Question Time right now!

[Seeingadistance]

Prof Robert Winston has just stated very clearly that it is not possible to change sex.

In relation to freedom of speech and Kathleen Stock.

[quote Georgist]@mountbattenbergcake

"The equivalence with racial slurs doesn’t seem correct?"

Is that relevant? I'm not suggesting they are equivalent. I'm saying they are concerned with the consequences of speech in both cases. It is fine to cause offense by disputing someone's claims or insulting them. But some people who do this also assault them. Therefore some people argue that the associated speech might be causing the assaults and shouldn't be allowed.

"Saying you can’t change your sex because it’s in your cells is not the same as a racial slur."

I think the rigid use of "sex" is slightly odd considering how the meaning of other words has been changed. For example, a mother use to be the woman who gave birth to a child. Now a mother is the woman who raises the child. For example, a woman who adopted a child will be called the mother, whilst the actual mother will be called the "birth mother!"
If a person who isn't really a mother is called a mother, can't a person who isn't really a woman be called a woman?[/quote]
Therefore some people argue that the associated speech might be causing the assaults and shouldn't be allowed.

What associated speech? What word gets people assaulted?

I think the rigid use of "sex" is slightly odd considering how the meaning of other words has been changed. For example, a mother use to be the woman who gave birth to a child. Now a mother is the woman who raises the child. For example, a woman who adopted a child will be called the mother, whilst the actual mother will be called the "birth mother!"
If a person who isn't really a mother is called a mother, can't a person who isn't really a woman be called a woman?

Sex is rigid because it's basic biology. There's no magic pill that changes your sex to female or male.

@Pinkfairylights
"People aren't attacking trans people because others are talking about biological facts."

I don't think this is relevant to their complaint. It's like the transwoman says "Why can't I go in the women's changing room? I won't harm any women."
It doesn't matter that the transwoman won't harm anyone. The problem is that others (in particular men who aren't trans) could not be stopped going in to changing rooms and so it would be easier for them to assault and rape women.

@Swashbuckled

I was annoyed that on both occasions that Fiona quoted KS, she put it out there like a half muttered throw away. I was also confused by it. What was her motivation for doing this? The statement quoted clearly demonstrated the lunacy of anyone interpreting that quote as transphobic. Why didn’t she stress every word and project it, to clarify this?

Used to quite like her but lost respect for her now. For that, and also for not giving the Prof more air time at the expense of the limp tongued waffle woman.

I think this is worth going back to as it's a similar problem to the one I noticed with Woman's Hour this week.

For so long (literally years) WH were frantic to avoid discussing this issue at all, but when they did actually don their fireproof hazmat suits and pick it up with the long tongs, it was done in such a tone of uncertainty and discomfort that spoke far louder than anything any of the contributors said.

The very fact of their discomfort made listeners who weren't aware of the debate - who had perhaps tuned in to try to work out what was happening - gain the instant impression that there was something inherently unpleasant and problematic about the GC position. The reaction of a supposedly neutral presenter; known, trusted and respected by the audience, provided a smokescreen that prevented people from being able to see the facts for what they are.

Same with Fiona Bruce. Her obvious reluctance to talk about it implies there is substance to the 'unsafe' and 'most vulnerable and marginalised' narrative. We need more plain speakers like Anne McElvoy and Emma Barnett who are brave enough not to play that ridiculous game.

@Marguerite2000

'Mother' has more than one meaning, as do many words. In fact, so does the word 'sex'. It doesn't mean the words have changed though.

Sex may have two meanings but Mother has only one.

Me too @Franca123, me too
Good old Prof Winston !!!!

Sex may have two meanings but Mother has only one.

According to my dictionary it has several, it is listed as both a noun and a verb.

It is fine to cause offense by disputing someone's claims or insulting them. But some people who do this also assault them.
Do you have any statistics on these assualts?
While we are waiting, this is an interesting article.

Just because trans people claim that they can change sex, it does not mean that it is true. Just because trans people claim that they are unsafe, it does not mean that it is true.

I'd love to see a discussion between Lord Winston and Prof Alice Roberts....she's more of the clownfish school of thought isnt she ?

If a person who isn't really a mother is called a mother, can't a person who isn't really a woman be called a woman?

To be called a mother you do still actually need a child. Call me back when we call women who neither bear nor raise children "mothers".

@Runningupthecurtains

For example, a mother use to be the woman who gave birth to a child

I'm not sure that was ever really the case if widowed man remarried it was very common for the new wife to be called Mum/mother (the Dr.s son in Call the Midwife calls the ex nun Mum), my mother called her mother-in-law and father-in-law Mum and Dad.

