Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The Guardian again: Gaby Hinsliff misses the point

64 replies

hackmum · 09/02/2018 07:18

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/09/transgender-women-labour-shortlists-gender-discrimination

She hasn't understood the point about self-identification - that under the Labour interpretation of the rules, any man will be able to stand on an AWS by virtue of saying "I'm a woman". I'd love to ask Gaby if she thinks Eddie Izzard - who has said he wants to stand on an All Women Shortlist - is a woman. It's not open for comments, unfortunately.

OP posts:
Original poster
hackmum · 09/02/2018 09:03

nauticant: "You would think that a journalist writing about this issue at this stage in the game would have got the basics right."

Yes. She is, after all, an experienced journalist. She could have made the effort to read up a bit on the issues first. But she clearly hasn't 'bothered to do any reading at all. (Note that she's framing the article as a response to something she heard Linda Bellos say on the radio - a pretty good indication that hasn't tried to educate herself about what's happening.) She hasn't grasped the fact, for example, that there's a legal issue with allowing self-identified transwomen to go onto all women shortlists. She certainly hasn't grasped the fact that the vast majority of "transwomen" are men who have not had surgery, not had hormones and have no intention of having either.

OP posts:
MacaroonMama · 09/02/2018 08:54

I cannot stand the Guardian any more because of sh*t like this. It will not allow anyone to write anything gender critical nor will it even allow comments. How did it get to a point where a supposedly left-wing newspaper just prints piece after piece which deny women a voice.

She has missed the point on many levels. 'Oppressed by gender' is in the byline - well, no, oppressed by biology. That is the point! So many women are not buying into gender crap but just for example say an equally qualified and experienced man and woman go for a job. They are in their mid-30s. Both have shiny new wedding rings on. 'Better select him' says the boss 'She'll be up the duff before the year's out.' That is biology not gender.

And yes of course men can have empathy with women, and that is great - but we have women's officers, BAME officers, LGBTetc (not being rude I just can't remember all of the initials) from those groups to ensure representation for as wide a variety of people as possible. This is why not all those positions are open to white straight 50+ men. I am sure lots of those men could think of the needs and experiences of women, BAME people, LBGT people - but as a society, we have chosen to ask people from those specific groups to best represent them (this seems to be universal when representation is needed iyswim - university, politics, unions, etc).

Sorry I am waffling. Very much heartened by the peak transing that is going on, by the solidarity on here and by my experiences in real life (friends, DH, parents, my MP, teachers at my kids' school) but the Guardian is being wilfully obtuse and refusing to engage properly with the frankly very intelligent discussions that lots of women would like to have. And it makes me sad, and ANGRY!

Xx

cista · 09/02/2018 08:23

FYI: Gaby Hinscliff is the journalist who write that horrible victim-blaming piece after the Cologne attacks... she's no friend of women. Angry

nauticant · 09/02/2018 08:17

I wasn't going to read the article but decided if I was going to have a view I should read it.

The article assumes the following:

Transwomen are women.
Self-ID is not a thing, it's all about transssexuals who've going through Hell.
The law does not already provide for transwomen to be on AWS legally.

You would think that a journalist writing about this issue at this stage in the game would have got the basics right. But we're dealing with the Guardian here and when it comes to trans issues, what they do isn't journalism.

SoulCister · 09/02/2018 08:02

The comments are switched off!

merrymouse · 09/02/2018 08:00

What is the point of having shortlists for women ( or any other group) if they are so diverse that nobody can explain who they are or what they have in common?

Lottapianos · 09/02/2018 08:00

'Gender assigned at birth'

I'm so sick of reading this stupid crap. Nobody's 'gender' is 'assigned' at birth, but their SEX is DETERMINED based on the EVIDENCE that you see in front of your eyes. I can't understand why some people still don't get that

And the handwringing about the suggestion that transwomen might actually be 'more male than female'. Hmm

I'm so sick of this shit from the Guardian. I wonder if Julie Bindel is begging to write something but they have locked her in a cupboard somewhere

rowdywoman1 · 09/02/2018 07:54

Hopefully someone on twitter will point out that this is about Self ID, not transgender people.

newsparklythings · 09/02/2018 07:52

Came on here to comment on the same.

Do you think this is a response to all the opinions the Guardian received on the greatest current threat to women's rights the other day?

TellsEveryoneRealFacts · 09/02/2018 07:40

What is it with these fucking women who cannot work out that they are fucking women because of their fucking biology?

Honestly - what the fuck?

QueenLaBeefah · 09/02/2018 07:39

Well I don't click on the Guardian anymore but it doesn't surprise me to read, yet again, that the Guardian are throwing women under a bus.

The Guardian again: Gaby Hinsliff misses the point
rb67 · 09/02/2018 07:37

I agree with Gabby that men can represent women. People are capable of empathy and I think that argument against trans rights is a weak one.
What she does, which is infuriating, is use trans women as if an agreed fact. The article is based on a false premise and the debate needs to be shifted back to the start.
Do you believe in trans women's rights is like being asked "what will you use when you fall off the flat earth".

Gileswithachainsaw · 09/02/2018 07:30

Wtf is that.

Does she seriously buy into women who don't have a vagina. The very way that babies are told apart at birth.

Ffs.

20nil · 09/02/2018 07:21

I know. I was just coming on to comment about this. Utterly, utterly misses the point.