Channel 4's Genderquake Debate is heavily criticised/ boycotted(?) by prominent transgender activists & allies .

[R0wantrees]

Transgender campaigners and organisations have released an open letter to Channel 4 criticising Genderquake, a season of programmes touted as an exploration of the gender debate, as "counterproductive".
Signees are particularly concerned about Genderquake: The Debate, a studio discussion hosted by Cathy Newman that promises to look at what gender means in 2018. It will discuss topics including: 'what defines our gender identity', 'how that affects our rights', 'should it be easier to change gender' and 'does gender matter'.

The letter, published by indy100 in full below, argues that the debate will give legitimacy to transphobia, prejudice and the notion that trans identities are up for discussion. This concern is presumably stoked by the presence of Australian-born academic and writer Germaine Greer on the panel, who has previously said transgender women "can't be women". continues...

"The letter is published in full below and has been signed by dozens of prominent transgender and non-binary activists and campaigners - and allies - alike, including Fox Fisher, Owl, Stephanie Hirst, Juno Roche, Travis Alabanza, Kate Llewellyn, Jack Monroe and India Willoughby."

www.indy100.com/article/genderquake-the-debate-transphobia-channel-4-open-letter-campaigners-germaine-greer-8341481

What a bloody farce.

I can kind of understand why other broadcasters are leaving this topic well alone. It is really hard to have a sensible debate.

Welcome bialystockandbloom, settle in for the long haul.

Fantastic job by Sarah in the face of so much opposition. But really what was the point of the audience? Could really feel their frustration bubbling with the total one-sided 'debate'. Gah!

Shouting penis was a ‘dick’ move.

To have a debate there has to be a balance of views and there obviously wasn’t. Well done Sarah Ditum, who I imagine is feeling a little dysphoric herself now.

Monroe definitely not the sharpest tool in the box, but also hugely unprofessional, which is is an issue given the amount of airtime they get. All of that breaking off to be ostentatiously upset by comments from the audience that weren't even picked up by the TV mic was just a cover for inarticulacy and lack of argument. The difference between that and SD having to fight to be heard was striking.

Well at least I got a bit more of my ‘centring female reproductive systems’ protest banner sewn. But other than that what a waste of time. Sarah Ditum did an excellent job though.

Who the hell is the handmaiden in red!! Could she shout down Sarah anymore when she was talking. What doesn't surprise is that the most airtime went to .... you guessed it the transwoMEN on the panel. Was an absolute joke from start to finish. I would also like to point out to Cathy that without women such as Germaine you wouldn't even be able to be presenting on tv you would be in the kitchen shutting the fuck up where some of the panel think you belong!

Wasn’t going to watch it. Might just tune in now!

bialystockandbloom welcome

bialystockandbloom Welcome to the mad house that is the GRA reform.

Having watched Ricky Gervais' latest show, I can't take Jenner seriously. Jenner supports Trump as well. Jenner is a bundle of contradictions and comes across as insincere. Bergdorff is just unpleasant and in the same league as India Willoughby.

I'm so pissed off and angry.
Newman is a sock puppet.
Shite journo.

I think it would be a shame if all criticism ended up focussed on Cathy Newman. This was taking place in a wider context and with a great deal of external pressures/
It seems a great shame not to have heard from so many significant voices in the audience... I presume there is a back story to this?

What everyone else said. I am sending my I ❤️ C4 badge back.

Watching on +1. Fuck me but Jenner is a boring bastard.

Cathy Newman deserves every ounce of criticism she gets. Dreadful host.

As it was a specially selected audience, I wonder of they were led to believe there would be a participatory element - seems a waste to have had them there. And probably frustrating for them (for those on all sides).

When CJ an Munroe high fived each other and looked smug my DH turned to me and said “you aren’t the only one seeing that, people might be scared to say anything but they see it too”.

Too many people for a proper debate. It is hard enough with the 4/5 on Question Time.

No clear delineation of audience/ speakers (weird faux cosy concentric circle crap), so the shouting from hecklers must have been off-putting/threatening.

GG (who I usually love) and CJ far too anecdotal. This format needs to be snappy and edgy, and their contributions were not.

GG ambushed - why did presenter not take a similar line on MB’s old tweets which were so horrible to women? Would have been good for balance.

Sarah Ditum excellent, informed and concise, facts ready, and she was v respectful.

Presenter did not get onto the real issues! Prisons? (Sarah tried there). Women’s shortlist’s? Scholarships? They touched on sports but instead of going into T levels, muscles, lung capacity etc, CJ turned it into a CJ anecdote about how glad she was to find sport as a kid - well, good for you but that is not the issue!

The presenter did not ONCE articulate the actual ways in which trans rights and women’s rights compete, nor ask for possible solutions.

I was upset to see a well known rad fem who has spoken at recent events shouting ‘penis’ and grinning just as MB asked people to stop shouting ‘penis’. Really rude and disrespectful - will not gain our cause any ground, and just makes us look transphobic.

I do not think it will convince people either way but there were no scary TRAs to balance it out - not that GG or SD is scary! But if they are painted as one end of the argument, where is the other end?

So disappointing. I hope not many people watched it.

So to sum that up: 7 panelists, made up of five genderists and two gender critical feminists, started out with suggesting that the divide is one of age rather than one of ideology. Then as it kicked off, everyone let each other speak until Sarah's turn, at which point Munroe proceeded to speak over her as she was talking about male predators. Then in the section meant to discuss the 'extremes' which were described as transphobia and violent misogyny, but then it became clear this was just an excuse to ask Germaine Greer several questions on her comments that have been most controversial, and they didn't even once talk about violently, misogynistic TA's. Before long, Munroe asked for a female audience member to kicked out, and then at the end, Cathy again suggested the issue was one of a generational divide ('aren't these feminists just old an irrelevant?' basically) before she berated the mostly lesbian women in the audience who had got so frustrated with the one-sidedness that they spoke up, even though she had ignored the mostly men who had shouted out in support of Munroe. Absolute shitshow.

Im also new here but was too pissed off to introduce myself before wading in.
I've been reading these threads for a long time and still feel nervous about posting. I need to practice at being articulate.
I do have the debate with family but am too scared to take it outside of that.
My name was reported on Facebook one day after following the fair play for women and this never happens pages and I suspect it might have been a tra malicious report leaving my identity more open than I would like on social media. I was using initials only but now have to use my unique name.

Your DH is wise, CircleSquare.

Really, the audience was specially invited? Why, so we could play spot the feminist/transactivist in the background?

Some people are saying on Twitter that Germaine Greer never actually was on the Victoria Derbyshire show, which is why she seemed confused when Newman laid into her. Found this article which suggests she sent a statement to the show rather than appearing on it.

I saw Dr Radfem in the audience.

Germaine Greer was on Newsnight