Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Head's Up. Radio 4 Women's Hour Phone-in 4th Dec

110 replies

SidJS · 25/11/2019 13:56

Women's Hour are having an election phone-in (1 and a 1/2 hour) programme on 4th Dec with the main political parties - focusing on how their manifestos will impact women.

Although the Self -ID proposals and sex-based exemptions under the EA are now being discussed more in the media, the media still in the main conflate gender and biological sex and I don't think the general public really still grasp what the proposals really mean:

As far as I can tell -

Womenhood will now have no definition
Lib Dems - any full bodied man can just out fill out a form so they can legally enter female only spaces
Labour - state that they will maintain sex-based exemptions but are fudging the issue so they might redefine sex to enable full male bodied self-ID TW to access these spaces.

We need to contact the programme so we can interrogate the politicians so that it is clear to the public the difference between sex and gender and give real life examples on how these proposed changes will lead to the wholesale REMOVAL of women's rights and protections.

My question will relate to communal changing rooms.

Currently it is illegal for full bodied males to go into female only changing rooms to watch women and girls undress and undress themselves exposing their male genitals. If this happens, a women can call the police.

Under your proposals, what will stop rapists (only males can rape), voyeurs, flashers, up-skirters, internet groomers (vast majority men) etc from exploiting the changes to legally watch women and girls undressing, and undress themselves exposing their male genitals.

Under the changes, if a woman calls the police, will she be accused of transphobia?

I need to be more succinct - but you get the point!

OP posts:
YellaHumberElla · 04/12/2019 17:46

Speaking thank you for phoning in. You were being rushed, but got your question across very calmly and clearly.

Can you imagine for one moment, a Lib Dem telling a transwoman that they would be fine accessing a facility relating to their birth sex, because bad things 'almost never happen'?!

The bloody audacity of them dismissing women with this.

Procrastinator2 · 04/12/2019 17:59

Yella I agree. It would be great if we could put something together regarding violence and abuse of trans people and the violence and abuse suffered by women. I know there's the channel 4 fact checker on the murder of trans people, and Michael Biggs' examination of claims of suicide in children who wish to transition and some dodgy Stonewall studies. What else is out there|?

NotAssigned · 04/12/2019 18:00

What a disappointment Sarah Wollaston is. I so like her on other issues. She was never really a Tory but just like Phillip Lee I can't understand how these medical people can suspend rational thought so blithely. The cognitive dissonance must be massive.

Sarah kept trotting out how much more at risk trans people are than your common or garden woman.

NO SARAH. THAT IS NOT TRUE AND THERE IS NO BASIS IN FACT FOR SUCH A CLAIM

In fact women are at greater risk from male violence including sexual violence than transwomen. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has thought about it for even a nanosecond. Most men who wish to sexually assault women (a) aren't looking for a cock and (b) are less likely to pick on someone their own size than someone smaller and weaker.

RubyViolet · 04/12/2019 18:02

Thank you Speaking.

NotAssigned · 04/12/2019 18:04

Sorry I composed that reply an hour or so ago and got distracted

Well done Speaking!

PencilsInSpace · 04/12/2019 18:14

Jane Garvey - presenter
Penny - listener calling in

Helen Whately - Conservative
Laura Pidcock - Labour
Sarah Wollaston - Liberal Democrat
Deidre Brock - Scottish National Party
Belinda de Lucy - Brexit Party

[1:21:21]

JG: ... Penny is in Surrey with another question for everybody. Penny, good morning to you.

P: Good morning ...

JG: Yes.

P: One of the biggest social shifts in a generation is taking place, with almost no political discussion, because all the major parties - tory, labour, libdem, SNP, greens ... have largely surrendered to one side of the argument before the public debate has even begun. This is about gender self-ID and ...

JG: Can I ask you to be really brief, Penny? What's the question?

P: The question is ... My question is, under the proposed reforms to the gender recognition act, which all parties support, which would allow a man to legally become a woman simply by filling in a form, with no hormones or surgery or doctors' certificates required ...