I thought the term birth mother was ultra-recent, but apparently it was coined in 1956. Maybe that was a red herring.

Doesn't the old-fashioned use of mother for mother-in-law make my point? Nobody said to their MIL "you're not my mother!"

I think there are other examples of incorrect claims which aren't challenged.
For example, fathers saying "we're pregnant."

I think they shouldn't be allowed in sports and I don't know what can be done about changing rooms. But I don't see why they can't be called what they want.

@senua

It is fine to cause offense by disputing someone's claims or insulting them. But some people who do this also assault them. Do you have any statistics on these assualts? While we are waiting, this is an interesting article.

Just because trans people claim that they can change sex, it does not mean that it is true. Just because trans people claim that they are unsafe, it does not mean that it is true.

No I don't have any statistics. Does anyone have statistics on racial or sexual attacks? I thought the consensus was that they were big issues despite evidence (we can't have evidence, because sexism and racism means that people won't report when they are victims of crime). Is that persuasive for racism and sexism but not anti-trans?

I am sympathetic to the position that trans suicide rates are very high because they cannot find happiness, rather than external discrimination. But I don't see how this could be conclusively argued one way or the other.

Doesn't the old-fashioned use of mother for mother-in-law make my point? Nobody said to their MIL "you're not my mother!"

I don't understand. You were saying that the word mother means "woman who has given birth" and PPs are disagreeing - it doesn't only mean that, and never has.

Mother superior...

[quote Georgist]@Pinkfairylights
"People aren't attacking trans people because others are talking about biological facts."

I don't think this is relevant to their complaint. It's like the transwoman says "Why can't I go in the women's changing room? I won't harm any women."
It doesn't matter that the transwoman won't harm anyone. The problem is that others (in particular men who aren't trans) could not be stopped going in to changing rooms and so it would be easier for them to assault and rape women.[/quote]
Hi Georgist

I was responding to a previous poster who said that saying people can't change sex woujld lead to attacks on transpeople, which is cobblers.

I don't want men - however they identify - in women's single sex spaces. As you point out we can't tell the difference between the good ones and predators. Not to mention that women shouldn't be made to share, not just because of potential violence but for reasons of privacy and dignity.

@Runningupthecurtains

Does anyone have any idea how/ why "I disagree with you" makes someone feel unsafe? Not "I disagree with you so I'm going to threaten you" not "I disagree with you so I will hurt you" not even "I disagree with you so you must change your opinion forthwith" just "I disagree". How does that make someone feel unsafe? Why is it of greater concern than the actual threats to prof. Stock? If you believe something why would someone else not believing it make you feel unsafe? Profs Winston and Stock say "you can not change you sex" drama student says "yeah you can, coz something I read on the internet" why does this make drama student feel unsafe or drama student LGBTQ+ classmates. I can understand why Prof Stock feels unsafe, because she is being threatened with violence, with losing her job, with abuse but I can't see why simple disagreement is harmful. If you believe you are correct why does someone holding the opposite belief harm you? DH has a very good friend who is a CofE vicar, DH is an atheist, neither finds the others belief (or lack of) scary. The don't shy away from the subject, they discuss, they debate, they gently rib each other, often to the horror of other people but ultimately they respect that they each hold a different view.

I'll have a shot at this one.

I believe in free speech and the rights of people to debate frankly on difficult topics.

The backdrop of this particular issue is a context where trans people are far more likely to be victims of violent crime than non-trans people(An American study using the National Crime Victimisation Survey, where nearly 300,000 households across America were interviewed, has indicated trans people are 4 times more likely to be victims of violent crime compared to non trans people: escholarship.org/uc/item/7c3704zg), where they face social stigma, low levels of family and social support, routine harrassment, poor mental health, poor life outcomes in general - in education, work, and also poorer physical health relative to non trans people.

Ideally we would live in a world where free and frank debate did not impinge on any of these things - but we don't live in that world - we do live in one where bigots will use the debate to marginalise trans people and invalidate them. Ideally we would live in a world where trans people all have robust mental health and can deflect real or perceived slights against them without feeling wounded....again, we don't live in that world. (And who, after all has completely robust mental health?)

The atheism vs CofE parallel is an interesting one, but people in these demoraphic groups do not hold the same extreme minority status and they are not vulnerable to the same degree. They do not generally experience the same challenges that trans people encounter on a daily basis. Their appearance does not give rise to shouts in the street, double takes on the bus, or fears/ challenges about where they can go to the toilet. (And trans peoples' appearances may cause them to be challenged in either set of toilets they go to).

