Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Woman's Hour 20 October: Has Mumnset become too politicised?

242 replies

nauticant · 19/10/2020 11:02

I assume this is about the the audacity to criticise the gender identity ideology. I wonder if they'll have a proper discussion. Remember that Jenni Murray only felt free to talk only as she was walking out of the door.

OP posts:
Cismyfatarsey · 20/10/2020 18:26

Missed the program but just to reiterate. Buy the book!! It is fabulous and name checks loads of Mumsnetters. You might find you have been quoted.

And it is a wonderful record of the amazing Man Friday amongst other actions.

Melroses · 20/10/2020 18:20

there really didn't see to be any point to the programme anymore if it couldn't centre the perspective of women when discussing the GRA

They have one job 🤷‍♀️

FleetsumNLangCleg · 20/10/2020 17:49

JG: "Right so what has been said on Mumsnet for example about the Gender Recognition Act that...um...I was going to say...that couldn't be said on Women's Hour (rushing) we can certainly discuss it but this is a BBC program and we therefore are not in a position to campaign for one side of ...uh...any argument or for the other but they can on Mumsnet..."

Sounds like JG is quite aware that women are mad as hell that this issue was not covered on WH and is explaining to us that she was simply doing her job. Nothing to see here.

No Jane. Not covering it WAS biased. Does the BBC cover elections? How on earth do you do that if you can't be seen to campaign for one side of any argument? By doing your fucking job.

jhuizinga · 20/10/2020 17:39

I've just listened to the interview with Sarah Pederson. I used to be a fairly devoted WH listener but gave up after the dire Belcher interview in June as there really didn't see to be any point to the programme anymore if it couldn't centre the perspective of women when discussing the GRA. I agree that Jane Garvey comes across as very uncomfortable with anything related to this issue. Sarah Pedersen was excellent, however, and I'm sure will bring new traffic to these boards. I downloaded her book to my Kindle earlier today so am looking forward to reading it.

BlackForestCake · 20/10/2020 17:39

@DonkeySkin

there is an assertion running through this thread that the suppression and censorship is being driven by men.

The massive online censorship (Twitter, reddit, etc) is definitely driven by men, as tech companies are overwhelmingly male.

I agree though that gender identity ideology isn't solely, or even mostly, a male project. Many, many women have embraced it, including most of the female political and media classes. Some of these women have been unbelievably vicious towards other women who question trans dogma, trying (and often succeeding) in making them unemployable and casting them out of polite society. Men didn't make them do that.

Clearly, gender identity ideology appeals on a deep level to many women, so it's erroneous to claim that it's solely a male creation, even though men are obviously its main beneficiaries (and women and children the losers).

Those women‘s magazines that are dedicated to telling women they’re not thin enough, not fashionable enough, not sexy enough? They’re mostly written and edited by women.

In cultures that practice FGM, it’s the women who enforce it.

Female misogyny is nothing new.

Janevaljane · 20/10/2020 17:38

@LittlePearl

I've said it before but I'm not at all convinced JG is fully GC. I have sometimes thought she sounds quite hostile to people arguing the GC view.

But maybe she's paranoid about being treated like the BBC treated JM, which I can understand.

I've never heard her be anything than thoroughly hostile.
JulesJules · 20/10/2020 17:30

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

LittlePearl · 20/10/2020 17:19

I've said it before but I'm not at all convinced JG is fully GC. I have sometimes thought she sounds quite hostile to people arguing the GC view.

But maybe she's paranoid about being treated like the BBC treated JM, which I can understand.

Chicchicchicchiclana · 20/10/2020 17:01

I listened and thought it was a good interview. JG sounded a bit defensive of the BBC and like she doesn't really know too much about Mumsnet.

sultanasofa · 20/10/2020 16:06

Just listened, very interesting. Sarah Pedersen was fantastic. It made me proud to be a part of mumsnet!

