"Britain is overdue a far more sober and less vitriolic debate about transgender rights"

[Igneococcus]

Leading article in the comment section:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/changing-gender-r6fd89cm3?shareToken=313b5bee4d884dfb001819c3718f332c

Very fair. Fingers crossed that reaches a few opinion formers and gives them pause.

Pretty measured... a good one to send to people I think.

Good article.

The BBC did a short film that showed the need for debate earlier too

Nice that it's their leading article. But to talk about balance so unremittingly is a little uninformed, in my opinion.

The claims made by transactivists aren't balanced, nor are their demands. And their silencing tactics are unhinged, never mind unbalanced.

It also depressingly misses the point that a significant percentage of the people they're talking about are cross dressing fetishists. They are giving credibility to a cohort undeservedly.

On the plus side, a balanced debate would, hopefully, reveal all this.

Gosh, so much better an article than I expected from the 'vitriolic' word in the heading. So tired of seeing claims that both sides are being extreme.

Yet if gender is to be based upon neither biology nor a psychological assessment, what is it to be based upon instead?

Nutshell.

And another article:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lib-dem-trans-activists-hounded-abuse-victim-b6dx39tv3?shareToken=6d849d70c49a6a9392adb220552be345

And now I really need to stop hanging out on the internet and get readyfor work.

Bloody hell The Times is on fire today.

Ms Bird said: “[Activists’] tactics seems to be the same as those used by abusive men: they play the victim publicly then privately try to do everything they can to control how others see you. They try to take away your voice and self-worth and then if that doesn’t work, threaten suicide. They built a smear campaign against me, shutting me out of Facebook groups, no-platforming me and silencing my concerns.

Whilst demanding entry to rape refuges and vulnerable women.

Some, including the group Stonewall, regard the issue as a successor to gay rights, and exude a terror of being seen as on the wrong side.

What a glorious sentence...

Actually, I think that was quite GC article. Talking about balance yet using the snidest of words for tans activism... it's tone was not quite what it set itself out to be...

Excellent leader. Indeed i think all that GC feminists have ever asked for or needed is a more sober debate as per the headline. Whereas #nodebate has been the position of the trans activists as they know that their only chance of success is the public remaining unaware of the implications of their demands.

One of my friends works as a senior journalist on the Times. Don’t want to say too much, but they are all incensed - so much more aware now. They have plans....

Anyway, think that’s pretty obvious from the way they’re writing these articles - defo much more from a GC point of view. Always noticeable in the guardian, for example, how they always end on a trans voice, whatever the point.

The "absolutely bloody furious" is coming across loud and clear in the Times coverage.

Excellent articles. I cannot express enough the disgust I have for that LibDem LGBTQ cohort and their nasty bullying, they are foul. My involvement with that party has gone forever. I can't believe Zoe O Connell had the gall to deny involvement in the action against Natalie Bird.

Talking about balance yet using the snidest of words for tans activism... it's tone was not quite what it set itself out to be...

That's good then. I'm fed up with 'nuance' and am probably too sensitive to the 'six of one' rubbish.

One of my friends works as a senior journalist on the Times. Don’t want to say too much, but they are all incensed - so much more aware now. They have plans....

That's very heartening.

That attack on Janice Turner the other day was a really, really duff move. It brought a lot of people out of the woodwork.

I agree with Ms Bird on the tactics used

Agree. Not many journalists are going to get into this from a woman’s rights perspective. But it’s the challenge to free speech that gets them where they live.

Hooray. I love this line in particular: "Feminists fear hard-won victories disintegrating, with vital issues such as reproductive autonomy being reimagined as tangential to sexual equality."

Now that's what I call a sound bite! The point feminists have been making for ages, that biology forms the material conditions without which you cannot make sense of women's long history of oppression - packaged up in one neat, easy to understand sentence.

I never read The Times until this insanity really blew up. Now I have a subscription and am very grateful for their coverage. I like their calm tone and lack of waffle, it's much easier to see the Emperor is wearing no clothes that way....

I think that’s a brilliant piece. It’s measured, but not so “balanced” as to be meaningless and bland - it is actually gets right to the heart of the matter and openly invites criticism of the received wisdom. Good to see. Just wish it, and the Spectator, were not behind paywalls - though I completely understand why they are. Just worry that a lot of people go to the Guardian because it’s still free.

It’s great that Natalie had the opportunity to male her case so clearly in that article after being silenced by her party.

I would love to see the sharetoken data for the Times’ GC articles vs its other output.

Nowt please ask them to be wary of paternalism. We need honest reporting like James and Janice have done, fearless research into the background money and influence, and promotion of women's voices from all parts of society. We don't need male voices "protecting" women, or worse, patting us on the head and saying "don't you worry about it".

The Times has an opportunity to be a shining light for real equality here. Don't waste it.

I'm hoping something's planned for The Sunday Times, as the result of its poll is due to be published on Sunday, and the result so far is unequivocal.