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

This was a set-up.
Cathy Newman has no interest in an honest, open debate, hence her selection.

www.allabouttrans.org.uk/interaction-with-cathy-newman-channel-4-news/

She has decided that she must get on board with the currently fashionable viewpoint. It's quite funny, actually, given this;

www.independent.ie/entertainment/cathy-newman-vows-to-not-let-itns-gender-pay-gap-go-36708051.html
Clearly NO patriarchy at all, nothing to see, move on!

Channel 4 has an agenda, and it is not to support women.

There seems to be a Green Party investigation of Olivia Palmer:

twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/994145752313139200

"Channel 4 is facing criticism after a live debate, which was part of its ‘Genderquake’ series, saw panellists Munroe Bergdorf and Caitlyn Jenner heckled with transphobic abuse....However, viewers quickly grew uncomfortable when members of the audience began shouting transphobic comments during the debate, and when Munroe called for them to be removed by security, her request was ignored."

I think it's very sad when SD worked so hard - under very difficult circumstances - to try to articulate the GC side for the benefit of those watching, but this is what's being talked about post-broadcast. Completely counter-productive.

"As part of their Genderquake season, last night Channel 4 aired a live debate with a host of voices, including Munroe Bergdorf, Caitlyn Jenner, Germaine Greer and Sarah Ditum. Often, it made for distressing viewing, which no doubt terrified young gender-questioning people watching at home."
continues....

Amrou Al-Kadhi writes:
www.independent.co.uk/voices/genderquake-channel-4-debate-genderqueer-transgender-caitlin-jenner-munroe-bergdorg-sarah-ditum-a8342771.html

This is so painfully frustrating to watch unfold

The way Munroe spoke to GG was disgusting - completely dismissing her because she "didn't know what she thought" when it was in fact Newman who was in the wrong (but she was on side, right? So of course she was believed).

I thought this too. Bergdorf was speaking to a professor at a University, the disdain and LACK OF RESPECT was palpable.

To gaslight Greer was unacceptable from the Chair, Cathy Newman. Newman was embarrassingly out of her depth as chair in this debacle 'debate'.

Hello all!

I was in the audience last night, along with @SwearyG, both of us wearing our #ManFriday t-shirts. We were approached by Channel 4 and asked to be in the audience to spend 2-3 minutes each talking about #ManFriday. We were assured that this would be the case right up until the end. One of the producers brought us water during the 3rd ad break so that we were ready to speak. The other gender-critical audience members in the middle-circle area were also supposed to speak: Posie, Venice, Rose of Dawn, Karen Ingala Smith etc.

Pre-debate, the debate panel and the targetted audience members were hosted in the bar and had a good discussion. Some conflicting views, but all very reasonable and constructive. Caitlyn Jenner complimented our t-shirts and took a couple of badges... Once we were in the ballroom, I was out chatting with the rest of the audience, handing out badges, getting to know people. All fine.

The debate itself was an utter mess. The audience were told to participate in the pre-show briefing, and then told to shut up. Cathy Newman repeatedly attacked GG, who in all fairness did not do a good job of putting across exactly which side she was on. Sarah was sat in a corner. Ash and Munroe kept interrupting and speaking over her. Cathy Newman then told to let Munroe speak. The transman and the gender-fluid woman on the panel were given one question each and then sat in silence. Ash... there are no words but I agree with Posie! (She's also the one who called me a weirdo when I said that feminism is about solidarity with women, not penis). Newman fawned over Jenner and was actively against either allowing the gender-critical view to be put across or tackling the issues. What was presented to us as a debate was actually about silencing women on the grounds that anyone who questions the trans ideology is both bigoted and an old bat.

Very, very disappointed.

Often, it made for distressing viewing, which no doubt terrified young gender-questioning people watching at home."

Can someone please explain to me what those gender-questioning people would be 'terrified' of?

Can someone please explain to me what those gender-questioning people would be 'terrified' of?

Someone pointing out that pretty much everyone on the planet is non-binary and that they are not all special snowflakes?

Tweeted re Olivia. We need to get behind her. She wouldn’t have shouted out, presumably, if the debate was actually fair.

I'm surprised anyone expected any different from this tbh. It was always going to be biased against women and heckling from the audience was an absolute gift to the TRAs.
But, on the plus side, every time TRAs are given a platform, they show their ignorance of issues, facts, feminism and history. It's just a shame that it's the 'heckling' story that's all over social media.

I also found Jenner going on about billionaires trans people offensive. Like I give two fucks about a billionaire feeling sad that people don't acknowledge their 'identity'. Most people who go through transition are marginalised and poor.

