Maya on Radio 5 live this morning

[BoreOfWhabylon]

Just announced she'll be interviewed by Naga Mumchetty after 10 am. Not sure when, as they'll be giving a lot of coverage to the Afghanistan situation.

Can't see another thread, sorry if I missed one.

..also, 'maybe there are five genders; Men, Women, Transmen, Transwomen and Intersex,' and 'Biology is not destiny: Look at Afghanistan...'

Just listened, Maya was fabulous! So clear and calm. The texts that are getting read out though, were they listening to a different show?! Completely disingenuous and misrepresentation of what Maya said. No surprises there.

I imagined that would be the case.

I'm just fed up of every debate/discussion about this issue it's always the GC women having to defend every detail of why they won't accept transwomen in their spaces.

It's never the other way round, lots of tip toeing so not to offend, no awkward intense questioning like women have to put up with. I find that incredibly frustrating.

I loved that Maya made the point about privacy. As she said, we don't let men into women's showers just because they individually aren't considered a threat.

Thing that annoys me is naga never mentioned the affect on women and girls.

It was like the most oppressed minority

Or maybe that was her job to do that. I never have listened to her before or radio 5

Jeez intersex is not a gender. I heard that as well

So rude

And yeah. That tip toing thing that goes on as well

I texted that the the women and girls in Afghanistan can't identify out of their desperate plight.

Get texting sisters! 85058

Yes I don't think I've ever heard anyone arguing the other side be interviewed so robustly. Maya can obviously handle it, but that's not the point! Such double standards, as per. Nobody ever asks such pointed questions. "Do you think comparing individuals who have been through male puberty and have all the benefits that entails as the same as women offensive?" Etc etc. Obviously that's a shit question but you know what I mean.

This is such a hot topic at the moment. And lots of places are wanting to, at least gives the impression of, debate.

So instead of putting on one side, and then the other, or instead of printing an article today, and a counter article tomorrow, why don't they have a to and fro that lasts, I don't know, an hour and a half?

Where each point is debated equally and at the same time, with refutations and analysis on a point by point basis.

Instead they've got people like Maya, putting forward a case which is, to my mind, impossible to refute and then a trans ally/activist putting forward an argument that is either an appeal to kindness, or staring points which are not true and easily demolished. But the first person never gets the chance to respond.

There's a reason why an awful lot of people say I'm confused about this, I don't really get it, I'm not really up to speed with it, despite the fact that it's being talked about all the time. They have been told it's bigoted not to agree, they've been told how transphobic they are to question, but when the opportunity arises to actually examine why, they're not given it.

I know there are many people who simply will not expose themselves in the media, because they know their argument is so weak. But in that case, the media should be making a whole issue out of that.

Excellent Maya.. there was enough time to get her points across well. But it does show that we are always on the defensive, responding to questions that imply our viewpoint is wrong. It never ever goes the other way. However, Woman’s Hour should have done this two years ago.

So instead of putting on one side, and then the other, or instead of printing an article today, and a counter article tomorrow, why don't they have a to and fro that lasts, I don't know, an hour and a half?

The fact that isn't possible really should become the story.

Here is a TV producer talking about his trials and tribulations trying to make a previous documentary on "trans kids".

As something of an outsider, he found it darkly humorous exactly how bad our opponents are. (He found working with both sides in Israel vs Palestine much easier...)

Please, Olly, make a documentary about it...

@Datun

This is such a hot topic at the moment. And lots of places are wanting to, at least gives the impression of, debate.

So instead of putting on one side, and then the other, or instead of printing an article today, and a counter article tomorrow, why don't they have a to and fro that lasts, I don't know, an hour and a half?

Where each point is debated equally and at the same time, with refutations and analysis on a point by point basis.

Instead they've got people like Maya, putting forward a case which is, to my mind, impossible to refute and then a trans ally/activist putting forward an argument that is either an appeal to kindness, or staring points which are not true and easily demolished. But the first person never gets the chance to respond.

