Woman's Hour on Maya Forstater today (9th March)

[WinterTrees]

Checking in with today's WH offering.

It's an Emma Barnett day, so hoping it's going to be good.

I thought it was good, Maya expressed her entirely reasonable views very clearly, the uninformed listener would've been utterly baffled by EB's line of questioning.

I don't for a second think that EB believed what she was asking, it's what Maya will likely face in court.

The next battle may be lost - and it will be devastating for Maya if it doesn't go her way but she's achieved so much more in the wider context, a win would just be the cherry on top.

It was a shame EB didn't draw out the fact that women have not been able to have this conversation and if it weren't for people tweeting like Maya did so many would be none the wiser as to the impact of males in women's spaces.

I didn't hear it. Was it just Maya on her own being interviewed?

BBC interviewers are supposed to play devil's advocate during a 1:1.

I was interviewed by Victoria Derbyshire once (I think it must have been for 5 Live) and it was the same, because the subject was in essence political. The chap on before me had been involved in an awful family disaster and she was much more gentle.

I've just listened to the whole programme in the car. I don't listen to WH normally so I'm not familiar with the journalist but I didn't care for her style (especially followed as it was by a load of gushing over Joss Stone ffs). I assume she was playing devil's advocate but it just made her sound obtuse a lot of the time imo. If her intention was to give MF the space and ammunition to sound deeply reasonable, she didn't really need to as MF sounds deeply reasonable anyway - much more calm and generous in reply than I would have been, I'm sure.

I'm very familiar with MF's case but have never heard her speak before. I really wish her luck in court. She was restrained in what she said, but the whole thing must have been a nightmare for her. I like a bit of a scrap myself but what she's been through would have made my head explode.

@Morred

I'm not sure if Emma Barnett lost the thread a bit, but I thought the line of questioning about the circumstances under which Maya would misgender someone a bit strange.

"When would you misgender someone?"
"Not in professional life, but potentially in this sort of harmful, dangerous situation"
"Why do you always jump to the harmful situations?"

Yes it was very odd. She asked a question and then seemed to take issue with the very straight forward answer.

Is this the first time WH has interviewed Maya since that time she was lined up and then the interview was pulled when she won? Am I remembering that right?

I like EB normally - but I also thought she lost her way with the " jumping to worst case scenario" line. MF was answering the specific question of would she ever misgender someone, after MF had already stated she wouldn't in a professional situation.
But I did like that MF was able to explain that her discussions were on twitter because there was no place to have them in real life.

Glad to hear MF has been allowed to state what she believes, but I don't like the presenter and think she is someone who likes to be seen as 'woke'.

Not had chance to listen yet but EB is not woke. She's probably the most aggressive interviewer around ATM but unlike, say, Paxman she gives people time to speak and asks open questions unless she gets evasive answers.

I've noticed it before with Emma. She is quite intent on asking awkward questions, but sometimes they don't then flow from the answer that she gets provided with.

It's like the challenging question is the focus, rather than developing further on the answer.

It means that she sometimes doesn't progress with the subject. So you're left with the feeling that there is more to be said, and a slight lack of comprehension over what the actually issue is that she's trying to get at.

It becomes less about resolution and more about interview technique, in my opinion.

@Barrawarra

Is this the first time WH has interviewed Maya since that time she was lined up and then the interview was pulled when she won? Am I remembering that right?

They mucked her about. Offered interview, then changed it, then said only interested if she won but could it be an exclusive, and she told them to bog off.

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1388174265674051586

They mucked her about. Offered interview, then changed it, then said only interested if she won but could it be an exclusive, and she told them to bog off.

That's right. They were hedging their bets and then missed the feminist interview of the year. The relations are probably a little frosty.

Maya was incredibly calm under pressure. Like many of you, I was rather surprised though that Emma pushed back when Maya talked about safeguarding

I did enjoy several times throughout, whenever Maya was asked did she regret it, or think her tweets were this that or the other etc, the straightforward "no". No follow up waffle, or trying to justify herself, just "no". And the silence afterwards. Powerful stuff.

Yes, I think being interviewed by EB must be a bit like playing a combat computer game (can you tell I'm not a gamer?) where you're under attack and don't know where the next strike is coming from. It works, often, in showing which views are easily shot down and which are resilient enough to withstand the attack.

However this time I think the strategy faltered a bit. She asked the question about when it was appropriate to misgender, then when Maya said in a potentially dangerous situation asked why Maya jumped straight to the worst case scenario. There was a pause - the only time in the whole interview when Maya sounded uncertain - because what she was trying to say was so very obvious that it was hard to see why EB would pretend to misunderstand. SAFEGUARDING HAS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WORST CASE SCENARIOS. I don't know if EB was giving her an opportunity to state that, but if so she botched the approach and it ended up down a bit of a dead end.

Emma's questions mostly focused on whether it wld be possible to say these things in a kinder way. Thats all they have now, but I guess that's the focus of the tribunal - she has a right to her belief but was the employer justified in sacking her for the specific ways she expressed it, in the contexts she expressed it? I still think uninitiated listeners will find the straight talking in some of the tweets read out jarring. Because the whole subject has been cloaked in conventions of speech that don't allow the actual facts to be stated. I really hope the outcome is good so that we can know it is possible to state the facts where necessary, without fearing job loss.

