Newsnight now

You are kidding
Woke-ingham?
🤣

I don't understand why the Lib Dems are pushing this so hard after the Challenor fiasco.

Hadn't realised but there was a web chat with Lib Dem Phillip Lee which Pink News (who else) somehow made mumsnetters challenging him of self ID and possible MNHQ censoring a car crash that they could celebrate??????

Webchat www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_live_events/3758248-Webchat-with-Dr-Phillip-Lee-LibDem-candidate-for-Wokingham-on-Tuesday-3-December-at-2pm

Reaction to web chat thread www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3759424-Dr-Philip-Lee-LibDem-candidate-shows-us-who-he-is

I have a friend who works for the BBC in a role where they are connected well. I've been drip dripping for about 2 years but said something a couple of months ago where I think the penny dropped with them. They are otherwise woker than woke and 'why can't we all be nice', but they know me well enough to realise I'm not a raving loon nor bigot and I do have legit concerns.

They've never actively said their position on the subject but a couple of comments have suggested they are fed up with the constant 'we need someone trans for segment' mentality.

I do think there is widespread disillusionment in the BBC ranks on this and its starting to get traction. But it has to get past niche programming after 10pm to make any tangible difference.

That has to start with simply asking the question why they are supporting Stonewalls homophobic definition of homosexuality. It lays it bare.

On Newsnight she said "if there is somebody who is clearly not transitioning, who is somebody who is very obviously still physically male changing within a group setting in a female changing room, that's inappropriate because it makes people feel uncomfortable"

So she gets it to that extent. That there's an issue of women understandably feeling uncomfortable around a biological male in this way, and she says that's not ok.

What she hasn't clicked on is that she's thinking Jazz Jennings, India Willoughby, and this is not the reality she is enabling to happen. She needs to do a lot of unpacking and a lot more research.

It's any male. At any stage of transition or not. There's no gate keeping, and women having feelings of discomfort is absolutely not ok or not something permitted to them.

And for many women, no matter what the stage of transition, they are still going to feel uncomfortable. What then? When do their feelings stop mattering? Who decides? What about the women who are not able to use any space with any male at any stage of transition? What about provision for them, is it ok to exclude them?

I don't think Sarah would agree it's ok, but Sarah is forcing this agenda forward and representing a Rape Crisis that prioritises the need of male people to be included and treated in female centres even at the expense and exclusion and trauma of those females. Not because their needs cannot be met in any other way, but because the presence of those females in a female only space even at the expense of those females is so important to those males.

As a PP said - Sarah's never going to square this circle.

thatdamnwoman - I'm a serial emailer too and completely agree with what you say about it. Inboxes mean something - particularly when it's clear that viewers/readers are independently noticing the little things, not just the big things that created the latest social media furore.

Sorry don't know where the random came from!

Brilliant - thank you Emily, I can imagine that took a bit of nerve with you being a BBC employee.

Wow. Thank you Emily Maitliss. Couldn't be said more plainly!

Another fine woman making her way to the peak.

Emily's tweeted about it today, here:

twitter.com/maitlis/status/1202651755441508354

I posted earlier that I hope Newsnight follow this through and ask all Parties about their position on self id.

Particulary now I have seen on a facebook thread that Labour would make it a hate crime to "mis-gegnder" a trans woman.

WtF????????????

Can anyone think of any other area of life where someone's choice to live their life at the expense of others rights is so studiously not discussed.

And if they dont then it will make me think that they were just using the trans issue to have a go at the Lib Dems which is definitely a BBC trend at the moment.

Thanks for the link nauticant!

Didn't Sarah Wollaston go directly against 'acceptance without exception' by stating that a male bodied person who looked obviously male shouldn't be in women only spaces? I thought that the bandwidth for women had been widened?

Some situations Emily Maitlis mentioned already have examples where the ability to enter women only spaces allowed abuse to occur by male bodied people( e.g. Karen White and Katie Dolatowski ); I have been getting so baffled by how the manifold problems coming from the GRA and self-id shenanigans are not being connected and highlighted by mainstream media, however after this and the Tavi segment before, I'm daydreaming that Emily is raising the issue with people who are pro self-id for different reasons, in order to tie it in to a more in depth episode focussing on female bodied women and their concerns.

