Behold the member

So, Sir Anthony Blair thinks "a woman has a vagina and a man has a penis" does he (Daily Telegraph, 17 June 2024)? I make no comment about the implications of this remark to the current heated transgender debates and online noise, nor about the former UK Premier's views generally. I make no political comment about these issues as I tend not to discuss politics and religion online.

If my penis is removed, I do not cease to be a man?

What I will comment on is some of the implications of this diatribe for one man (me) of these remark that a man's sex, his manhood or manliness, is defined by his penis. Other men, women and non-binary people may or may not agree, it is not for me to say. Neither is it for me to say what defines womanhood or feminine identity.

The view that a man or woman is defined by the presence or absence of a penis or a vagina is quite simply not true. Why? For one thing, there are more organs that contribute to the classification of male sex, as the above medical illustration demonstrates. Furthermore, if my penis were to be surgically removed, I would not cease to be a man. I would clearly not become a woman (even by Sir Tone's absurd definition, quite apart from the obvious reasons). I would not appear to the outside world to be any different (I try to avoid appearing naked in public) and it would have only a minimal effect on my gender self-perception. Yes, as a man, I am sure I would still miss the organ even though it now has limited use to me at the age of 64. But by any definition that I can think of, I would still be a man.

When I was born, I was not a man, even though I had a penis

For that matter, if a woman attached a penis to her lower anatomy (without the benefit of clinical intervention), would it make her a man? Or did you mean, Tony, that a man is a person born with a penis (to paraphrase some of the anti-Trans rants for your benefit)? Well, when I was born, I was not a man, even though I had a penis. I became a man through a series of physiological and emotional developments over a long period of time, the length of development depending on what stage one considers to be the start of manhood (for a boy). Some say that boys never grow up and I can understand why. Still doesn't leave any support for the Blair view of the definition of sex.

Whatever Blair's intended meaning, and I will come to motivation later, I cannot accept that as a person, as a man, I am defined by my penis. Not least because the comparatively diminutive proportions of said member (please don't judge me by willy size) would make me quite a small man: boo hoo! More importantly because there is so much more to being a man, and being manly, than being attached to a penis.

Manhood, influences and understandings

As a man, I have a self-perception of my manhood, a gender identify if you will, that includes a wide range of influences and understandings. I include the fact that I have contributed to the parenting of three children, more if you include the foster children we cared for as a family some years ago. No doubt my biological fatherhood of the first three I mentioned has something to do with this. I also have what some might think of as traditional, old fashioned or misplaced, aspects of my self-perception of manliness, a person of male sex/gender. I won't provide a list of these as they might detract from the point I have made and they are not particularly important, except to me.

At a biological level, I am sure my manhood, for want of a better term, includes a wide range of genetic, biochemical, hormonal, cultural and philosophical factors and contributors, that go beyond the limits of my self-perception.

Some babies are born with neither a penis, nor a vagina, while others are born with a combination of both

Perhaps what the Right Honourable Sir Anthony, Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, meant is that sex is typically characterised by a person having a penis or a vagina? I suggest this because some people are born with neither and some are born with both. I believe the correct terminology for these manifestations to be 'intersex' a state of being that has been known for thousands of years at least. As already mentioned, it is also possible for the penis to be cut out, and this is true of a vagina too.

Surely, Sir Tony, you are aware of all this? You are, after all, clearly an intelligent man. You were educated at Fettes College, studied law at St John's College, Oxford, being called to the English Bar at Lincoln's Inn. Architect of 'New Labour' and the youngest Prime Minister of the 20th Century, we can hardly view you as stupid or unthinking.

Could Tony Blair be saying this just for the publicity?

On which basis how can you say that sex is defined by two specific organs alone? More importantly, why do you feel the need to say this publicly? As a former Labour Politician, currently without any major appointment in politics, I can only think that you have become consciousness of being a faded, once-famous person. Like so many other once-famous people, popular celebrities of the past, you have some kind of need to get back into the public eye. Perhaps you have written a book you would like to publish or you want to be selected as a competitor in Strictly Come Dancing, I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here, or some other reality TV show, who knows? Or could it be in deference to your religious views as a Roman Catholic covert?

Given your undoubted intelligence and experience, it cannot be because you are stupid. You must surely have seen the opportunity to wade into this absurd and damaging trans 'debate' and get some publicity as a consequence? You perhaps seek to gain some public recognition at the expense of the many trans, LGBTQ+, and binary men and women who may be hurt by your comments. Or am I being unkind? Perhaps you merely succumbed to some aggressive media questioning and gave the hoped-for reply in a moment of weakness. You are, after all, getting on in years. No, at the risk of judging someone unfairly (I try not to judge others at all) I think I will go out on a limb and say these comments were a deliberate act of self-publicity.

These remarks, Sir Anthony, are a betrayal. A betrayal of principle, a betrayal of humanity, a betrayal of the Christian virtues and values you claim to espouse, a betrayal of trust, and a betrayal of this voter who supported you throughout three terms in office.

I hope you will at some point at least have the decency to retract them.

You may think of yourself as nothing but a penis but I am not.

Ray Taylor

If you liked this article, you might also like:

• Boy, girl or not
• All about the noise