Listen now | Over the past year, I’ve spent countless hours studying the intersection of historical feminism and modern day gender ideology. I’ve interviewed numerous feminists, journalists, and academics who believe that the word Woman is defined by biology, not an identity…and that any change to this canonical definition is harmful to the categorization and protection of women at large.
The clarity with which Julie explains the female position is a privilege to hear. I was also relieved to hear her reclaim the quote from Simone de Beauvoir!
Julie’s arguments are so brilliantly clear in this. And for me , the history of women as a sex class is so important in terms of women as property , as in producing children to ensure succession, even in as practical a situation as having periods and being shunned and excluded. Trans women have no part in any of this!!
I believe that women and transwomen are different but that both must be treated with respect socially and with each other.
I apologize for making a trivial point, but as a graduate of Leeds University I feel I must point out an errror: Leeds Metropolitan University is in Leeds, not London.
Part 2, I also believe that narcissism is strong in this population and some form of mental illness or distress is evident. I hasten to say that human beings of any sexual persuasion can be basket cases and do a great deal of harm to their partners and as heterosexuals are the majority by definition they can do a great deal of harm. Distress is evident in children and adolescents and young adults who say they have gender dysphoria. This dysphoria usually disappears if they are not interfered with and left to discover that they are lesbian, gay, bi, or straight. What human being has not questioned themselves during puberty and even much later as to who they are and how they behave? Also, it seems that the movement activists, besides dictating to women what they are and who they must accept as women, want to be in the permanent position of dictating to children, adolescents, and young adults and deciding for them that they are trans and grooming them to accept pornography and medicalization. If you are male and like to play with dolls or like pink, lo and beyond Thou art trans, Let there be light and such. If female and like blue and have your eye on a fire engine you are a male. This is a boom for individuals and corporations and medical and clinical practitioners who desire both power and money. This is very dangerous and is obviously grooming, especially now in our wired in societies. Some of these men are pedophiles. Julie is correct in pointing out on several occasions that male sexual crimes are the same in non trans males as in trans males. She failed to mention at least one study that found that trans women actually have a greater incidence of sex crimes than other men. One wonders if this is due to the fact that many of these men are living with mental health problems. Misogyny is denied on the part of the activists. They insist they are women and always have been women. I believe this is nonsense. I believe instead that they have convinced themselves of such and have been helped along by other men and by pornography specially created to groom them into the practice of transness. The whole affirmative model of treatment is a medical scandal that should be unacceptable in any society that values the safeguarding of children. As to why women and girls believe they are trans or support the trans movement even if they are not trans, whatever that means, it should be obvious that young females are attempting to run from the fate of other females in our society who are openly denigrated, harassed, and subject to abuse on line and off. With advances in tech, the abuse of women and children has increased exponentially around the world. Why would they want any part of that? As to why professional women in government or our institutions would go along with the madness, they are afraid of losing their positions, have a paucity of courage, or in some cases truly believe that it is better to be a trans man than be a lesbian or that the trans movement will eventually usher in a utopia that will solve our sexual dilemmas, a vain hope. The movement is part of a lamentable breaking down of even the idea of fairness and civility in relations between and among males and females. It is only adding to our dystopian times.
