A transgender scholar has outraged Woman’s Hour listeners with an interview full of “incredible nonsense” in which she gave convoluted answers about feminism and the “natural organic type” of women.
Grace Lavery is a British professor of English and gender studies at the University of California, Berkeley, who wrote a memoir titled Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis.
Lavery, who is from the West Midlands, transitioned in 2018 and was an active social media campaigner for trans rights before she was suspended from Twitter last month for saying she hoped the Queen would die of Covid.
She appeared on the BBC4 show yesterday where an extract from her book was read saying: ‘I am quite sure that women’s rights are not, never have been and should never be based on sex “.
She seemed to suggest that women’s rights should encompass everyone who identifies as female, rather than being based on biological sex.
Host Emma Barnett asked Lavery how she would react to women who believe they should have gender-based rights when it comes to participating in sports and women-only spaces.
She appeared to argue that gender-based rights were a ‘bad deal’ for women because feminists throughout history have fought to be equal to men, rather than having an ‘enumerated’ set of rights. especially for women.
Grace Lavery is a British professor of English and gender studies at the University of California, Berkeley, who wrote a memoir titled Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis
“I’ve been doing this job for a long time,” Lavery said. “The notion of gender-based rights is a very recent phenomenon, which has not existed for more than a few years and which is a very bad deal for women.
“I’m not saying this as a trans woman, I’m not saying this as anyone other than a scholar of feminism.
Lavery then claimed that many women gender critics are not feminists and that there is “no reason why the state should be able to decide whether a person is male or female.”
Viewers were quick to share their views on Twitter, with many calling “extremely offensive” the idea that women shouldn’t have rights based on their biological sex alone.
Many viewers were particularly frustrated with the interview as it aired directly after hearing harrowing testimonies from victims of neglectful maternity services at Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust.
“How could Woman’s Hour leave such an offensive lie on Woman’s Hour?” wrote one user.
She appeared on the BBC4 show yesterday where an extract from her book was read saying: ‘I am quite sure that women’s rights are not, never have been and should never be based on sex “
“I’m honestly still shaken by this story on #BBCwomansHour today about the woman whose baby died due to incompetent/cruel midwives. Going from something so appalling for a woman to Grace Lavery talking about how gender-based rights for women only recently existed is too much,” said another.
A third said: ‘So ironic the juxtaposition of an interview with Grace Lavery after the interview about the heartbreaking experiences of stillbirth and neglectful maternity services. His answers and explanations were decidedly autocratic, to the point of being unpleasant.
Lavery claims that “historically” people who believe the word “woman” means someone who was born biologically with female genitalia are people “on the side of the patriarchy.”
She was asked if she understands why ordinary women — who aren’t vocal skeptical feminists — can believe that women can’t have penises.
Lavery said that the question “Can a woman have a penis?” is “deliberately misleading” because it looks like they are asking permission.
She said the correct way to ask the question is to ask, “Do you think the female class can contain people who have penises?”
Viewers were quick to share their views on Twitter, with many calling the idea that women shouldn’t have rights based solely on their biological sex “extremely offensive”.
She said “most people” would consider the question “weird and pointless” because of the way the question is worded.
The activist claims that sex is real and “deeply important” and that a person is capable of changing sex.
His understanding is that if, for example, a woman injected large amounts of testosterone, a male sex hormone, into her body, her “balance of sexual characteristics and traits” would change.
She recognized that while the person’s chromosomes and primary sex organs will remain female, their “secondary sex organs” – parts of the body produced by sex hormones – will have changed.
Barnett pointed out that some people think a person can never completely switch to another sex because that person cannot change their chromosomes.
The presenter then turned her attention to the subject of sports, pointing out that many people – who do not study the subject academically – worry that trans women have an unfair physical advantage.
She then asked Lavery if she sympathized with those who didn’t share her views on what constitutes being a woman.
Host Emma Barnett takes issue with many of Lavery’s arguments – saying at one point that many feminists who are very aware of patriarchy and have always come to the conclusion that the male body has an advantage over the female body
While the academic said yes, Lavery claimed that those who believe in a “natural organic type” of the female body only do so because the patriarchy told them to.
Barnett pointed out that many are feminists who are very aware of patriarchy and have always come to the conclusion that the male body has an advantage over the female body.
Lavery seemed to argue that this was not a valid argument because a person’s body can be altered by sex hormones.
She went on to say that gender feminists, who believe that sex is biological and immutable, have only been around since transgender women entered the mainstream.
“There is no doubt that there are feminists who share this view,” she said. “All I can say is that this is a profound historical novelty.
“I don’t think you could find a single feminist who would take that view before Caitlyn Jenner appeared on the front of Vanity Fair.
‘I think historically the notion [that] Woman is a natural type who deserves specific, enumerated rights based on sex, which is precisely what feminism was created to oppose, Lavery said.
“The fact that we have reached this impasse or this confusion about what feminism is is a historically interesting development.”
Lavery was suspended from tweeting on Twitter to the UK Government that she hoped the Queen of England would die while Her Majesty had Covid last month.
When pressed by Barnett on whether she had any regrets about the tweet, Lavery said she did not regret the statement – arguing that during the French Revolution “regicide was really on the table”.
Listeners quickly took to Twitter to voice their disagreement, with one user writing, “So #GraceLavery said there aren’t as many female gender critics as the media says.” Please indicate below if you criticize the ‘gender’ by saying ‘I am’
She further frustrated listeners after claiming her suspension from Twitter had made her realize that there were far fewer gender-critical women in reality than the media would lead the public to believe.
The tweet received thousands of replies from women, including one stating, “I am.” I also criticize Grace Lavery, who spouted the most unbelievable nonsense in this interview’
“I think leaving Twitter has been very helpful in finding out how this issue plays out in community spaces in the UK,” she said.
“Which means that I just don’t think there are as many gender activists, feminist or not, as the media wants us to believe.”
Listeners were quick to take to Twitter to voice their disagreement, with one user writing, “So #GraceLavery said there aren’t as many female gender critics as the media says.” Please indicate below if you criticize “gender” by saying “I am”.
The tweet received thousands of replies from women, including one stating, “I am.” I also criticize Grace Lavery, who spouted the most incredible nonsense in this interview.
Another agreed: “It was a really infuriating interview, even though @Emmabarnett was pointed and mostly focused on the issues.” But #GraceLavery has no idea what real women live for. She is a good example of the extent to which academics have sold themselves to ideology through endless obfuscation.