Jane Garvey sounded so jittery whenever it sounded like the conversation was veering anywhere towards women's rights. It really stuck out because she usually sounds very fluent and relaxed.

The accusations towards FPFW, WPUK, and FiLiA were outrageous. 'Some people....' who? 'in some circumstances....' what circumstances? There was no evidence to back up the smears - it was the sort of thing Trump would say. And there was no balance because there was no-one to speak up for FPFW, WPUK or FiLiA. I've emailed Womans Hour to let them know my thoughts.

Overall, though, I'm happy to hear this topic raised on the BBC. If a few more listeners come for a casual browse of FWR to see what it's all about, that can only be a good thing.

EvenSupposing · 20/10/2020 15:32

[quote Dogman]@nauticant embarrassingly it’s more Dav Pilkey... my youngest is obsessed![/quote]
Mine too Grin and I saw yours amd considered a name change to LilPetey Grin

DonkeySkin · 20/10/2020 15:09

there is an assertion running through this thread that the suppression and censorship is being driven by men.

The massive online censorship (Twitter, reddit, etc) is definitely driven by men, as tech companies are overwhelmingly male.

I agree though that gender identity ideology isn't solely, or even mostly, a male project. Many, many women have embraced it, including most of the female political and media classes. Some of these women have been unbelievably vicious towards other women who question trans dogma, trying (and often succeeding) in making them unemployable and casting them out of polite society. Men didn't make them do that.

Clearly, gender identity ideology appeals on a deep level to many women, so it's erroneous to claim that it's solely a male creation, even though men are obviously its main beneficiaries (and women and children the losers).

BoreOfWhabylon · 20/10/2020 14:54

It's up now to listen again

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000nl76

Starts at 25 mins in and they're asking for feedback.

Sarah was excellent - she says she's been on MN for around 18 years!

Meic · 20/10/2020 14:03

Thank you for raising my use of the word gender so politely.
I should, of course, have used the word sex instead of gender everywhere except in the expression "gender recognition act".

It is merely a habit of conditioning and self censorship in places which have a different approach to the use of these terms. Not an ignorance of their meaning .

Dogman · 20/10/2020 13:55

@nauticant embarrassingly it’s more Dav Pilkey... my youngest is obsessed!

SengaMac · 20/10/2020 13:46

Meic please check out the difference between the words 'sex' and 'gender'.

The Gender Recognition Act was named that specifically because the government was lobbied to do so by trans activists who wished to create confusion.

Your references to 'gender' should be 'sex' because you mean biological reality.

(And yes, we know, not all men etc)

Abitofalark · 20/10/2020 13:36

@Meic

I listened to the program and wanted to give Mumsnet a vote of support. I normally just read here because as a male single parent I feel like an intruder posting here. However that doesnt stop me from fully supporting a place where people can speak freely, even if it can be hostile to my gender as a whole. On the subject of the gender recognition act, there is an assertion running through this thread that the suppression and censorship is being driven by men. Obviously I cant speak for all men but I think this is way off the mark. On this particular issue I think that you will find that the majority of people (including that gender which many of you see as the enemy) agree with you and especially support your right to free expression even when we dont agree.
Yes, there are men who support the freedom to speak and do not support the current campaign or ideology. A few of them have been mentioned here quite often and maybe a couple have even posted. However this campaign is being driven by an organisation which I have long considered male and misogynistic, albeit in later years including women.

This doesn't mean I say you are a misogynist or only men are, and are to blame for everything wrong. There is a sort of default though and a hierarchy in which somehow women often seem to end up secondary or worse, even, as in this case as invisible. The GRA is badged, portrayed, pursued, perceived and adopted as a 'rights' agenda, and therefore embraced by all sorts of people, not only men but young, old, idealists, awareness and rights- and right-thinkers of the left and the 'progressive'; and more than that, by institutions, from the international rights one, such as the UN, the European Convention, the EU, Amnesty and so on down to our own political parties, Cabinets, government departments, lawyers, professions, education, polling companies, commercial firms, charities, even women's organisations such as the Fawcett Society the Women's Party - how did that happen?

nauticant · 20/10/2020 13:34

Yesterday's programme took hours to be put up.

