It was not conscious. I have always asserted that I would use preferred pronouns to be 'polite' but when the time came, my tongue rebelled.

You were brilliant @Spero and you were as polite as could be.

I can do pronouns myself, MumsNet has been good practice for me. I can't guarantee to get them right all the time in real time, but then I have mild aphasia so saying the name all the time would mess me up too.

I am concerned to note that I am now accused of 'disguised hate speech' and 'degendering' for using Robin's name!

Well there we go, anything that isn't exactly what our opponents want, makes us bad people.

"Degendering" used to be known as "gender neutral" or "non-sexist" language and it used to be a good thing, but people refused to do it because it was too much effort. And degendering is still a good thing in (self-identified) progressive circles if it's a "person with a cervix".

And this

I suppose there are two superficially similar but in terms of deeper meaning quite different versions of that sort of story:

1. like all 'gender affirming surgery', getting your voice 'done' doesn't really give you exactly what the other sex has, only a crude carbon copy with multiple risks attached, if your voice is the key tool of your profession then why risk it?

2. faced with a choice of presenting as male or female, in this regard it's advantageous to present as male.

RMW talking about saving children from the horrors of puberty while choosing to still take full advantage of one of the legacies of male puberty puts me in mind of an even greater hypocrisy from US Assistant Secretary for Health R Levine.

Levine said both that life for Levine without the children Levine fathered was unimaginable, and that children/adolescents who now identify as trans should be given medical treatments that would prevent puberty and thus prevent them from ever having children of their own as adults. And both these things were said in the same interview.

The doublethink really is quite extraordinary.

I listened to the clip while doing something else and had no trouble identifying when the woman was speaking and when the transwoman was speaking.

This

So boring, though, the fight for the rights of boring uterus people, isn’t it? Who can possibly be expected to maintain interest in that, when there are shiny new gender change penis people’s rights to campaign for!

On a serious note, sorry you had all those experiences though.

Correct.

If you are born male, you simply cannot go through any other puberty but a male puberty. This is what needs to be told loud and clear to any child who is being encouraged to go down that route. I am sorry that Robin has been denied the opportunity to have the kind of voice Robin would have preferred. I have been denied the opportunity to live as an able bodied person. Sometimes, we just have to suck it up. Regardless, we have no rights to demand that others are simply bit players on the stage of our own particular fantasies.

Well said, spero. The lying to children is unconscionable.

And as I said above, Robin is the one who has denied Robin the opportunity to have a more feminine voice, because Robin recognises the clear advantages to a lawyer of having a male voice - not just in terms of volume and carrying power but also, crucially, of socially ascribed authority.

I'm pretty sure I have read - possibly even on this board - RMW saying that RMW deliberately retained RMW's male voice because it was advantageous in the courtroom.

Full disclosure here, I was food prepping whilst listening to this clip, but it did seem that Robin received more deference than Sarah.
Otherwise it was wonderful to listen to a debate without having to use earplugs and lipread.
All hail to GB news for this, or perhaps more specifically Andrew Doyle.
I used to think relying on anyone other than the BBC and The Guardian for excellent journalism was questionable. Those days are gone.

Massive hypocrisy from RMW then as RMW is on record as saying it was a deliberate choice not to have the feminising voice surgery that is available, in order to retain all the advantages (all the advantages, as Helleofabore pointed out upthread) of a male voice in the exercise of RMW’s lucrative and prestigious profession.

Many of us have been denied jobs and promotions because we were women. We didn't need to change reality or lie about ourselves though to fight it, we just did our jobs and proved that we could do those jobs elsewhere and the original employers were denied our expertise.

I was once laughed at in the canteen of the Royal College of Art for applying for a job heading up the section that was regarding metalwork [cannot remember the job title]. A bloke came and sat by me as I had a pre-interview coffee and said 'are you the women that applied for the job'. I said yes and he laughed as he told me 'nobody could believe a woman applied and they're all in there waiting for you'. There were 5 interviewers. I had no chance.

I once covered a role when a man left when I was in construction and wasn't considered for the job. I asked the boss why not and he said 'we need a man, we have to be able to talk to clients'. I said I was talking to clients as I had been covering the job and covering it well. He shrugged.

Being denied a job because we are women and might go off on maternity is still very much an issue. Nobody seems to be bending reality for us though.

Sounds amazing, the corner where my tree was sat, still looks very empty.

I bought a pack of wee robins and I hide them round the living room for people to find, the kids, visitors, the guy who came to fix the boiler...you get the idea.

I'm usually still finding them come Easter.

I sympathise with Sarah's predicament. I find it impossible to use preferred pronouns on this board. At least I have distance and time to compose my sentence. I'd be merrily misgendering away were it not for the monitors. I think irl, I'd wind up sounding even more like a gibbering idiot...or I'd crack my jaw. Mental and verbal whiplash, disconnect between what you know, can see, can hear and what you 'know' you should say.

