Ruth Serwotka on R4 now

Hooray for Radio 4 geeks!

Here's my theory about Webb. He went out to the US as a foreign correspondent and fell in love with the place, warts and all. (His besotted reports from there used to drive me up the wall.) But as time went on he noticed one of the warts, identity politics, grew misshapen and then turned cancerous. He was very upset that his new love had developed a disease and became strongly averse to identity politics in its manifold forms. When gender identity politics came along he was primed to notice it and also not to view it as a positive thing.

I was weaned on Radio 4 so I'm probably about to be geeky.

Justin Webb is definitely GC. I've emailed him three times now to congratulate him for raising the issue and encourage him to keep it up. He's going softly-softly, but he's been going at it for some time now and each time he takes it a little further. He is one of very few people who've dared have a GC speaker on without a transactivist for 'balance'. I think he's rather good at succinctly explaining why trans is such an assault on women's rights. When the battle is over he's due a place in the Terf hall of fame.

I can practically hear people like Jane Garvey and Tom Sutcliffe's eyes rolling when guests on their programmes start talking gender bollocks and both have been known to pull them up on it. I've several times heard Sutcliffe shut them down with a disapproving: 'My wife would have something to say to you' or similar. Tom Sutcliffe's wife sounds as if she might be at home here. Here's hoping that Harry's JR and Maya's case will mean they all feel more able to speak openly.

Sarah Montague has also been chipping away: she actually responded to one of my emails after she'd covered one incident and although obviously she can't come out and say it, I feel fairly confident in saying she thinks gender is bollocks.

What's bothering me is that while those above have been doing what they can to question and undermine the trans script, so many of the BBC's senior people have dodged it. Emily Maitlis, Evan Davis, Kirsty Wark, where were you?

Here's Justin Webb criticising the BBC over this:

twitter.com/JustinOnWeb/status/1189620616170737669

As I heard it, Justin Webb was interviewing Laura Pidcock about another matter and threw the self-ID question in as a curve ball at the end.
Ah right. Thanks nauticant

Well done him.

As I heard it, Justin Webb was interviewing Laura Pidcock about another matter and threw the self-ID question in as a curve ball at the end.

I wonder whether this line of question had been sanctioned by the producers of the Today programme. I wouldn't be that surprised if Webb's dislike of identity politics sees him leaving the BBC.

Mmm, Laura Pidcock was definitely saying single sex and provision for trans in addition.

What is annoying is her inability to pronounce the letter tee when it occurs in the middle of a word.

Par-y
Ma--er

And so on.

I didn't hear it so I may have missed something but I do think it's interesting that the Labour Party didn't send Dawn Butler. Surely this would normally be her brief, not Laura Pidcock's? Now why wouldn't you want your secretary for Woman and Equalities to handle it?

People just don’t think beyond 280 characters these days. They think that is a complete debate.

The problem is that most politicians are not engaged with this issue and haven't thought deeply about it. So I have no confidence that someone who casually says something like, "of course single-sex spaces will be protected" wouldn't flip to "of course transwoman are women and should have access to women's spaces" the second they are leaned on by the trans-activists.

I think we are guilty of reading too much into these casual statements when all the politician is really doing is mirroring back what they think people want to hear in that moment.

They can’t - the argument is just ludicrous. You can’t defend absolute nonsense.

But agree it's positive that they are no longer completely ignoring these issues.

I just listened to Piddock’s interview on catch up. She did say “single spaces” (sic) should be maintained but that there should be provision for trans people. It sounded very much like an argument for third spaces and services, which women with concerns about this have been saying for ages they would support.

If I believed that was without doubt Labour's genuine position that they will stick to despite criticism from TRAs they would have my vote.

Well done Ruth. WPUK has to tread a line. Presenters are starting to get it. We need to peak the public but this will also put the wind up Labour which was probably the bigger aim this morning.

Though I’ll note it was qualified with a “women need places to heal” statement. That made me wonder if the range of protected spaces would be very tightly defined, so fitting rooms and gym changing rooms would still be a free for all.

I just listened to Piddock’s interview on catch up. She did say “single spaces” (sic) should be maintained but that there should be provision for trans people. It sounded very much like an argument for third spaces and services, which women with concerns about this have been saying for ages they would support.

A man can gain a new birth certificate saying he is female if he obtains a Gender Recognition Certificate. This does not require any physical transition. It is being proposed to make GRCs available on a self-identification basis. If any man can obtain the legal status of female, how will single sex spaces and services for women be protected?

This. What OldCrone said. This.

This is what every woman who is interviewed should be saying.

I was referring to the interview with Ruth.

It’s amazing that it is being brought into the daylight so much now.

‘But they say they will protect women’s rights!’
‘Have you seen how they define women - have you seen their women only shortlists?’

The Labour woman was Laura Pidcock. Big ally of Jeremy Corbyn and famously said she could never be 'friends with a Tory'. Good for Justin Webb for bringing up topic and challenging her on her definition of what would happen to a trans woman who has not had surgical or hormonal treatment in a woman's refuge.

I thought it was good, but there was a point in the middle of the interview. where she had an opportunity to put across succinctly what the problem is, but she waffled a bit instead. That said, she was much clearer than I would have been, so I'm not going to criticise her for that.

What needs to be said in an interview like this is to state clearly what the problem is:

A man can gain a new birth certificate saying he is female if he obtains a Gender Recognition Certificate. This does not require any physical transition. It is being proposed to make GRCs available on a self-identification basis. If any man can obtain the legal status of female, how will single sex spaces and services for women be protected?

Ahhh I heard that. I was wondering who she was and who the ‘bloody idiot’ was.

It was Laura Pidcock just now on R4. Just loads more pointless waffle.

It all comes back to the definition of woman.

This was at about 8.45