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

Across the Red Line Radio 4

51 replies

Everyoneesleistheproblem · 15/08/2024 16:31

Sharon - fucking amazing.

That's all. Just on now (possibly a reoeat , recorded before Paris)

OP posts:
BigBadaBoom · 07/09/2024 07:32

nextdoorconundrum · 16/08/2024 10:07

I have listened to this programme since it began and have enjoyed it. The format works really well when you have a topic where the issue is an established fact but the opponents have different perspectives.

For example the last one about obesity. Should it be classed as a disease. Between a consultant oncologist who disagrees and an obesity campaigner who agreed . This was an interesting debate and both parties argued their point of view logically and respectfully. The format worked well here . Because obesity is a fact. It's a real thing . both parties came at the argument from this point of view.

The transgender debate was completely pointless because there was no agreement on the basic premise.
Sharon's pov being that biological sex is an absolute and cannot be wished away. That males have a biological advantage over females in sport.
Whereas Charlie's pov was that she was female because she had 'transitioned' .. which is not a fact. It's a wish . A wish is not a fact - so the basic premise makes a discussion in this format a non starter.

I thought Sharin was fabulous. Left Charlie whining about being 'othered' and less respected. Yet couldn't express the same empathy for all the women who will never be ranked in their own sport if biological men are allowed to be admitted.

^ This

I've seen a trend on progressive podcasts saying how society used to have a shared, rational understanding of reality and that the right-wing has moved away from it, causing our current social divisions. But this is a disengenuous narrative which conveniently centres the progressives the ones who have the rational, scientific position.

History shows us that modern-era society is in a permanent state of conflict over how we understand all sorts of things. The existence of God (and how that is interpreted), the nature of the Universe, how humans and other animals came to exist etc. Then there's more immediate areas like comparing the brains of black people with white, and the bodies of women with men. These have been battlegrounds where bad science / unscientific ideas and good science / good reasoning have had to battle it out (and still so) and the wrong side has often been dominant, causing terrible discrimination.

What has allowed the trans activist belief system to spread so far and so quickly and is that the progressive side is traditionally the one debunking bad science to make society fairer and more just. Many people just assume that because TRAs present as progressives, they must be on the right side of the science / reason argument. And because science and reasoned thinking is hard to do, especially when emotions are high, many people haven't realised that in this case the progressive activists are frequently on the wrong side of the good science / bad science debate.

Starmer is smart man and I bet the policies of making puberty blockers a scientific / medical decision AND talking about adding critical thinking to the curriculum are signals to the left that they need to do better. Of course the TRAs won't recognise that, and those on the hard left have never been very good at telling good science from bad anyway. But maybe there are people on the soft left and centre left who will change their minds thanks to Sharron.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page