RW's voice is quite something, what I'd assume to be RW's reasons for keeping it are, I suppose, fairly depressing - that kind of voice, that of an upper middle class, middle aged, man, is 'the voice of authority' in this country, it's the one that commands the most respect and credibility, clearly advantageous for a barrister.

I once saw a lecture by RW which included a depressing story about how RW was basically denied a job on account of being trans. Putting an end to that sort of thing strikes me as very much 'the good fight' from a 'trans lobby' perspective, completely distinct from instances were trans and female interests come into conflict.

Just a reminder of the petition to update the Equality Act to make clear that ‘sex’ means biological sex,
⬇️
www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4668426-petition-update-the-equality-act-to-make-clear-the-characteristic-sex-is-biological-sex?page=1

@IcakedefargeIam You are the gift that just keeps on giving

I'm not good at picturing things in my head, but that oh, the image .

I used to have Christmas santa hat fairy lights years ago that hung over the mirror and mantlepiece (yes it was as classy as it sounds). I'm imaging the same scene but with little perfect replica Robin fairy lights😶instead of the hats.

It's beautiful. You get an extra large slice for that.

🍰

Id comment but I got deleted last time I mentioned anything to do with voi🤐

I think we are very lucky to have Andrew Doyle. He is very good at bringing out the essential points in a debate and I hope Robin and other trans people will agree and accept that he is genuine in his desire to hear all sides of an argument and provide a platform for robust but respectful free speech.

@spero you were magnificent in that interview & your response here is magnificent, in your very calm rational & understated way.

I sympathise with your tongue's rebellion. I used to be OK about using preferred cross-sex pronouns, but as the TRAs/MRAs have become more vociferous, I have become less kind.

You were also so, so patient in the face of the mansplaining to you as if you were an ignoramus on these matters. And the constant changing the subject or topic, and not answering the questions put (the 'mad women' question was only one of several). I note that while you clearly and unreservedly apologised for your comment about Robin White's voice, you did not receive even an acknowledgement that calling women "mad" is the very reverse of respectful.

It did make me wonder, yet again, in general terms why men who seem so to despise us want to be us.

(And I'm jealous of you meeting Andrew Doyle - he is my current embarrassing crush).

I find it hard to believe that there is any good faith coming from TRAs & their ilk when they advocate NOT to exclude convicted rapists or child abusers from womens prisons or from having their bit of paper to say they think they are not a man.

Surely, if there is such a thing as a genuine man who thinks he is not a man, then, that man would also be at risk from the convicted criminal who harms those who are women?

Why do the rights of those who commit rape & murder against women matter more than those women or of children?

Nobody who has a shred of decency should be insisting rapists get the right to a false identity & the surrounding safeguarding issues where working with children requires the good faith of a convicted child molester to disclose his name change.

It was not conscious. I have always asserted that I would use preferred pronouns to be 'polite' but when the time came, my tongue rebelled. I simply could not refer to 'she' and 'her' with regard to someone who presents as masculine. I don't think this is about bigotry, I think it is about how my brain is wired to understand and process language. I accept that 'gratuitous and indiscriminate' 'misgendering' as per Forstater EAT judgment ought to be avoided but I am concerned to note that I am now accused of 'disguised hate speech' and 'degendering' for using Robin's name!

It seems that women can't win.

It also seems to me that politeness and consideration cut both ways. If Robin had been able to concede that it was wrong to call women 'completely mad' who argue that there is a tension between the rights of women and the rights of men to be called women, then possibly I would have made more of an effort to afford Robin the pronouns Robin wants.

But it was very disappointing to see that a straightforward question did not received the courtesy of a straightforward response. This continued demonisation of women as 'mad' and 'hateful' for raising arguments now confirmed as legitimate by Lord Hope, the EHRC, the UK government etc etc etc has got to stop. I don't think anyone has any legitimacy demanding preferred pronouns when they are prepared to be in denial about the legitimacy of women's concerns.

But I continue to applaud Robin for attending - I have noted with some horror and disgust the really revolting comments many have made on line about Robin's appearance. No one should have to be subjected to that and it does 'our side' no credit. But the issue is and remains for me that Robin presents as a man, that is what I see and hear. The only solution that Robin offered is to ensure that children are saved from this by 'going through the right puberty'.

If you are born male, you simply cannot go through any other puberty but a male puberty. This is what needs to be told loud and clear to any child who is being encouraged to go down that route. I am sorry that Robin has been denied the opportunity to have the kind of voice Robin would have preferred. I have been denied the opportunity to live as an able bodied person. Sometimes, we just have to suck it up. Regardless, we have no rights to demand that others are simply bit players on the stage of our own particular fantasies.

Well, I certainly grew into a kick arse and brave woman so not all bad.....

And I work in a school...... 😉

although sometimes there were more Robins than a Christmas mantlepiece

😆

rabbitwoman · Today 10:21
rabbitwoman, what a brave little girl you had to be. What happened to you was particularly awful. 💐