There are, of course, plenty of women out there who disagree with other women on this whole issue. I'm not here to mansplain to them; I want to listen to them. To ALL women.
The following tweets will ask 16 questions. To be answered by women only.
I make no apology for the detail within those questions, nor for requesting and hoping for as much detail as possible in the answers.
When legislative changes such as self-ID are being proposed, detail is vital if what results is to be good, effective law, not bad law.
One other thing too. Trans rights are human rights. Brilliant: we all agree on that. But it's not what the detail in the questions is about.
Once I've set out all the questions, I will not comment on any of the responses. I promise to read all of them.
I may retweet, without comment, those responses I find particularly interesting or thought-provoking. Absolutely including those which disagree with my position on all this, which is irrelevant.
Because I'm a man - and this issue fundamentally concerns women and girls.
I have 2 other requests. Without trying to tone police anyone, I hope what results is a comprehensive discussion on ALL the issues - but a respectful, civil one without judgement. I want all women who read this thread to feel comfortable about answering some or all the questions.
This is Twitter, so that may be too much to hope for, but we'll see.
And finally: if you're a man, please stay out of the thread. You'll be telling on yourself if you don't. Butting out is what I'm about to do the very moment I've listed the questions, which are as follows.
1. Do you think anatomical males should be allowed in protected women's spaces such as prisons, rape refuges, hospital wards or lavatories if they say they’re a woman?
If so, why?
2. Do you think anatomical males should be allowed to get changed in women and girls’ changing rooms if they say they’re a woman? If so, why?
3. Do you think someone born male should be allowed to compete in women’s sports? If so, why?
4. Do you think schools should have only unisex lavatories? If so, why?
5. Do you think anyone should be able to self-declare as the opposite gender without having transitioned first, and immediately be able to access protected women’s spaces? If so, why?
6. If legislation allows for anyone being able to self-declare as the opposite gender without transitioning first, how do you propose to stop male sexual predators and/or violent criminals claiming to be female and taking advantage of said legislation?
7. If a child of any age in any circumstances decides one day they’re of the opposite gender, do you think they should be automatically supported in that by their parents, guardians, schools and/or teachers, with no questioning in any way by any of the latter? If so, why?
8. If you answered ‘yes’ to all or most of the above, how do you propose to deal with any issues around safeguarding?
9. Do you refer to ‘pregnant women’ or ‘pregnant people’? If the latter, why?
10. Do you refer to ‘women’ or ‘cervix havers’ / ‘menstruators’ / ‘bodies with vaginas’? If any of the latter three terms, why?
11. Do you think rape survivors should be required in court or elsewhere to refer to anatomically male rapists by their preferred pronouns? If so why?
12. Do you think statistics on violence against women and girls should treat anatomically male perpetrators as ‘women’ if they self-identify as a woman or girl?
If so, how should policymakers respond to the data which results?
13. Do you think surveys such as but not limited to the census should ask for someone’s sex, or their gender?
If the latter, how do policymakers accurately account for the needs of all people born female?
14. A question for lesbians only: is it ‘transphobic’ or in any way bigoted not to be sexually attracted to someone who does not have the same anatomical parts as you, but who consider themselves a woman?
If so, why?
15. Do you think it’s possible for someone to change sex? If so, how?
16. Finally, how do you define ‘woman’?
I very much hope as many women as possible respond to some or all of this.
And with that, I'm off to feed the pigeons. 🙂
IMPORTANT ADDENDUM: if, in any way, you feel uncomfortable answering these questions on a public platform, which may apply to many, please feel free to DM your answers.
Everything you say will be treated in absolute confidence. Thankyou!
And a clarification: I'm not conducting research, or collecting data, or writing an article or a book.
The purpose of this thread and any DMs I receive is purely to give women the space to discuss all this. And educate and inform others, including me, through their perspectives.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Ireland have qualified for 6 major tournaments. They reached the knockout stages 4 times.
Wales have qualified for 4. They reached the KO stages 3 times.
Northern Ireland have qualified for 4. They reached the KO stages 3 times.
(Technically, twice in their case - because of FIFA's daft format of four groups of three in the 1982 second phase - but Northern Ireland reached the last 12 and BEAT HOSTS SPAIN, so we'll ignore that).
Scotland have qualified for 12 major tournaments in their history.
This being the twelfth. They have NEVER reached the knockout stages. Is today, Sunday June 23 2024, when the interminable, excruciating wait finally ends?
By the way: they've actually qualified for 13. But in 1950, they refused to take up their place!
- The same reason as Emily was raked over the coals by her CBC (no typo) bosses for the crime of asking Rod Liddle whether he considered himself a racist and highlighting his never-ending racism.
For having depicted a racist as a racist, she had "failed to be even-handed".
- And the same reason as when she declared that Dominic Cummings had broken the rules during lockdown when he'd... broken the rules during lockdown.
A journalist stating facts sent the CBC into fits of apoplexy.
I don't think Sunak's chucked it exactly. He's not a complete idiot; he does, contrary to many appearances, know what reality is. It looks like this:
1. This election is unwinnable with any strategy or for any Tory leader. It's been that way since the mini-budget in 2022.
2. The Tory party is also completely unmanageable - especially under anyone who even vaguely tries to look for the centre ground. Just as it was between 1993 and 2005.
3. Waiting till the end of the year would've meant EVEN MORE public fury and disgust.
There's no rabbits out of hats that can be pulled here. Any Tory MP who thinks there are is plain delusional. Which brings me to:
4. The currents of the Conservative Party are drifting ever further rightwards: towards Badenoch or even Braverman. Ever further away from reality.
I think the number 1 reason Israel-Palestine is such a constantly huge issue on the British left and in British politics generally is just that: our large historic role.
Yet back in 1957, Israel barely enjoyed any real US support. That didn't follow for another decade.
It, along with Britain and France, had just shamed itself in front of the world during the Suez crisis: when an apoplectic Eisenhower said sanctions would be imposed unless there was an immediate withdrawal.
Which promptly followed, with Britain especially humiliated.
The thing that shocks me about @simon_schama, a fellow alumni of the same school incidentally, is he's not just a brilliant historian with a majestic ability to explain complex events in rivetingly engaging ways people can identify with.
He's always - until now - been so HUMANE.
That was what echoed throughout so much of his work. His warmth, his humour, his empathy, his sheer humanity.
Now, it's completely gone missing. I would say I find it incomprehensible - but not quite. Here's why.
I fully understand the emotional connection so many Jews all around the world feel to Israel.
After what she went through in the Holocaust, my gran stopped believing in God - how in the world could she after what she'd experienced? - but became a fierce supporter of Israel.