Prospect Magazine: Kathleen Stock v Robin Moira White

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

Great discussion.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/essays/gender-wars-two-opposing-perspectives-on-the-trans-and-womens-rights-debate

Gender wars: two opposing perspectives on the trans and women’s rights debate
A lawyer and philosopher respond to seven propositions—ranging from single-sex spaces to puberty blockers for children

Robin says ‘[transwomen]... are accepted into the female diaspora’

This diaspora comment? Surely that works out as Robin saying transwomen are accepted into male spaces? Which is hardly surprising....

"And perhaps a greater proportion of trans people face discrimination than those with protected characteristics such as race or sex."

Robin knows this isn't true as this is exactly the reason Robin has chosen to retain theit male voice.

It's worth looking at the rest of this edition of prospect magazine. Some other interesting articles on cancel culture, no platforming etc which some ppl on here are intereste in. Something by Jeanette Winterton, something by malala.

Thanks Robin for doing this interview.

We have had self-declaration in the workplace since the 2010 Equality Act came into effect and industry hasn’t ground to a halt, nor have service providers experienced any real difficulty. One US study found that laws in Massachusetts that allow transgender people to use public toilets and changing rooms in accordance with their gender identity have not impacted on safety as measured by criminal reports.

We discussed that study on this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3994546-stats-on-attack-on-women-by-men-self-identifying-as-women?pg=4

I've linked to page 4 where Kantastic explained some of the methodological issues with that study in a number of comments, starting 15/08/2020 at 00:00. (continued onto page 5 and 6).

I then went into more detail in this comment on page 12:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3994546-stats-on-attack-on-women-by-men-self-identifying-as-women?msgid=99299061#99299061

showing that in 6 out of the 9 localities studied, the law changes had taken effect less than 12 months prior to the fieldwork, the laws were not actual self-id laws but rather aspirational bylaws on equality for all that would have gone largely unnoticed, and that the data collection differences between localities did not allow any comparisons to be made that were statistically sound.

I don't expect RMW to be aware of that discussion, but didn't want to let this claim go unchallenged. The study provides no evidence at all that self-id laws will not impact on women's safety and should not be cited as doing so.

I don't expect RMW to be aware of that discussion

I would expect that the author of a book that covers related issues to should be aware of the methodological flaws and matters arising even if unaware of the specific and related discussion on a social media forum that the author frequents.

I took @robinmoirawhite 's comment about voice and power to mean that to have it altered would affect her voice strength wise, which wouldn't be good if you use it a lot for work.
Nothing to do with being male pitch which others are jumping to.
I find it fascinating how people' s minds interpret the same things completely differently.

@ArabellaScott

RMW was asked to respond to a series of questions that were put with someone else's answers. RMW didn't know that this was going to happen hence withdrawing from the 'debate'

Oh, really? That's interesting. I thought it was a really helpful and interesting way of looking at the issue - two views from different angles. They are very clearly from different angles, given the difference in tone and content, too. I thought that was interesting - Robin's answers seemed much more personal while Kathleen's were apparently factual.

Robins answers seemed much more personal while Kathleen's were apparently factual. Well, the answers would be, wouldn't they? As how on earth would you know what it was like to be trans if you weren't? You wouldn't have a personal experience of it yourself. (and don't come at me saying but how you no Kathleen's not trans, you misgendering her like? ' as I might just have to do a whatever myself

@NoNotMeNoSiree

I took *@robinmoirawhite* 's comment about voice and power to mean that to have it altered would affect her voice strength wise, which wouldn't be good if you use it a lot for work. Nothing to do with being male pitch which others are jumping to. I find it fascinating how people' s minds interpret the same things completely differently.

Yes I did as well.

I've just said that I find it quite an extraordinary comment if that is how Robin meant it, but I agree your interpretation makes much more sense.

NoNotMeNoSiree

When I first read the comment I took it the way you did. There's then post after post going on about "male gravitas" etc.etc.

That's really not how a court or tribunal works.

wonder regarding Robin's voice, Robin means that Robin doesn't want to risk having surgery for this as if it went wrong that would cause problems with Robin earning a living due to one's voice being necessary to work as a barrister. The retention of the advantage of speaking with male authority could therefore just be seen as a side effect of this decision.

Yes I imagine so.

However, many trans women do not have vocal surgery but alter their voices through vocal training, which Robin could still do, so this is where this argument falls down.

Indeed, Tinsel.

@TinselAngel

I wonder regarding Robin's voice, Robin means that Robin doesn't want to risk having surgery for this as if it went wrong that would cause problems with Robin earning a living due to one's voice being necessary to work as a barrister. The retention of the advantage of speaking with male authority could therefore just be seen as a side effect of this decision.

However, many trans women do not have vocal surgery but alter their voices through vocal training, which Robin could still do, so this is where this argument falls down.

Always entertained by folk who know my life story better than I do - and I was there, I seem to remember.

I worked with a nationally recognised voice coach but to raise the pitch of my voice sufficiently left me in a position where to produce enought power to hold a court room was too much of a strain. We are all different and the same might not be true for another transwoman.

The relevant vocal-cord tightening operation has a number of associated risks and I decided that they were risks too far.

I see that this thread, particularly in the early pages is full of those who wish to judge my appearance. Well, my experience is that I dont get misgendered when I am seen as well as heard, and I will live with that.

