Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

BBC 100 Women List - Gender is contentious

168 replies

highame · 07/12/2021 16:20

I'm sure there was a thread but I can't find anywhere. Did it get deleted. Anyway, here's a good article by James Kirkup

www.spectator.co.uk/article/gender-is-contentious-the-bbc-is-pretending-it-isn-t

This is yet another fine article from James Kirkup
The continuation of this argument is that including transwomen in the category of women is harmful to natal women and against the interests of natal women. These harms can take many forms. In law and policy, the 'transwomen are women' approach can mean the erosion or removal of boundaries around single-sex spaces. In culture and society, 'transwomen are women' diverts attention from — and potentially devalues — the unique experiences that natal women have based on their female biology and socialisation.

And when finite resources are allocated, 'transwomen are women' means that some things that might otherwise have been allocated to natal women are given to people who were born male. It is a simple statement of fact that because the BBC awarded some places on its 100 Women list to transwomen, those places — and the status and acclaim they bring — cannot be given to natal women.

He has a fine way with words

OP posts:
CheeseMmmm · 08/12/2021 01:45

Not seen the list will look in a min.

Lists like this in general make me feel rather inadequate because it's exceptional people who have done amazing things and I've never heard of most of them.

Will have a look.

SpringCrocus · 08/12/2021 01:23

There are two, maybe three men on that list. They are not women. Why are they on the list?

TreborBore · 08/12/2021 01:01

Good article, I don’t understand Mumsnet HQ. If people aren’t able to discuss these issues respectfully on a public forum, it builds resentment.

334bu · 08/12/2021 00:31

I would assume that there is a list of criteria for gaining a place on such a list and would guess it would be a women who has done something ground breaking despite being disadvantaged as a women, or is fighting for the rights of women who are being discriminated against because they are female etc.
To include other people who do not fit these criteria ,admirable though they may be for fighting against the discrimination they face because of their gender non conformity, seems to me to diminish the achievements of both of these very different disadvantaged groups.

SolasAnla · 08/12/2021 00:22

@WarriorN

There's been more threads than Covid variants on this today Hmm
🙄 😲 😆 🤧
Mooscow · 07/12/2021 23:47

If a natal woman identifies as non-binary do TRAs still accept that she is a woman and would she be allowed on this list? What about a non-binary natal man?

FlyingOink · 07/12/2021 23:19

GrumpyPanda thank you

Mollyollydolly · 07/12/2021 23:02

I don't understand why we cant discuss it either for all the reasons stated in Jame's excellent article.

GrumpyPanda · 07/12/2021 22:47

@FlyingOink

I've read this thread and the Site Stuff thread. I've come to the conclusion that it must be statements like "X shouldn't be on that list because X is a man" that cause the problem with moderation.

If that's the case is it because MN are somehow legally liable for having allowed the statement to stand if X is no longer legally a man? (For example)

Facebook calls itself a platform not a publisher for this very reason, is it different for MN? Does MN have stricter standards than FB, is it because MN is UK based maybe?

Honest question!

Facebook is currently under a specific section of the US Telecommunications Act giving immunity to providers for online content. No idea about the equivalent situation for the UK. www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2021/05/14/section-230-reform-deserves-careful-and-focused-consideration/amp/
WorkingItOutAsIGo · 07/12/2021 22:44

Twitter is all about #BBC98women so I am struck that MN keeps talking about 97. It’s a sad shame that we now scrutinise women for the outliers these days.

MandalaYogaTapestry · 07/12/2021 22:25

Who is the third transwoman? Apart from Iman and Alba?

WomanStillNotAFeeling · 07/12/2021 22:17

@Ritasueandbobtoo9

In my opinion the BBC (Biased Blokes Cartel) have published the top 98 women.
No more than 97 women on that list
Ritasueandbobtoo9 · 07/12/2021 22:07

In my opinion the BBC (Biased Blokes Cartel) have published the top 98 women.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/12/2021 22:03

Site stuff one still up for me How to discuss BBC 100 women list? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/4420161-How-to-discuss-BBC-100-women-list

Theunamedcat · 07/12/2021 22:01

@FlyingOink

I've read this thread and the Site Stuff thread. I've come to the conclusion that it must be statements like "X shouldn't be on that list because X is a man" that cause the problem with moderation.

If that's the case is it because MN are somehow legally liable for having allowed the statement to stand if X is no longer legally a man? (For example)

Facebook calls itself a platform not a publisher for this very reason, is it different for MN? Does MN have stricter standards than FB, is it because MN is UK based maybe?

Honest question!

Site stuff one is gone now just this one left I believe
Lovelyricepudding · 07/12/2021 21:34

If that's the case is it because MN are somehow legally liable for having allowed the statement to stand if X is no longer legally a man? (For example)

Maya's case makes it clear that simply stating this does not amount to harassment and is allowed.

FlyingOink · 07/12/2021 21:30

I've read this thread and the Site Stuff thread. I've come to the conclusion that it must be statements like "X shouldn't be on that list because X is a man" that cause the problem with moderation.

If that's the case is it because MN are somehow legally liable for having allowed the statement to stand if X is no longer legally a man? (For example)

Facebook calls itself a platform not a publisher for this very reason, is it different for MN? Does MN have stricter standards than FB, is it because MN is UK based maybe?

Honest question!

ChateauMargaux · 07/12/2021 21:27

I'm just coming on to add my voice... we have to discuss this.. otherwise other people who feel that women's lists were set up to address the inequalities between the sexes and that ensuring that they remain in place for natal females is important will look for these discussions and find themselves 'alone' in their thoughts.

Blackandwhitehorse · 07/12/2021 21:14

Bizarrely you can say more on Instagram and Twitter than on here it seems.

Frenchfancy · 07/12/2021 21:11

I confess I haven't read the whole list, but then again, what is the point? 3% this year, how many next year or the year after. How are we supposed to achieve equality if we can't even keep our small slice of the pie? (Desperately trying to make my point without getting the thread deleted)

WomanStillNotAFeeling · 07/12/2021 20:57

A wee diversion

I’m completely bewildered why Barbara Smolińskav sugar reborn babies is included? I appreciate some women who have lost babies might find them helpful (I don’t myself obviously or I wouldn’t be mentioning it here) but that doesn’t seem like enough for a natal woman to make the list.

PickAChew · 07/12/2021 20:53

Every time.

PickAChew · 07/12/2021 20:52

I shall express no further opinion on the make up of this list, as, every fine a thread about it is deleted, I feel a little angrier about it.

oldwomanwhoruns · 07/12/2021 20:52

I hope that we have all sent in our complaints to the BBC?
(wearing son's old jumpers for the trendy whatever-gender look).

WonderHen · 07/12/2021 20:45

@TheFnozwhowasmirage

Bumping. I'm wearing men's trousers and socks as I type this,so hopefully that will render me unfeminine enough for my comment to not be deleted.
Grin