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 is exactly why I said I though shouting penis has caused us harm.

Why, because biased trash journos write biased trash pieces? Would you have expected anything different if there hadn't been heckling??

Please can I say that despite me being a transsexual woman, I am 100% against the granting of a Gender Recognition Certificate ( and therefore a new birth certificate and "legal form of change of gender" ) too easily, and without stringent checks. And to people who have not proved a long term commitment.

But I do not quite recognise the " silencing women/ not letting women speak" situation that is being complained of. Even though heaven knows there has always been a lot of that. The MPs committee concerned, which was mixed sex, assumed that what had ( apparently ) worked elsewhere would work in the UK. They expected little trouble, and a quick " rubber stamp". They were wrong, weren't they?

I'd guess ( and hope) that the chances of the proposed changes going ahead are slight, and getting slighter.They are already in the " shelved for now" cupboard.

Please carry on ;write to your MP, whatever, but please do lose the support of the " sensible transsexual" party. You may have need of us as one extra nail in the coffin of this foolish change in the law.

Oh, and on how many transsexual people agree with us on this. What proportion? I havn't a clue, and no-one has. So do not believe this " only a tiny proportion of TS people object to this proposed change, which the otherwise excellent Professor Whittle is said to have claimed. NO-ONE knows for sure. There is no way of knowing. I know some who agree with us, but are unwilling to put their heads over the parapet.

JoanSummers People who have no opinion or are on the fence will read an article like this. It's also in the Daily Mail. By turning what has to be a debate about the issues women face into penis-gate does us no favours.

KayM2

In terms of shutting women down, Dr Nic Williams has collated some of the evidence for this, which you might find interesting, and maybe a little shocking.

fairplayforwomen.com/misogyny_hate_silencing/

Google "sarah ditum" or "germaine greer" and "transphobe". These trash pieces would have gone out today regardless of what was said last night.

Then there’s Sarah Ditum, your best mate’s mum who won’t sign the consent forms for the school trip. She hates FUN. I don’t. I’m the girl with the short skirt and too much makeup on hiding behind the bike shed with a bong, a packet of Superking Menthols and Liam from 6th Form

Paris Lees wrote that, in an article that called Ditum and some other moderate feminists 'privileged white feminists' 'Meanies' and 'TERFs'. Articles trashing feminists were inevitable today, in fact the TAs have been squealing about terfs on genderquake all week. The issue for these misogynists is not that some women were out of order in speaking out of turn, it's that all women are out of order for exercising our right to speak at all.

They trashed woman's place meetings. They trashed we need to talk events. Thy trashed man friday. They have trashed every single article written with even the slightest gender critical angle. They trash women's marches and women's refuges and women's libraries.

We are trashed whatever we do, whatever we say. We may as well laugh and heckle.

JoanSummers On Twitter today I have seen very little about the excellent and valid points SD made. Had penis-gate not happened and therefore exploded all over Twitter then SD points would have been discussed more widely, even if only to abuse SD. Those tweets would have been shared and people on the fence or with no opinion may well have seen them and explored the issues a bit more. As it is, all they will see now is penis-gate.

You and I are not going to agree on this and that's fine. I've given my opinion on why I think this is a mistake so will leave it there.

Interesting account from Rose of Dawn about her experience at the debate. She was invited as one of the target members of audience.

I found the heckling irritating and rude. Likewise the rent-a-mob irritating cheering every minor banal point voiced of it was ‘your team’.

This is ‘debate’ as carried out over Facebook and Twitter. Shallow slanging match. The ‘debate’ wasn’t a ‘debate’ anyway. It was a ragbag of questions aimed at individual panel members followed up by zero discussion.

NRTFT (sorry) just started watching this now. Already got my back up by claiming Catelynn Jenner was an Olympic medalist. No, Bruce was the Olympic medalist. According to tra agenda Bruce was a completely different person and no longer exists.

Yes I was wondering how that worked Delete. Also how CJ wants people to remember the Bruce that won the medal and not the Bruce that was in the car crash.

