Ruth Serwotka on R4 now

Followup question asked to labour politician.. didn't catch name.

After a LOT of waffle said that single sex spaces such as refuges would he maintained

It is yes, but I see this as a series of pincer movements that need to be taken across a number of areas in appropriate ways.

I can see your point, but the heart of the matter is that this is about transgender men trying to override women's rights to separate facilities/sports.

It seemed to me that what Ruth was trying to do was avoid the interview becoming an argument about trans issues. I thought she was very careful to steer away from any potential accusations of being 'transphobic' and stuck to the details of what is going on at the heart of the Labour Party.

She was given just enough time to develop this and did get to illustrate a number of points by the end. I was pleased she mentioned the 'high street' issues.

WPUK have been tireless in working to maintain a balanced, pro-women's rights, stance. They are careful in their use of language and stick to facts. We need this approach but of course we also need women like Posie to say it as it is and cut to the heart of matters.

This interview wasn't the right place for that and I thought Ruth did a good job - especially considering that the BBC has been reluctant until very recently to allow women to talk freely and openly on this issue.

In presenting to the public it's important to remember that most people won't have a clue about the basic issues so therefore, go back to those issues and talk, in terms that most of the audience will understand, about those. Most of the audience will have heard "infighting in the Labour Party" rather than penises in women's single sex spaces.

Looking at twitter one issue that did cut through is Ruth's point about blood. That led to a few cul de sac discussions.

I'm sorry to be negative but the overriding goal has to be to put these issues in front of the public in basic and clear terms.

It’s brilliant that Ruth was given time to actually speak without interruption and also without “the other side” present. I did think Ruth could have been a bit more concise, it’s important to remember the vast majority of people aren’t very well informed about this subject.

Justin did a great job at explaining things too.

I thought Ruth was the complete opposite of clear. She was handed straightforward and helpful questions on a plate and rather than arguing in concrete terms about what the worries and possible consequences were, she waffled around the questions.

I've been reading about this for years and I struggled to follow her arguments. I'd imagine most of the Today audience would have not understood what she was saying.

She did far better than I would have done but I don't think she'll have got through to the audience at all.

Was she really clear? I was waiting for a concrete example. I wanted to hear her give a more specific example. Maybe I am just to used to Posie Parker.

Delighted to hear Ruth's interview this morning. She was clear and calm and got across the important points.

Interviewer Justin Webb seems to be across this and have a decent understanding of the issues, which went a long way in enabling the discussion to make sense to the general listener.

I dont think that Ruth S would be able to explain her perspective in such an uninterrupted way a year ago.

It is baby steps, but I feel that having a gender critical view is becoming more acceptable by mainstream media.

Ruth was great. Very clear and explained things well for people new to this issue.

Ruth was clear and informative. Good to hear this being openly and seriously discussed. Great!

Well done Ruth. Clear and measured about women's single sex provision rights. Good to hear a voice saying no groups rights should override women's rights on radio 4! Recommended listening

Listening. I noticed the manifesto and was joyful. Then i hear Dawn butler weighs in and inwardly groan. This woman talking now is very good.