Madeleine Kearns on The Nine, BBC Scotland

[DrSusan]

Apologies if someone has already posted this, but it's worth watching. Madeleine Kearns discussing the JK Rowling thing with James Morton of Scottish Trans Alliance. She says the unsayable and the sky doesn't fall in.

twitter.com/BBCScotNine/status/1208139377756561408?s=20

I thought she was excellent, but I thought it was really unfair to ask her if she accepted James Morton was a man.

I was very impressed that Kearns answered that question (and skewered the presenter for asking) but you could tell how uncomfortable she was as it came out as a sort of whispered mumble.

Thanks for re-posting that link, I saw it last night and I agree it is worth watching. It confirms that if we are ever going to get anywhere in this debate we need to be talking to the transmen and not the transwomen. I did however come away feeling very sad for James Morton although I'm not entirely sure why.

Yes, Madeleine has tweeted that it was unfair to personalise the question which should have been posed as 'are transmen men?' But I'm really glad she didn't duck it.

I know what you mean about James Morton, but don't give in to it! We know what James is like. And I think it's very telling that James always does the media for STA and not someone like James's colleague Becky Kauffman . . . Almost like sex matters, isn't it?

I'm annoyed that the situation Maya found herself in is being framed as her being abusive towards a colleague. Maya was posting online, not at work. She was sacked for something factual that she posted on social media.
A reasonable tone of voice does not guarantee a reasonable debate. I don't see why my right to single sex spaces and services should be put at risk.
The GRA does not guarantee trans people the absolute right to access them, I don't know when people started to say it does but its concerning.

@TheInebriati completely agree. James Morton was misrepresenting the judgement throughout. And the interviewers weren't well enough informed to challenge.

Madeleine was great, thanks for sharing.

There are very different issues though for trans men than from trans women - trans men are much more likely to pass in the first place, but more critically are much more unlikely to do any harm to men, whereas the opposite is true for trans women. She answered the question well though.

I am also pissed off that Maya is being misrepresented - she has basically engaged in the type of discussion that we have all been having about the implications of the GRA and it's reform as far as I can see - the conversations that the judge reckons it should be fine to have.

James Morton and Madeleine Kearns were so civilised. They listened to each other and respected the others right to hold and share an opinion, There was no aggression and no interruption ... It was almost as if two women were debating.

My thoughts exactly aliasundercover

It's almost as if female socialization growing up has stuck with JM

After this innocuous discussion, is Madeleine Kearns now at risk of being sacked for "misgendering" James Morton?

There was no aggression and no interruption ... It was almost as if two women were debating.
That was very noticable. I groaned when I heard "Scottish Trans Alliance", but was genuinely suprised at Morton's reasonable tone and nonagressive body language.
Thinking about it, I've noticed much the same thing whenever I've seen a transman interviewed on TV. Not that we ever get to see many of those on TV of course; as far as the media is concerned, Paris Lees and Munroe Bergorf are about the only trans people in existence!

Very refreshing to have 3 out of 4 people discussing this having xx chromosomes and I agree that both MK and JM were civilised and polite.

It was a shame that they did not allow MK to rebut JM's misrepresentation of the judgment. The judge went further than JM suggested and specifically said that Maya's "beliefs" about the immutability of binary sex were incompatible with a democratic society, ie that if she said as much this would create a hostile environment for trans people.

So the scientifically supported fact of of the immutability of sex is rendered unsayable by the judgment, on pain of being sacked.

This is not, as some have suggested, the same as not permitting employees to state views that homosexuality is wrong. Depending on the context I accept an employer might have grounds to dismiss an employee on these grounds. And this would be an opinion, not a fact that is agreed by 95% of scientists.

A better parallel is if an employer prevented employees from discussing climate change (upon which 95%+ of scientists agree) on the grounds that others who do not believe in man made climate change might disagree with them, and might feel hurt and uncomfortable.

It was almost as if two women were debating

Careful now. Thats sex stereotyping.

This is not, as some have suggested, the same as not permitting employees to state views that homosexuality is wrong. Depending on the context I accept an employer might have grounds to dismiss an employee on these grounds

I disagree. If an employee was, say, at an evangelical church meeting in a personal capacity where they said homosexual sex was a sin and someone there told someone else who was upset by this and complained to the employer then I don’t think there should be any grounds for dismissal.