JG: Yep ...

P: ... How will the parties protect women in single sex spaces ...

JG: Right ...

P: ... from ...

JG: Thank you very much. I think that's it, in a nutshell. We've got very little time, so can I ask for a reaction from everybody? Sarah Wollaston -

SW: Well, I think there has been an extraordinary level of hostility and, I think, discrimination against the trans community, and I'm very proud that the Liberal Democrats are going to actually reverse that. And if we talk about attacks on other people, actually it's transgender people who are among the most vulnerable to being attacked themselves. And so I think ...

JG: But what about the protection of women only spaces?

SW: Of course, I think that - that is - is a - is - is important that that is recognised, for example within our prisons and so forth. But in practice, the number of people who would want to identify for another gender, if that wasn't genuinely the case, is relatively small. So I think that there is ...

JG: So in short, the LibDems support self-ID?

SW: I think it is. I mean, why should somebody who identifies by another gender be forced to undergo humiliating medical tests and reports? And I think that we should be also looking at in practice, the level of hostility and aggression and attacks that have taken place on transgender people.

JG: Right. I mean it is worth saying, those attacks come from men, not from women.

SW: What I'm saying is, I just think that - that we - we should turn this on its head and look at the discrimination that transgender people have - and violence that they have faced.

JG: OK. That's the LibDem view there, and Laura Pidcock -

LP: To answer the question directly, we have said, and it's in black and white in our manifesto, that we will protect the single sex exemptions on spaces. And I think it's about bringing some clarity on what is a very kind of messy situation in people's minds, so that we would uphold those single sex spaces. I think what we have to do, however, and Helen from the tories will kind of confirm this, in that the consultation on the GRA ...

JG: That's the Gender Recognition Act?

LP: Gender Recognition Act - there were thousands and thousands and thousands of responses and nothing has been done with those. There's been no analysis of those responses and I think the next step, whoever gets into government, and we are saying we would do this, is to analyse those thousands of contributions on the GRA.

JG: OK. Helen -

HW: So, clearly it's a really difficult issue. I'm sure it's been discussed quite a lot on this programme on previous days, but we don't want to see anyone discriminated against for their gender, but we do recognise and want to protect single sex spaces.

JG: Belinda -

BdL: I have huge sympathy for those going through gender dysphoria and that are living in a body that they don't feel they can identify with. I really do, but I also think this is a huge conversation, where women need to be involved in it far, far more. I think a [self identification?] can be seen to be reducing biological sex to quite an insignificance and that needs to be talked about. Also, the impact this will have on data and statistics. You know, if you identify as a woman, just - even if you - well, if you're biologically male - look like a man, dress like a man, act like a man - but you claim that you're a woman, and then for some reason commit a crime, how will that affect women's statistics in crime? Will suddenly - you know, you've got to understand the consequences and the significance of redefining what is a woman and what is a man. And I do think women organisations need to be part of the discussion and not hounded out. I think there's quite an intolerance and a ...

JG: Well, yes ...

BdL: ... authoritarian sort of ...

JG: I just ...

BdL: Yup.

JG: Thank you very much. Deidre, in Edinburgh -

DB: Yes, it's a shame there's so little time left to discuss this unfortunately because it's a very complex area ...

JG: You've got a good minute.

DB: Right, OK. Listen, we - I think - I mean, there's such a lot of heat around this discussion. And all of these issues really need to be considered with a lot of care, very openly, thoughtfully and respectfully. We need to ensure that the rights that have been very hard won, for both trans people and women, are maintained, and that we build upon the progress we've made there. So, I've heard directly from trans - young trans people in particular, of the fears they face, so for us, the GRA act that - the draft bill that we are introducing early next year - that's about ensuring that all young people have access to support from a trusted adult. And then we're also, of course, very much aware of the concerns that many people have about changing the current process. And the Scottish Government does have a - has a duty to address that. But the Equality Act is nearly a decade old now. It's clear that where it is proportionate and justifiable there can be exclusions from certain single sex services, and that applies in cases even when a trans person has legal recognition.

