Gender Wars - Channel 4 - 10pm tonight

Dad very proud of himself.

https://twitter.com/robertpossnett1/status/1663616642956374018

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/may/30/gender-wars-review-youd-need-hundreds-more-of-these-shows-to-truly-address-the-issues-around-trans-rights

Got it.

Frankly I'd be more than happy for Whittle's entire career of activism to be scrutinised. On the telly.

I thought the programme was extremely sympathetic to the participants who identified as transgender. They were given the opportunity to set out their concerns, thoughts, feelings and wishes. They weren’t challenged on any of the statements or assertions they made. There was barely any focus on women’s rights or the impact on women. There was an extended sequence on political support for TWAW/TWAM in Norwich.

The overall editorial ‘message’, such as it was, was that people should come together, talk to each other, and live in harmony - with the choir sequence deployed to add an unspoken appeal to emotion to that effect.

It’s surprising that Whittle et al find the programme so objectionable.

Reflecting on why, two points strike me. First. The participants who identified as transgender outnumbered those explaining the women’s rights/ gender critical viewpoint. Twice as many, I think. If there are nine voices to be heard from one side and three from another, then it’s hardly surprising if not all of those nine individuals get the same amount of air time as an individual who is one of the group of three. There was a sense from Whittle’s tweet/ blog statement of an expectation of being owed the same amount of air time as Kathleen Stock. I would have expected a more realistic understanding of how a TV programme is likely to work from someone with Whittle’s very successful track record of behind the scenes campaigning to influence the media approach to coverage of individuals who identify as transgender. A person who has lost their job and been subjected to protests and demonstrations very recently is going to be the ‘main character’, as it were, of the tv programme. A person whose contribution was in the past or went under the radar won’t be.

Secondly, it seems to me that the fundamental objection to the programme, from those complaining about it, is that it featured Kathleen Stock. They wanted her cancelled. They wanted her silenced. And there she is: on TV, being heard. That’s what’s causing the rage.

Well as someone who agrees with you guys and I do read this section, but don't know as much as you guys probably do, I think it was a really good programme.
I think it's possibly(?) The best programme getting out these issues onto Tele.
Yes I'm sure from what you're saying there's other things they didn't go into but I think it's really good they showed the programme with these viewpoints. (The viewpoints we all agree with)
I learnt things I didn't know.
I'm glad it was shown.
And yes his cats were adorable ♥️

Good point made on twitter:
Julie fucking Marshall The Shrill @DarcyWAHF
·
#GenderWars a fair program especially for middle class voices. It would have been great to hear from women prisoners and how they feel having rapists and violent men in their prisons. Instead we have spoilt middle class men in their kitchen talking of their faux oppression

@IcakethereforeIam In his long blog post of objections to the programme Whittle mentions the difficulty of getting a job during 'an astonishing career'.

@Datun 'They do not reference my 50 years of experience, or that I am an expert...I do not get to do [what KS does], to tell about my life as an academic...The film does not show my knowledge and expertise' etc.

Ah, that makes more sense now!

@datun that's how I interpreted it!

In case I wasn't clear, it was Whittle who seemed to want the death of that poor child included, not me. But I didn't intend to derail the thread, sorry.

1 in 4 women and girls experience sexual assault. Women are killed by their male partners every day.

I am certain everyone of those women was told by her abuser that she was wrong. Wrong to say no to sex, wrong to object to being hit, strangled, burnt or killed. Wrong when she questioned why she has no access to family money. Wrong to question why she couldn't leave the house when she wanted, or see who she wanted.

I am not wrong when I stand up for women's rights.

I do NOT believe all men are rapists or abusers. But I do believe that due to the physical size, and strength, advantage that most men have over most women, that we need the protection that woman only spaces offer.

Being told by a man that he is a woman is massively dangerous to women and girls. It undermines our instincts, stops us from questioning his presence, and ultimately makes it far easier for any male rapist or abuser to use access to women only spaces to target a women or girl.