There's a reason why an awful lot of people say I'm confused about this, I don't really get it, I'm not really up to speed with it, despite the fact that it's being talked about all the time. They have been told it's bigoted not to agree, they've been told how transphobic they are to question, but when the opportunity arises to actually examine why, they're not given it.

I know there are many people who simply will not expose themselves in the media, because they know their argument is so weak. But in that case, the media should be making a whole issue out of that.

Yes datun

That was exactly what happened with the Peter Tatchel/ jellie Jay interchange last week, Datun

The last word was given to Tatchell and it was all incorrect information that can easily be disproved, but Kellie never got the chance to even signpost to the relevant proof. Made me mad!

And of course then people only hear obe side of the story and think they have got the whole picture. So deceitful.

I am a big fan for letting it ALL come out, all the evidence, from all stakeholders and main players from Linehan to Susie Green to Jazz Jennings and Elliot Page because I think all the evidence speaks for itself.

If the 'other side' is do confident that they are right and everyone agrees with them, why do they so aggressively suppress the debate!?

Nice, reasoned approach and lots of space provided by interviewer Naga for Maya to explain with clarity (the bleeding obvious, but ye)...Well done Maya, especially clear on the blokes in women's showers stuff ....

This interview was like a cool drink of water. So clear, calm and factual. Such a relief to hear it discussed like this. Thanks for the link!

@NecessaryScene

So instead of putting on one side, and then the other, or instead of printing an article today, and a counter article tomorrow, why don't they have a to and fro that lasts, I don't know, an hour and a half?

The fact that isn't possible really should become the story.

Here is a TV producer talking about his trials and tribulations trying to make a previous documentary on "trans kids".

As something of an outsider, he found it darkly humorous exactly how bad our opponents are. (He found working with both sides in Israel vs Palestine much easier...)

Please, Olly, make a documentary about it...

Thanks for posting that NecessaryScene. I've heard about it, but I haven't actually watched it. It's fascinating.

This man is not a gender critical person necessarily, or a feminist, he's a documentary maker.

And he was utterly shocked at the depths people went to to stop the documentary being made. He says he approached Helen Webberley, Susie Green, Maria Miller (too busy apparently, for three whole months, and 'not at all involved in that any more', despite the fact that the next day he was sent an email where she was chairing a panel on trans issues), Stonewall, Owen Jones, Paris Lees, Justine greening, Jake LaGraf, Gendered intelligence, and a whole load more. None would participate. Helen Webberley said he must not talk to David Davis MP, or Stephanie Davies Arai and then she might consider it.

He complied, she cancelled anyway.

He encountered huge resistance, with people going to several layers of boss above him, in order to gain control of the documentary.

He points out that Susie Green said she wouldn't do it, because it would be one sided, even though he says well wouldn't that guarantee it's one-sided!

He says that in his entire career, he has never encountered resistance of this nature, and was overwhelmed when he finally heard the opening as it was broadcast.

He concludes by saying people will talk to any journalist any where, if they think they are right.

Come on Olly Lambert - this is the big story.

Seconds out, round two!

As far as the format for discussion in the media, I think that's a general problem with how the mainstream radio and television media operate. They just don't spend enough time on issues to go into serious depth, and they either soft-ball the questions or are too aggressive so the people being interviewed can't really describe what they mean.

Even shows that allow an exchange between guests often descend to a sort of shouting match or people talking aver one another.

Some of the longer form interviews now available on podcasts and youtube are much better in terms of allowing guests to really explain their perspective, but I just can't see radio moving to hour or more interviews.

Even shows that allow an exchange between guests often descend to a sort of shouting match or people talking aver one another.

Yes, I think you're right. It requires a seasoned professional, who is determined to remain neutral at all costs. Something, particularly when it comes to women's rights, that is hard to find.

Reading out texts ALL critical of Maya's position. Now a woman with a NB child.

Looks like they couldn't get one of the usual suspects to speak.

Who did they get? Please don't say Tatchell or even worse India Willoughby

More than one of yertexts that simply cannot fathom the distinction between sex (male/female) and gender (masculine/feminine.)

I wonder what the actual balance of texts was....