Helen Lewis interview

[AutumnalCosiness]

Great episode of the Adam Buxton podcast this week....

we need everyone

Yes we do need everyone, so I wouldn't mind Lewis debating the downside of what Rowling tweeted if she credited the powerful reasons why Rowling needed to make those tweets. Everyone Rowling named was a significant example that other women need to raise, if not about that individual then about someone similar, when they raise women's prisons, toilets, sports, prizes, safeguarding..... All the things that Lewis feels free to take for granted should be for women only, but other women have learned the hard way that they're not and need to be able to say so, with examples of just how much they're not.

(Well nearly everyone Rowling named. Maybe not India Willoughby. Willoughby is not significant just irritating.)

I don't mind debate as long as she knows what she's talking about. Uninformed debate is frustrating.

Ah, Ronson not Theroux* of course, thanks Appleblossom.*

Let's face it, they are pretty much all interchangeable...

Theroux did an interview with Germaine Greer recently, and also did one of those wanky "don't hate me" apologies for what she said, and basically told people she would be dead soon.

Have just listened to the intro, not the full chat yet, and didn't think Buxton was excusing himself more than almost hopefully actually realising his male privilege - "people directly affected" etc. Very fluffy, but not as bad as feared.

After listening to the whole thing I was pleasantly surprised. That such a big chunk of the chat was dedicated to the issue at all was something for Buxton - it's a mainstream, very popular be kind light entertainment podcast after all. He could have glossed over it but listened and asked questions, and while there was a bit of 'some people'ing (oh God just say women, you mean women Adam) it was not as sneery as I expected. I think it was a pretty useful conversation, all in all.

That's good to know @Brewdug Sounds as if things are shifting, people are listening who might not have done a couple of years ago.

An interesting listen and I think significant that the discussion was had. I think Helen Lewis is still trying to ride two horses and there are some contradictions in her position that she doesn’t quite want to confront. Buxton got on my nerves with his constant “Be Kind-ing”. It would have been good to have had them interrogate the aetiology of transgender identity a bit. It felt quite surface-level and Guardian dinner party-ish.

I felt that podcast should be called Teen Talk but I know I'm not the target demographic. Still, the inanity of the intro was quite something.

Anyway HL says she said what she had to say on the GC issues way back when and long before JKR got involved. So she doesn't need to keep talking about it. Except of course, having said anything, she will always be asked now to say something.

So, I think she is trying to backtrack.

What she's saying now is that there is an extreme fringe who want to use plain language and look again at the GRA. But that's not where she is! I guess she means KJK. Though she had a good go at JKR for not being "nice".

I feel she is backtracking. She dipped her foot in the water, decided it was too cold, and backed off. Maybe she'll return in the summer when the water is warmer.

Meanwhile, though, it would be nice of her not to trash women wanting to keep their language and tell it how it is. But hey ho!

I like to keep abreast of the voices on this issue. So I do listen to a lot of them. Some times though, I do feel that was not a good use of my time. This was such an instance.

I don’t think she’s backtracking. She was an important early voice, it’s just the debate has moved on and she hasn’t moved with it. She’s also clearly more comfortable playing the dispassionate observer rather than the active participant.

@GhostOrchid I think dispassionate observer is an understandable position to want to take. Except she isn't. She is clearly disassociating from women who are more hard line and in doing this publicly, it acts as a criticism. Moreover people can then say - look at this nice middle of the road lady, being reasonable. It givers permission to those who want to paint women who have no truck with trans as bigots.

It IS taking a side.

She’s also clearly more comfortable playing the dispassionate observer rather than the active participant.

That's a good way of putting it and why I think her approach is useful. She is very good at giving an informed and accessible overview.

@JoodyBlueToo i guess my only disagreement is that she’s always only been very moderately GC, as she says herself. I didn’t particularly like her both sides-ing, but it makes her a safe voice to listen to.

Well I do support the right for her to say what she likes. And for others to support it. And so I appreciate your response and engagement with me.

For myself, what I hear is, those women over there are bad, but I'm not like them.

I think I almost feel a "moderate" voice really undermines the women who are prepared to fight for women's rights. Because there is really no half way position. We need reality based language with which to define reality based legal protections.

I think setting oneself up as "moderate" almost by definition says that those who expect more real support from our legislators and leaders are in some way extreme. But they aren't are they? They are courageously telling the truth.