The heckling has done us no favours at all. Yes, people were frustrated and they had reason to be but the story is not what the panel said it's what the hecklers said.

heckling from the audience was an absolute gift to the TRAs.

Throwing stones at shop windows when women campaigned for the vote was an absolute gift to misogynists in Parliament.

Hello.

This is my first post. I've been tying myself in knots to get on board with what seemed like the Progressive stance on all this - to share the views of many commentators and activists whose opinions I value. I recently came across an article/exposé about this board and am so glad I thought to check it out for myself. I've learned so much and watching the few minutes of the genderquake debate I could take really convinced me that many trans rights threaten women's rights and that women are absolutely being silenced.

I probably won't post much here - I'm not a mum - but wanted to say thank you to all for speaking up and creating such a thoughtful, brave community.

I don't agree spon. I have seen hecklers on QT and other TV debates plenty of times and never have I seen the panel or the host demanding that they are evicted. The debate was a sham from the outset and I see no bloody good in sitting being good little girls.

AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth I hear what you're saying and with things like QT the heckling can be constructive comments. To shout 'penis' on a debate about gender when you have transwomen on the panel just made us sound like bullies. If people read these boards they will see the broad range of issues women have and why we are worried. Barely anything of note was debated last night, so shouting penis just didn't help.

Nice to see you SewSwiftly. You don't have to be a mum to join in.

I was hoping for an open debate where all sides could be aired. Very disappointed to find that it felt mostly like The Caitlin Jenner show

So many topics touched on but not properly discussed and some relevant topics not mentioned at all.

I don’t understand why the upholding of women rights must be seen as silencing the rights of trans people.

All this debate did is succeed in making me angry.

YesItsADebate thanks for the insider view, v interesting. Do you think you were set up? I don't understand why the debate you were promised didn't happen? Bloody wasted opportunity!

Each side of this, and other similar debates, relies so much on meaningless clichés that it gets frustrating:

" Silencing women", when clearly women are speaking up on these things, and will continue to do so.

" pulling the ladder up" addressed to transsexual people who are opposed to the changes in the GRA ( we are keen to keep the ladder, for the transsexual people it was installed for, but not extend it's use to the whole trans community.

" They are all man haters", addressed to radfems, who clearly aren't. "

"There is not such thing as a gender identity", when clearly the idea that there isn't has been overtaken by the knowledge that there is, but you only become troubled by it when there is dissonance.

And so on, and so forth.

I popped my head over the parapet recently in the " Guardian letter" fuss, and you know what? I wonder if it would be better to just get on with my life, secure in the knowledge that the diagnosis that psychiatrists made, the hormones and surgery , are making the last part of my life easier to live. No-one knows what GD is like till they have it. Telling us there is no such thing is just a waste of time.

Elendon it isn't the same.

The suffragettes were actually brilliant at 'optics' even though it didn't even exist as a term then.

If you wanted to mirror the suffragettes' campaign tactics then the frustrated people could have unfurled a banner. They could have staged a walk-out. They could have drew attention to our cause in a way that didn't reduce it to heckling.

Not all publicity is equal. If you accept going into a TV studio then you also need to accept that the editing and the chairing are outwith your control. Then you choose your tactic accordingly.

Of course, you could also refuse to sit in the audience or on the panel and then explain why you refused (in letters; interviews; statements). From the first advert for the Genderquake series, it was obvious where the channel's allegiances were.

I was hoping for an open debate where all sides could be aired. Very disappointed to find that it felt mostly like The Caitlin Jenner show

This! What on earth can CJ say that has any baring on ordinary lives? CJ rambled on with anecdotes that had nothing whatsoever to do with debate. It was a shambles from start to finish when it could have been a real start to the gender debate. Sarah Ditum is the only one who came out of it with any credibility and she was talked over most of the time.

"Silencing women", when clearly women are speaking up on these things, and will continue to do so

If you read Maria Miller's report for the HoC Women and Equality you will see that not only did they not listen to women's groups, but they said that there would be no effect on women, having not listened to any.

That goes a long way beyond clichés in my book.

Well behaved women seldom make history

Much of what is characterized as female “misbehavior” is a matter of voice — of a woman insisting she be heard, paid not only attention, but also the respect due a being as fully human and necessary as a man.

Given millenniums of patriarchy, the issue of women speaking out is necessarily that of their speaking out of turn. The mostly male forums of public life may patronize women with token attention and even, sometimes, take their words seriously, but they rarely if ever pay attention to a woman as they would to a man, without consciously taking her sex into account.

mobile.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/books/review/harrison.html

Power to the hecklers, the warrior women prepared to be visible and stand up for all of us.