Are you a Joe Abercrombie fan by any chance Dogman?

OP posts:
InflamatoryWrit · 20/10/2020 13:17

Yahoo! Someone put the question to them! (not on twitter, just snoop)

Woman's Hour 20 October: Has Mumnset become too politicised?
Dogman · 20/10/2020 13:02

Decided to listen to this on BBC Sounds during my lunch. Strangely it’s not available.

MichelleofzeResistance · 20/10/2020 13:00

there is an assertion running through this thread that the suppression and censorship is being driven by men. Obviously I cant speak for all men but I think this is way off the mark.

No, it's dead on the mark. Because the suppression and censorship of females from political lobbies re the GRA is solely about removing sex based rights from female people for the benefit and freedom of preference of male people who wish to identify as women. That's it. That's what it's about.

It gets really tiring being constantly gently ticked off by male people who have hurt feelings that women here are apparently upset with men because it isn't their fault and it's not fair - yes, it is fair. Yes, this is a movement by men that will remove in law protections and sex based rights and even the words from women. If you'd listen to what women have to say about this without taking it personally and do something to help, as a man, against the male led movement doing this, that would be lovely, thank you. But the expecting female people to fight for their rapidly vanishing equality and rights more nicely while being gentler on the feelings of men as a class? Spot the misogyny there really.

Abitofalark · 20/10/2020 12:53

Even the nuns now! Did you hear it? When they were talking about being aware of all that's been going on in the world, caused by the virus, the nun said that yes they were very well aware of all the suffering and knew all about what's going on from The Guardian and the BBC. Well informed, eh! They should try Mumsnet.

That was a very good account of Mumsnet from the author and a huge boost for the owners - Congrats to them - but the Woman's Hour questioning of mumsnetters' interests and the cringing 'some say' apologia for misogyny of some unnamed 'some', left a bad taste.

It's a bit late in the day for Woman's Hour and Jane Garvey to start sniping at a woman's / parents' site about politicisation after spending years on a programme badged as being from women's perspective and Jane Garvey unashamedly proclaiming her feminist stance on women's rights and interests. That is until recently when she has uncharacteristically and strangely held her tongue on certain occasions. She was previously outspoken on many things, including equal pay at the BBC and she's never been neutral on say, abortion or maternity rights.

The BBC's claim to be doing this for impartiality is bogus considering it has appointed designated staff and embraced and promoted an ideology even to the point of putting out stuff about a notional hundred genders as if it was real and factual and pointing people, including youngsters, towards unqualified and questionable people / organisations for 'advice' and 'information'. They don't have a Feminist or Women's Rights Editor or Correspondent, do they?

PearPickingPorky · 20/10/2020 12:45

@Meic

I listened to the program and wanted to give Mumsnet a vote of support. I normally just read here because as a male single parent I feel like an intruder posting here. However that doesnt stop me from fully supporting a place where people can speak freely, even if it can be hostile to my gender as a whole. On the subject of the gender recognition act, there is an assertion running through this thread that the suppression and censorship is being driven by men. Obviously I cant speak for all men but I think this is way off the mark. On this particular issue I think that you will find that the majority of people (including that gender which many of you see as the enemy) agree with you and especially support your right to free expression even when we dont agree.
You should keep reading, you might then realise that it's not Men, nor you specifically, it's patriarchal structures.

Oh, and it's sex, not gender.

littlbrowndog · 20/10/2020 12:40

From filia

Woman's Hour 20 October: Has Mumnset become too politicised?
Beamur · 20/10/2020 12:34

But as Neurotrashwarrior says, it's not all unconscious. The power structures that exist can be neatly exploited too.

Swipe left for the next trending thread