Head's Up. Radio 4 Women's Hour Phone-in 4th Dec

There’s no doubt JG is on the ball with this. Pressure from above is probably intense.

I agree.

Pencils thanks for the transcript and Speakingfor asking the question.
@YellaHumberElla this is for you.

I thought JG was fantastic.

I was pissed off at first with how much she interrupted Penny/Speaking but it was clear there was very limited time left and I think she managed it well. I doubt she was in charge of which questions got cued up when.

She managed to challenge Sarah Wollaston a couple of times quite strongly and made agreeing noises when Belinda de Lucy said that women's groups have been met with intolerance and authoritarianism.

^ThePurported*

It does need saying.

And here on Mumsnet, despite people thinking we're the worst of the worst, we don't highlight and link to these men, or encourage pointing fingers. We just observe, and know who they are. We see them.

It was the thing that woke me up the most, out of my slumber of supporting unquestionably 't' rights.

But once you start researching, trying to understand their point of view, their call to 'womanhood, the minute you disappear down their social media, you realise that most of them have no idea what a woman is, and that they are mostly fetishing women.

I do still try to find Sarah's cohort that she refers to, that 'most vulnerable group', as I want to understand all perspectives.

But mostly I find fetishists, who are sometimes lauded by young women.

When I listen to programmes like this morning's Womens Hours I try to think about 'the most vulnerable'. But I have few examples I can centre, and all I can relate to are the many, many men who identify as women, all over social media, who are dominating our female world with their fetishistic language and opportunistic chance to take our spaces and places from us. I, like many of us, have the evidence. Though I don't think many people are that bothered about what we've found.

There’s no doubt JG is on the ball with this. Pressure from above is probably intense.

Little and often will get attention though. It’s no longer a fringe issue and it’s not going away, editors know it.

I think she is treading a fine line. The BBC has a disproportionate number of trans employees

JG should have either intervened less by letting Speaking Penny make more points or cut in with more comments of her own showing up this dangerous nonsense.

I dunno. I'm going to cut WH some slack on this.

JG is clearly clued up.

Yep, so predictable it was the last item and no time to cover it.

Having said that, it did sort the wheat from the chaff with only 2 mins soundbite from each commenter.

Well, chaff from mostly-chaff.

I'd cut my arm off before putting an X next to uber-misogynist LibDems and SNP. Couldn't even acknowledge that women exist, let alone have policy needs.

I'd cut my arm off before voting Tory (or UKIP/Brexit Party) anyway.

Laura Pidcock didn't do badly - represented the manifesto in that there's a commitment to protect single sex space (although practically speaking no meat on the bones) and a hint at long grass for moving to self-ID with the we've not even analysed the consultation responses yet stuff. Still not strong enough though.

Laura - well done, but you're going to have to do better and be blunter before I vote Labour.

Oh Sarah, I so often want to link here to the twitter profiles of the transwomen who litter twitter profiles like yours and other politicians with supportive messages and thanks for standing up for their rights. I don't here, as I think they're confused and have issues, and I don't want to point fingers towards these people. But if you, or your political supporters, scrolled down, even a couple of months, on their profiles, 9 out of 10 times you would find images of penises 'trapped' in fishnet tights, selfies of thighs and 'girls' boots, and discussions that I'm pretty sure don't point to 'most discriminated' against, but playing out fetishes of what a woman means.

A great proportion of the people you think you are supporting are NOT the sort of people you think you are supporting.

This^ really needs to be said and I hope it doesn't get deleted, because it's true. Some of these politicians don't have the first idea about what they are supporting. And those who do know - wtf are they thinking!?
My patience with MPs like Sarah Wollaston is wearing very, very thin.

Thank you to everyone who sent questions to WH, and I salute you Speaking, we wouldn't even get these scraps if people like you didn't pick up the phone

I had to go out at 10.30, but barely bothered to listen up until then because I KNEW - knew with an absolute, bet your last fiver on it certainty - that they'd squeeze this in in the last two minutes.