Deleteordecay; my experience as a transsexual is not as you say;

Bruce Jenner's achievements were not by someone different; they were by Bruce Jenner, who is now Caitlin Jenner. The past is not obliterated. I've never heard any trans activist claim it is. I'd expect that to be objected to by any sensible person.We object to CJ being called " Bruce" or " he'd", but we don't claim BJ never existed. Nor does she, as we saw when she referred to ( some of her kids calling her " Dad".

I agree , there are some idiots under the TRA banner, but tbh there at idiots everywhere. They are mostly very young.

To be honest, I don't think politicians kicking this into the long grass is good enough anymore. Too many are acting like self id is already legal and women and girls are not allowed space of their own. Politicians need to make it clear to organisations like school, hospital, prisons, that sex segregation is legal and very important for women and girls.

Baroquehavoc I agree. Do women really have to carry a copy of the EA to show to people where our rights are already being eroded? I guess that's going to be a yes if we don't get our rights ringfenced and enshrined in law.

I still havent watched the darn thing but like Rose's synopsis. Some good points made.

Sounds like it was a massive shame they didn't get to question the audience.

Was the beautiful make up guy the Irish beautiful make up guy - John something?

Can't help wondering if the production team have been following these boards as there's definitely been recent threads in him (and yes he's absolutely transfixing in his videos!)

I watched the Rose of Dawn video. It was very refreshing and obviously very thoughtful and knowledgeable. Would I have liked her to talk in this 'debate'? Yes sure. And Posie.

Channel 4 really missed a trick getting all these interesting people together and ignoring them. I have not looked at the debacle again (I had trouble watching it as my computer did not like Ch4 and kept crashing) and I am not sure that I want to waste any more of my time on it. It was all really badly handled and could have been so good.

I also agree with Baroquehavoc. There really is a problem with all this behind the scenes diversity education which is taking out exemptions in the Equality Act by the back door. It does no one any favours and is to no one's benefit in the long run. It really needs to be addressed properly.

www.nytimes.com/2018/05/09/opinion/britain-transgender-debate-caitlyn-jenner.html
extract from the New York Times
"I deeply resent the idea that my identity gets to be “debated” in the first place. I’m not alone in this; a number of activists in Britain protested the show for this very reason. (Others boycotted it because of Ms. Jenner herself.) As Dr. Adrian Harrop — a trans advocate who declined an invitation to be part of the show — told the website Pink News: “This debate is not about incorporating trans people into mainstream society and improving their lives and making sure they can access and engage with society on a meaningful level. This is a very basic debate around whether existing as a trans person is a valid, legitimate way to live one’s life.”

Spontaneous - fair enough, you're right it seems unlikely we will agree on this.

I deeply resent the idea that a US journalist thinks it's their place to object to women in the UK having opinions on proposed changes to UK law that will affect women in the UK and which will not affect US journalists.

The people shouting penis and man really pissed me off. We aren't kids. We are adults with serious concerns. Stupid nasty behaviour.

This is a very basic debate around whether existing as a trans person is a valid, legitimate way to live one’s life.

That'll be Dr Harrop up to his normal gaslighting and women-silencing tricks.

UK libel laws require that I don't post any comments about the fragrant Harrop.

This is a very basic debate around whether existing as a trans person is a valid, legitimate way to live one’s life.

It really, really isn’t.

Nobody is debating anybody’s personal identity or lifestyle.

The issue is classifying everyone by gender and ignoring the real consequences of sex.

PencilsInSpace Initially the 'journalist' directed their resentment towards the BBC. The article was subsequently edited.

I think you're right Pratchet. He scares me - horrid man.

I deeply resent the idea that a US journalist being called a journalist when they couldn't be bothered to fact check BEFORE publishing the original article.

Jim Waterson @ jimwaterson
The New York Times is so angry at Channel 4's decision to broadcaster a transgender debate that it's decided to blame the BBC.