say they have transitioned as a woman or not (with the likely upshot that any man will be able to self ID on the spot and qualify for a "women" reserved place, and within a few years the very concept will be laughable).

I'm not sure the title is misleading. It sounded to me like a reasonable summary of the whole puff piece in the Indie was misgendering. But I see it's not quite captured by that. The regret thing though is really what I think is a bit of a trend atm. I guess people getting their "regrets" out early is what we should expect from the cancel culture thing.
Sorry I am mainly having a brain dump. Part of me just wants to believe the whole TWAW thing is just a fleeting media fancy that will go away. But having listened to half of the LBC phone-in the other day, I was horrified by the callers who instead of saying "oh yeah, TWAW is like saying it's ok for a white person to ID as a black person and claim access to their spaces, which is clearly nonsense" they said: "well I support TWAW so I'm now going to twist my brain inside out and argue that of course white people should be able to ID as black people too"

[merrymouse]

Using another context "Do you consider yourself saved by Jesus?" is more confrontational that just asking "What do you believe?".

[merrymouse]

One question is open ended, the other isn't.

[Namechangetoavoidmra]

@LockdownLump I totally would (and on the rare occasions it comes up, do) address trans people by their self id. It's human courtesy and costs me nothing. I'm also very happy for people to adopt whatever gender ID they want (or indeed no gender ID). I dont believe humans can change biological sex and there are some areas where that matters. But as gender is a construct of course it's up to people to construct whatever gender they want for themselves and I'm very happy to address them as per that gender.

[Falleninwiththewrongcrowd]

merrymouse

One question is open ended, the other isn't

But he isn't replacing "Do you consider yourself a woman?" with "What's your gender identity?"; he's replacing it with 'Do you identify as a woman?", which is no more open ended than the original question.

[BlackForestCake]

"Do you consider yourself" is forcing the person to lie because they know perfectly well what they are claiming about themself isn't true. "Do you identify" is easier.

[Quaagars]

In a way it reminds me of how a few years ago every 2nd rate celeb had their “me too” story when it came to flogging whatever they needed to flog


Bloody hell -

Should they have just shut up, fakers as they were trying to promote their book or whatever?!
Lost for words!
This is the feminism board, right?!

Louis covered trans topics several times it's hardly new wagon jumping
Agree with this

[Namechangetoavoidmra]

@Quaagars as I have already tried to make clear, my comment was about how the media have a fleeting interest in topics then move on, not about women coming forward and sharing their experiences. I was thinking out loud whether or not the current focus on trans stuff was an example of a media hook which would similarly disappear without much change.

[DidoLamenting]

Your explanation doesn't match what you said. Your words are clearly criticising the "2nd rate celebrity trying to sell something- not the media.