Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

R4 now Tuesday 7.51 am

541 replies

somethinginoffensive · 08/06/2021 07:52

Discussing Stonewall.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
Avocadowoman · 08/06/2021 14:01

@nauticant

This was a popular comment under the Daily Mail article:

So if the word 'mother' is to be replaced by 'parent who has given birth' what does that make a grandmother? A parent who has given birth to a parent who has given birth or contributed to a parent giving birth.

Sadly I think that 'grandmother' would be defined as 'a grandparent who identifies as female'.

For grandmother, we use maternal or paternal if we want to be specific.

So if my father now identifies as a woman, and my paternal grandmother identifies as a man, I suppose the concept is 'grandparent who identifies as male who gave birth to the parent who contributed sperm to make me'??

However, this shows how complicated the whole thing is, because we are debating this using English, where for example the word 'aunt' could be used to mean 'my mother's sister' or 'my father's sister' or 'my mother's brother's wife' or 'my father's brother's wife', or 'my mother's sister's wife' or 'my father's sister's wife'.

I believe that other languages would have a different word for a number of those relationships, if not all. So if my sister identified as a man, that would change the word my nephew would use to describe me, even though I might disagree with the concept of gender and hence still think of my sister as my sister and not by brother.

Can anyone confirm this?

If so, has this led to new words now same sex marriage exists?

nauticant · 08/06/2021 14:04

That's why the comment was popular Avocadowoman, it was someone hazarding a guess at "what will this look like when it's implemented" and finding that the answer to be "ugly and alienating".

CroydianSlip · 08/06/2021 14:08

Someone said they were glib and to email JW to thank him - I'd like to do the same, and for SW - does anyone have the addresses?

I actually felt quite touched by SW putting forward the point re spaces and sports as it's so unusual to have a male voice represent what worries me so much about all this. And he was allowed to say it clearly, calmly and without interruption.

nauticant · 08/06/2021 14:10

Actually writing my post has just crystallised something for me. Up to now identity politics has been fought on the territory of those wanting to rewrite reality and to gain power and control and one reason why the latest battles are proving to be especially helpful to the GC cause is that as this stuff becomes mainstream people making up the mass of the UK feel they're being told "your identity is offensive and will now be rewritten". They are finding this just as unpalatable as the social justice identity warriors and are starting to say "right then, if you want an identity war we'll give you one".

HeronLanyon · 08/06/2021 14:12

I hope JKR was listening. It might help her with all the death threats etc she received for saying the same. And Maya and Allison and all of the brave women and some men speaking truth and upholding transwomen’s and women’s rights.

HopeClearwater · 08/06/2021 14:12

BC: I’m Jewish I’m gay I’ve got a disability SO YOU CAN’T ARGUE WITH ME

Justin Webb:

ShagMeRiggins · 08/06/2021 14:15

“Self ID is simply about paperwork"

So is marriage. Both examples change a person’s legal status, which is why we can’t merely self-identify into it.

I can’t split with my partner then demand half of his assets unless I have a legal entitlement to it.

poshme · 08/06/2021 14:18

James Kirkup has pointed out on Twitter:

Listeners to @BBCr4today might have heard claims about Stonewall’s position on the single sex exemptions to Equality Act 2010. The fact is that Stonewall made repeated calls for those exemptions - which allow for female-only services - to be abolished
With a link to his thread from a few years ago.

Been retweeted by Adam boulton who has 212k followers. Smile

Mrsorganmorgan · 08/06/2021 14:19

purpleboy
I have just tweeted how really offensive that remark was to Hillsborough and all who died. I have had many "likes" for that tweet

Puddycatfan · 08/06/2021 14:20

Yes, @HopeClearwater, I liked that bit too...
Like i said earlier, usually i would have been at work at that time. Obviously the stars were aligned allowing me to listen to the best radio I've heard in years!

bellinisurge · 08/06/2021 14:22

Here's an easy link if anyone missed it

ChristinaXYZ · 08/06/2021 14:22

Nice piece by Sarah Phillimore in The Critic

thecritic.co.uk/trans-activists-car-crash-r4-interview/

WeeBisom · 08/06/2021 14:24

So, David Paisley has just tweeted his outrage that 'gay cis men' spoke over trans people. He recommended Katy Montgomery to the BBC, but the BBC wanted people connected to Stonewall. But I find this anger very telling. He really doesn't seem to care, or realise, that it's just men speaking about a woman's issue.

