Ofcom will now investigate Talk Tv re transphobia.

[Imnobody4]

Here we go again.

From Good Law Project:

We said we’d sue over Ofcom’s decision to dismiss 22,000 complaints about transphobia on TalkTV – now the regulator has caved.

But we had monitored its output for July 2025, a month in which it carried 11 discussions on trans people. And in every discussion, its hosts and guests consistently spouted transphobic views. TalkTV’s stance mirrors the broader editorial position of its sister newspaper The Times, whose toxic and intellectually dishonest campaign against trans people we believe to be a contributor to the rise in hate crime against them.

x.com/JuliaHB1/status/1996576537894703427?t=VgmnlP9LETiwrihlgEkCqA&s=09

Among my misdeeds, apparently, is that I said this on air: "By definition, if you’ve had to get a piece of paper to say that you are a woman, you must accept then that you are man."

I'm happy to be found guilty of defending women's rights and safety, knowing the actual law, understanding basic biology and knowing what a woman is. 🤷🏻‍♀️

And yet, the male people who have this ‘psychic experience’ are not women.

As I said. The truth of that statement simply depends on how one chooses to define the word "woman".

Plus, they have labelled their experience as ‘women’

Yes they have. Which I firmly believe they have every right to do- to label their own experience using the words that feel right to them.
On the other hand, imo you have no right/ legitimacy whatsoever in labelling them "men".

But that is where we disagree.

I think we have at least made some progress in a shared understanding of what being trans / trans experience is.

Definitionally make you female, (even though in your brain you perceive yourself to be male). That is how you define the words "female" and "male".

Well, yes. I define "being female" as "having female lived experiences". How else would you define it?

And yet your psychic experience of seeing yourself as male remains.

Indeed. This is my female experience of seeing myself as male. If I were male, I wouldn't experience any incongruence in seeing myself male. It's only because I'm female that it's a problem.

I don't think "female experience" or "female lived experiences" has a meaningful universal or singular definition. This is sex essentialism. All experiences of being female are varied and diverse. There is no one way to be female.

You're welcome.

Make no mistake, though: I'm nothing special ;) :D I'm just one of many sex realist trans people. There are plenty of us out there, but we are systematically pushed out of "the community", and harrassed if we dare to speak up in public spaces. On this board, I've been dismissed as a detransitioner (I'm not) by other trans people who disagreed with me, because apparently they couldn't fathom the very idea of a sex realist trans person.

I actually agree with that. There is no one way to be female. The ONLY thing all lived female experiences have in common is that they happen to someone of the female sex. That's it. If the person is of the female sex, then their experiences - whatever they are - are lived female experiences. That's why my experiences are just as female as those of the most stereotypically feminine woman who has ever existed out there: because we are both of the female sex.

No I'm sure . I know there are other "sex realist" (as you call it) trans people. I've just never had an in-depth conversation with one:

Trans people of course have a diversity of philosophical belief systems, because (contrary to the firmly held prejudices of many on this board) being trans is not itself an ideology or a belief system, but simply a developmental difference that some people happen to have, regardless of their values or beliefs or philosophies about things:

Right. So then we get on to what is "the female sex" , but perhaps we better not open that can of worms for today. 😝

Oh and one last thought.

you say this:

"I define "being female" as "having female lived experiences". How else would you define it".

But then you say:

"The ONLY thing all lived female experiences have in common is that they happen to someone of the female sex. That's it".

So female sex is defined as having female experience; and female experience is defined as being of the female sex.

Surely this is all completely circular?

Since you haven't answered my previous question about how lived experience is different for trans people, I would also like to know why trans people are allowed to define what trans means for everyone, despite not really being in agreement about what that definition is, but women are vilified for wanting to define what women means despite all basically being in agreement.

Dunno about ‘completely circular’, but there are an awful lot of spherical objects about.

(‘Who is Mrs Round and to what does she object?’)

It's circular because it's definitional. What defines "female" is being born female, because being born female will define one's entire life.