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 04/12/2019 18:14

Congratulations, Speaking. Thank you.

NotAssigned · 04/12/2019 18:19

Thank you Pencils.

PencilsInSpace · 04/12/2019 18:20

Speaking StarStarStarFlowers

I'd vote for you!

pombear · 04/12/2019 18:22

Speaking well done!

My kneejerk reaction on listening was the familiar sadness that strong, political women seem unable to speak with any coherence about this issue. And mostly have stick to centering men who identify with women, not women (female sex).

My second kneejerk reaction was 'fucking hell, the only woman who could speak coherently and acknowledge properly the conflict of needs was the Brexit contender' - though my guess is that party is the least likely of parties to have been targeted by the Denton-report crew.

After my kneejerk reactions, I've thought a bit more.

Yet again, this morning's programme has highlighted

  • the obvious fear at R4 Women's Hour of focusing on this issue too much.

The subject is more often included now, given the amount of women talking about it, but it's very often rushed. This programme was focused on 'how the election manifestos might impact women'. And then they spent time on the environment (both sexes), (Brexit, both sexes, without much reference to women in particular) etc. And then, a question that is very, very specficially around women (women as a sex, not a gender). 1 or 2 minutes each - soundbites, no in depth discussion.

The most insulting comment was around 'we need to turn this around' to re-focus the question about men who identify as women (I think this was Sarah, but I may be wrong).

The whole discussion for the last couple of years has been about men who identify as women, their needs, their rights, their wants.

Why does the caller have to suddenly flip it right back again to these people? Where are women (sex, not gender) in this discussion. Why do we need to flip it always back to the men?

pombear · 04/12/2019 18:23

Pencils Star

RuffleCrow · 04/12/2019 18:27

Looks like I'm voting Tory then Shock

WineGummyBear · 04/12/2019 18:31

pombear I completely agree. BBC Woman's Hour are absolutely terrified of giving any significant air time to this issue.

Genuinely the biggest issue facing women in a generation. All women. And they dare not touch it. I don't say this lightly but they are an absolute disgrace. And we will remember this.

NotAssigned · 04/12/2019 18:33

Really useful to be able to read through it pencils.

So, LibDems a complete shitshow (such a shame, Sarah)

Labour, vaguely encouraging. Stressing the manifesto and need to examine consultation responses, but not holding my breath.

SNP - woke - Equality Act alarm.

Brexit - won't get a single seat so irrelevant.

Conservative - we already know they will kick self ID down the road, but imo will harm women in other ways.

JG - confirmed t**f imo.

RuffleCrow · 04/12/2019 18:33

Or maybe Brexit Party?! Shock

This is doing my head in. I have to vote for a party i hate because the others don't appear to know or care what a woman is. I can't even

WineGummyBear · 04/12/2019 18:34

There's some small comfort to be had that JG did at least interrupt the LibDem candidate to point out that the violence that trans people do face is from men and NOT women.

Small comfort indeed.

It's in the f#*king name WOMAN'S hour.

PencilsInSpace · 04/12/2019 18:34

I thought Laura Pidcock came across as quite sensible. She said labour would protect the single sex exceptions and that they would analyse the GRA consultation responses as the 'next step'.

But it's also there in black and white in their manifesto that they are committed to reforming the GRA to introduce self ID. So I don't know why they're bothering about the consultation if they've already made their minds up.

pombear · 04/12/2019 18:40

And thank you Pencils for the transcript - this was the bit that was the Shock

P/Speaking How will the parties protect women in single sex spaces ..

SW: What I'm saying is, I just think that - that we - we should turn this on its head and look at the discrimination that transgender people have - and violence that they have faced.

'Turn this on its head'

So what you're saying Sarah is stop looking at women's sex, not gender definition safety, privacy, dignity, You're saying stop talking about protection for women.

Instead - in this case, as the question was about women, we should refocus, turn it on its head, and look at men who identify as women. You're saying we should centre them?

