Woman's Hour Tues 20/11/18 "Why is the current debate about sex and gender so often called “toxic” - we hear from @Bex_Stinson and @helenlewis"

[MrsSnippyPants]

twitter.com/BBCWomansHour/status/1064804876327235584

How many instances do we have of trans women being physically assaulted by women?

Well, apparently three young girls were rude to Eddie Izzard when he was crossdressing in their loo some years ago. They even started to follow him until he turned round and glared at them. Does that count?

If only women could have obtained liberation and equality by demanding rights and then refusing to discuss it further.
Women are still slugging away discussing, reasoning, arguing, evidencing and bloody begging for consideration of our rights and even then ....
Because, power.

Bowl
It's the perfect medium indeed.

What, just say 'Women are voters, #NoDebate'?

Why didn't Millicent Fawcett et al think of that?

The difficult thing about radio is that its' very exposing. Most trans women I've heard interviewed on the radio sound exactly like men

This is amongst the reasons why accepting complaints of misgendering feel to be problematic if they are to be made a matter of workplace discipline, customer complaints even without the apprehension of it being categorised as an offence.

So much fraud prevention depends on matching up the voice on the phone and the details in front of you yet there have been instances of complaints of misgendering because call centre workers perceived a male caller and queried it. There was more than a voice involved, but I should imagine the recent incident involving a complaint when someone was challenged picking up a parcel for a female name was similar.

I'm musing about this because I had a coffee shop chat with a law student yesterday who was very interesting about the legal discussion around intent and malice. We seem to be setting some people up for substantial consequences for unintentional consequences because they're obliged to fulfil their roles.

JG's position is pretty clear, but she's hosting the arguments brilliantly and giving space to both sides of the argument. Thank you Jane. I imagine it's a difficult line to tread (and dangerous, in the BBC.)

That was one of the best pieces I've heard on this.

I agree and Jane, I Love You, thank you for asking the important questions!

Exactly Graun

“I’m off on maternity leave and I get to keep my job, no debate”

Easy peasy

Loved the bit about transwomen being scared and "well, you're not going to be murdered by middle aged lesbians!"

Am I right in thinking that they're debating this all week on Woman's Hour?

I'm more than half-expecting, given the way that on both days the feminists wiped the floor with their TRA opponents, that on the other days the TRAs will drop out, citing BBC bias and hostility and saying they are too fearful to take part in the remaining debates.

hackmum - I would take bets on it.

I think two weeks, Hackmum, but am not 100pc sure.

In which case, pre recorded pieces will still presumably be aired. This is probably going to feel like a bad decision for TRAs as they can’t respond to all the very good live discussion of the issues.

on the other days the TRAs will drop out, citing BBC bias and hostility and saying they are too fearful to take part in the remaining debates.

Unless WH has altered its methods, I'd expect that the recordings have already been done if they are part of non-live discussions.

Jane Garvey was absolutely brilliant today.
Helen made some excellent points, particularly the point about women not being responsible for violence/assaults on trans women.
Stinson, pretty much as expected, apart from the fact that it was altogether too intimidating to do a live broadcast

Maybe organisations should start doing a reverse-no-platform. If Stonewall are repeatedly invited to platform (speak and debate live) and repeatedly refuse to show then they will look pretty daft.
Is someone logging all their no-shows?

What, just say 'Women are voters, #NoDebate'?
or more recently 'gay couples are married #nodebate'.

I have to admire them though - they have got this far (a very long way) behind the scenes, while maintaining nodebate on the public stage. Clever strategy.
They used the modern version of the corridors of power (the diversity policies of power?). Millicent et al didn't have that option.

Logging Stonewalls no-shows is a very good idea.

Can’t believe that a radio studio is too hostile and intimidating for the poor things, but training sessions with schools, businesses, NHS are fine and dandy. The exact same questions and issues are likely to come up in a training session, however, unlike in an interview, Stonewall are in control of the narrative.

If Stonewall are incapable of representing their own views publicly, the views upon which they are campaigning for changes to the law, then they are woefully unfit for purpose and should have their funding removed.

It's astonishing really. Trans ideologists have the support of government, the major political parties, large charities, international agencies, big businesses. Despite this we're supposed to believe trans people are the most marginalised and oppressed people who have ever lived in the entire history of the planet.

Only until the scales fall from your eyes and you realise this is an ultra-capitalist men's rights movement that is entirely prepared to sacrifice as many women and children as is necessary to get its way!

I take back what I said about Helen. She did brilliantly.

or more recently 'gay couples are married #nodebate'.

I was thinking more like

''intelligent design will be taught in schools #nodebate''

''abortion will be banned #nodebate''

AFAICT TRAS aren't pushing for any noble goals in the vein of votes for women or gay marriage. Instead they want to replace meaningful definitions with meaningless ones. They want unscientific ideology taught in schools as fact. They want to interfere in the sexual maturation of children who don't conform to gendered stereotypes.

This seems like an excellent series. Why the hell wasn't it out out before the GRA consultation ended?

Stonewall's position is the reason for the toxicity. When any group makes demands that society changes on their behalf and strips out rights from other groups and then frames it (as they have done from the outset) as a no debate issue, then any challenge - no matter how reasonable - is always framed as hostile.
It was fascinating listening to BS frame the argument: trans as the perpetual victim over women - top of the victim hierarchy - and demonstrating a total lack of insight, empathy or understanding into any women's experiences or beliefs. Irony in action.

Can’t believe that a radio studio is too hostile and intimidating for the poor things, but training sessions with schools, businesses, NHS are fine and dandy. The exact same questions and issues are likely to come up in a training session, however, unlike in an interview, Stonewall are in control of the narrative.

But the questions won't come up at work because (as you say) Stonewall are in charge of the narrative: questions=phobia, phobia=disciplinaries and people are worried about their jobs.

Jane Garvey if you are reading this thread- you are brilliant! And brave. And asking all the right questions. Keep going. No idea how you've got this approved by BBC producers but it's terrific!

Keep on keeping on. You speak for me. Thank you.

LemonJello
I suspect that Stonewall trainers are rarely challenged. Sessions will be very carefully manipulated with TWAW & #nodebate laid out as the framework. It would be a very courageous employee to challenge this in any way. Stonewall and other trans lobby groups have trained everywhere , especially in local and national government. This is why they have been able to trample all over the rights of other protected groups, the safeguarding of children and even the nature of democratic discourse. Such an abuse of power.