Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Cancelling tv licence: stop funding misogyny

141 replies

Victoriapestis · 02/03/2019 23:30

I do appreciate the recent panorama programme showed some progress in the BBC’s trans coverage. But overall my impresssion is that the BBC has sadly become an unbalanced, pro gender stereotype, misogynistic organisation that is actively damaging women’s rights, deliberately silencing gender critical voices, and thereby normalising oppressive and damaging behaviour. (I’m feeling cross.)

I feel very uncomfortable about the fact my payments are subsiding this and really want to stop. I would not fund pornhub, because of the damage it does, normalising stereotypes, etc, and similarly don’t want to fund the bbc.

So, has anyone else cancelled on this ground? Did you contact tv licensing to say why? And what hoops does one need to jump through?

OP posts:
CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:59

Everyone is free to give opinions and argue about opinions.

You've said you love the BBC, that's great.
I don't agree, i don't give them my money, you've asked me why and i've told you.
We have different opinions.
That's it, then you post someone else posts with hashtags?

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:57

I think we know it was a response to me, but I'm unsure of what you were trying to demonstate by copying and pasting those posts?

That people who are not me said things and gave their opinion?

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 16:55

^ That's hardly profound.

But seems to be getting a little lost on this thread.

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 16:54

That was in response to CaptainKirksSpookyghost's weird little dramatisation at 16:20:07, OVA.

Sorry, should have said that.

I think we probably all agree that:

a) we're free to spend our own money as we like (within legal limits);

b) we're free to argue that other people should do the same as us – but other people are free to argue that we should do something different.

OVAgroundWOMBlingfree · 03/03/2019 16:44

And what, Perking?

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:35

Perking

#Ihaveanarmyofatomicsupermen

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 16:29

Page 1:

poster userschmoozer Sun 03-Mar-19 00:12:14
It would have more impact if a group of us do it smile

poster OVAgroundWOMBlingfree Sun 03-Mar-19 00:13:45
#BoycottTheBBC
#ByeByeAuntyBeeb

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:20

people are strange.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:20

"I'm giving up my TV licence"

"Okay, DON'T YOU DARE EXPECT ME TO!"

"okay"

"HOW DARE YOU EXPECT ME TO, WHAT WILL YOU GAIN?"

"£154 a year."

"YOU WON'T BRING DOWN THE BBC"

"Okay, i just don't want to give them my money, they don't represent me. The BBC make billions, i doubt we will bring them down"

"DON'T EXPECT ME TOO JOIN YOU HAHAHAHA"

"okay"

"I'M NOT INTERESTED!"

"yeah"

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:13

Just don't expect us all to join in. If we don't, it's because we disagree with you and that should be an end to it.

Which leads to the question of why are those unintrested here arguing?

Tanith · 03/03/2019 16:07

Tanith
You can spend your money where you like
So can everyone else
Why should women be forced to give their money to orgs because you say so?

I've said nothing of the kind. I can indeed spend my money where I like and I'm finding the over-investment of several posters on this thread, determined to convince us otherwise, to be questionable.

Boycott if you must. Just don't expect us all to join in. If we don't, it's because we disagree with you and that should be an end to it.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:06

undermine the BBC's existence

OH I GET IT!
Very good!!!

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 16:05

As they shouldn't exclude info about a legal medical process due to pressure from religious groups

I agree with this completely.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 03/03/2019 16:05

It's not just a show is it Perking

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 15:59

Hmm Sadly, people suggesting that lack of a direct weblink to abortion advice after Call the Midwife means we should do without the BBC altogether is a very good example of the point I'm making.

I'm not suggesting the BBC is wonderfully perfect. I agree completely that it is susceptible to pressure groups. Groups making enough noise get some influence in steering it, at least temporarily.

Indeed, as you say, external pressure is what got the BBC to put up a direct weblink.

I would rather they had got it "right" (in my eyes) first time, but when they don't, I'd rather pressure them to do it "right" than undermine the BBC's existence.

Because I know what the likely replacements look like, and many are really not (in my eyes) an improvement.

OVAgroundWOMBlingfree · 03/03/2019 15:53

Bad me, naughty me. Naughty women.

SardineQueenII · 03/03/2019 15:32

Yes

Because they changed it after massive adverse publicity

But not immediately

Your argument that the call the midwife thing shows how great the BBC is, its a bad example

Also, your idea that the pro life perople used the complaints process successfully due to them being 'adept' at it

Is also a terrible thing

As they shouldn't exclude info about a legal medical process due to pressure from religious groups

THAT is bias

The points you think you are making do not support your argument in any way

They are all demonstrating that the BBC is biased
And susceptible to interference from extreme pressure groups

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 15:22

Not following you, SardineQueen.

When I go to the Call the Midwife front page, I see a link for "Information and Support", which goes to a page that looks like this. If you can read it, it includes " NHS Advice on Abortion"

Is that not what you are seeing?

Cancelling tv licence: stop funding misogyny
PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 15:05

SardineQueen, I agree with you that it was wrong not to have direct links to abortion advice services after Call the Midwife.

I don't agree that therefore it's a great idea to boycott the whole BBC. Which commissioned and showed the hour-long programme in the first place.

SardineQueenII · 03/03/2019 14:59

In fact they STILL don't have it on the front page

"Pregnancy issues
Pregnancy, infertility, pre & post natal depression, premature birth, miscarriage, still birth, child bereavement"

But if you click pregnancy there is now a link to NHS Abortion guidance

Abortion should be a header of its own in that category.

They are fucking pathetic

SardineQueenII · 03/03/2019 14:57

At the end of progs viewers are pointed to a action page

It is not specific to each prog

You don't really know what you're talking about do you

SardineQueenII · 03/03/2019 14:55

Perking what are you on about

You used call the midwife prog on abortion to say bbc are great fab and awesome

I said that leaving out links to abortion advice at the end as it's a "controversial" subject was wrong wrong wrong

They initially stuck to their guns saying that if you clicked through to NHS you could find the info

Eventually they seem to have backed down and published links after letter signed by large number of womens orgs healthcare orgs etc

And it being a story in a lot of the mainstream press

Your guessing about what happened here there is hard to follow, and I'm not sure what the point is

BBC is supposed to be unbiased, deciding not to publish links to respected orgs about a legal medical procedure is BIAS

It really was a shit example and multiple posts of you thinking out loud don't change that.

Ineedacupofteadesperately · 03/03/2019 14:49

In addition to the other reasons given I think 154 is a lot of bloody money and far too much to be honest. Lots of people simply can't afford that - for what? Most people could pay for at least two streaming services with that money, or, you know food or school clothes for the kids.

Also, the threatening letters they send are a scandal, really bullying and nasty and that alone is enough to stop paying for the license because actually I don't want my money spent on bullying people. I used to get their bullying letters all the time in a flat I lived in even though I HAD a tv license and had repeatedly told them so, I suppose someone in the block wasn't paying and they just weren't fussed about getting it right. There were vulnerable people in that block too - elderly people who could have been scared and confused by those letters.

PerkingFaintly · 03/03/2019 14:45

(I could of course be wrong; it could simply have been one person in one part of the BBC who made an individual choice about which links to put, on a programme which was obviously produced by a different unit.

In which case it will down to the individual, or to their unit, without influence by explicit lobbying.)

Swipe left for the next trending thread