Freddie McConnell is also mad that journalists are discussing trans people's basic rights and humanity without talking to them. And to be honest the cognitive dissonance is making my head spin. Sorry, Freddy but for years your side has refused to engage in debate and has even made 'no debate' a slogan because your 'existence' is not something that should ever be discussed. There are multiple trans people who have sworn they will NEVER debate this issue. So if trans people refuse to speak about it, you can't very well complain If trans people are left out and their side is left looking like fools.

Tanith · 08/06/2021 14:25

"I think Ranty Ben had gibbered away for so long that they just didn't have the time.
The idiot even started with a long propaganda statement when it was obvious that there were time constraints."

It's an old tactic I first saw used in the 80s. The interviewee starts out with attacking and accusations so the interviewer is diverted by trying to defend themselves. Less time to discuss the actual issues.

What Ben doesn't seem to have considered is that:

  1. You have to be good at it, and he's not.
  2. Most interviewers these days know exactly what's going on and can easily counter it.

Like the attempt at "No Debate" by not showing up, hoping to wreck the discussion, it's an out of date tactic that no longer works.

CardinalLolzy · 08/06/2021 14:28

It's an old tactic I first saw used in the 80s. The interviewee starts out with attacking and accusations so the interviewer is diverted by trying to defend themselves. Less time to discuss the actual issues.

You'll see this happens a lot on certain threads (not just on MN but everywhere on the internet).
Derailing in such a way used to be what we meant by 'trolling' back in those days. (Or asking pointless, irrelevant disingenuous questions, a bit like 'which is worse?') or deliberately misinterpreting what has been said.

poshme · 08/06/2021 14:29

I just listened to the whole thing.

Well that was excellent. Smile

bellinisurge · 08/06/2021 14:29

Sorry, other posters have done this already.

NecessaryScene · 08/06/2021 14:30

So all the trans activists are begging to get onto programmes to debate this stuff now?

Er... good? Let's go!

merrymouse · 08/06/2021 14:33

He really doesn't seem to care, or realise, that it's just men speaking about a woman's issue.

It’s also about the right of people who are same sex attracted to clearly define their sexuality.

Erikrie · 08/06/2021 14:34

Why would they want to interview Katy Montgomery. They're just some random trans rights activist. Much better to have Benjamin Cohen. A slightly more identifiable angry activist. Who interviews very badly.

Anyway, seeing as this isn't about trans rights, but the impact on women's rights, then if they were going to add anyone else to the mix then it should be an actual woman. Not a biological male. However they present.

crossparsley · 08/06/2021 14:35

I would LOVE to hear Katy Montgomerie on the Today programme. Ask her about the suffragettes, and why she would have had a vote before any of them did.

WinterTrees · 08/06/2021 14:40

Wait a minute, wasn't the slot on the Today Programme to discuss Stonewall and why it, as an organisation, has lost so much support lately? (sorry, can't remember how the segment was introduced.)

Why then the tantrum over having two gay men discussing it, and no trans people? Stonewall is still supposed to be an LGBT organisation, is it not? Why is it being put forward as an outrage that one letter from that acronym wasn't elevated above the others?

Erikrie · 08/06/2021 14:41

I would LOVE to hear Katy Montgomerie on the Today programme. Ask her about the suffragettes, and why she would have had a vote before any of them did

I find Katy utterly insufferable. But I probably would listen for entertainment purposes. This morning's car crash made my day. Grin

BoreOfWhabylon · 08/06/2021 14:41

@Tanith
It's an old tactic I first saw used in the 80s. The interviewee starts out with attacking and accusations so the interviewer is diverted by trying to defend themselves. Less time to discuss the actual issues.

Also a tactic beloved of politicians. Stupid stupid man trying it against an interviewer of Justin Webb's calibre.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 08/06/2021 14:42

@CroydianSlip

Someone said they were glib and to email JW to thank him - I'd like to do the same, and for SW - does anyone have the addresses?

I actually felt quite touched by SW putting forward the point re spaces and sports as it's so unusual to have a male voice represent what worries me so much about all this. And he was allowed to say it clearly, calmly and without interruption.

I should think if you email to thank Simon Fanshawe at his contact details that would be welcome:

simonfanshawe.com/