Woman's Hour today (Monday 7 Jan) on marriage after transition

[AbsintheFriends]

Was in the car and heard Jane Garvey say they were going to be discussing this today, with a firefighter who transitioned m to f and the effect on their marriage. Just got home and waiting for the discussion to start.

Coming up now!

Whatever one thinks of her narrative, I think it is interesting to report it just as that, followed by another, different narrative.
Ideally, I would love someone to then do another slot to highlight the functions that the different narratives serve for the individuals presenting them and within the context of dominant discourses in society!

Just googled Rebecca Root for photo. It confirmed that it was the same actor that was on 'Doctors' last year (or maybe the year before). I was staying with my DM and I only saw a couple of episodes.

It was all very odd. Were we the audience supposed to read this person as an actual woman (v. difficult) or were we supposed to read them as trans? Whichever, the acting was atrocious and the storyline had clearly been shoehorned in to comply with 'the agenda'.

(Derail, sorry).

Didn't hear it but this thread reminds me yet again of Jane Fae's poor daughter learning the night before an AS exam that her father had decided to transition to a woman.

I do think it's important that listeners hear for themselves, tbh.

It's a pretty effective way of demonstrating the dynamic, especially when it's followed up by the perspective of a woman whose husband has transitioned. If we didn't have it demonstrated for all to hear and just refused to have the transitioner's perspective then we just feed into their false "nasty women" narrative and nobody gets to assess it for themselves directly. I think most people listening to both will get it. Far more effective to do it this way, imo, because no TRA can claim they weren't heard but everyone will see exactly how self absorbed it is . It's a win-win.

I took the article to be about transitioning in the context of a heterosexual marriage, so relevant to women in heterosexual marriages.

For many of those who transition, what may have started as a heterosexual marriage becomes a 'same sex relationship'.
Wives or partners of males who become women can then be defined as being in a lesbian relationship by this ideology/narrative.
Their sexuality has not changed though.

It's Woman's Hour, FGS. I wouldn't expect them to impose a reading from a book by a serial adulterer complaining that his wife didn't understand him on their listeners. I'd expect them to centre the wife

Absolutely this ^

Very interested to hear tomorrow's programme. This is arguably one of the most important strands of the trans issue in terms of relevance to the WH audience demographic. They have a huge responsibility to their listeners, a significant number of whom will have first hand experience of this and will very likely have felt isolated and ashamed. WH absolutely need to centre their perspective, and if they don't do that adequately it will constitute a massive breach of trust and failure of purpose.

MsBeaujangles

I took the article to be about transitioning in the context of a heterosexual marriage, so relevant to women in heterosexual marriages.

My enjoyment of this stems from my interest in the stories that people tell/ the narratives they form to make sense of their lives.

You're not coming across as someone with an agenda, but as someone who is perhaps interested in the human condition.

If you truly are neutral and genuinely curious about what it's like in a marriage if the man transitions, the thread below will be very interesting to you.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3101834-trans-widows-escape-committee?msgid=83895371#83895371

Rebecca Root was the person, I believe, who challenged a rape survivor (on national tv) who had been in a rape refuge, over what constitutes a woman. With the never to be forgotten, unutterably tone deaf assertion that their mother had had a hysterectomy and does that mean they are not a woman?

In an attempt to discredit the rape survivor who was 'unwittingly' speaking of a woman as someone who had female anatomy. Given that they had been raped using their female anatomy, it was bloody shameful of Root.

WH absolutely need to centre their perspective, and if they don't do that adequately it will constitute a massive breach of trust and failure of purpose.

Yes, it will entirely depend on that perspective and how it is told - would be better if it had been Stephanie's wife. If it's all "yay, brave and stunning and I just got used to it" then of course it will be a massive fail.

Rebecca Root was the person, I believe, who challenged a rape survivor (on national tv) who had been in a rape refuge, over what constitutes a woman. With the never to be forgotten, unutterably tone deaf assertion that their mother had had a hysterectomy and does that mean they are not a woman?
In an attempt to discredit the rape survivor who was 'unwittingly' speaking of a woman as someone who had female anatomy. Given that they had been raped using their female anatomy, it was bloody shameful of Root.

Yes, this was such a shocking thing made more so that Victoria Derbyshire did not challenge Root's comments.

March 2018 interview on Victoria Derbyshire with Sarah Ditum, Rebecca Root, Nicola Williams & Clara Barker.
twitter.com/victorialive/status/970605542916812800?lang=en

This was the BBC article by Katie Alston, Victoria Derbyshire programme, about the points raised in the episode:
www.bbc.com/news/uk-43255878

Pink News coverage:
'Journalist insists she isn’t anti-trans, believes trans women should not have access to women-only services'
by Meka Beresford

(extract)
"[Victoria] Derbyshire suggests that they are “afraid” of trans people, but both Williams and Ditum say that they are not.

Rather, Williams says that they are “cautious” of self-identifying trans women.

The debate then welcomes comments from viewers, and one female watcher insists that trans women cannot be women because they do not have wombs.

Another says that they must have the menstrual cycle to be a woman and so, they should not have access to women-only spaces.

However, both Barker and Root knock this idea as they ask if that means women who have had a hysterectomy or women who do not have a menstrual cycle, be it through menopause or another reproductive disease, are not women.

Root perfectly sums the poor arguments against allowing trans women access.

“You’re tarring the whole community of trans women with the brush of one or two people who are bad people and in prison because they’ve committed a crime,” she said. “It’s like saying every priest is a bad person because one or two people committed offences to one or two young people.” (continues)
www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/03/05/journalist-insists-she-isnt-anti-trans-believes-trans-women-should-not-have-access-to-women-only-services/

Datun I do have an agenda - I want to see strong sex based rights being applied according to natal sex. I want the words women and female to be used exclusively for natal females in order for this to happen.

