It was a pleasure to interview Connie Shaw from the Free Speech Union. A truly fascinating insight into her views on gender, free speech, and the general political state of play. You can see Connie as a regular contributor on GB News and Talk TV. Through her work at the Free Speech Union, she champions the rights of individuals to express their opinion without fear of punishment. Follow Connie on X @_ConnieShaw.
Can you tell our subscribers about your work at the Free Speech Union and a little bit about your journey as to how you got to where you are? Chris, View on the Doorstep
As a presenter at Leeds University student radio, I wanted to explore the rising backlash to wokeism and identity politics; I had a particular interest in gender ideology. After various interviews and articles around the subject, I was permanently removed from my committee position at the student radio station for expressing gender-critical beliefs. After being investigated by the student union through a rigorous disciplinary process, I faced potential expulsion. The Free Speech Union (FSU) helped prepare my defence, and I was eventually found not guilty. I couldn’t speak about the case publicly as I would face further disciplinary action, so I waited till graduation before telling my story. I am now working for the FSU as an external affairs officer, which involves promoting our work and raising awareness of individual cases.
The Supreme Court decision in April confirming that a woman is a biological female was supposed to provide clarity, yet within some organisations, it seems to have galvanised trans rights activists. Are we really in a better position? Caroline Noakes, Bedfordshire
Yes, we are in a better position because the law is on our side. Organisations that are reluctant to follow the Supreme Court decision are being lied to by lobby groups such as Stonewall, who tend to dominate the narrative on the gender debate. The immediate aftermath of the decision saw several sporting bodies confirm that there will be two categories for sport: female and male. Whilst elite sport has changed its rules, there’s still issues at a grassroots level. Some organisations could be waiting for further clarification from the Equality and Human Rights Commission and there is still work to be done, as the largest number of cases we see at the FSU are against people expressing their gender-critical views; the David Toshack case highlights this – click here to read more about his case.
Why do you think politicians have been scared to address the issue of gender identity? The majority of the population, whilst being respectful, believe that there are 2 genders and it’s as simple as that, so why have politicians complicated matters? David Jenkins, Nottingham
Simply put, politicians seem to be confused by the law and have been influenced by powerful lobby groups. Politicians have seen what happens to anyone who expresses gender-critical views such as Rosie Duffield and Joanna Cherry. Take the example of trans activist India Willoughby who has accused Adnan Hussain of “trans hate” for supporting single-sex spaces. Adnan’s views on gender can be linked to the Muslim faith and the importance of strict definitions of men and women. It’ll be interesting to see how left-wing parties tackle the issue of gender identity amongst their core Muslim voters who tend to have traditional, conservative views of gender.
I also think a lot of politicians simply don’t care as they see the gender topic as a culture war, as opposed to valuing the rights of women and children. After the Supreme Court ruling, women weren’t being asked about their rights being restored, it was men who were asked about their feelings on being banned from a ‘woman-only space.’ A successful ideological campaign has framed politicians to think a certain way and if you’re a politician that doesn’t want to understand the issue, it’s easy to go along with the ideology, but it’s an ideology that is an inversion of reality.
Sex space rights should be taught as fact
Are you concerned about the role that education has in shaping views on gender? Louise Williams, Cambridge
I’m not against the idea of gender ideas being taught in schools, I just think they should be taught in the right way. Teachers need to teach the facts and the law; biological sex is real and that is the basis on which men and women’s rights are grounded. Schools are the place where safeguarding matters more than anywhere else, and it’s important that children are taught that they deserve single-sex spaces. No matter how someone identifies, if they are of the opposite sex, they do not belong in your space, when that space is specifically reserved for members of your sex. Gender identity should be taught as a secondary belief system not as fact. It is sex space rights that should be taught as fact because they are enshrined in law.
The issue of gender identity and biological fact seems to have infringed the right to free speech; it scares me that someone such as Graham Linehan has been arrested. What needs to change to ensure this never happens again? Katherine Blythe, Leicester
The police need to get their priorities straight; they need to stop spending time arresting people for speech that has hurt someone’s feelings. I believe there are a group of militant trans activists who seem to have the police in the palm of their hands. Of course, there are issues with our legislation which needs changing; on the one hand, Mark Rowley, the MET Police Commissioner, is blaming governments for the legislation, claiming that the police have no choice, but the government are critical of the police, so nobody is taking responsibility. Primarily, the police need to use a common-sense approach to avoid unnecessary arrests. Visit the FSU to find out the latest news in relation to this case.
In my opinion, the Lucy Connolly case was not only an example of free speech under threat, but provided clear evidence of two-tier justice, particularly in comparison to the case of Ricky Jones. Should we be concerned about two-tier justice or has this been exaggerated by the media? Andy Newton, Newark-on-Trent
I think the phrase two tier justice has been sensationalised. However, there is some truth to it. The cases of Lucy Connolly and Ricky Jones are very different as they faced different charges. Also, Lucy pleaded guilty, and Ricky pleaded not guilty. It does seem that if you plead not guilty to a speech crime you will be acquitted by a jury, as also seen in the Jamie Michael case. In the aftermath of the Southport riots, Keir Starmer made it very clear that the police would be remanding people in custody and the court process would be efficient. There are confusing and complex elements to the cases. However, I can understand why the public could perceive a two-tier approach to justice.
Do you think Reform will win the next election? Peter Withe, Nottingham
Despite Reform flying high in the polls, I find it quite difficult to make an early judgment. I have concerns about the arguments that have taken place between the small number of MPs in the party. There are people on the right who have fallen out of love with the Conservative Party, yet they don’t trust Reform. I think Nigel Farage, in some ways is trying to appeal to too many people and Reform need to get more serious policies in place. Reform made a complete mess of their policy on trans prisoners when their justice advisor, Vanessa Frake, argued there shouldn’t be a blanket ban on trans women in women’s prisons; Reform had to clarify this wasn’t party policy. I understand the appeal of Reform as people are crying out for change. However, I remain sceptical as to whether they can be in government.
The response from some people on the left to the tragic shooting of Charlie Kirk was sickening; have we reached a point in politics where political views are so tribal, that we’ve lost all common decency? Mike Clarke, Derby
I don’t think we’ve lost all common decency, but it’s concerning how mainstream it was to celebrate Charlie Kirk’s death. At the risk of making generalisations, there are issues on the ‘left’ with their responses to people they disagree with. You can disagree with someone’s views and even find them abhorrent, but that doesn’t mean they’re a bad person. I’ve personally never felt more scared about the future because of the way social media operates, and it can be difficult to decipher what the attitudes of people are. Progressive leftists tend to believe that words are violence, and they use this to justify violent actions, so the response to Charlie Kirk’s death from the ‘left’ didn’t surprise me.
Do you see a positive future for Britain amongst all the gloom and doom? Lauren Ellis, Lincoln
I find it quite hard to see a positive future. I’m really concerned about some of the ideologies we’re importing into this country, particularly when those ideologies are damaging to Western culture. There is hope, but I worry we’ve left things too late. Perhaps it’s one of the reasons to support Reform to instigate the change. If we were to teach politics at an early age in the UK, I think young people would be more invested in the future of their country and this could install a passion to change the country for the better. Despite all the negativity in the world and in the UK, I am optimistic, I just can’t see what the pathway is to bring positive change.
A massive thank you to Connie for giving up her time and answering all your questions. We have some further interviews lined up before the end of the year and we will keep you updated on email.
© View on the Doorstep — 2025 All Rights Reserved.