Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Any Questions - Germaine Greer

56 replies

Househelp123 · 03/08/2018 20:43

Just covering a self-Id question.

OP posts:
SoaringSwallow · 04/08/2018 07:24

You can email any answers too. Contact details in image.

Any Questions - Germaine Greer
R0wantrees · 04/08/2018 07:36

SirVixofVixHal
It was published this week:

This is c&p from Stonewall:
"This research was commissioned to better understand the experiences of professionals in the field and to hear their views and approach on trans inclusion.

Representatives from the three main political parties have written forewords for this research and fully endorse the effort to gain greater evidence.

The Rt Hon Maria Miller MP (Conservative), Chair of the Women and Equalities Select Committee said: ‘In 2016, I was proud to lead the Women and Equalities Select Committee’s inquiry into transgender equality. Alongside fundamental changes within our healthcare, education and criminal justice systems, we concluded that reform of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 is urgently needed.

‘But while there is cross-party support for trans equality, misinformation is holding back progress.

‘That’s why Stonewall and nfpSynergy’s report is so important. It provides a clear, balanced account of the provision of women-only services to trans survivors. It shows us that many services already support trans women on the basis of self-identification; streamlining the legal system of gender recognition will not have an impact on the way they are able to operate.

‘As the public consultation progresses, I hope that reports such as this will be used to inform an evidence-based conversation, where everyone can be heard and treated with dignity and respect.’

Labour MP Jess Phillips said: ‘We need to remember that it is trans people who will benefit from the reform of the Gender Recognition Act. Of course, there needs to be discussion and that needs to be conducted in a way that is considered and civil. The public conversation has been the exact opposite.

‘Stonewall and nfpSynergy’s report shows why it’s so important that we hear from women’s refuges and rape crisis centres, who assess the needs of the vulnerable women in their care day in, day out. In this report, they’ve shared their experiences of supporting trans women. And they talk about the ways in which all survivors need personalised support.

‘I hope that, throughout the consultation process, we continue to listen to each other and place our trust in the experts.’

Baroness Burt of Solihull, Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Women , said: ‘The Gender Recognition Act is in urgent need of reform. The changes we want to see introduced will simply make it easier for trans people to have their gender legally recognised. But we’ve seen a wave of attacks from a vocal minority in the media and online portraying these proposed changes as a threat. One often cited fear is what will happen to domestic and sexual violence services.

‘This report shines a light on the experiences of professionals whose voices have been largely missing. Opponents of reform portray scenarios that are very different from reality. It is therefore crucial we listen to services providers and hear about what is actually happening. It’s clear that their efforts to progress trans inclusion are an integral part of their work to make their services inclusive for all women.

‘Through working collaboratively, we can end this damaging speculation, and focus on building a society where all marginalised women are treated with dignity and respect.’

Threads discussing the report:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325247-Stonewall-report-into-domestic-and-violent-services

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325388-Stonewalls-Report-on-domestic-and-sexual-violence-services-Interviews-with-professionals-in-the-sector

R0wantrees · 04/08/2018 07:41

current case in Canada (women-only refuge supporting substance misuse issues):
nationalpost.com/news/canada/kristi-hanna-human-rights-complaint-transgender-woman-toronto-shelter

Case in California (women's homeless shelter) going to trial this month:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3266198-No-True-Transwoman-transadvocates-question-whether-TW-is-genuine-after-said-TW-sexually-harasses-women-in-homeless-shelter

SoaringSwallow · 04/08/2018 07:53

If you want to email, best make it short, to the point and calm. More chance of being read out then.

If you want to make lots of points, best break them up into separate emails.

BirthCanal · 04/08/2018 08:41

Totally lost my faith in Jess. Thought she had a mind of her own

PyeWackets · 04/08/2018 08:52

Place our trust in the experts, I agree with Jess. the experts are women, listen to us.

R0wantrees · 04/08/2018 09:01

Womans Place Uk 'Voices':
"Dear Sisters,

Some of you may have seen my last blog post, The silencing of feminists silences survivors , which Woman’s Place UK very kindly published whilst protecting my anonymity. I spoke about the genuine fear as a woman in the Violence Against Women (VAW) sector in questioning the impact of gender Self-ID.