However, had it been an option for me not to have endured male puberty, then I would not face this difficulty, which is one reason from personal experience why I support tht being an option for trans young people who are sufficiently mature to take that decsion.

RobinMoiraWhite

I've asked for my first post to be deleted as it's unfair to you.

When I first read the comment I took it to mean what you have just said and what NoNotMeNoSiree also posted.

I'm afraid I started doubting myself after all the posts putting a quite different interpretation.

@Manderleyagain

It's worth looking at the rest of this edition of prospect magazine. Some other interesting articles on cancel culture, no platforming etc which some ppl on here are intereste in. Something by Jeanette Winterton, something by malala.

Thanks Robin for doing this interview.

You are welcome.

One of the many dis-incentives for trans people to engage publicly with any form of discussion, is the general vileness we are exposed to on forums such as this, which go far beyond comments on the substance of what we say. Reading the thread above are comments about my appearance and my professionalism, for example, most of which are just plain spiteful. Feminists who have my respect dont deply such tactics.

But if those who do think tht is a tactic which is likely to win hearts and minds, then carry on. I wont be adopting it - I just pity those who do.

However, had it been an option for me not to have endured male puberty, then I would not face this difficulty, which is one reason from personal experience why I support tht being an option for trans young people who are sufficiently mature to take that decsion.

Someone who has not been through puberty means they are prepubescent. Prepubescent. A child.

How can any child, anywhere, at any time understand the implications of a lifetime of infertility, a compromised, if not non existent, sex life, and being dependent upon drugs and/or treatment for the rest of their lives?

And you appear to be basing this opinion on your voice being too deep??

Good lord.

However, had it been an option for me not to have endured male puberty, then I would not face this difficulty, which is one reason from personal experience why I support tht being an option for trans young people who are sufficiently mature to take that decsion.

Given that many children begin puberty before theage of twelve/ thirteen, how many would you think have the mental maturity to undertake treatment which will render them infertile and may even result in never experiencing sexual fulfillment?

I meant to say male children, obviously many girls begin puberty much earlier than that.

At the other end of the spectrum, while I look female, I sound male as I have done little to alter my speaking voice, as it is something I rely on in my job as a barrister

This the exact quote. The interpretation being put on it by some posters here actually displays a quite astonishing degree of sexism and prejudice.

In a profession which now has over 50% female entry and good female representation at lower courts and tribunals ( higher courts have a wee bit to go) do posters really think the courts care more for "manly gravitas" than a well argued and presented case?

Can you (general you) not see what a sexist spin you've put on this?

Feminists who have my respect dont deply such tactics.

I'm not sure if you're being disingenuous, or you genuinely don't understand why people question your assertion that no one knows you're trans.

The reason people question it, is because asserting that transwomen are in women's spaces and no one knows is a position that needs challenging.

Women are reluctant to challenge male individuals in person, because experience tells them it's a risky tactic. Or they may be being kind.

There are 6,500 genetic differences between men and women and women are socialised almost as soon as they are aware, to spot them.

It's not spite! It's in response to your assertion that no one knows. Because if women genuinely don't know, aside from the question of potential deceit, they shouldn't be making any kind of objection. Therefore it is refuted. It's not because women are being 'vile'.

I mean Robin, why do you think women are challenging you? Why do you think they don't want transwomen in their spaces? Do you honestly think it's spite? Is there not even a small part of you that understands that women's experience means they would like an all female space sometimes?

do you honestly think it's spite
Comments about my appearance and professionalism for example
Did you read Robin's post properly?
If so, why are you twisting her words to start going on about challenging in n spaces?!
That's not what she was referring to!

Random n in there for some reason, don't know where that came from

When she said spite she was clearly talking about people picking apart her appearance, and about her professionalism.

@Datun

Feminists who have my respect dont deply such tactics.

I'm not sure if you're being disingenuous, or you genuinely don't understand why people question your assertion that no one knows you're trans.

The reason people question it, is because asserting that transwomen are in women's spaces and no one knows is a position that needs challenging.

Women are reluctant to challenge male individuals in person, because experience tells them it's a risky tactic. Or they may be being kind.

There are 6,500 genetic differences between men and women and women are socialised almost as soon as they are aware, to spot them.

It's not spite! It's in response to your assertion that no one knows. Because if women genuinely don't know, aside from the question of potential deceit, they shouldn't be making any kind of objection. Therefore it is refuted. It's not because women are being 'vile'.

Exactly. Women are completely socialised to pretend in social environments in order to keep safe/avoid conflict. They will be pretending all the time not to notice something that is very obvious to them. This happens in lots of social interactions when women interact with men: it isn't just to do with transness. But to say that women don't notice - and then ignore women repeatedly saying yes, they do - is not any kind of feminism.

It's telling that you always complain you're being personally attacked, Robin - yet you don't engage with questions of content; and have a tendency to grandstand on threads by talking about yourself rather than the issues. Then you don't want posters to talk about you (or do you?)

Have you spent any time on any of the other boards to find out the general posting style on MN? If you posted about yourself in relation to any other topic on another board, you'd find posters being a lot more blunt than here. Try a nice parking post on AIBU, or post how much you spend on your Christmas food shop, and just see how spiteful you think we all are then