Three years ago, on this page, I took the plunge. To be specific, I wrote a column about how women's access to exclusive private spaces was being eroded in the name of 'trans rights', arguing that this was a threat to women's safety and dignity.
I say I took the plunge, because I had been warned that I would be mercilessly attacked by those who regard any distinction between biological women and those who have changed their gender from male to female as bad.
I also remember a conversation I had with Dr. kathleen shareswho has been expelled from her tenure as Distinguished Philosopher at the University of Sussex due to her 'gender-critical' views (stated with remarkable clarity and force in her book Material Girls).
Kathleen Stock (pictured) resigned from her job at the University of Sussex in October after what she described as a campaign of "intimidation and harassment" by students demanding her dismissal.
Dr. Stock had warned me: 'You may find very unpleasant consequences. If he does, please don't back down. I'd rather you didn't write about this at all than talk and then retract.
Torrent
It turned out that I didn't find any abuse at all, just a lot of emails from female readers of this newspaper saying they were delighted to have me speak for them.
However, I am sure that if I were a woman and had written such a column in the April 8, 2019 issue, I would have been criticized on social media, especially on Twitter.
Look what happened to JK Rowling, who suffered death threats and the worst of personal abuse after defending Maya Forstater.
This is the woman fired from her job at the London office of an American think tank, the Center for Global Development, after expressing her belief, one might say, the fact, that it is not possible to change biological sex.
One of the reasons Rowling was met with such a torrent of personal abuse, after tweeting '#IStandWithMaya', is that she, unlike me, is a world-renowned writer and an unprecedented success. When she speaks, the world listens.
But the fact that she is a woman also has a lot to do with it. When I asked Kathleen Stock why that was, she said, "Men would rather attack women than other men because they are less at risk, and women would prefer to attack other women for the same reason."
I guess this is an argument based on evolution (men have always been more dangerous) and also reflects the fact that men have been more powerful within society.
Dominic Lawson writes: "Look what happened to JK Rowling (pictured), who suffered death threats and the worst of personal abuse after defending Maya Forstater."
Whatever the reasons, it is an observable fact that women, regardless of the topics under discussion, receive much more toxic abuse on social media, and in general, than men. We call this misogyny, and it's a real thing.
But I had another explanation, which is that women, like Dr. Stock and Maya Forstater, who say, 'You can't change your biological sex,' are saying that to those who are born male but feel viscerally that they're 'in the body. wrong'. : I'm sorry, but we won't let you into our club.
For many (but not all) trans women, this is an outrageous and actively cruel insult. Whereas I, as a man, am completely irrelevant to this and don't own anything they want.
Last week, Ms. Forstater and others launched a campaign with the slogan "Respect my sex if you want my X." This was tied to the upcoming local elections.
These feminists are particularly angry at the way in which the Labor Party (perhaps their natural home, politically) finds it difficult to accept that, sorry to be rude, women can't have penises.
Because, obviously, if women can have penises, then there's no reason why trans women in full possession of male genitalia shouldn't have access to public toilets or female locker rooms. Or, indeed, the women's wards in hospitals.
The 'Respect my sex if you want my X' movement experienced immediate success when, just after it was launched, the Prime Minister declared that he did not believe that trans women should compete in women's sporting events.
Although he did not elaborate, what Boris Johnson meant was that being born biologically male and having gone through male puberty conferred an unfair advantage on trans women when competing against those with female bodies.
Brave
Her intervention followed the dispute over the exclusion of transgender cyclist Emily Bridges from a women's event in the UK, after the relevant sporting body first accepted Bridges' entry and then collectively changed its mind.
On Saturday, the BBC Radio 4 Today program interviewed two people on this topic.
One was former British swimming champion Sharron Davies, who has been as outspoken as anyone — and as courageous, given the backlash — in opposing the participation of born males in high-level women's sporting competition.
Maya Forstater, pictured, lost her job after claiming that people cannot change their biological sex
She feels this deeply, in part because had she not faced an East German swimmer who was given a dose of male hormones at the 1980 Moscow Olympics, Davies would have won the gold medal instead of the silver.
She told Helen Joyce, the author of the book Trans: 'Twenty years swimming against East Germans who had been pumped full of male hormones! It is equally obvious, now, that allowing people with masculine physiques and the benefits of male puberty to enter a female race is categorically unfair.
On the other side of the argument, the Today show interviewed Veronica Ivy, who was born male, but like Rachel McKinnon (I know, it's confusing) became the first transgender track cycling world champion in 2018, in a women's event. from 35 to 44 age range.
Armed with the knowledge that peer-reviewed scientific papers show that even after the testosterone reduction that sports bodies have required of trans women entering women's competition, those born male have unique physical advantages, Nick Robinson told Ivy, "You can't undo male puberty...do you accept that?
Ivy responded, amazingly: 'People have claimed that, but the scientific evidence doesn't support it.' Or perhaps not so surprising, as Ivy has argued that "in some special contexts, we can lie."
But when Robinson asked the obvious and consequential question: "Why don't we abolish women's sports, if that's the case?" Ivy repeatedly refused to answer.
Although Ivy was perfectly polite throughout the interview, the former Canadian cycling champion hasn't always been, having once declared, via Twitter, that those who don't accept that women can have penises should 'die in a fire' of fat'.
Furious
And when Magdalen Berns, founder of For Women Scotland, was dying, aged 36, of a brain tumour, Ivy lectured this feminist critic of the transgender lobby: "Don't be the kind of person that people who you have harmed, they rejoice at you." They are dying of brain cancer.
This, exactly, is the kind of cruelty inflicted on women who refuse to keep quiet, insisting, for example, that female sports competition should be reserved for those with female bodies.
Veronica Ivy could be said to be guilty of misogyny. After Saturday's show aired, Sharron Davies was clearly furious, tweeting: "If you listened to the BBCR4 show can you ask them why they still use a person who threatened...me and all the people...who believe in Should Biology Die in a Fat Fire? The BBC should be held accountable.
In this, I disagree with Davies, at least that the interview with his opponent was very instructive and valuable as part of the necessary debate on this issue.
Veronica Ivy's arguments were so palpably weak, and her refusal to answer an obvious question so clearly stated by the interviewer, that this can, in the best sense, be described as a public service broadcast.
Also, it's a good thing that the BBC, which until now seemed almost religiously wedded to the view that there can be no debate about the idea that 'trans women are women', is now allowing a proper discussion to take place.
That's far better than leaving it stuck on social media, where 'gender-critical' women, like JK Rowling, are treated with abuse and malice.