I don't really want to criticise HL, it doesn't feel like a supportive thing to do to another woman. But if she is going to speak on the subject, I wish she would do it full justice. Articulate all the arguments even if she then disagrees with them.

The pronouns for example. There are strong arguments against using them. But she simply says it is "rude" not to. It doesn't do justice to those putting themselves at risk by making the strong argument. Am I making any sense?

I agree with your analysis @JoodyBlueToo

Having thought about it for another five minutes, for Helen Lewis to be invited on Buxton’s podcast she must be considered pretty anodyne by people like him because there’s no way Buxton would interview a woman who properly challenges his views on women’s rights. She can’t have pushed him out of his comfort zone with her views on the matter or her framing of other women involved in the debate.

She is. But not by the legions of whining trans rights activists who think, despite her milquetoast approach to "trans" issues that she is the devil incarnate, second only to JK Rowling.

This is pretty much my take on Helen Lewis. My opinion of her was diminished by her Blocked and Reported podcasts with Katie Herzog earlier this year when Jesse Singal was on sabbatical. She seemed quite happy to throw shade on women who are in the trenches actually getting stuff done. It came across a bit ‘pick me’ to be frank.

I agree, she's much more convincing to people who haven't been steeping in this issue for years than any of the loud hardliners are. We need the Helen Lewis types or we'll just be like the TRAs in their echo chamber.

I agree that she reaches a particular audience which is needed and the I think that's good. I'm allowed to find some of her comments unhelpful, just like anyone can criticise anyone else in this movement.

@JoodyBlueToo you are making complete sense.

I was still delighted to hear HL making the points she made on Buxton. It's definitely progress.

This is what intrigued me about the chat. They know each other and she's been on before. But Buxton knew about Blocked and Reported, and was asking questions about Cass. There must have been a reason he wanted to talk about it. And as such he can't plead ignorance like he used to anymore.

One thing it was good for was realising, by way of a real life conversation, how both of them criticised JKR's thread not exactly from a personal dislike, as much as simply not being able to even begin to comprehend why anyone would call a trans woman a man. This seemed like genuine puzzlement. I forgot how much people can tie themselves up in knots at the stage Buxton is finding himself.

Yes, yes - there was no interrogation of the concept transness at all, what it is and what it might represent. Just an acceptance that “some people are — get over it”. I thought her line saying basically “it’s fine to be treated as the opposite sex except when sex matters” was a bit weak because what does that leave you with?

it’s like she hasn’t quite thought her thoughts all the way to the end, which is why I quibbled with the backtracking point. She never fronttracked! She is, publicly at least, exactly where she was in 2015.

I would very much like to hear a conversation between her and Helen Joyce.

I thought it was an interesting interview. I particularly liked that Helen said there are many women who will find it hard to move on from men dismissing their concerns - Adam sounded deeply uncomfortable at that point. I also liked that she pushed back against Adam's criticism as bitchy when she said that Contrapoints likes slathering on the makeup and lady clothes so accusing GC women for reinforcing gender stereotypes is a bit rich. He had nothing to say when she rightly said that Contrapoints had been very rude about her.

I like Helen although she is more moderate than me. I think she's wrong about public toilets, for instance, and I don't have an issue with JKR joking around on Twitter with transwoman parody account. I think her idea of a moderate compromise will never, ever be accepted by trans activists and she does a bit too much "both sides-ing".

She's very good on Blocked & Reported though (it sounded to me like Adam has listened to Blocked & Reported? I wonder if he has and that's why he was willing to have this conversation with Helen now) and I've heard her raise issues of gender on the Private Eye podcast and be dismissed by the two male co-hosts (Ian Hislop and the other one). It was good she pointed out the professional consequences she and other women have experienced. Buxton comes across as the wettest of all wet blankets but I'm pleased he chose to interview her.

“it’s fine to be treated as the opposite sex except when sex matters”

In situations where sex didn't matter, what would this look like? In what way would a woman be treated like a man or vice versa?
Apart from pronouns and names, ideally society should already be doing this.

I think this is the thing I have trouble with - it's the acknowledgment that society is inherently sexist, and treats women and men differently for no reason where sex is irrelevant. And then shrugging and saying, well what I want to change is that I receive the opposite sexism.