BBC Question Time this week

[Spinsterf]

Have applied for an audience ticket. Apparently Justine Greening is on the panel. Any ideas for phrasing a question on trans issues as topically as possible to maximise chance of it getting onto the show?

It said to me that Lily Madigan was quick to identify 'hate speech' and accusations of violence against Linda Bellos who was simply responding to the notion that if she was attacked she would attack back

twitter.com/belloslinda?lang=en

Should male sex offenders who self-identify as female be allowed to transfer to a women's prison?
Like it

How about

"Should male sex offenders who self-identify as female be allowed to transfer to a women's prison?
And is it time for a free and open consultation to legally protect or remove sex-based rights, protections and privacy for good?"

To justine greening - would you be happy to be undressed in a ladies changing room with someone who claims to self id as a woman and still has his / her male genatalia which you can see as he/she is also undressed - as this is what self id will allow and no one can challenge that person without being potentially charged with transphobia. How do think that parents of teenage daughters feel about this scenario

I don’t have anything smart or pithy to add.

My question would be ‘what the fuck is going on???’ or ‘has the world gone mad?’

I don’t have anything smart or pithy to add.

My question would be ‘what the fuck is going on???’ or ‘has the world gone mad?’

yes, I think 'claims to self identify' is good, because it raises the question of what is entailed in self id, people may still be picturing some poor tortured soul, when it could equally be a cynical move to access vulnerable women

You won't be able to cover everything in a single question.

Greening is a tory so I'd focus on the stated tory policy of amending the GRA rather than Labour's AWS. Also if you go with AWS you risk it getting side-tracked into 'why do we have AWS anyway?'

I think using a topical example like that Marie bloke is an excellent idea and ask in light of that and similar cases is it wise to amend the GRA to self-ID.

Good luck!

I like that guardian. Encapsulates the f/ m element plus wider debate.

"Should a person with male genitalia convicted of sexual offences involving teenage girls be housed in a women's prison if they say they are transgender?"

I don't think "self identify" means anything to the public at large.

"If they say they are" does?

I think the word is ‘pretend’.

I was going to say just that very thing LangCleg.

it's not 'if they say they are transgender' though, it's 'if they say they are a woman'
the Dean person may well be transgender, but they aren't a woman

Both of the main parties assert their belief in equal opportunities and free speech. I believe that we all have the right to be treated with respect and peacefully. However when legitimate concerns are raised over the detrimental effect the GRA could have on women, a protected characteristic in EA, the conversation is closed and accusations of bigotry are thrown. Why is legislation being pushed in such a narrow minded, evasive and negative way?

Not concise sorry. There needs to be some intro to show the angle at which criticism s are being made though.

I think the real issue is the public is unaware of agp. I think that the idea that cross dressers who perform femininity as a form of sexual arousal and gratification are piggybacking on everyone's perceptions of transgender as weak and vulnerable. I would ask about marie and say given his case, are you going to let what we used to call cross dressers and transvestites claim transgenderism and claim they are literal women, calling anyone bigots who disagree.

Do the panel think that the 33 million females of the UK are aware that all political parties are in support of abolishing sex based protections from discrimination and sex based women's rights in law?

Do the panel think that the 33 million females of the country are discriminated against because they are recognisable as biologically female, or because they possess an invisible belief about their gender identity?
On which basis do the panel feel women and girls would prefer their rights to be protected - as the female biological sex, or as people who declare their inner conviction of a womanly identity?

If woman no longer means adult human female, as seems to be the position of all political parties, what should adult human females identify as now? How can one self identify as a woman, if there is no proposed definition of woman to identity WITH any more?
Do the panel think it wise to jeopardise existing, clearly defined legal sex based protections for a nation of women and girls, in favour of replacing them with an illogical circular concept which says a woman is anyone who calls themself a woman?

"Could the panel have a look through this thread on mn and tell me their thoughts"

It's a shame in a way that we have to think so carefully how to pitch a question that matters to so many as we know how easily it will be dismissed or avoided depending on the precise wording used.

I agree. Or to say "they declare themselves to be a woman". The term "declaration" is used in the Women and Equalities Committee Transgender Equality and so should be unobjectionable.

That's very clever when. Very difficult to answer without qualifying your reasons.

(Your second one particularly)

I think that question hits the nail on the head for me, when, but I fear it would be too easy for them to give the virtue-signalling answer that if the programme/studio contained only women and no transwomen they wouldn't consider women to be adequately represented either. And wait for applause from the floor.