Women's Hour features interviews with Professor Alex Sharpe and Professor Rosa Freedman as part of 'Sex & Gender' series **Thread title edited at OP's request**

Alex didn’t seem to give a fuck

I promise you from my interactions online with Alex that Alex doesn't give a fuck.

They are so hopelessly useless it is amazing that they have got this far with their lunacy.

Who goes on Woman's Hour and compares women speaking about women's concerns to the bubonic plague ffs?

This only retrenches my feminism. Who, other than men, would get away with being this shit for this long and being so roundly trounced by so many clever women - and yet mysteriously still survive and in some cases thrive?

Surely no one other than Alex would have agreed to liken the rights of women to a bubonic plague.

This was an absolute marvel.

No self awareness whatsoever.

Be interesting to see if the shift to cis sexual coincides with a similar shift to calling themselves transsexual.

I can't see transsexuals taking something so blatantly obliterating lying down.

Alex was so patronising and irritable. Great way to win people over in your side, isn't it! I certainly felt very convinced when Alex was telling me how I feel, what I think, and describing my online behaviour to a tee! How remarkable.

Today's new narrative was the shift from cis gender to cis sexual.
I don't know if it's a coincidence, but Shami Chakrabarti was also talking about "refugees/migrants to our sex".
The video from the BristolUniWomen event is now up at en-gb.facebook.com/bristoluniversity/. Skip to 1:20:00 if you don't want to listen to the whole thing.

I think they've realised that the gender stuff doesn't wash because it's about gender stereotypes, hence the shift to sex.

kesstrel Thank you.

Honestly, still reeling after that. How can anyone think that kind of approach is ok? Alex was incoherent, aggressive, evasive and just plain incomprehensible even to people like us who know this debate only too well.

I'm sure in their little pre-game gang briefing they thought these soundbites would be devastatingly effective. Unfortunately Alex made themselves look like an ignorant, incompetent and patronising fool.

Surely no one other than Alex would have agreed to liken the rights of women to a bubonic plague.

And no one but a profound misogynist would claim that women enjoy trawling the Internet to find other women who have been sexually assaulted, to prove a point! Firstly ugh, and secondly no woman has to prove that point.

Until today I thought that activists were stopping using #nodebate as it was playing so badly with the public. But listening to this, I now realise that it is their main modus operandi.
This movement would have got nowhere if they had to debate and negotiate removing rights from other protected groups (let alone targeting children in schools). It is only because they have been able to insert themselves at the centre of power (government, civil service, unions, charity sector, think tanks etc) quietly and without fuss and then, using their insidious mix of gobbledegook, threats and intimidation, they have bullied everyone else into compliance with their distorted view of the world.
AS gave a classic display of this with a demonstrated lack of empathy, insight and respect for the needs / rights of the women. As the great Maya Angelou said - 'when someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time'

Alex Sharpe is a barrister? I wouldn't instruct them to carry my bag to Court and fetch tea.

Lols
Yeah
Alex did say we were privileged
Soooooooo privileged
Top of the privileged

Alex so blatantly had a list of all the correct and approved talking points Alex was allowed to state. No deviation permitted.

I'm sure in their little pre-game gang briefing they thought these soundbites would be devastatingly effective. Unfortunately Alex made themselves look like an ignorant, incompetent and patronising fool.

Debate will never work, because even these simple questions would collapse the ideology

Do you think that homosexuality is same-sex attraction?

Do you understand that my 10-year-old and my elderly mother would feel uncomfortable with a man getting changed right next to them?

Do you think I have a right to know if a 14-year-old boy is sharing a tent with my 10 year old daughter at girl guides?

If sex is a protected characteristic under the equality act, but anyone can be any sex, how does that work?

If they go on to say that this is a problem of the equality act, not the gender recognition act, then let's talk about the equality act, and revise that as well.

Which bits of us do trans women want to be

Certainly for some (not all, HQ, this is not a sweeping generalisation), it's the bit which gets them laid.