(Oh Sarah, I so often want to link here to the twitter profiles of the transwomen who litter twitter profiles like yours and other politicians with supportive messages and thanks for standing up for their rights. I don't here, as I think they're confused and have issues, and I don't want to point fingers towards these people. But if you, or your political supporters, scrolled down, even a couple of months, on their profiles, 9 out of 10 times you would find images of penises 'trapped' in fishnet tights, selfies of thighs and 'girls' boots, and discussions that I'm pretty sure don't point to 'most discriminated' against, but playing out fetishes of what a woman means.

A great proportion of the people you think you are supporting are NOT the sort of people you think you are supporting.)

Michelleoftheresistance · 04/12/2019 18:43

Dying to know how the Limp Dims plan to 'turn around the hostility'. Particularly as a judge has recently commented that the GC side was barely in the foothills of offensive, whereas 'DIAF' is fairly damn hostile really.

Forcing males into women's spaces is not going to end in bunnies, sunshine and people skipping hand in hand into the rainbow lit woods, it's going to lead to exponentially increased anger, resentment, evidence of harm and fury about the women harmed, court cases, compensation claims and PR disasters. You'd think someone in this position of responsibility would have the basic intelligence to foresee it. No wonder they can't write risk assessments or impact assessments.

Thank you Pencils . And very well done Speaking

Floisme · 04/12/2019 18:46

Thank you Speaking - well said. And thank you for transcribing Pencils.

I thought the most cogent response by far was from the Brexit Party. Not a position I ever expected to be taking but credit where it's due. She'd even thought about the mangling of crime statistics which is a particular concern of mine.

BoreOfWhabylon · 04/12/2019 18:49

Well done SpeakingOutLoud Flowers

NotAssigned · 04/12/2019 18:51

You've cheered me up a bit michelleoftheresistance.

You've reminded me that we're not going to give up on this fight and that resistance can only grow. It might take longer to win than we would like. But we will win.

pombear · 04/12/2019 19:01

Oh, and that reminds me, one of the 'stand up, help us out' vocal man-idenitfying-as-a-women right now that pops up regularly to support the political parties as they give away women's rights

  • scroll down only a little bit, and you'll see his proud-as-punch picture when he was 'just cross-dressing' in a schoolgirl outfit. And I don't mean a 'Britney Spears' outfit, which is bad enough, but a primary school gingham check dress, knee high socks, and cross-bar shoes.

Female politicians - you should damn well know the reality and totality as to what you're supporting when you do this 'vulnerable, discriminated against' schtick.

(Prepares for deletion for pointing out the obvious. Mid-week, fed up!)

AbsintheFriends · 04/12/2019 19:07

I had to go out at 10.30, but barely bothered to listen up until then because I KNEW - knew with an absolute, bet your last fiver on it certainty - that they'd squeeze this in in the last two minutes.

Bloody bastarding treacherous cowards

ThePurported · 04/12/2019 19:10

Oh Sarah, I so often want to link here to the twitter profiles of the transwomen who litter twitter profiles like yours and other politicians with supportive messages and thanks for standing up for their rights. I don't here, as I think they're confused and have issues, and I don't want to point fingers towards these people. But if you, or your political supporters, scrolled down, even a couple of months, on their profiles, 9 out of 10 times you would find images of penises 'trapped' in fishnet tights, selfies of thighs and 'girls' boots, and discussions that I'm pretty sure don't point to 'most discriminated' against, but playing out fetishes of what a woman means.

A great proportion of the people you think you are supporting are NOT the sort of people you think you are supporting.

This^ really needs to be said and I hope it doesn't get deleted, because it's true. Some of these politicians don't have the first idea about what they are supporting. And those who do know - wtf are they thinking!?
My patience with MPs like Sarah Wollaston is wearing very, very thin.

Thank you to everyone who sent questions to WH, and I salute you Speaking, we wouldn't even get these scraps if people like you didn't pick up the phone Wine

Swipe left for the next trending thread