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

Speaking well done!

My kneejerk reaction on listening was the familiar sadness that strong, political women seem unable to speak with any coherence about this issue. And mostly have stick to centering men who identify with women, not women (female sex).

My second kneejerk reaction was 'fucking hell, the only woman who could speak coherently and acknowledge properly the conflict of needs was the Brexit contender' - though my guess is that party is the least likely of parties to have been targeted by the Denton-report crew.

After my kneejerk reactions, I've thought a bit more.

Yet again, this morning's programme has highlighted

• the obvious fear at R4 Women's Hour of focusing on this issue too much.

The subject is more often included now, given the amount of women talking about it, but it's very often rushed. This programme was focused on 'how the election manifestos might impact women'. And then they spent time on the environment (both sexes), (Brexit, both sexes, without much reference to women in particular) etc. And then, a question that is very, very specficially around women (women as a sex, not a gender). 1 or 2 minutes each - soundbites, no in depth discussion.

The most insulting comment was around 'we need to turn this around' to re-focus the question about men who identify as women (I think this was Sarah, but I may be wrong).

The whole discussion for the last couple of years has been about men who identify as women, their needs, their rights, their wants.

Why does the caller have to suddenly flip it right back again to these people? Where are women (sex, not gender) in this discussion. Why do we need to flip it always back to the men?

Speaking

I'd vote for you!

Thank you Pencils.

Congratulations, Speaking. Thank you.

Jane Garvey - presenter
Penny - listener calling in

Helen Whately - Conservative
Laura Pidcock - Labour
Sarah Wollaston - Liberal Democrat
Deidre Brock - Scottish National Party
Belinda de Lucy - Brexit Party

[1:21:21]

JG: ... Penny is in Surrey with another question for everybody. Penny, good morning to you.

P: Good morning ...

JG: Yes.

P: One of the biggest social shifts in a generation is taking place, with almost no political discussion, because all the major parties - tory, labour, libdem, SNP, greens ... have largely surrendered to one side of the argument before the public debate has even begun. This is about gender self-ID and ...

JG: Can I ask you to be really brief, Penny? What's the question?

P: The question is ... My question is, under the proposed reforms to the gender recognition act, which all parties support, which would allow a man to legally become a woman simply by filling in a form, with no hormones or surgery or doctors' certificates required ...

JG: Yep ...

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

JG: Right ...

P: ... from ...

JG: Thank you very much. I think that's it, in a nutshell. We've got very little time, so can I ask for a reaction from everybody? Sarah Wollaston -

SW: Well, I think there has been an extraordinary level of hostility and, I think, discrimination against the trans community, and I'm very proud that the Liberal Democrats are going to actually reverse that. And if we talk about attacks on other people, actually it's transgender people who are among the most vulnerable to being attacked themselves. And so I think ...

JG: But what about the protection of women only spaces?

SW: Of course, I think that - that is - is a - is - is important that that is recognised, for example within our prisons and so forth. But in practice, the number of people who would want to identify for another gender, if that wasn't genuinely the case, is relatively small. So I think that there is ...

JG: So in short, the LibDems support self-ID?

SW: I think it is. I mean, why should somebody who identifies by another gender be forced to undergo humiliating medical tests and reports? And I think that we should be also looking at in practice, the level of hostility and aggression and attacks that have taken place on transgender people.

JG: Right. I mean it is worth saying, those attacks come from men, not from women.

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.

JG: OK. That's the LibDem view there, and Laura Pidcock -

LP: To answer the question directly, we have said, and it's in black and white in our manifesto, that we will protect the single sex exemptions on spaces. And I think it's about bringing some clarity on what is a very kind of messy situation in people's minds, so that we would uphold those single sex spaces. I think what we have to do, however, and Helen from the tories will kind of confirm this, in that the consultation on the GRA ...

JG: That's the Gender Recognition Act?

LP: Gender Recognition Act - there were thousands and thousands and thousands of responses and nothing has been done with those. There's been no analysis of those responses and I think the next step, whoever gets into government, and we are saying we would do this, is to analyse those thousands of contributions on the GRA.

