Near unanimity about pronouns/EI on Radio 4 just now

The newspaper article talked about Izzard wanting she/pronouns from 2 years ago, but Izzard hasn't consistently been in "girl mode" (to use his words) all that time surely - isn't there a recent movie he is a man in?

Well done to TP. Of course we can call Eddie E a man. Things are getting a bit silly. If someone has done a full legal gener change under English (not Scottish) law, had the pe nis removed too and only ever goes out there as a woman I don't particularly mind calling them female but if people are chopping and changing and legally are still a man then it is ridiculous people arei n trouble for not using what people want.

Eg I hate insurance companies etc call me by my first name as I am not on first name terms with them. However I am not going to sue because they treat me casually and use the first name. I just suck it up and get on with it.

Given that cross dresser comes officially under the Trans Umbrella (according to Stonewall) then E is trans. When he is a in girl mode he must therefore BE a woman.

I'd love to think he is engaging in performance art to push this to the limit in order to demonstrate what this means in reality.

I don't think he is though.

Not respecting Eddie Izzard's preferred pronouns is perhaps the easiest resistance to gender woo.

He's been a self declared transvestite for decades, it's a massive cognitive leap for many to equate transvestite with transwomen (or whatever people's idea of what a TW is).

You can also point to the obvious fact that EI has been highly successful and at times a national treasure whilst being an out and proud transvestite. He's hardly been the victim of transphobia, he's been hugely accepted.

I don't think EI believes he is actually a woman? So on that basis being forced to use the female pronoun seems even more unrealistic. I would use it out of politeness only for someone who had a genuine belief that were a woman.

Oh, just to add, I do think TP has rethought some of his ideas. If you watch his film Things We Won't Say About Race That Are True he talks about some of them. And similarly in his interview on Triggernormatry.

One of the things where I've disagreed with him is that he considers that living racism in he UK refers mainly to groups that have been historically disadvantaged, and so still have disparities. So if your ethnic group arrived in the UK, and went into an industry that then failed, so your group has made a limited recovery as of yet, that is an example of systemic racism that should be addressed.

Certainly such things exist and deserve real attention, but I have never been able to see why it on;y applies to groups that are not white. To my mind this applies to lots of people of all ethnicities including some whose ancestors have been in the UK for 1000 years. And who might not be picked out as an identifiable "other" ethnicity at all.

I would vote for him for PM in a heartbeat, I don't think it would matter what party he was in.

@MagpiePi
How very dare you!

Phillips is himself the living embodiment of Identity Politics. I remember him saying that ' people who talk about the class struggle are in a 70s time warp'. Diversity was the only show in town.

I don't think that's fair at all. The people in Labour talking about only the class struggle at that time were stuck in the 70s. Most of that same part of Labour are the ones now pushing ID politics.

Phillips has always pushed back when the work and language of equality he pioneered started to be stolen by those interested in performing victimhood rather than doing anything about inequality.

He is (laughably) routinely accused of being right wing for talking about the complexities of gender, ethnicity, integration and disability rather than paroting the requisite drivel.

The EA has helped tens of thousands, it's not his fault it gets misrepresented.

That was the shortest discussion I've heard on R4. They were all too scared to speak so it shut down.

@BoreOfWhabylon

Derailing the thread, but your name has just made me laugh out loud. :D

I heard it too Gasp0de! The whole genderthing is now mainstream and the genie won't be going back into the bottle. The more people talk about it the more the sunlight streams in

He seems to think that the word, and the concept, transvestite, has been rebranded as transgender. Whereas, most people think that it's 'transsexual' that has been rebranded.

Very good point. There used to be two very distinct terms, that were pretty well understood. 'Transvestite' and 'transexual'.

These have now been collapsed into 'transgender'.

If there was ever such a thing as true trans, it's been completely traduced. I don't really give much credence to any of it.

This is why I don't have any truck with any of it.

I wouldn't mind so much, but Eddie Izzard is a self confessed transvestite. Which is a man who gets aroused by wearing women's clothes.

He seems to think that the word, and the concept, transvestite, has been rebranded as transgender. Whereas, most people think that it's 'transsexual' that has been rebranded.

Not that I disagree with him. But many people who are busy 'rebranding', will reconfigure the criteria too.

Transvestitism is an adult paraphilia. Transgender has been re-marketed as something you're probably born with. In order to distance the concept from a fetish.

And it's not just a question of free speech, that just sounds a lot more justifiable. People can say I disagree with it on the basis of free speech and being able to talk about reality, instead of I disagree with it because it's absolutely sexist to the hilt, and attracts predators and fetishists.

And if all else fails, since when has the definition of a woman been 'a man who...(fill in the blank)'

It was a risky move coming out as what we used to call a transvestite, and I felt quite proud of myself

www.bigissue.com/culture/eddie-izzard-i-reclaimed-word-transvestite/

I thought the guests sounded nervous too. Especially the first woman he asked whether she would call Izzard a woman. She mumbled , laughed and said something about free speech.

Phillips is himself the living embodiment of Identity Politics. I remember him saying that ' people who talk about the class struggle are in a 70s time warp'. Diversity was the only show in town.

I wonder if he has reconsidered these issues? Class has never been more relevant surely. But then , if there's a way to lose , Labour will seek it out.

Paddy very much put the women on the spot, and I am sure Kate and Sarah would have preferred not to answer. But well done them for being honest. Their response very much how most people feel nowadays - not wanting to say anything and get dragged into it and getting attacked by TRA, but ultimately with their feet on the ground.

I like Paddy, but if he had a bit more about him, he could have followed up those answers with a question about how The Sun would refer to Izzard. What does IPSO require?

Good that this was asked. There are so many useful idiots in politics fawning over men like E while failing to join up the dots about what's happening to children and women. They need to be forced to say out loud they don't care about safeguarding children and women's rights.

Trevor also made an excellent C4 documentary about political correctness which discussed trans issues.

'we're in a very strange place'
'it's not disrespectful to say there is such a thing as a woman'
'would you call [Eddie Izzard] [a woman']?'
'um ah wah um er'
'I'm with Rosie'

(paraphrasing slightly)

Sarah Sands and Kate Ferguson.

Thank you. Sarah Sands is someone I am familiar with.

I can’t believe the BBC are giving this nonsense airtime. Totally agree with Trevor and the people questioned…