Beth Rigby interviews Iain Anderson

Anderson's main aim, it seems, and his main goal for the Labour Party he has recently joined, is to " have a strategy for this conversation".

He cannot deal with the actual conversation, this is very apparent, but he wants to play around with how it is coming across. He wants to change a few words, put emphasis on certain things - but also to avoid the nitty gritty of the actual conflict.

He uses the word 'conversation' in order to deflect from the fact that it is actually a fundamental disagreement.

He is just like Kier Starmer. Avoidant. Non committal and evasive.

Neither Stonewall nor Iain have tweeted about it yet. I wonder why? 🤷‍♀️

I remember the Stonewall campaigns to overturn Section 28 and bring in equal marriage. Thru impassioned argument, inescapable logic and true advocacy for human rights, they turned my opinion around.

Now they're a shower, an embarrassment, pure amoral lobbyism.

I guess thought that Beth will be refused interview requests from stonewall supportive people now. Unfortunately, she will be rejected and dismissed as right wing and fascist.

I've followed Beth Rigby on Twitter for a while and noticed last year she retweeted a post from JKR about her charity. This was in the midst of one of the twitter pile ons JKR has to suffer. I wondered at the time if it was a subtle show of support for JKR. I've also read an interview with Beth where she was asked who she would like to interview and she said JKR. I've always thought Beth would be across all the issues, she was excellent last night. She's just replied to Maya Forstater on Twitter to say she wants to do more on this.

https://www.youtube.com/live/DtDvBTMxDfI?feature=share

it is under the ‘live’ tab

I really hope the full interview is uploaded to YouTube so I can watch it whenever I get Imposter Syndrome. Can't believe he's apparently an expert in communications. That clip where Beth Rigby asks him about Lia Thomas and how he would feel if he was one of the female competitors and he goes 'Oh, I'm not very good at sports!' (or words to that affect) was so pathetic and dismissing of women. I hope this is a turning point for how people feel about Stonewall's stance on trans issues.

I've never watched Beth Rigby before and thought that was excellent.

There was a point at about 23 minutes where Iain looked as if he was going to cry. DH suggested he needed a support animal.

and it’s not just about elite sports (don’t think I missed that little evasion). Amateur sportswomen also deserve fairness, which means no bloody men

Quite. Pretending it doesn't matter at grassroots level is so disingenuous. How does Iain think that elite female athletes are created? They don't appear magically from a lab somewhere with their sporting greatness ready to go.

They start as young girls at grassroots, girls who need fairness and belief in fairness to grow and develop to hone their talent. They need role models that aren't adult women pressured and cowed into handing their sports over to men.

If they don't have this why would they continue in sport to become elite level? Many just won't, they'll drop out young because being forced to compete, change and shower with boys is hell for them.

I’ve often wondered if Beth Rigby is a bit terfy…

she’s certainly well-informed on our side of the debate!

😂

'I thought he came across as a desperate weasly toad.'

Exactly what I thought. What a pathetic show from him. Not a clue about the impact of any of this on women and no interest in engaging with it either. Flannel and fudge all the way through. Beth was great

As others said, compare his waffle to the likes of Helen Joyce, Kathleen Stock, Julie Bindel, KJK, who are rock solid when challenged and explain everything in a clear and calm way. Facts on their side, see?!

Btw, I didn't know that Sharron Davies had been on Triggernometry! Will be watching that later 😃

This is why they needed no debate, once the debate happens they turn into incoherent fools.

Iain Anderson strikes me as a bit of a weathervane who will change position depending on the direction of public opinion. Once a staunch tory now Labour (as they gain a sniff of power), and also seems to be softening on this issue.

I don't think either side of the debate could trust him.

Re the Lia Thomas picture, I liked her explicit question ‘how would you feel if you were one of the women in silver or bronze position?’

sweaty weasel was of course unable to answer

’elite sports are addressing this individually’

do men become not men if they’re wearing a netball skirt or football studs then?

and it’s not just about elite sports (don’t think I missed that little evasion). Amateur sportswomen also deserve fairness, which means no bloody men

Beth did a lot of looking at that image though. I suspect that she did get the message across to the viewers by doing that

Q. Should men be allowed to compete against women?
A. I've got rainbow shoelaces.

Or something. I couldn't listen anymore.
Piffle , waffle and flannel.

ooh that's unfortunate! Not his best look.

Oh dear 😂
https://twitter.com/CraigSJames/status/1682280744427585537

Best not to share this unflattering screengrab.

A prime example of trying to nail jelly to a wall. Never trust someone who, when asked a direct question, starts nearly every answer with "so....".

Beth did really well, except for not being able to push the sports debate to its logical conclusion but I suppose the interview was time limited.

You've seen Helen Joyce's proposition that the sunk costs amongst the elites running institutions and big corporations are so large and so damaging, that noone on that side can admit mistakes have been made.

Least of all this fellow. Stonewall admit mistakes were made, then so do Labour have to.

No, the leftist elites continue strapping themselves into the bad ship Trans as it veers off course.

But there's no alternative now to the likes of Stonewall having to come into the light. No Debate is over.

Now that we have Operation Let Them Speak underway, will everyone now get them on and give them a grilling or will they now go to ground?

He had the ideal opportunity to say 'we got it wrong' but he didn't. He reaffirming that 'my community' are his priority. And that doesn't include gay, lesbians or bisexual people.

I'm betting 'go to ground'.

Compare that inarticulate, incoherent waffle with the absolute, fact based clarity of this fantastic interview with Sharron Davies...

He was obviously channelling his Inner Michael Winner with his calm them comment. He might have all as said

"Calm down dear "

I assume by 'perception of the conversation' he means we are no longer in control of the narrative here and that's a problem for us.

Stonewall literally do not care that countless women and girls are being cheated out of sporting opportunities, medals, records, sponsorships etc.

They only care that the general public are saying it's not fair and making a fuss instead repeating the lie that we must all go along with this to #bekind.

Maybe Qs for that follow up interview. I wonder if Iain is up for that after the flaying he took yesterday.

One side takeaway yesterday, was just how poor not just this fellow, but so many public figures are when questioned deeply.

There's just no depth to so much of what laughingly classes itself as public discourse these days.

It's not ironic in anyway that those individuals with properly carefully thought out views and consistent internal logics fare best. I'm talking the likes of Helen Joyce.

I laughed when Trump trotted out his fake news tropes in 2016. Just six years later, it's self evident in performances like Iain's yesterday. And so many in public life, increasingly on the left.