And they choose that on the basis of deciding which aspect of a woman they want to shag.

Which bits of us do trans women want to be

littlbrowndog, all the privilege, obviously. Women are swimming in so much privilege we should have plenty to spare.

Oh, and any TERFs here feel inclined to argue, I won't indulge, so just block me instead.

#nodebate then? How very fucking novel. Trying hard not to bite on this one as I don't think it's worth it!

Recent article by
“TERF Is Hate Speech and It’s Time to Condemn It”
(extract)
"Extremists don’t believe women, chiefly lesbians, deserve boundaries. That’s what this issue is all about. They disguise their misogyny and homophobia as social justice in order to gain support from people who are misinformed. So-called “progressives” are openly oppressing and condemning the homosexual community, primarily the lesbian community.

The Economist has banned the use of “TERF” in articles and comments because the slur “may have started as a descriptive term but is now used to try to silence a vast swathe of opinions on trans issues, and sometimes to incite violence against women.” Unfortunately, too many journalists and sites have decided to do the opposite. Even editors are doubling down on their misogyny and homophobia.

The Daily Dot recently posted a piece that questioned why violent Twitter users are having their posts removed and accounts banned. Alex Dalbey, Daily Dot writer, argues that Twitter is being unfair to users who post hate tweets using the slur TERF. On the contrary, Twitter hasn’t done enough to protect women, especially lesbians, on its platform." (continues)

medium.com/@amydyess83/terf-is-hate-speech-and-its-time-to-condemn-it-6efc897ce407

J:good morning to you,

A:hi Jane, thanks for having me on the show

J: No, it is lovely to talk to you. Now um is it right to say that you, you would prefer not to enter into adebate, which is why I am going to talk to you first and then we will move onto Rosa.

A: Yeah, I i don't wish to enter into a debate, I think it is much more productive to have er a a conversation with you and try to get some important points across to your listeners.

The cisgender and cissexual difference was rather telling.

More labels and more pseudo division with which to separate women.

Whilst arguing that it's GC feminists who are not including all women by not being intersectional.

The boobs, basically.

OK so you know you are coming onto BBC Radio 4's Women's Hour.

You should have been listening last week and be aware that you will be asked for clarification on jargon terms used.

How hard would it be to prepare?

Cis is basically the opposite of trans, so someone who is not trans. But instead of using a negative "non trans" we use the term cis, spelled "C" "I" "S". This term comes from (latin?) and is used in chemistry it means in the same place, where "trans" means across from.

(I think that's right isn't it? tip for the next TRA who wants to go on Women's Hour).

Also, might be worth preparing your actual arguments a bit too, so you don't come across as a defensive fool who doesn't really understand the point they are trying (badly) to make.

Rosa was great. Until tomorrow then....

I don’t get this
Trans women want to be women yet they don’t have a scooby about women
Dismissing fears and actual debate
Which bits of us do trans women want to be

Did Alex say that cis-woman was another term for natural woman or real woman? Does that mean Alex doesn't think transwomen are real women?
The whole 'debate' is confusing because others say transwomen are real women (India W for example).

It was Jane who was giving examples, I think.

Alex agreed. Because disagreeing would've taken Alex down a rabbit hole of no return. Claiming that men who identify as women are real/genetic/biological women is an insanity too far. Alex knows that.

So many womenhave no idea what's happening and announcing they're bored of such a 'minority issue'

That's fine.

I agree, we are under time pressure. But viewing as a minority issue is part of the process.

Asking if it's a minority or saying it is, is moving the narrative forward. Because people will reply and say no, it's going to affect 100% of the population, if anyone can be any sex.

What's happened on mumsnet is a microcosm. Which is why they are being relentlessly pressured to shut us down.

People start off wondering what all the fuss is about, decide it's nothing to do with them, then start to see it in more places, so go and take a look.

Then someone in their kids' school, a relative, a newspaper article, pushes too far into their conscience for them to ignore it.

So they go looking and ask questions. As soon as they ask questions, the no debate and fury it provokes does the job.