This is why I turn to you and write to you openly. We need you to step up now. What started as the Government’s proposed changes to the GRA 2004, has become an environment where self-ID policies are already happening and we, as feminists in the sector, are too scared to speak.

I am asking you to make a simple statement. To state your support of women in the VAW sector to openly discuss the potential impacts of self-ID. Please make clear that to do so is not transphobic and as such it should never affect funding for women’s services.

By making a simple statement, it breaks the silence; it demonstrates the ‘Mother Ship’ has got our backs; it means we all remember why we are here and what the sisters in the second wave afforded us when they founded both Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis in the 1970s.

Only this week the government has promised to consult with women’s organisations about their concerns on the proposed GRA changes, I’d say now is the perfect time to come out publicly and back us all in being part of a wider public discussion.

Do I think other national second tier organisations in the sector should be stating this too? Absolutely! But I start with your organisations because the second wavers gave birth to you and they did so to give us the freedom of assembly, voice and space to openly and safely challenge male violence.

I’m asking you to remember your heritage and your purpose. To remember that your organisations were born out of the Women’s Liberation Movement. A movement that emerged from 1960s civil rights activists, in particular political women who refused to succumb to the vociferous bullying tactics of fellow male activists who outwardly ridiculed their voices in debates and on many occasions refused to let them speak.

The same thing is happening now.

I think it is important that we all remember where we came from, why we work in our sector. We are here to challenge male violence and as such it is important we maintain a laser sharp focus on that goal.

I have heard repeatedly that ‘there is literally no evidence that self-ID will harm women’. However, there is a plethora of evidence to show that sex offenders will abuse self-ID and self-inclusion policies (carry out a quick google search). Or have a look at this recent study, A Woman Means Something, which evidences the incidents of voyeurism-related offences in Target stores before and after the introduction of their gender-inclusion policy found that ‘upskirting’ and ‘peeping Tom’ activity more than doubled and sometimes tripled after the policy was introduced.

I have heard the argument that laws are already in place to protect women against sexual violence. Of course we know of these laws, they only exist because of our movement. However, like any legislation those laws come into place once an assault and a crime has taken place. They will not prevent male offenders using the rhetoric of self-ID to access female only spaces to commit further attacks on women. Female-only, safe spaces reduce the risks of rape and sexual assault, that’s always been the point of having them: so, we do not have to wait for women to be attacked before we act.

Sometimes we have to stick to what we know and in our movement, we all know what male violence looks like. We don’t all agree on the mantra “Trans women are women” but we all agree that “Sexual predators are predators”!

As organisations, Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis are consistently, bravely and brilliantly raising issues about funding (or lack of it) nationally. I’d ask you to think about self-ID the next time you attend meetings at Westminster or lobby government. We all know what services will be picking up the survivors of sexual predators who abuse self-ID.

Feminism has always been about enabling women to speak their truth safely (even if disagreed with), to ask questions and to be protected when doing so. That is all I am asking you to do. Endorse us in speaking up. Protect us and our services from attack.

A statement from the Mother ship will empower the rest of us in the VAW movement (particularly those of us in smaller organisations) to be safe to speak. Once you make a statement more of us will feel empowered to stand in solidarity as a sector in the same way we stand in solidarity with survivors and always have.

In hope

An anonymous sister"

womansplaceuk.org/the-silencing-of-feminists-silences-survivors/

womansplaceuk.org/an-open-letter-to-womens-aid-and-rape-crisis-england/

Floisme · 04/08/2018 10:28

Jess Phillips may have put her name on that report but it sounds as if she's still picking her words very carefully, which to be honest, is starting to annoy me nearly as much as the likes of Stella Creasy. I simply cannot believe she doesn't get this.

Mind you I was amused to see Maria Miller writing that she was proud to lead the Women and Equalities Select Committee’s inquiry into transgender equality - with Jess Bradley as a key witness. I guess a week really is a long time in politics.

qumquat · 04/08/2018 13:03

Any Answers on in an hour. Is anyone from here going to call in? So many fantastic women on here who could speak brilliantly. However I'm not sure I can bear to listen!

MorrisZapp · 04/08/2018 13:09

I whooped and cheered in the kitchen.