JG: OK. Helen -

HW: So, clearly it's a really difficult issue. I'm sure it's been discussed quite a lot on this programme on previous days, but we don't want to see anyone discriminated against for their gender, but we do recognise and want to protect single sex spaces.

JG: Belinda -

BdL: I have huge sympathy for those going through gender dysphoria and that are living in a body that they don't feel they can identify with. I really do, but I also think this is a huge conversation, where women need to be involved in it far, far more. I think a [self identification?] can be seen to be reducing biological sex to quite an insignificance and that needs to be talked about. Also, the impact this will have on data and statistics. You know, if you identify as a woman, just - even if you - well, if you're biologically male - look like a man, dress like a man, act like a man - but you claim that you're a woman, and then for some reason commit a crime, how will that affect women's statistics in crime? Will suddenly - you know, you've got to understand the consequences and the significance of redefining what is a woman and what is a man. And I do think women organisations need to be part of the discussion and not hounded out. I think there's quite an intolerance and a ...

JG: Well, yes ...

BdL: ... authoritarian sort of ...

JG: I just ...

BdL: Yup.

JG: Thank you very much. Deidre, in Edinburgh -

DB: Yes, it's a shame there's so little time left to discuss this unfortunately because it's a very complex area ...

JG: You've got a good minute.

DB: Right, OK. Listen, we - I think - I mean, there's such a lot of heat around this discussion. And all of these issues really need to be considered with a lot of care, very openly, thoughtfully and respectfully. We need to ensure that the rights that have been very hard won, for both trans people and women, are maintained, and that we build upon the progress we've made there. So, I've heard directly from trans - young trans people in particular, of the fears they face, so for us, the GRA act that - the draft bill that we are introducing early next year - that's about ensuring that all young people have access to support from a trusted adult. And then we're also, of course, very much aware of the concerns that many people have about changing the current process. And the Scottish Government does have a - has a duty to address that. But the Equality Act is nearly a decade old now. It's clear that where it is proportionate and justifiable there can be exclusions from certain single sex services, and that applies in cases even when a trans person has legal recognition.

Sorry I composed that reply an hour or so ago and got distracted

Well done Speaking!

Thank you Speaking.

What a disappointment Sarah Wollaston is. I so like her on other issues. She was never really a Tory but just like Phillip Lee I can't understand how these medical people can suspend rational thought so blithely. The cognitive dissonance must be massive.

Sarah kept trotting out how much more at risk trans people are than your common or garden woman.

NO SARAH. THAT IS NOT TRUE AND THERE IS NO BASIS IN FACT FOR SUCH A CLAIM

In fact women are at greater risk from male violence including sexual violence than transwomen. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has thought about it for even a nanosecond. Most men who wish to sexually assault women (a) aren't looking for a cock and (b) are less likely to pick on someone their own size than someone smaller and weaker.

Yella I agree. It would be great if we could put something together regarding violence and abuse of trans people and the violence and abuse suffered by women. I know there's the channel 4 fact checker on the murder of trans people, and Michael Biggs' examination of claims of suicide in children who wish to transition and some dodgy Stonewall studies. What else is out there|?

Speaking thank you for phoning in. You were being rushed, but got your question across very calmly and clearly.

Can you imagine for one moment, a Lib Dem telling a transwoman that they would be fine accessing a facility relating to their birth sex, because bad things 'almost never happen'?!

The bloody audacity of them dismissing women with this.

If everything is violence, and if you're continually on the look-out for it, then it's everywhere.

I'd really like to see this rock solid evidence for all the terrible violence against trans people. Because I've looked and looked and I can't find it. I'm genuinely concerned to hear there is such a huge and catastrophic tide of violent hatred and crime against trans people, upon which laws are being overhauled. But where is it?

I can see:

• Daily headlines about torture, death and violence inflicted upon women with named people, tragic events in great detail and horrifying statistics.
• Daily news about women's rights being rolled back on a global scale in policy and protocol and law

• MeToo
• Impact of Brexit forecasts re female population proportionately suffering more in most areas, economic, political, social etc
• Rape conviction rates v reported 1 in 4 women being assaulted
• Online bullying and attacks against women in public positions evidenced on every platform

etc etc etc

Where are all the relevant trans statistics, data and evidence for this reported violent epidemic? There seems to be a gap in my knowledge here.