Bloody bastarding treacherous cowards

Oh, and that reminds me, one of the 'stand up, help us out' vocal man-idenitfying-as-a-women right now that pops up regularly to support the political parties as they give away women's rights

• scroll down only a little bit, and you'll see his proud-as-punch picture when he was 'just cross-dressing' in a schoolgirl outfit. And I don't mean a 'Britney Spears' outfit, which is bad enough, but a primary school gingham check dress, knee high socks, and cross-bar shoes.

Female politicians - you should damn well know the reality and totality as to what you're supporting when you do this 'vulnerable, discriminated against' schtick.

(Prepares for deletion for pointing out the obvious. Mid-week, fed up!)

You've cheered me up a bit michelleoftheresistance.

You've reminded me that we're not going to give up on this fight and that resistance can only grow. It might take longer to win than we would like. But we will win.

Well done SpeakingOutLoud

Thank you Speaking - well said. And thank you for transcribing Pencils.

I thought the most cogent response by far was from the Brexit Party. Not a position I ever expected to be taking but credit where it's due. She'd even thought about the mangling of crime statistics which is a particular concern of mine.

Dying to know how the Limp Dims plan to 'turn around the hostility'. Particularly as a judge has recently commented that the GC side was barely in the foothills of offensive, whereas 'DIAF' is fairly damn hostile really.

Forcing males into women's spaces is not going to end in bunnies, sunshine and people skipping hand in hand into the rainbow lit woods, it's going to lead to exponentially increased anger, resentment, evidence of harm and fury about the women harmed, court cases, compensation claims and PR disasters. You'd think someone in this position of responsibility would have the basic intelligence to foresee it. No wonder they can't write risk assessments or impact assessments.

Thank you Pencils . And very well done Speaking

And thank you Pencils for the transcript - this was the bit that was the

P/Speaking How will the parties protect women in single sex spaces ..

SW: What I'm saying is, I just think that - that we - we should turn this on its head and look at the discrimination that transgender people have - and violence that they have faced.

'Turn this on its head'

So what you're saying Sarah is stop looking at women's sex, not gender definition safety, privacy, dignity, You're saying stop talking about protection for women.

Instead - in this case, as the question was about women, we should refocus, turn it on its head, and look at men who identify as women. You're saying we should centre them?

(Oh Sarah, I so often want to link here to the twitter profiles of the transwomen who litter twitter profiles like yours and other politicians with supportive messages and thanks for standing up for their rights. I don't here, as I think they're confused and have issues, and I don't want to point fingers towards these people. But if you, or your political supporters, scrolled down, even a couple of months, on their profiles, 9 out of 10 times you would find images of penises 'trapped' in fishnet tights, selfies of thighs and 'girls' boots, and discussions that I'm pretty sure don't point to 'most discriminated' against, but playing out fetishes of what a woman means.

A great proportion of the people you think you are supporting are NOT the sort of people you think you are supporting.)

There's some small comfort to be had that JG did at least interrupt the LibDem candidate to point out that the violence that trans people do face is from men and NOT women.

Small comfort indeed.

It's in the f#*king name WOMAN'S hour.

I thought Laura Pidcock came across as quite sensible. She said labour would protect the single sex exceptions and that they would analyse the GRA consultation responses as the 'next step'.

But it's also there in black and white in their manifesto that they are committed to reforming the GRA to introduce self ID. So I don't know why they're bothering about the consultation if they've already made their minds up.

Or maybe Brexit Party?!

This is doing my head in. I have to vote for a party i hate because the others don't appear to know or care what a woman is. I can't even

Really useful to be able to read through it pencils.

So, LibDems a complete shitshow (such a shame, Sarah)

Labour, vaguely encouraging. Stressing the manifesto and need to examine consultation responses, but not holding my breath.

SNP - woke - Equality Act alarm.

Brexit - won't get a single seat so irrelevant.

Conservative - we already know they will kick self ID down the road, but imo will harm women in other ways.

JG - confirmed t**f imo.

pombear I completely agree. BBC Woman's Hour are absolutely terrified of giving any significant air time to this issue.

Genuinely the biggest issue facing women in a generation. All women. And they dare not touch it. I don't say this lightly but they are an absolute disgrace. And we will remember this.

Looks like I'm voting Tory then

Pencils