Women's Hour Tomorrow!

[MsBeaujangles]

The consultation is going to be discussed tomorrow on Women's Hour. They are asking for our views!

A very educated, professional friend of mine is happy to refer to her non binary friend as “they” and every time it just grates massively. Attention seeking nonsense.

They don't seem to (want to) realise that Stonewall is a lobby group. They lobby for their particular view point, give only the information that furthers that view point and spin anything that contradicts that view point. They have fuck all to do with women and do not care. Any one they put forward as being an expert will do the same.

They put women 'experts' forward to further their view point so as to undermine anything said by women. Just because they are women does not make them experts in the field of law, or whatever, that they do not practice in, just because it is about women.

(although being transgender does of course make you expert in every field )

I'm only part way through the program, but I noticed that Una Mullally, the Irish Journalist (and LGBT campaigner, so another paid shrill for the trans movement) completely deflected and avoiding Nicola William's points about the stronger protections in the Irish law.

I do love Jane Garvey, used to listen to radio 5 all the time. I thought she handled that well. Cutting down on the waffle. She sounded GC to me.

I laughed at the "send us a pithy email" lol. Mumsnet's bad I bet! Certainly mine.

The argument for me boiled to TRAs saying "you're fearful for absolutely no reason"
And us saying
" Yes we are, and our reasons are valid and we have evidence"

Lovely Debbie and awesome Nic came across really well. Intelligent and reasonable. Nic was so right to focus on how this is fundamentally changing biological definitions.

I love how the Irish journalist was totally owned. The rabbi sounded mad as a box of frogs and it was clear JG wasn't having any of it.

We only got called bigots once. They should have covered the harassment of women in this issue with more detail.

However. Miles better than genderquake and the way the debate should be had. Should have been more GC voices but to be fair the rabbi and the journalist did our job for us.

There is clearly a problem with the Equality Act and the government need to look at that again. We need this sorting out.

Just got an email from Level Up spouting the same rubbish that we heard on the BBC this morning, asking me to submit their preprepared submission to the consultation. Have emailed them back to tell them to take me off their database because of their gross mischaracterisation of the issues. So much for the sisterhood.

Extract: “Here is a personal message from a member of the Level Up community about an issue that is close to their heart:
As a trans feminist it feels as though my life and existence is being used as a political football. While I think all women are right to name the fear of navigating the world in public and private spaces, rather than recognising that this fear comes from a real threat of violence from men, a small group of women are projecting that fear on to trans people, especially trans women...If you aren’t trans, you might not know how many humiliating, long and expensive hurdles we are made to jump through just to get on with our lives. If they were removed, our lives would improve so much...We only need to look at Ireland, Denmark, Argentina or the other countries that already allow people to choose their own legal gender to see that there are no known examples of anyone legally changing their gender with the intention of making things unsafe. As we all know, the entitlement of gendered violence knows few bounds and abusers certainly don’t seek legal permission; when they want to hurt people, they don’t usually look for legal processes to give them permission...” Etc.

I've just listened again, with a tab open to the counter linked by Hawkeye upthread (thanks!)

I'm not claiming scientific precision, but I timed the actual spoken contributions of the guests, not including JG's questions or interjections. I included Bex Stinson, Natalie Gamble, Una Mullally and Megha Mohan as the pro-GRA reform speakers (I think the latter was probably supposed to be neutral, but clearly revealed her position early on when she minimised concern about the massive increase in young girls transitioning). Nic Williams and Debbie Hayton as pro-women's rights.

The stats:
Pro-GRA speakers - 21 minutes 02 seconds
Pro-women speakers - 6 minutes 22 seconds
So - 76% of airtime given to pro-GRA.

Even given a bit of a margin for error, that's an even starker imbalance than I'd thought.

Natalie Gamble represented the father in this case www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32603514

On that 'balanced' basis maybe Woman's Hour should be renamed Transwomen's Hour.

Am so cross that so many women would have wasted their time emailing in-for nothing! they read out 2 emails.....and gave more air time to male bodied people than women. if this isn't a wake up call nothing is.

Does anybody know anything about the podcast? They said in the programmer that they will read more emails in the podcast. However having gone to the BBC site the podcast seems to be up, but is exactly the the same as the claptrap this morning.

Am I looking at the wrong thing? Or is there a different podcast?

Vagina, that's a chilling case.

Isn't it heart breaking?

Depressing. The BBC is an anti-women organization. They have twice as many trans people as lesbians in their workforce. About 200 lesbians and 700 gay men. Then 400-500 trans individuals.

They don't pay women the same as men and Women's Hour is not interested in woman's issues or woman's rights.

Biological men in all their disguises get to dominate women.

The growth of a new 'suffragette' women's movement, to take a fight to Parliament over the very definition of a woman, is a huge story.

And that is the story that Woman's Hour still needs to tell. It couldn't tell that story but had to remain 'balanced' until 19th October.

After the consultation period ends, they are free to turn their attention off the GRA, to the biggest story for a generation. It will be seen as a WH own-goal if they cannot focus on the struggle to get a woman's voice heard in the face of an establishment that seeks to 'erase' us as an interest group.

That's the story that I want to hear and that is the mission for Women's Hour now. I've given my opinion on that, directly to WH

Gabcsika - there is a bit right at end of the podcast were they read some more of the emails but it really doesn't add much and I got the impression they were trying to dismiss the gender critical ones as scaremongering

That podcast made me want to vomit. I can’t even comment on it

for Nic & Debbie

LangCleg I really hope that rabbi reads your translation and it gives her pause for thought. I think you have it correctly.
I thought that JUdaism was big on analysis and critical thinking, not in her case it seems. I'm guessing that some women had quite a struggle to be accepted as rabbis, maybe she should reflect on her debt to them also. Our rights didn't fall from the skies and weren't handed over easily.

Vagina that case sounds so awful

“Biological men in all their disguises...” I bloody love that. I will not have Caitlin Jenner put into the same category as myself..there I’ve said it.

I’ve just listened (was at work earlier, but I do love a bit of Woman’s Hour).

This is my summary of what I heard:

All the new act will do is to make it easier for trans people to get a new birth certificate in the gender they believe themselves to be.

Birth certificates are not necessary for anything- trans people can do anything they need to in their gender currently, but some people would like to get theirs revised.

Birth certificates can currently be changed, but it costs a lot (less than £200, but other costs? Not explained) and there is a panel that is unknown and you can’t appeal.

So basically what JG said is right- if it means that much to you, you would do it. It is clearly not necessary but just something some people would like to do. Therefore, why do you need a change in the law? And why is everyone (Trans rights people and feminists) so het up about it?

I’m listening to it again, and despite being an educated (including in the sociology of gender) and critical person, I think if I didn’t have the context of the discussions I’ve read here, I wouldn’t really have any real sense of the issues and challenges of this based on the debate only. The GC voices are definitely afforded much less time and focus than the trans voices.

Go Debbie, repeal the GRA!! Well done

Wow, Debbie actually said the GRA needs repealed?! Thats unexpected.

So glad I didn't watch this. Seems like just another load of trans activist propaganda. And not surprising they cut off Dr Nic when she mentioned Karen White.

Why was Bex given a clear floor to speak for ages? I sorted a weeks laundry in that segment but Nic (the voice of reason) was squashed round the edges. All the others were hopeless particularly the mother with her dd going through a stage which she is now mortifyingly trumpeting about on national radio.

That case is appalling - the "neutral" lawyer clearly sees no issues in the rights of women being trampled to appease men, whether linked to the GRA or surrogacy. Absolutely shocking.