Well done for getting in with a question even though they didn't enable you to present it properly, or give it enough time, or elicit anything useful from the panel.

We've got to keep going on about this.

I'm increasingly terrified of a Labour/Lib Dem/Green coalition.

Delurking very briefly to say the caller was me.

Thank you to all the intelligent, thoughtful women whose posts on these boards helped me form my views over the last few months and frame my question today. Some aspects of the debate I feel more strongly about than others but the fundamental issue for me is that it must be discussed openly in the political arena.

I was gobsmacked, and not a little nervous, when they rang back to say they wanted me to put my question live. I hoped to refer specifically to prisons, hospital wards, changing rooms etc but, as you heard, got cut off as they rushed to get answers in before the end of the programme.

It was really very depressing to hear the LibDem completely ignore my question as to how they are going to resolve this conflict of rights. She ducked behind a whole bingo card of oft-repeated mantras - hostility and discrimination, attacks on the most vulnerable, any problems 'will almost never happen'. And continued to wave her Big Bingo Card of Mantras even when Jane Garvey tried to pin her down again with ' but what about WOMEN?!'

It's a resounding 'no' from me, Dr Wollaston. And I'm a lifelong LibDem voter and Remainer. You have completely exposed your party as unfit for political responsibility. Until you can acknowledge there are conflicting rights and needs which must be discussed and resolved in a careful, grown-up fashion you don't deserve my vote.

Just listened again, actually the SNP did affirm (albeit in a vague woolly way) that the EA exemptions were important - just talked a bit vaguely about it being a decade old (so what?!), and didn't commit to an answer either way or address the actual question.

LD also talking about how it's only a few insignificant numbers blah blah (cos of course it doesn't really matter if it's only one rapist in a women's prison does it?). And going on about violence towards trans people... which, as at least Jane Garvey pointed out, doesn't come from women!

"we need to flip this around and think about the trans people".

Why?
Why not listen to women's concerns for once?
Why do you want men to be able to claim that they are women - why is that a priority?

The removal of sex as a recognised characteristic has been the goal of trans privileges activists since day one. Any 'updating' of the EA has to be spelled out clearly by the parties proposing it, because they might well mean replacing 'sex' with 'gender identity'. Stonewall wants it, so it's got to be a progressive thing to do, right? Right?
Muppets.

These MPs who have joined Lib Dems in recent months would have been better off joining / staying in Change UK or whatever it's called these days. The Lib Dems' genderist policies make them all sound a bit unhinged.

BBC R4 Chickens Hour

Hello, chicken on the line. The chickens are concerned that Lib Dem proposals to protect some foxes, actually allow all the foxes into the hen house and, although we like foxes generally speaking, we might need to think of an alternative solution? What do you think?

LD: Well let's turn this around and look at how many sad foxes are being chased around the place. It's awful for some foxes, they are suffering horribly and need to be kept safe. This is not about chickens. The chickens need to shush and let all the foxes in and stop being MEAN.

Oh look, we've run out of time! Don't worry chickens, at least you've been heard.

Thanks, Michelle, good points. I think we need to fight for the EA, and the repeal of the GRA.

Yes, Lib Dem response made me really really annoyed. The saying we need to turn it around bit and look at things from the trans perspective.

The bloody Lib Dem woman was inexcusably awful. Totally unwilling to even acknowledge the concerns.

It was a completely nonsense answer.

The only half decent response appeared to be from Helen someone?? Conservative MP. She did at least recognise the concerns were real and should be discussed.

couldn't believe the Lib Dem woman (Sarah Wollaston? Adoctor?!)'s inability to even speak about women, and just constantly said, on repeat, "we need to flip this around and think about the trans people".

Appalling

I couldn't believe the Lib Dem woman (Sarah Wollaston? Adoctor?!)'s inability to even speak about women, and just constantly said, on repeat, "we need to flip this around and think about the trans people".

The question was about WOMEN, Sarah. You're on WOMEN'S Hour. Can you manage to think about this issue from the perspective of 50% of the population, rather than 0.5% of males?

Fuck Sake.