R4 now Tuesday 7.51 am

I had family who died at Hillsborough and family who survived but wished they didn't. I'm really fucking angry that dick is comparing the 2 things. If anyone is on Twitter can you please go and tell them how offensive this is to those who died and the survivors

I met the parents of one of the young men who died on a train. They were travelling everyday to attend the Coroner's Inquest at that point. It's decades on and I've never forgotten the grief that pervaded every part of them and their horror at their boy's last few minutes. It was all the more aggravated by the rapid spinning of lies in the media about the fans and the cause of the crush.

It's abhorrent for people to appropriate that shameful episode that has left such a deep wound for cities and families.

There is a case of a young female person who presented as male (but wasn't trans, I'm not sure of all the details) who was convicted of sex by deception after using adult toys on their young, female partner who believed she was in a heterosexual relationship. It was all very odd, and murky.

I believe there were several such cases. Here is a (slightly fawning) review of a book by Alex Sharpe, a TRA law professor, about this subject. I've bolded the bit which explains Sharpe's view in simple terms.

Against this background Sharpe’s analysis, in which queer and gender non-conforming identities are acknowledged and centered, provides a much-needed counterpoint. By examining McNally through the lens of queer theory, Sharpe is able to shift the perspective on this and other such cases, making explicit the cultural and ideological assumptions underwriting the decisions reached. Her position is that the conceptual coherence of gender identity fraud relies on the foundational premise that the categories of sex and gender are ontological truths which may be uncovered and compared to a defendant’s self-representation; if Justine McNally’s gender presentation is conceived not as pretense but as a genuine expression of male identity,then there is no deception for which to answer. In framing McNally’s self-representation as a deception, therefore, the court both assumes and reinforces “the naturalness and stability of the categories of sex, gender and heterosexuality” (7). To exist outside of such categorisation becomes an inherently deceptive act, creating a situation in which “fixed identities are legally required”:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11572-020-09540-x

Well, NK did compare gc views to anti-semitic views. In black and white
Also, Stonewall have/had as their agenda to remove rights to single sex spaces. In black and white

Yes, at that point it was a bit like a Python sketch:
‘NK likened GC views to anti-Semitic views’
‘No she didn’t’
‘Stonewall want to remove exemptions in the EA, like access to single sex spaces’
‘No they don’t’
‘This isn’t a debate this is just contradiction!’
‘No it isn’t.......’

[quote nauticant]Looking at twitter the response seems to be split 3 ways, "debate, yay!", "woke stuff, yawn!", and "I can't believe how transphobic this is, Ben is a hero". For an example of the last of those:

twitter.com/SlauHaus/status/1402160037309693957[/quote]
I had family who died at Hillsborough and family who survived but wished they didn't. I'm really fucking angry that dick is comparing the 2 things. If anyone is on Twitter can you please go and tell them how offensive this is to those who died and the survivors

It's frustrating that the issues always seem to get skirted around, too.

It's quite true that Stonewall were campaigning to remove the single six exceptions. But if Cohen says that's not the case, then the question should be so do you agree with single sex exceptions in that case? And if he says it depends, then let's hear under what circumstances he thinks they are acceptable.

Let's get to the nitty-gritty. Under what what conditions does he think that women's consent and boundaries need to be respected, if any.

Because, as we've seen on here, when women just say no, you have two options. You either agree, or you disagree.

Let's hear it.

The sex by deception is a massive red flag. Massive. I'm not even sure you could call it a flag, it is an entire bolt of red fabric flapping off the top of a skyscraper.

I have had this conversation with some of my colleagues - we are HCPs. According to them, post op transwomen should not have to disclose their gender status because that is their private medical business and nobody's business. "but if their sexual partner is male and heterosexual and believes this is sex with a female person then the new sexual partner is not engaging in the heterosexual activity they consented to. That is a crime, his sexuality deserves the same respect as anyone else's" This got me called a transphobe and it all got a bit tricky at work for a while.

There is a case of a young female person who presented as male (but wasn't trans, I'm not sure of all the details) who was convicted of sex by deception after using adult toys on their young, female partner who believed she was in a heterosexual relationship. It was all very odd, and murky.

Sex by deception is a massive problem for the people who have the surgery. Even after that level of change they are still not of the opposite sex, it must be very confronting.

to be fair, I would probably interview worse

Well tbh, it's always going to be harder if someone is coming from a position of bad faith and no logic. All that's left is to call people names and try to derail the interview. Whereas obviously from the position of safeguards for women and children, it's far easier. There are proven facts and logic with this position. The activist position has neither. 🤷

Shame the BBC didn't pull him up on the lies about single sex spaces. I also want interviews to start talking about the sex by deception issue

I think Ranty Ben had gibbered away for so long that they just didn't have the time.

The idiot even started with a long propaganda statement when it was obvious that there were time constraints.

They may not have had much time, but there was plenty of rope, and they handed it to Ben . . .

"Self ID is simply about paperwork"

If it’s just paperwork what is the point?

That comment really got me , if it’s just paperwork why is he making such a fuss. It’s a typical male put down . Women are; ‘making a fuss about nothing’ or they ‘don’t understand’ . I understand perfectly well BC and it’s not about paperwork

That is what I was thinking. The reason there were no trans voices is because he was presuming to take their place.

To be fair, I expect any SW-friendly trans person would be pursuing #nodebate in line with SW and I doubt he'd have countenanced putting forward somebody not known to be SW-approved.

"Self ID is simply about paperwork" BC.

Not for the women in Edinburgh who need access to a refuge, mate. Let's find out what women, who are vulnerable, think? Let's ask them whether self ID is paperwork or the consequences of self ID is a gross invasion of women's safety, privacy and dignity.

The weird thing was that the conversation with Simon Fanshawe was pretty tame in tone and then Justin turned to BC and it was like a Rottweiler let of a lead , he didn’t even wait to be asked a question he just exploded with a stream of irrelevant nonsense . I thought Justin Webb did a good job and I rarely listen to the Today programme now , dh put it on because he got up early to actually go into the office .

The only thing that would have made that perfect was if LGB Alliance had been on.

I enjoyed that so much. Went off Times radio when they had BC on talking about this stuff with no comeback from Matt Wattsisface a few months ago. That was perfect.

Good interviewers ask testing questions and good interviewees make a cogent, coherent case for their point of view. Ben couldn't even answer the opening question. As for Justin being 'spoken to' within the BBC this will, I am sure, be 'Oh God you had a right one this morning didn't you Justin'

to be fair, I would probably interview worse....

He ran out of feet to shoot himself in.

Just listened. That tantrum was glorious. Well done Justin!

Well, just listened. Reminds me of the days of trying to converse with toddlers. Perhaps BC was feeling hangry

Kathy Burke saying that Benjamin Cohen “handled it well” on Twitter. was she listening to the same interview??? I’m GC (or “transphobic!” as BC would scream) and still feel for the sake of a reasoned and nuanced debate (which is what is needed as we know) Trans people deserve better representation than his ridiculous tantrumming.