Can't afford to subscribe. Hope unlike other sites you will take comment. I appreciate your podcasts and listen to them, as I receive your emails. Always impressed with Julie. Always impressed with your civility and humanity. Julie is not against trans people. She understands the need for people to be able to live as they must and supports people who do not conform to the stereotypes societies impose on us. Not impressed with Brit. Sorry. He wasn't able, and I find this is true with (with a few exceptions) of all the trans women whom I have read or listened to, to understand Julie's point of view in some essential ways. He is insistent, in the face of the horrendous abuse of gender critical women on line and off, of putting the nicest possible face on catastrophe. And no one brings up what is perhaps going on with trans women: they are obsessed sexually with the idea of womanhood, specifically with performing femininity, and even better than natal women. In most cases, it seems to be because of resentment, envy, and sexual compulsion. It usually starts in puberty and the secret adoption of female underwear and secret cross dressing. Sex is biological. The performance of masculinity and femininity is gender. Gender equals stereotypes. This is why the trans movement is regressive, not progressive. That is why it insists on the meticulous attention to all the stereotypes of femininity. Many if not most of these stereotypes in clothing, shoes, hair, makeup, etc. were demanded by men of women. Of course, most women attempted in the past and attempt today to adopt them as they believe they must attract males in order to survive or have a meaningful life. It is lonely being different. The failure to adopt these stereotypes on the part of women overwhelmingly meets with criticism from men. Lesbians know this well, as Julie can attest. Lesbianism is an affront to many men. That is why trans women seek to undermine lesbians by going on their dating sites. It is not because they are really women or even believe they are really women. They boast openly of their hatred for women. I must accept that there are some men however who are sincere in their adoption of womanhood. I do not accept that they are thinking clearly about themselves and reality. I do not accept that they are thinking clearly and humanly of the effect they are having on their wives, children, and other family members. Men of both the Left and the Right support this movement. Many men of the Left and the Right are equally misogynist but in different ways. Many Left males will support abortion rights (gets them off the hook) and pay lip service to other demands but they are notably absent in their support of women's rights when push comes to shove. Most every pregnancy can be prevented by male use of the condom, which most men refuse to use. The need for abortion would largely disappear if men were more responsible. Women endanger their health and spend a great deal of money to protect themselves from pregnancy. Why do we still have no male contraceptive? Because most men refuse to take responsibility. This is true of Liberals, socialists, communists, democratic socialists, the few Left libertarians, and the anarchists. Most men of the Right want women in traditional roles, and will elevate women only if they play the game as the men design it. On the Left women must play the game also by acquiescing to males' sexual rights. I believe this movement is driven by male sexual rights and that it is in reaction to the gains women have made in recent decades as a result of the movement for women's rights. It is telling that it is centered in the tech sector and involves trans humanists who seek to meld humans with machines and create new forms of life. In Germany, a man with a Middle Eastern name is opening a center for test-tube babies without transference to female wombs and some surgeons around the world work toward the transference of female wombs into male bodies and the nurturing of life in males. This is a primary example of womb envy and the erasure of the female. This is self-evident in the language of the trans movement with the redefinition of woman and the replacement of words relating to women in the language and the insistence that sex and gender be redefined in language and law. And all of our institutions and governments have gone along with this. And women are supposed to believe this has nothing to do with misogyny? Some men find the gains that women have made, and they are always provisional (as the trans movement attest) as unsettling and hence unacceptable, and not all of them are in the trans movement but this movement is a center of objections to emancipation of females from male control. There have not always been trans women. Historically, there were a very small minority of males who found it difficult to live as men (for perhaps tragic reasons) and were more comfortable adopting the persona of a female within a very small group of gender nonconforming males. Some few sought lives openly as females. Some of these men went through full medicalization. An even tinier number of gifted, highly educated males achieved success as females after undergoing full medicalization. Others died young from the effects of surgery and hormone treatment or through suicide to end their tormented existence. The current movement has largely ditched male medicalization (except for gender dysphoric children, adolescents, and very young adults) in favor of self-ID. To gather acolytes is necessary to affirm the reality of their mental disorder. Sex and gender are constantly and wrongly and often deliberately conflated. Trans activists ensure that they are and are constantly turning on a dime to distort language and take up new mantras when faced with every advance by gender critical activists. I accept that some of the differences between males and females are indeed based on evolution. I also believe most are socialized. Some socialization is natural: men do impregnate women, are usually stronger as a result of testosterone, and women do grow life in their wombs, give birth, and nurture babies at their breasts. I don't believe like Mary Harrington that there is no such thing as patriarchy, even though she concedes that it is more a brotherhood of men. I believe that men are ambivalent about women for a variety of reasons: One, women give birth to males and females (this reality must have affected male psyches very strongly in very early times before the male role in creating life was well understood and I believe today it is still an issue with many men (that is why they so easily denigrate women and femininity to convince themselves of their superiority); two, it is women, even in two-parent families, who mainly raise children, and often without adequate support from the husband or male partner; three, it is harder for males to separate from the mother so doing so successfully is a frought endeavor, just how fraught little understood by one and all; four, males' genitals are outside their bodies and hence vulnerable which creates anxieties, especially regarding castration, and comparison with other males. Unless the atmosphere and support in the home for children is truly exceptional on the part of both parents and if there is no denigration of the mother or the father for that matter at least in the home, and the absence of any negative experiences in the lives of those children, children have the best chance of coming out of the family with a healthy attitude toward reality, sexuality, and the opposite sex. Family life however is not easy and human beings are easily affected by problems occurring within and without the home and in society at large. Males also mature later than females on several developmental fronts. I gather that Brit is a gay man. Did he announce his transness due to his lack of comfort with gayness? Does he believe, in view of the phenomenal success of the trans movement, that he will allay his discomfort with being gay by posing as a woman? Most cross dressers are heterosexual. Women do not cross dress for sexual pleasure. Only men do. That is why traditionally they have been categorized, whether straight or gay, and most are straight, as fetishists. Women on the whole do not fetishize items of male attire. It is very rare as to be nonexistent. Likewise women do not perform exaggerated displays of drag where men are made fun of and denigrated.