• Female children are raised differently from male children, in ways that oppresses them and reduces their conscious and unconscious choices.
• Female babies can even be killed for being female.
• Female people (women and girls) enjoy, in far too many countries, less legal rights than male people.
• Even in the countries where they have legally the same rights, studies after studies amply demonstrate that they don't enjoy all the same practical freedoms and opportunities as men and boys.
• And of course: male people assault female people in terrifying numbers, all over the world - sexually, physically, verbally, emotionally, psychologically. Being born female almost automatically means getting assaulted by a male person at some point in one's life.

As long as the above remains true, there wll be a "female lived experience" which is based entirely and exclusively on being born female.

That's not circular - I probably have more in common with my husband than I do with a Japanese woman, an elite sports woman, or a supermodel (I am none of these things).

The thing I DO have in common with them is having a female body. That's it. The way society reacts to their womanhood is entirely different to the way it reacts to mine, but it's for the same reason - our bodies.

The experiences we could potentially share - periods, pregnancy, birth, breastfeeding - are due to our female bodies, and every other experience is going to be something I could have in common with anyone.

Which is why so many people reject the idea that someone can say with utter confidence that they know what it feels like to be someone else even when that person points out all the ways they are experiencing life differently. It overlooks the fact that inhabiting a female body is an inherent part of the experience of being a woman.

It always amazes me how trans people's (realistically only transwomen's) lived experiences, their beliefs and 'identity' are sacrosant and cannot be questioned, must be accepted and they are allowed to define what a woman is but women's lived experiences and desire to define themselves are not. Funny that.

Well much as this has been an absolutely fascinating trip around the mulberry bush, is anyone convinced that the examples given of Talk TV broadcasts are so transphobic that Talk TV should be censured by OFCOM?

I don’t think anyone thinks being trans is an ideology, but thinking that being trans gives you rights of the other sex or makes you into the other sex - that’s definitely an ideology.

I doubt OFCOM are either. They just need to cross all the i's and dot all the t's.

It does highlight the controlling aspect of this ideology (the belief that ones self-experienced gender identity, whatever that is, supersedes sex in language, law and culture), that the language necessary to object to the ideology is itself proscribed.

It's like defining "oi, you are standing on my foot" as hate speech, then insisting the simple act of complaining when someone stands on your feet is proof that the issue is not the fact they are crushing your feet but that you simply hate the fact other people have feet too.

In a word 'No'.

So if there is no one way to be female, how can a male claim he “feels female”. What criteria is he using to decide this? As there is no one way to be male, how how does he know he’s not male?

“Even when men treat me better because they see me as a man, it's because I present as a man, not because I am a man.”

I have often wondered about this.

Thanks for clarifying

It's very telling when someone doesn't attempt to explain.

Oooh are you going to tell us sex is reeeeeaaaalllly complicated and wibbly wobbly and no one can understand it? I can’t wait. A orevious poster tried this and got their arse handed to them. Maybe you’ll do better. Rooting for you!

I think the common usage of the word that has been established for centuries is a perfectly good place to start. Followed by the clarification that is available under UK law.

So, if you choose to use your own personal definition of words, you will find rather fewer people to agree with you once you start telling them what your personalised definition of words that don’t follow the established conventions are. It is like the Yougov polls when male people are specified to have not gone through extreme body modification . The support for those people falls dramatically.

An overlap between, for example, autistic people and trans identification doesn't necessarily show that trans identities have a neurological basis.

No. It is not

Because every single female person has a common experience in navigating society with a female sexed body. That is about the only thing that we can say is in common.

There are many ways to navigate society with a female sexed body. But that we have one and must learn about it is a commonality. Even if that woman has to seek medical assistance because of that female body. Even if that woman is seeking to change that female body.

So, no. I don't believe it is circular. I believe saying it is circular is just a dismissal of the reality.

No male person has this experience. It is a uniquely female experience saying so does not diminish the uniqueness of every female person's experience. To say that this is 'essentialist' is false and misleading.

The female sex is defined by having a body formed around the production of large gametes regardless of the production status of those large gametes. That is the commonality.

Isn't this just the age-old back and forth between fate and free will? Based on your argument, do I have any choice in how I relate to my son, who says he is a woman? According to you, surely I have no choice whether or not to be (in your terms) "transphobic". It's just how I am, that using my son's demanded pronouns causes me unbearable cognitive dissonance. Not my fault at all, is it?