I'll admit to being biased but I did think Sarah was 8 minutes of whataboutery for her answer, no definitive answers whatsoever!

I have just watched it and found it unbelievably frustrating, both how little Sarah Wollaston understood they issue and how Emily Maitlis didn’t ask the key questions (though I am grateful for her efforts).

Just watched it. Emily is fab ❤
I used to think well of SW, but she's drunk the kool aid as well, hasn't she

I also think they have some insight into what their supporting. But are choosing not to think too much about it in case the contradictions upset a simple narrative they've adopted and which, so far, they can sell on for their own advantage.

I'm developing some real contempt for the Lib Dems.

You really don't have a clue what you are supporting here

She does.

You could see it in her face. Why else, every time the flaws were pointed out,would she go back to how awful and traumatic it all is.

On Newsnight she said "if there is somebody who is clearly not transitioning, who is somebody who is very obviously still physically male changing within a group setting in a female changing room, that's inappropriate because it makes people feel uncomfortable"

Well, that's a bit transphobic, isn't it? A 'transwoman' isn't someone who has had or is going to have their penis removed, if that's what she means by 'physically male'.
The penis becomes a female penis when its owner declares a female gender identity. People who think like this actually exist, and they are the cheerleaders of your self id policy, Sarah. You really don't have a clue what you are supporting here.

They know exactly what a woman is too..or theyd never be deliberately putting them/themselves in.a position where.of they wanna keep their jobs they have to go along with everything the men.say.

For anyone without access to BBC iPlayer:

Having watched this and the Sonia Poulton documentary, it's very evident that the Lib Dems pose an active danger to women and children with zero understanding of safeguarding

They understand safeguarding. You cant simultaneously be intelligent enough to know exactly what tactics to use to make people feel guilty enough to not speak up and/or come up with lengthy detailed explanations as to why you feel that way purposely avoiding certain parts of the question, and not get safeguarding.

This is an active choice they know. They understand full well. But mens feelings matter more

Just got round to watching this. What a pleasure to finally see a BBC presenter openly tackling the issues. And what a disaster to see a (presumably qualified rather than self identified) woman doctor missing the point so spectacularly. Just deny deny deny.

Having watched this and the Sonia Poulton documentary, it's very evident that the Lib Dems pose an active danger to women and children with zero understanding of safeguarding.

Emily gets it all right.

Sarah Wollaston like most other politicians simply does not understand the issue.

On Newsnight she said "if there is somebody who is clearly not transitioning, who is somebody who is very obviously still physically male changing within a group setting in a female changing room, that's inappropriate because it makes people feel uncomfortable"

With self ID a self declared tw can present however they like. They do not have to have transitioned.

She has absolutely no idea about the scope of this, and does not deserve to be among the grown-ups making decisions for other people if she is so blind.Yes, it is inappropriate because it makes women feel uncomfortable if that somebody is male.

She knows what's right-- she said it right there on Newsnight. What she does not know are the real issues.

I object to the insinuation that I'm someone who'd go around bullying new posters.

That wasn't what I said at all.

I welcome the correction and I agree it's important to get it right. My point is about tone, not content.

My point is you were unecessarily snarky to me, and that although it's not going to stop me posting on FWR, it might well put a new poster off. I'm getting the sense that you are perhaps unaware of how snarky you came across?

Perhaps you are unaware how off-putting it could be to some women new to FWR who may find attitudes like that intimidating when directed at them for making a simple mistake?

If so, please can I implore you to be a a bit gentler to other women here, I strongly suspect you don't intend to come across as intimidating to new posters?

I won't say any more on this as this had taken up quite enough time already!

Thanks for sharing your list of what you've been up to, inspiring stuff. I wonder if an ongoing thread with addresses of people we could all write to, to thank could be a useful thing to do?

I used to work in the media and there's no real way for programme-makers to know whether they're getting things right except for feedback from viewers/ readers/ listeners. I would say that an hour's work sending a few thoughtful emails asking a few key questions or encouraging investigation into a particular area could be far more effective than getting up before dawn to put a t-shirt on a statue – not that that wasn't a good thing to do.

I think it's best when these emails trickle in independently. Feedback from lots of people saying the same thing over a long period is difficult to ignore. Even better if the same person feeds back regularly over time. You can build up a bit of a relationship and they begin to realise that the axe you might appear to be grinding does actually need grinding.