Tom Swarbrick on LBC has been climbing Peak Trans for a while, albeit slowly. He still thinks "real trans" is only post-op lifelong commitments though, not aware of the aggressive activist type, very keen to be right on with pronouns and letting people live etc.
He caught onto the Claire Dimyon/NHS case last night, and cross-referenced it to the GRA and self-id manifesto pledge by the Lib Dem. He's also started reading Janice Turner.
As intro, he plays Nick Ferrari interviewing Jo Swinson. It's as much of a car crash as everything she’s done lately. She is audibly clueless and unable to respond several times.
Responses:
-
Males 1 and 2 (predictably): "I don't care as long as qualified" and "pay to go private then". TS is not impressed.
-
Male 3: "Doesn't matter as long as qualified, BUT Claire within her rights". Hastily pre-denies transphobia before saying male is male. Asked about self-id and immediately recognises the issues, and turns it onto a woman in a man's place being uncomfortable for him.
-
Female 4: "Claire case is outrageous, she did nothing wrong. I don't care re male or female but I had women and it was great" ( 
). Raised issue that people might simply avoid necessary intimate treatment for fear of "offending".
Had Linda Bellos on to respond to political anti Semitism claims (seemed like a deliberate red herring to get her on tbh, as finally got round to GRA…). She is damningly eloquent about the ignorance shown by MPs about the law and explains it very well. Refers to the negative impact on women and lesbians specifically, and how that is being ignored. Calls on the government to explain.
-
Female 5: “A doctor is a doctor”. Doesn’t understand any of the issues, admits she missed the whole explanation re Claire but can’t see the problem ( 
). Rape is “not a nice thing to happen”. Says that nobody would be able to tell a (transwoman) male from a female anyway. Completely misses the self-id issue entirely and assumes it is equal to full medical transition and post-operative. Makes no sense whatsoever – “dresses like a woman”, says a woman is someone who “behaves like a woman”. Has the typical nice trans friends. Ends up saying “you can’t just say you are a woman to be one”! Tom is very frustrated.
-
Male (transwoman) 6: ‘Traditional’ transsexual, post-op, has GRC. Completely agrees with Claire, no problem with it, doesn’t feel discriminated against at all, thinks her wishes should be respected. Accepts they are, and always will be, male and will get “some sort” of discrimination but that’s life. Openly says they are a transwoman, not a woman. Womanhood is not their “territory” and they are ok with that.
-
Female 7: Makes very good point that the emphasis should be about respecting the patient’s wishes above all. Asking for a female for intimate exams is not discriminating and means people get necessary medical care.
-
Male (transwoman) 8: Thinks it means GRC and all the legal and bodily changes. Says most women will accept that but not self-id. Lib Dem route is a can of worms.
-
Male (transwoman) 9: Slightly aggressive, says they are female (“not trans”) and sees no difference between natal women and trans people. Ridiculously tries to minimise all difference between the sexes to one single chromosome as if that is meaningless, “ancient history”. No longer governed by that, evolution has moved on. Any one differentiating is bigoted.
Topic closed immediately after that, but is longer than it has been given before. Am going to contact Tom later today with my thoughts.
(You have to download the LBC app to Listen Again, starts about 1.05 into the Sunday night show)