Potentially devastating consequences for women

The Telegraph introduces the UK to Meghan Murphy:

As one of the lone voices unequivocally arguing that identifying as a different gender does not change one’s chromosomal sex (and, ergo, that trans-women are not actually women) Murphy was swiftly labelled a ‘radical’ feminist, as well as a bigot and a transphobe by her detractors, many of whom also accuse her of being Right-wing.

To Murphy, a once proud socialist with a Marxist father, it’s a laughable claim. But she feels betrayed by the Left. ‘The NDP [Canada’s equivalent to Labour] has fully vilified women who speak out about this,’ she says. ‘They won’t even have a conversation.’

On Monday evening she spoke at a sold-out event on women’s rights in Bloomsbury, where she received something of a rock star’s welcome, with extended applause and whoops of appreciation as she walked onto the podium. It makes our meeting at one of Camden’s most rock ‘n’ roll pubs the following afternoon feel quite appropriate.

The reason for Murphy’s visit is because a similar ideological battle is taking place on this side of the Atlantic. Last year the Government launched a public consultation on ‘gender self-ID’, a policy which would require little more than signing a statement – and no medical oversight – for anyone to obtain a legal gender change. The debate in the UK has been equally fraught, with accusations of transphobia liberally hurled at those who dare raise the potential practical impact of such sweeping legislative reforms.

Liberally in one sense but very illiberally in another.

Murphy has genuine sympathy for those suffering from gender dysphoria (the belief they have been born the wrong sex) but it is outweighed by her concern that trans activists’ increasingly rapacious demands, particularly in the name of trans-women, many of whom, it is believed, opt to retain their male anatomy, will have potentially devastating consequences for women and children in a plethora of areas from professional sports to domestic violence provision.

In Vancouver, she points out, a women’s rape shelter which denied services to trans-women was deemed ‘transphobic’ by local politicians, who subsequently voted to cut its government subsidies. ‘Women who are escaping male violence need somewhere to go,’ Murphy says. ‘And these places are going to lose funding unless they cave [to the demands of trans activists].’ It is for erstwhile uncontroversial statements such as these that Murphy has attracted such opprobrium.

Despite her public aura of bravado, Murphy admits the incessant harassment has taken its toll. In Canada she has lost friends who are afraid to associate with her for fear of damaging their ‘woke’ credentials, received obscene telephone calls, and even been reported to the police for alleged transphobia. ‘They obviously thought it was silly,’ she says, but nevertheless a policeman warned her to ‘be careful’.

‘I’m scared for my safety,’ Murphy confesses. ‘Lots of women are. I know people who’ve lost their jobs over this. Women are being silenced.’

Yes but pronouns. Pronouns, I tell you.

9 Responses to “Potentially devastating consequences for women”