Julia HB Talk Radio this morning on transwomen in prisons

[2rebecca]

She was talking about this just now on my way to work. The discussion started just after 8.30. A lot of opposition to people with penises in female prisons. It's a good job I was at traffic lights when she threatened to throw someone out of her studio for talking about "cis" women at the end of the debate. I gave her a round of applause for stating that there are transwomen and women and that transactivists don't get to change the language applied to women just because they want to change gender. Men and women are still men and women.

This is absolutely joyful stuff. We'll done Julia. Wow it's been a good day.

Scipio Thank you for the explanation - I have taken a copy for future reference .

Agreed! I thought that segment was really great. He ate up all his time by refusing to listen to the host haha she was NOT having it.

That was brilliant, well done JHB! Don’t all ways agree with her, but she was great here.

now there is a woman who failed female socialisation 101

it is a beautiful thing to see. i've watched it twice now . i might go in for a third viewing.

Bernard now there is a woman who failed female socialisation 101 too true and didn't SA just hate that fact.

Interesting how many can agree with JHB over this but thoroughly disagree over other issues.

I remember her talking about all women shortlists. From what I recall, she disagrees with them. But, given their existence thinks they should at least be populated by women.

Having witnessed, firsthand, quite how blatent some men can be over their entitlement to absolutely bloody everything, I wonder if her stance on all women shortlists has shifted at all.

Because this is what happens. You engage with TRAs and the Overton window of your attitude to gender and power moves automatically, as a result.

Certainly don't agree with JHB about lots of stuff; but here, she was impressive. Lovely interchange. Don't take any shit from any man who's spouting bollocks!

JHB actually said No lots of times; but still, that bloke tried to argue against her clear No.

Glad that JHB persisted and prevailed.

Inspiring!

Fucking glorious.

Just listened to it.

I think Steve Allen felt that he was trying to "educate" JHB
and seemed utterly bemused that he wasn't going to be able to change the definition of women to include men without being challenged robustly about it. By a woman.

1.1K replies on Twitter, most of them saying well done.

twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1068434726908776448

Vanessa Lloyd-Platt who was in the studio at the time also tweeted:

"Loved being on the show @JuliaHB1! Yes we are women and proud of it! Can I come out from under the chair now??"

Steve Allen is silent on this issue.

And ha ha ha at him thinking ‘non trans women’ would work. Like how black people love to be called non white people . What a massive idiot.

I remember her talking about all women shortlists. From what I recall, she disagrees with them. But, given their existence thinks they should at least be populated by women

I suspect I have a lot in common with her although I think she is more to the right than I am and I disagreed with what she said about Ched Evans. I agree with her re AWS.

Because this is what happens. You engage with TRAs and the Overton window of your attitude to gender and power moves automatically, as a result.

It was MRAs who shifted the Overton window for me, which may be part of why when I encountered TRAs it didn't take long for the penny to drop that these were basically the same people, but in lippy.

I do feel it important to remember that there is still a very very small group of transsexual people who suffer from gender dysphoria getting swallowed up by the whole transgender / cross dressing / transvestite / self id nonsense.

For those people who are diagnosed, actively transitioning and on female hormones and testosterone blockers I would feel comfortable with granting access but I appreciate this is a very very small minority of what we are seeing nowadays. At a guess I would have thought less than 1% fit that bill.

I sympathise with what's been done to those people's identity and public image by the trans agenda too, Can't I think most people here do. There has been quite deliberate blurring of all boundaries between people with the legal fiction granted through transition and all and sundry including part time cross dressers and anyone who wants to say the magic words 'I identify as' for their own agenda.

So women are now left in a situation of the door opened for a tiny group of male born people by that legal fiction, having been forced so wide that to say yes to any has to mean yes to all: it's demonstrably been abused to the extreme. It is a failed experiment. So the only possible answer because not all women can tolerate mixed sex spaces without themselves having to lose access to women's spaces which is unacceptable, is no. There should be no male born people at all, regardless of how far into transition they are. Women and transwomen are different groups with different needs, and in some situations need separate provision.

The second issue underneath that, much less talked about, is the issue for transsexual people with dysphoria who have transitioned medically/surgically, as many (as Debbie Hayton has said) are no keener to share spaces with part time cross dressing men and the Karen Whites of this world than women are. If the gatekeeping is released to let anyone identify into a GRC then there are many issues for transsexual people that need hearing and addressing. But that needs to be led on by transsexual people and it would require the establishment having the guts to maintain boundaries and use the word 'no' to the TRA lobby.

Not something they find easy.

It was MRAs who shifted the Overton window for me, which may be part of why when I encountered TRAs it didn't take long for the penny to drop that these were basically the same people, but in lippy.

Me too.

For those people who are diagnosed, actively transitioning and on female hormones and testosterone blockers I would feel comfortable with granting access but I appreciate this is a very very small minority of what we are seeing nowadays. At a guess I would have thought less than 1% fit that bill.

I used to think this but now feel that it opens a chink in the armour of women's protections and the rest of them sense an opportunity and rush the gap. Besides, even within the anti-self-ID transsexual ranks, there are still plenty of entitled, sexist, male-socialised people that I don't want to share space with. Quite a few of them turn up here and it doesn't take long for their slips to show. The slightest challenge and they have forty fits.

Also langcleg it opens up questions about transsexuals who can't afford surgery or have medical reasons why they can't take blockers or hormone therapy. They would be discriminated against to set the bar at surgery/hormones. So they would have to be included. So you need a way of objectively certifying dysphoria along with health and/or financial conditions which prohibit hormones/surgery as the acceptable criteria to avoid that unfair discrimination based on health or wealth.

Then of course the next thing is - actually surgery hormones are bad for anyone- the results are never really as good as people would hope and lead to lots of health complications. So how about those genuinely dysphoric people who don't want, justifiably, to harm their health even though they don't have any pre-existing health concerns? Surely they should be allowed?

The whole thing is a slippery slope to re-defining what is a woman and what boundaries women and girls are allowed, as a way of managing the psychological conditions of males. There needs to be a different solution.

Just marvellous!

The whole thing is a slippery slope to re-defining what is a woman and what boundaries women and girls are allowed, as a way of managing the psychological conditions of males. There needs to be a different solution.

My view precisely. None of this is my burden to shoulder.

There needs to be a different solution.

^^ There it is in a nutshell.

Like LangCleg I have shifted to thinking that the whole "born in the wrong body" transsexual argument is deeply flawed.
I used to think "well OK if they're gender dysphoric enough to have genital surgery then why not?" but now feel that that pressurises young people to have genital surgery and much of the genital surgery isn't that great and can muck up your urinary continence and sexual function.
But then if you don't have genital surgery in what way have you actually transitioned to change gender? Women aren't just men with boob jobs and facial surgery. It's also propagating the lie that you can change sex and that if you don't conform to sexual stereotypes it's your body that is wrong not the stereotypes, and leaves the way free for males to enter women's sports etc.
The whole trans philosophy is very regressive.
I think the full recording on the 8.30-9 Talk Radio clip is better than the 2 minute clip because the 2 minute clip cuts out Vanessa's contribution to the debate and doesn't have all the prison stuff that preceded it.