Generally, although certainly not always, religious belief is not as core to an individual and fundamental to their everyday lived experiences as their sense of gender. And granted gender may feel meaningless to many, it feels that way to me, but it does not feel meaningless to trans people who know all the challenges and pain ahead of them as they contemplate revealing a new identity to others. They know the hardships they will go through, the potential loss of relationships, but their sense of gender drives them to put themselves through it all anyway.

It is in the context and lived reality of being unsafe, that the debate feels unsafe.

I don't believe that should stop anyone talking, but I do believe in care, awareness and consideration.

True because as trans people believe they are already the sex they claim to be, they are not changing anything.

They can believe what they like, Prof Wilson was quite clear what sex means.

But I don't see why they can't be called what they
If want they want is Lucy or Helen or Fifi fine. But when men want to be called women there is an impact on women. We become "cervix havers". We have wooly definitions of woman that exclude actual women in order to make way for men. We have loop holes that let rapists identify as women to access women's spaces.

where trans people are far more likely to be victims of violent crime than non-trans people

There is no evidence of this in the U.K., as you've repeatedly had pointed out to you.

You fudged the question though. What "care, consideration and awareness" are you talking about here? What would be acceptable to you? Obviously it can't mean speaking in a way which makes it impossible to get your point across about sex based rights, can it? Because that is hardly a reasonable expectation.

A suicide is always a coroner's case. Therefore we do have accurate suicide statistics. The accurate statistics completely debunk the supposedly high suicide rate/risk in trans people.

No I don't have any statistics. Does anyone have statistics on racial or sexual attacks? I thought the consensus was that they were big issues despite evidence (we can't have evidence, because sexism and racism means that people won't report when they are victims of crime).

Yes, of course there are statistics about sexist and racist attacks.

I am sympathetic to the position that trans suicide rates are very high because they cannot find happiness, rather than external discrimination. But I don't see how this could be conclusively argued one way or the other.

Why is this women's problem to solve?

Yes, of course there are statistics.

suggestionsplease1

I get your point. I don’t want to make people feel uncomfortable as a matter of course. I certainly don’t want them to feel unsafe.
But what about the women who are stuck in prison with violent male bodied rapists? Are they allowed to defend their right to feel safe? Because it doesn’t feel like it at the moment.

What about the women who have to play contact sports against male bodied people? What about the vulnerable women sharing women’s refuges with male bodied people?

At various points, women have said that things like this make them feel unsafe. I think we need to listen to them, and see what we can do to make them feel safer.

@suggestionsplease1

I wasn't just talking about the trans debate. I mean the no platforming of people for all sorts of reasons, the gasps of you can't say that about perfectly reasonable views and indeed facts. DH and the vicar get other people telling them they can't speak to each that way when they are perfectly OK with a full and Frank exchange of views. Why have started to seek offence on other people's behalf when the words being used aren't slurs or insults or threats they are just different opinions.

@ChloeCrocodile

Doesn't the old-fashioned use of mother for mother-in-law make my point? Nobody said to their MIL "you're not my mother!"

I don't understand. You were saying that the word mother means "woman who has given birth" and PPs are disagreeing - it doesn't only mean that, and never has.

I think it is quite recent that "mother" was reduced to "birth mother" (coined 1956) or "biological mother." I think this became commonplace so as not to offend adoptive mothers. What reaction would you expect if a child referred to his "birth mother" as his "mother?" Or if people said to an adoptive mother: "Oh! You're not the real mother!"

I imagine in the minds of trans people, they want to be treated the same way. They want sex to have as many different meanings as mother has and to be used just as liberally.

@TheMarzipanDildo

suggestionsplease1

I get your point. I don’t want to make people feel uncomfortable as a matter of course. I certainly don’t want them to feel unsafe.
But what about the women who are stuck in prison with violent male bodied rapists? Are they allowed to defend their right to feel safe? Because it doesn’t feel like it at the moment.

What about the women who have to play contact sports against male bodied people? What about the vulnerable women sharing women’s refuges with male bodied people?

At various points, women have said that things like this make them feel unsafe. I think we need to listen to them, and see what we can do to make them feel safer.

That's it. That what I'm trying to get to the root of. Why have we reached a point where it is more acceptable for a rapist (who by the very legal definition of rape must be male) to be put in a prison cell with a woman than it is for for a biology professor to state that humans can't change sex. Why is a nebulous fear of saying the wrong thing more powerful than the actual harm?

"Birth Mother" can mean a surrogate womb-to-rent.

And some adopted people will refer to their adoptive mother as their 'real' mum, which is what it means subjectively to them.

But mother remains a term that is generally understood to normally mean a biological genetic mother.