Sarah Baxter in The Times

[Igneococcus]

Rather confused fence sitting:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/im-with-jk-rowling-but-lets-be-kinder-about-gender-hddmmsmk6?shareToken=a91974a238bfb7356c5fe29cea1beae3

a very confused article. her concessions that sports, rape counselling and prisoners who are sex offenders shouldn't get the full protection of TWAW will have her condemned as a transphobe. 99% compliance is insufficient. so will she capitulate that last 1% or will she accept that satisfying the woke is not an achievable ambition?

She comes across like someone who has only just started thinking about it all.

Love that Barrackers “Pronouns” piece is quoted

It’s the insistence that Maya thinks all men are rapists/all TW are rapists which I find the most galling. Sarah doesn’t mind changing with men, so why should anyone else. For the billionth time, Not All Men (including TW) rape. However, until we have a sure fire way of telling who will and who won’t, we exclude ALL men from spaces where women are vulnerable as a protective measure. Even then, an outrageous amount of women are sexually assaulted each year.

Love that Barrackers “Pronouns” piece is quoted

Might have been nice had it not been attributed to Maya.

Silly article which doesn't properly understand the arguments from either side and is superficially researched.

I agree this article is muddled and inconsistent - I wonder whether there is an element of it being deliberately so - the Times has had numerous attacks and at least one court case linked to the TWAW mantra and the very clear pro GC approach. Articles like this can be pointed to as evidence as including a range of views - the fact it is being discussed is great - the silencing of discussion in the media seems to be coming to an end - The Maya court ruling - whilst horrible will hopefully lead to a broader debate and an improved legal decision.I am struggling to come to terms with the fact I could be sacked for stating ‘I don’t believe it is ever possible for a man to change into a women’

Yeah she doesn’t really get it does she

Just cos she is comfy with men in the ladies pool she reckons that all women should be

Needs to expand her thinking about why some women would not be comfy with that

It’s I am fine with it therefore all women should be

A odd way to think 🤦‍♀️🤷‍♀️

It’s the insistence that Maya thinks all men are rapists/all TW are rapists which I find the most galling. Sarah doesn’t mind changing with men, so why should anyone else. For the billionth time, Not All Men (including TW) rape. However, until we have a sure fire way of telling who will and who won’t, we exclude ALL men from spaces where women are vulnerable as a protective measure

Absolutely. If they are saying not all men rape, so why bother, then why not just get rid of any child safeguarding too.

It will be interesting to see the comments, if not censored. Times readers tend to be highly GC.

Oh FFS. What a crap article. Yes, she seems to have only just discovered the issue and misrepresented Maya very unfairly and misunderstands the whole area.

I have mailed the Complaints section of the Times regarding the attribution of the Rohypnol article to Maya. More of us should do this.
Here's the address: [email protected]

Thanks. I've commented about some of the things she's got confused.

Honestly though, surely it's the "suck my dick" brigade that need to be kinder.

Terrible. Not all men, I don't mind gender neutral toilets so nobody else should, but will nobody think of the children etc etc. But lets all be kind. Bullshit bingo from someone who doesn't actually want to engage.

I have also commented, but the comment is "pending approval".

Yes a critical comment appeared in my feed but has now disappeared.

I think it will be quite some time that the comments will appear. There are currently seven people typing comments. The moderators will be busy today.

I think you can sometimes see comments in the 5 minutes window that allows editing the comment.

I have also commented, but the comment is "pending approval".

Normal. They can take three hours to get through sometimes.

I agree with confused nature of this piece. How can you define a "female rape counsellor" with self-I.d. In place.

However, I do agree with this:

"I would rather troubled teenagers were able to self-identify without being pushed helter-skelter towards puberty-blocking drugs and irreversible sex surgery, as they are by the militant trans lobby".

Shocking, that the medical profession in this field has allowed itself to be governed by the militant trans lobby.

The sooner "gender" and "sex" are separated again the better.

Empress, most of my comments in the past get through right away and stick. A few have had to be approved; some passed approval, some didn't. This time I only commented on the false attribution of the Rohypnol article. I expect many did so. There's nothing controversial about that: it's just wrong.

On a second reading I think this is a mendacious piece. Effectively Baxter wants to please both sides and does this by agreeing that the gender critical side have some good points but then recognises that to insulate herself from the aggression of trans activists she must pay tribute and does this by throwing Maya Forstater to the wolves. Cowardly and dishonest is quite a combination.

The ferocious trans wars echo the debates of the 1980s, when some feminists insisted that all men were rapists. Yes, there are perverts out there, but I don’t regard every trans woman as a walking sex offender, as Forstater appears to. - probably untrue

“Pronouns are Rohypnol,” she once claimed, referring to the date-rape drug. “They change our perception, lower our defences . . . alter the reality in front of us. They numb us. They confuse us. They remove our instinctive safety responses. They work.” - false attribution

This suggests that every self-identified “she” who has failed to lop “her” bits off is a threat to the female sex. - misrepresentation

In some ways, opponents like Forstater play into their hands by insisting that possession of a male member or a set of ovaries is destiny. - gross misrepresentation

It is close to slandering Maya the way that the media quote that one paragraph from the tribunal judgement, it makes it sound as though she was persistently misgendering someone at work, which didn't happen. It was a badly written judgement but the sloppy media coverage (copy/pasting from ill-informed Twitter accounts) is making things worse. I really hope someone publishes a follow up piece that is better researched and more fair, because the impact of this misrepresentation is going to be really big, especially for Maya's future, but also the future of what people believe is permissible. We are so so low on spades this Christmas but I am going to have to find some for this case.

Comments are coming through, but not as GC as I would have liked. More "this is a great and balanced article". No comment about the misrepresentation of the Rohypnol article as come through.

" By sex, Rowling didn’t mean bonking"

Is this The Times or The Sun?

and it is not being unkind

it is about whether transwomen are women

I believe not but do not care is anyone thinks that unkind

But I reserve the right to consider Forstater a very rude person.

Shut up women and then none of this nastiness need happen to you.