At one point Abney posits the idea of a girl growing up in a hypothetical society where she has never experienced any violence, abuse or misogyny from men. He suggests that if 30 or 40 years later this woman was dropped into the reality of our world, her experience would be identical to that of a transwoman now & that that means the transwoman is the same as the born woman.
Well no. He can’t be. Quite apart from the hormonal, endocrinological & essentially female biological processes that girls bodies go through as they grow, this scenario relies only on perception. If man presents himself as stereotypically female, then yes he might start to experience the same negative vibes that women do in terms of how males perceive him. But that doesn’t make him a woman. Being a woman is not only to do with a sense of threat or even just being patronised & sidelined by males. It’s to do with everything that your body, your emotions, your very specific perception of the world delivers to you as you grow up. This is what Simone de Beauvoir meant by ‘becoming’ a woman. It’s a whole body & mind package of experiences. A paradigm even. It’s not just putting on a dress, wearing lipstick & affecting a set of mannerisms.
Interesting that Joey has so much outrage over "TERF". He should spend five minutes on Twitter and see what Julie and her pals call trans people. I assure you, Julie gives twice as well as she gets. She has one of the trashiest mouths on the planet. (something she would probably admit) Trans people WISH they could get a slur as friendly as TERF from Julie. Guess that is more objectivity from Joey (insert eye roll).
Julie is a liar. She absolutely hates trans people. She is a typical British talking head and adopts a moderate tone of "Acceptance" whenever it suits her. Then when she is on Twitter and making speeches to like-minded people, she will be all insults and implying that trans women are an existential threat who must be destroyed. It's this type of disingenuous activism that is pure poison. I have no respect for people who lie about their own platforms to manipulate the people they are in front of. What's even worse is the people that enable this obvious lie without the slightest bit of pushback. Anyone that wants to verify this should go look at her abhorrent stalking of Eddie Izzard.
It's an absolutely ridiculous and purely nonsensical argument that gender can be eradicated. Every person in that video has been attracted to someone based on gender realities. It's a basic human characteristic engrained in our DNA. Because we are social creatures, we contrast with each other in visual ways to show our individuality (including gender expression). Julie's entire position is one of ignorance of this basic human fact which doesn't surprise me because Julie usually ignores any kind of fact that does not confirm her bias.
You can argue biological sex until you're blue in the face, but at the end of the day, the paycheck to paycheck person out there just trying to make it is not interested in chromosomes or gametes. They are not interested in pronouns or safe spaces. They operate on a what you see is what you get logic and have absolutely no desire to ever change it. If someone looks like a woman, then they are a woman. It's that simple. That's everyone's reality. What Joey's anti-trans activist guests want to make you believe is that there is this "major problem" and "women are under threat" by the existence of transwomen. Transwomen are such a tiny percentage of women, this entire concept is completely ridiculous.
All of this debate will never change a thing. Instead, it's allowed a lot of talking heads who previously required day jobs to capitalize on fear and ignorance and give people an intellectual cloak for their bigotry.
Think for just one moment what a bio-sex segregated world would look like. Women would share bathrooms with fully bearded, transitioned transmen (yes with penises). Trans people that pass would have to correct people daily on their identity so they did not break any laws, constantly leaving them in a position of constant conflict with all parts of society. It would require a sex-police authority that would demand to see your child's genitals before they could play a sport (yes that was proposed just last year, and subsequently scrapped due to outrage). Constant conflicts would come up over a person's sexual identity. It would be chaos.
That's why people don't even want to hear it. Bio-sex segregation is unenforceable. There is too much human variance. It's a waste of time to even debate it.
The only people that are trying to create this militant bio-sex segregated society are bored, middle-aged people of privilege. Everyone else wonders what this has to do with the price of a gallon of gas.
This is more create the disease and sell the cure fake news crap used to control you. Ignore it. Trans people exhibit absolutely no threat to you or anyone else you know. You're welcome to have your own opinions about trans people just like you always have. Go live a happy life and worry about things that matter.