You are right that I am interested in the human condition and I have read the trans widows thread, as it has progressed. It makes for harrowing reading and I am pleased that in addition to the posters finding the thread offers some support, I am also pleased that their experiences are shared with a wider audience in order to shed light on the issues.

I just enjoyed the WH item. I was interested to hear Stephanie's narrative and am looking forward to hearing a different narrative tomorrow. If the item had been spouting factually incorrect nonsense or dodgy science, it would have enraged me. As it was, it presented a first person account of an individual experience, they will present a similar but different one tomorrow (I think).

Trans people's lives can make for interesting material. I think it would help the GC cause for nice, unpleasant, reasonable, unreasonable, passing and non passing trans people to appear in the media. I would also welcome broader discussion about transsexualism, AGP, HSTS, drag queens etc. This way people can see that being trans in itself does not tell us much about a person and there is significant variety in lived experiences and narratives.

Rebecca Root was the person, I believe, who challenged a rape survivor (on national tv) who had been in a rape refuge, over what constitutes a woman

The Victoria Derbyshire program is no longer on iPlayer but a full transcript of the program is linked below. There were a number of segments. The woman who had needed to use refuge services to remain safe from the male who had abused her speaks from 1:24:57
subsaga.com/bbc/news/victoria-derbyshire/2018/03/05.html

Ah forgive me MsBeaujangles, it sounded as though you were still exploring the issue.

I personally think gender dysphoria, as a condition, is fairly interesting. As I believe it's a reflection of our highly gendered times. The fact that it can lead to something so profound, should be examined.

However, I find the people who have it are often so self obsessed and self pitying, that it overrides any attempt to analyse their actual condition.

I just enjoyed the WH item. I was interested to hear Stephanie's narrative and am looking forward to hearing a different narrative tomorrow. If the item had been spouting factually incorrect nonsense or dodgy science, it would have enraged me. As it was, it presented a first person account of an individual experience, they will present a similar but different one tomorrow (I think).

I wasn't concentrating on this narrative being read.

I think its worth mentioning as an aside, that Lundy Bancroft, Freedom Program etc make clear the serious damage done by relationship counselling which gives equal value to both partner's perpectives and experiences when one person is using emotional abuse, coercive control etc.

RR has been in at least one radio 4 afternoon play, probably hence the air time on WH.

author Stephanie Jones
twitter.com/Stephy54839964/status/1063728685621088256

It should be a three-parter if there are kids involved.

Datun

I agree that people who have gender dysphoria are often self obsessed and self pitying. I think this is also the case for people with a wide range of mental health issues. I think much can be done to challenge 'thin' self pitying and introspective narratives. It is this thinking that underpinned my enjoyment of today's article. I think some narrative therapy would be great for Stephanie.

The problem with the current zeitgeist suggesting that dysphoria is a condition and not an illness (or, for some, not even a condition) means that the best outcomes for people with dysphoria are not properly facilitated. The issue being disagreement as to what is the best outcome! I cannot think of another illness/condition/ problem in living where the desired goal is not to help people feel comfortable inhabiting their own, natural bodies, whilst trying to avoid the need for invasive treatment.

I am not against physical intervention (hormones/surgery) if other interventions fail to deliver a good enough quality of life for a sufferer. I am very much against physical intervention being the 'go to'/ first port of call intervention. The anorexic wants to lose weight, the alcoholic wants to be able to continue drinking and the dysphoric and dysmorphic want to change their bodies. None of these wants are healthy yet one is treated differently to the other.

Yes I agree with all that. And I think once you drill down to that extent, it does become a little weird that it was aired on woman's hour. If one accepts that woman's hour should be about women.

It should be a three-parter if there are kids involved

That would be interesting. It is a story that would probably change as the children grew up and made their own way in the world. I think children get a rough deal in the world of adult problems.

I think once you drill down to that extent, it does become a little weird that it was aired on woman's hour. If one accepts that woman's hour should be about women.

Probably all the BBC employees who identify as trans insisting that TWAW and they should show the perspective of the male women as well as the female women.

WH has always been about issues affecting women not just about women.
For example, they might do an item about erectile dysfunction or prostate cancer and what it is like for women living with loved ones with the condition.
Earlier in the show, they mentioned that the lady with breast cancer's husband had written to the show but not posted the letter because he wasn't a women and thought he ought not to. They made it clear that they did welcome comments and views from men.

Stephanie Jones (author of writing featured) providing training for South Wales Police.
Gingerbread person training slide used

I think its worth mentioning as an aside, that Lundy Bancroft, Freedom Program etc make clear the serious damage done by relationship counselling which gives equal value to both partner's perpectives and experiences when one person is using emotional abuse, coercive control etc.

Very much worth mentioning and a dynamic one would have thought the Woman's Hour editorial team were a) aware of and b) would avoid. They wouldn't dream of offering a critique-free and lengthy slot to any other male's poor me narrative, would they?

For example, they might do an item about erectile dysfunction or prostate cancer and what it is like for women living with loved ones with the condition.

Yes. They wouldn't have the husband on for a lengthy segment, unchallenged, complaining about his wife's failure to do enough to help him out, would they? And if they did, nobody would be surprised when listeners told them to shove it where the sun doesn't shine, would they? Trans, though? Special case. Must have an emotional blackmail segment appealing to female socialisation before we even get anywhere near the wife.