I don't think it's clear or in the public domain yet if Brianna's death was [redacted]

As I said, please don't speculate as to the possible motives for Brianna's alleged murder. We are talking about two legal minors being charged with the murder of a third minor. There will be a a jury trial, it's going to be traumatic for the defendants (who we still presume to be innocent at this stage) and Brianna's family. It's really important that this trial is done correctly by the book and that there is no room to claim that the jury was prejudiced by what they've read on Mumsnet or indeed anywhere else.

The students were an own goal. Kass's performance at the union debate a massive own goal. Male privilege with extra bonus pronouns. Hi students! The world's a much more interesting place than your personal relationship with sex stereotypes. PS my generation and my parents generation had this great idea, we could ditch the stereotypes and just relate to people as people where their biology isn't relevant.

The rest of them, great, now we're agreed that respectful debate is a good idea, can we get the adults together and actually have one. Would love to hear one of KatyJon and Linda's discussions. Or Kathleen Stock and anyone really.

Dennis Kavanagh

Dennis Noel Kavanagh on Twitter: "What we learned from Channel 4 "The Gender Wars" My not entirely serious take on what we learned is this: 1/ Two trans men in Norwich spend an awful lot of time burying SOMETHING on an allotment and have a sofa slightly too small for them. t.co/VWHR9Qx35Q" / Twitter

The alleged murder of Brianna Ghey is, as you say, sub judice. Speculation about any aspect of it, including possible motives of alleged perpetrators, could compromise the upcoming jury trial.

The recent events in a Southampton Starbucks would have made an interesting inclusion.

TRAs are complaining that Kathleen Stock's arguments weren't analysed more. For once I agree when them! https://twitter.com/jamiehowarth0/status/1663672196248616960?t=vbPTPNtV1gUSKsS3TbB-BA&s=19

Also, that student in the flat said that he never even thought about gender or identities until he met people at university who told him about it.

I really think this is a fashion/phase for so many and once they get out into the real world it will be forgotten about.

A US Gallup poll found that roughly 21% of Generation Z — those born between 1997 and 2003 — identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or something other than heterosexual.

https://c-hit.org/2022/02/21/poll-21-of-generation-z-self-identify-as-lgbtq/#:~:text=The%20Gallup%20pollfound%20that%20roughly%2021%25%20of%20Generation,the%20gap%20gets%20even%20bigger%20among%20older%20generations.

When is he ever not?

Whittle can't be saying that they are equivalent to Kathleen stock?

@IcakethereforeIam yes, indeed. A BBC article from the past few days makes clear that the defendants cannot be named, and there are pre-trial issues that cannot be reported upon. In light of that, mentioning it in the documentary seems unwise.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-65722453

In addition, I don't think it's clear or in the public domain yet if Brianna's death was related to her being trans. A statement either way in the documentary could pose issues for the trial.

I think it's a shame Prof Whittle is so upset. I thought he came over well and his contributions were useful. There does, though, seem to be a tone of, "Me! Me! It should all have been about me!!" in his comments, which does seem typical in trans-people.

I've not seen it yet. But Whittle was complaining that no-one bothered about people protesting 'him', comparing that to how Doc Stock was treated. Said 'he' couldn't resign because there was no other job lined up. Does anyone know if this was true?

Also, annoyed that Brianna Grey wasn't mentioned. As that's an open case, which has yet to be tried, I understand why that was left out.

Tuesday ends in Y.

Damn, another firm for my boycott list.

The other thing that gets me, do those transmen who, I'm afraid to say, just come across as young lesbian women with quite a few issues, to me, do they understand AGP when they see it??

surely, they must encounter men with AGP. Do they genuinely see themselves the same? Two sides of the same coin?

We could make it thus! Maybe it is a huge group hangout in twitter. Where they keep all our accounts listed so we can find each other so much easier!!!

I don't understand the bit about how young people are now more fluid and breaking away from strict boundaries. It seems the opposite to me.

personally, I think they keep contradicting each other. NBs wanting to not look completely masculine or completely feminine is a sartorial choice. It's called personality. They've turned it into an 'identity. I don't see the difference except it's more special.

But transwomen claim that because they feel a certain way, or act a certain way, or want to look a certain way, they must be women. You're right. That's cementing the gender boxes, not busting them open.

The main thing that comes across to me is how they're all so tediously self-obsessed. It is truly remarkable.