DP thought Belinda Carlisle had announced another comeback :)

R0wantrees · 04/08/2018 13:58

equivilences drawn with gay rights, race and attributation of Greer's view on gender / sex belonging to the last century.

LizzieSiddal · 04/08/2018 14:04

They are discussing self id now.

R0wantrees · 04/08/2018 14:04

There are no calls yet about this.

written responses are being read out.

R0wantrees · 04/08/2018 14:09

#bbcaq Twitter

borntobequiet · 04/08/2018 14:12

Well they read out my email, right at the beginning.

Ekphrasis · 04/08/2018 14:27

I'm traveling and just managed to listen to that q on AQs.

No one answer the q - should we teach children that boys can be girls and girls can be boys - the second speaker almost did by explaining what GGs female u explained; surely putting this book on the syllabus for teens is the answer?

They all danced around individual's personal experiences and failed to recognise how society and stereotypes need to be tackled. Missed a big trick there.

GG was awesome as usual.

BoreOfWhabylon · 04/08/2018 14:27

Well done born!

FreezerBird · 04/08/2018 14:37

I missed the begining so I don't know who everybody was, but I don't understand how that bloke can talk about Germaine Greer's work being liberating when she draws a distinction between sex and gender, and not see that trans ideology is busy trying to lock people back into oppressive gender roles.

FFS.

vesuvia · 04/08/2018 15:01

It seems to me that Barry Gardiner thinks that Germaine Greer's opinions about biology, sex, gender roles and gender identity are not valid because Greer believes in old-fashioned external reality (for example, a human cannot change biological* sex even if she/he can make her/his body look less like her/his sex).

Gardiner gives me the impression that he and his socially "progressive" allies believe that Greer has been she has been left behind by their allegedly morally superior social "progress" which believes in internal reality ("I feel X or I want X, therefore I am X").

*Some governments allow some people change their legal sex but this does not mean that a person has actually changed (biological) sex.

silentcrow · 04/08/2018 15:17

born well done! I was listening whilst driving and just caught the beginning - I knew that would have been someone from here!

I think GG was ok, obviously weary of being asked, but still could have answered better. The question was too fluffy to start with - we need someone to lay it out in cold, flat terms: self-id creates a legal loophole which we know from experience predatory men will take advantage of. How do you intend to close that loophole and preserve safeguarding in single-sex spaces?

Mossandclover · 04/08/2018 15:32

silent I don’t think that is enough - it is not just about predatory men and safety, it is also about privacy, dignity and boundaries. Why are we insisting women should be happy to undress in front of males? I don’t want to do that however ‘safe’ that man might be.

silentcrow · 04/08/2018 15:39

I agree, my phrasing was just trying to think of the sort of short, sharp questions a politician live on air couldn't weasel out of. The q asked to the panel was nowhere near specific enough - to me it was getting at Mermaids in schools, but if you don't know anything about that, it comes off as "fuddy duddy old woman doesn't like boys with long hair and girls in pants". And then you get the reply that Sneery Barry got away with.

YaLoVeras · 04/08/2018 15:53

what time does the self-id talk start?!

vesuvia · 04/08/2018 16:08

Germaine Greer said "A lot of things people feel inside themselves are not real at all. You may be convinced that you're a cocker spaniel but you're wrong."

Barry Gardiner accused Germaine Greer of being unnecessarily offensive in her comparison of transgender people (who believe they are the opposite sex) and transspecies people (who believe they are another species).

I think that Germaine Greer probably thought that she had to shock the audience by giving a transspecies comparison. I expect everyone in the audience agreed with her that humans cannot become cocker spaniels. It's a way to highlight the absurdity of the claims that humans can allegedly change their biological sex (by medication, cosmetic body modification or declaration of feelings). Unfortunately, some people will misunderstand or dismiss Germaine Greer's comparison of feelings.

It is difficult for gender-critical people to criticise the belief that a transgender person can change her/his biological sex because this idea is treated as a special and unchallengeable feeling, which must not be compared to other feelings that people have (e.g. changing species).

Barry Gardiner said "These are real psychological issues for many people".
Is he saying that transgender people are mentally ill?