The other thing which maya alluded to but it didn't come out much, is that it doesn't matter how kind and mild you state it. To say anything at all is enough.

I thought Maya was great, I'm sure most listeners would agree with her. EB job is to pay devils advocate and she's great at it. I actually thought doing so today she sounded a bit daft because Maya was so clear and, well, sensible. Thought Maya came out of it rather well.

I think EB did Maya a huge favour by being probing and challenging in her questioning, but only because Maya has such a firm grip on this issue and her positions. EB enabled Maya to clearly present a great deal of considered rationality in clear terms.

There are some areas where I though EB fell into being needlessly contrarian:
she put considerable emphasis on the validity of Maya's positions depending not on material reality but on the feelings of others, without there being any test that those feelings and their exercise need to be reasonable;
because Twitter has served to inflame the debate, EB was suggesting that it's a platform that Maya shouldn't use, but if that were to be the deciding factor, then all that trans activists would need to do is to turn debate on any platform toxic meaning that gender critical people would always have to withdraw from discussions; and
criticising individual Tweets on the basis that they don't contain the whole of the substance and the nuance of all of Maya's views, ignoring that they're part of a wider conversion, which is a ridiculous demand considering the nature of the platform (which means it's another way of presenting the "shouldn't use Twitter" argument).

A very impressive performance by Maya.

Well done Maya. EB was being deliberately obtuse, and proved Maya’s case to be rational, and one that most of us would subscribe to. Particularly notable when Maya brought up what has been done and said to actual women. Best of luck this week, and I hope she gets proper compensation, which seemed to be something that EB thinks she doesn’t deserve. EB knows about safeguarding, she knows what the issues are, so the interview could have been a lot better. But good for Maya. Full of admiration for her.

I'm finding this tough to listen to. I find the presenter quite adversarial and deliberately provocative but maybe I'm so fed up of all the crap that I'm overly sensitive.

Nope. Just come to the hypothetical 'transwoman scout in the shower scenario and she's gaslighting Maya about it being a 'mental leap' to think about safety and the potential for violence if a male scout is in the girl's shower.

Mental leap.

Maya's doing well but I've had enough.

Given she's a scout leader, I would have thought that there's no need to jump to worst-case scenarios. It's quite important for the Scouts to be the grownups when it comes to two possibly very willing, opposite-sex teenagers in a tent.

Emma Barnett was on the attack here. She was relentlessly digging at and opposing Maya Forstater every inch of the way, not because this was in any way balanced or neutral questioning but because Emma Barnett is clearly hostile to one side of this, objecting to everything, quoting back and interpreting things she tweeted and said on the subject in the most adverse way and not crediting any other perspective.

All she does is keep on keeping on at the same form of attack, hammering away up to the point of seeming obtuse when the interviewee has said repeatedly that what she was saying was sex and not gender identity. This wasn't good enough because it wasn't what she wanted to hear or what she wanted Maya Forstater to have said or believed. It's easy to see where she's coming from.

@FebruaryRainandSleet

Given she's a scout leader, I would have thought that there's no need to jump to worst-case scenarios. It's quite important for the Scouts to be the grownups when it comes to two possibly very willing, opposite-sex teenagers in a tent.

I don't get your point or how it's relevant. If a male scout leader is in the girls shower it is prudent and indeed natural to question why they're there.

@Abitofalark Yes clearly she is biased here. I found her repeated attempts to get Maya to concede that the way she stated her beliefs might justify her employer not renewing her contract, knowing this woman has a case coming up, quite frankly, out of order, besides the clear cut answers cannot be stated any more 'nicely'. She was literally telling her 'why weren't you nice about saying a man cannot be a woman?'
Then her constantly questioning whether Twitter was an appropriate space to have such discussions. Then suggesting it's not an appropriate, or good platform to air views and whether Maya would take the debate elsewhere.

It was all very personal. That much became clear by the shower section.

Actually I thought she showed maya pretty much the same type of treatment as Nancy Kelly. And this is a good thing, isn't it? Because look at the vast difference between how Nancy fared, and maya.

I am also totally fed up with looking at people's feelings in this debate. For instance, tweet g that you don't believe trans women are women 'can't you see how that might be hurtful to trans women!'

Well, how about trans women are wonen is hurtful to ME, a woman because I never wear make up or dresses so does that mean I am not a woman?

Stop making it about hurt feelings and start making it about safeguarding and fairness!!!

I thought the interview was OK although I did feel Emma got a bit bogged down and repetitive on the pronouns issue. Yes Maya was going for a worse case scenario with the pronouns but she had answered the question saying at work she would use preferred pronouns but not necessarily out of work if she thought sex mattered in that situation. I wasn't sure what different answer Emma was pushing for.

I thought EB was really poor in this interview. She can and should question and examine rigorously but I felt she misrepresented Maya’s position when she kept saying M was tweeting about gender identity not sex and the nonsense about Maya always leaping to the worst possible interpretation. The problem is that the trans rights issue will always be in conflict with womens rights because trans ideology wants to impose a lie upon society - that people can change sex and that sex is a matter of choice. And there are huge consequences that follow from that - from the practical issues of how we collect meaningful data and ensure safety and fairness for women to the psychological pressure of being afraid to speak the truth. A great quote from Chernobyl: “ Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid.” The truth matters and the problem with Emma’s interview stance is that she is treating gender identity as are that they give equivalence to things that are not the same in matters of feelings against matters of fact.