Transcript part one:
JG: Now we're going to continue our look at the now controversial subjects of sex and gender. Last week I talked to Professors Sally Hines and Kathleen Stock about the current disagreement over what sex and gender mean, and also to Bex Stinson and Helen Lewis about why the debate about this subject, or these subjects, is so often called 'toxic' these days. Those conversations took place on Monday and Tuesday of last week, obviously you can find the Woman's Hour podcast via the BBC Sounds app if you didn't catch either of those two quite interesting conversations, actually.
So today we've moved on to what the law says about sex and gender. Is the safety of women and girls genuinely threatened by the reform of the Gender Recognition Act, allowing people to self identify now as female or male? And what does the law say about the rights of all women, and how should the law be interpreted?
So in a moment I'll talk to Rosa Freedman who is Professor of Law, Conflict and Global Development at the University of Reading, and Rosa is also a barrister. First up, Alex Sharpe is Professor of Law at the University of Keele, she's a human rights barrister, and Alex, you are a transwoman, good morning to you.
AS: Hi Jane, thanks for having me on the show.
JG: No, it's lovely to talk to you. Now, is it right to say you would prefer not to enter into a debate, which is why I'm going to talk to you first and then we'll move on to Rosa?
AS: Yes I don't wish to enter into a debate, I think it's much more productive to have a conversation with you and try to get some important points across to your listeners.
JG: All right, let's start with - and forgive me, this will be I suppose, in some ways for you, and indeed for Rosa, a very basic conversation, because I am really anxious for this to be a mainstream discussion that everyone can understand and become a part of. So, tell me Alex why you believe that no-one needs to be concerned by the reform of the Gender Recognition Act.
AS: OK Jane, this is really perhaps the key and the most toxic issue, so the idea that, I mean obviously reform is going to be really beneficial for trans and non-binary people, that's not controversial. What is controversial is the notion that reform will negatively impact on cisgender women
JG: Right, just very briefly - cisgender?
AS: I should probably use the - I didn't really want to get bogged down in that terminology because gender crits will object to that term -
JG: I mean some people just won't understand it Alex, so what does it mean?
AS: OK, well I would use the word cissexual rather than cisgender, you've kind of forced me into that conversation -
JG: Yes but what does it mean?
AS: OK, well cissexual means a person who is comfortable with the gender that they are assigned at birth, whereas - that's what cissexual means, cisgender means someone who's comfortable with the normative gender expectations that follow from that assignation. So lots of people are not cisgender and most gender crits by definition won't be cisgender but they are cissexual. But I'll just use the word cis to -
JG: I'm really sorry but I'm trying to think of our audience who vary from people at university to people in their 80's. They're already going to be slightly confused, so by 'cis' -
AS: But Jane, Jane, I'm only going to have a few minutes here and I think -
JG: No, you've got a fair chunk of time by live radio standards, trust me. So, what does cis mean?
AS: Well, I've just explained that. What I'd like to discuss is - well I'd like to make the point that the claim that cisgender women are going to be harmed by the proposed government reforms is utterly bogus, and I'd like to be given the opportunity to explain why I believe that, and I think your listeners would like to know. Is that OK if I proceed and explain that point?
JG: Well yeah, go on, yeah ...
AS: OK, so basically what gender critical feminists argue is that there are currently 5000 people who have a GRC, or thereabouts, that's true, I'm one of them. With reform what we will see, they say, is a massive increase in conferral of those certificates. I agree there will be an increase, I'm not so sure about how massive it will be. But let's for the sake of argument say that there will be 100,000 rather than 5000. Let's just go with that. They then say that that will lead to an increase in harms against cis women, and specifically in gender segregated space, or women only space.
JG: OK, give me an example of some of the spaces they might be referring to.
AS: Yes, OK, so, well obviously bathrooms but also rape crisis centres, domestic violence refuges and so forth. So they make those claims, and they also claim that cis men will exploit the reforms and use them to gain access to cis women for the purpose of harming cis women. Now all of those claims are utterly bogus and let me explain why.
JG: OK, yes tell us why you believe we shouldn't be remotely concerned - nobody needs to worry.
AS: Well, first of all, the notion that transwomen as a class pose a special risk, if we just park the idea about how offensive that is, there's no real evidence for it. So, let's look at the reality of the situation. Eleven countries around the world, across Europe and South America, have already introduced a regime of self declaration. They've done so without any of the dramas and they haven't had problems on the ground.
JG: Just out of interest, just give the listeners examples of some of those countries, they might be surprised.
AS: OK, well, yes I think they would be very surprised Jane, thank you for pointing that out. So, obviously countries like Belgium, Portugal in Europe, but also Brazil, Colombia, Argentina. Even in Pakistan there's been some movement on this question. So we already have an empirical testing ground. But more importantly perhaps than any of those things is that we have an empirical testing ground right here in the UK, because the focus on the 5000 people who have a GRC is an error. It doesn't matter who has a GRC. Hundreds of thousands of people are already covered under the Equality Act. We as transwomen already have the right not to be discriminated against, and it's true, cis women have the right to discriminate against us in very limited circumstances, as provided by the Equality Act. Those rights will remain in force as Theresa May has made very clear, so there'll be no change to that balancing of rights. The reality is that hundreds of thousands of transwomen exist and we use the bathrooms every day, public bathrooms, and we go to rape crisis centres, sadly, when that's required, as sadly it is in many cases within the trans community. So, in other words, we're there in massive numbers and we've been there for decades. What could be a more clear empirical testing ground that that? There's a massive data set and yet there's no harm.
JG: So the current feverish debate on all this then, you would say is what - is somewhat concocted?
AS: It's massively concocted, it's a campaign of fear, it's a moral panic that's been generated by gender critical feminists. I mean, just think about it, with the exception of the few cases that have been reported in prisons, there are hardly - hardly any cases - there are either no cases or they're exceptionally rare, and if that wasn't true, if there were cases out there, we would know about it. Think about it, every time a transwoman transgresses in any way whatsoever it's a media frenzy. So let's not kid ourselves that there are some hideous cases lurking out there. Gender critical feminists spend their lives trawling the internet trying to find these cases. They're manna from heaven, Jane, when they do arrive - arise - they're just not there, it's just utterly bogus.
JG: How many of these gender critical feminists are there in fact?
AS: Well, I don't know what their exact numbers are, I would say they're a relatively small but highly vocal and very well organised group of people, who have a very s -
JG: This sounds so petty but they'd say the same about you I expect
AS: Well perhaps, perhaps they would, but I think the vast majority of feminists support us. This isn't really a battle between transwomen and cis women as the media like to frame it and as gender crits like to frame it. This is a battle between intersectional feminism, those who are truly inclusive, those that I would describe as real feminists, and exclusionary feminism. Exclusionary feminism has always been a part of feminism, it's always - it's like - it's like bubonic plague, it's always been in the soil and it always rears its ugly head from time to time and we're seeing that happen right now.
JG: Alex, thank you very much. Can I just - I hate to go on about this but I do think it's so important, and I'm looking at Twitter, people are still saying they don't know what cis means. What does it mean?
AS: The word cis is simply used - if we don't have a term to describe non-trans women, we end up using words like genetic woman, or natural woman, or real woman, or -
JG: Or born female?
AS: Well, or born female. But it sets up a hierarchy. No-one's denying certain sexed realities, the point is to have a language where we can talk about different women without reproducing the idea of hierarchy and power.
JG: OK. Right. Thank you very much, let's move on to Rosa Freedman, and as I've explained, if this does seem slightly unfair it's because Alex wasn't really keen to discuss in a debate form with Rosa. So we move onto Professor Rosa Freedman ...