Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The BBC strikes again…

40 replies

NitroNine · 16/11/2024 14:08

I started reading the article on inclusive Morris dancing because - foolishly, I know - I thought it might be about people facilitating the participation of disabled dancers. Nope. Queering Morris. 🤦‍♀️ (With an extra 🤦‍♀️ for the attempt to claim it’s something recent/new - Molly sides, in particular, have been LGB[T] friendly for at least the last quarter of a century.) I read all the way to the end just in case there was something about adaptive/disability-friendly Morris &/or about trying to reach people from communities that don’t traditionally engage with Morris dancing. Nope.

”Inclusive” now seems to be a synonym for “LGBT-centric”. Of course, it’s much easier to promote a non-binary Molly side than it is to, for example, facilitate a side of wheelchair users. Or one for people with learning disabilities.

How is so much of the UK’s publicly-funded broadcaster’s news output pure TRA propaganda? The endless stories of this kind sitting alongside things like a journalist’s struggle to get the man who made obscene phone calls to her prosecuted & the use of private nursing homes to effectively hide unmarried mothers & facilitate the [secret] adoption of their children really does jar. There are of course “light” stories about women too - like the Zambian granny who’s become a fashion icon. It cannot be denied, however, that there’s a disproportionate amount written about the T (& of course drag queens); & the volume of non-news [skewed to be] focused on them is absurd.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
YesterdaysFuture · 27/12/2024 00:15

From what I saw he was probably the best, but it was rigged as in all the other celebrities picked were not as good as a drag queen.

Zita60 · 26/12/2024 18:45

Tallisker · 26/12/2024 18:21

I saw there was a drag queen in the line up, and presumed he would be the winner. Could he actually dance? Was he a worthy winner? I haven't watched it yet.

He was very energetic, but he was doing a cha cha and his legs were bent the whole time. In spite of that, the judges all gave hime 10s, and everyone called him "her". 🙄

Tallisker · 26/12/2024 18:21

I saw there was a drag queen in the line up, and presumed he would be the winner. Could he actually dance? Was he a worthy winner? I haven't watched it yet.

Plasmodesmata · 26/12/2024 16:46

I'd have been more surprised if a drag queen had entered and not won, tbh.

YesterdaysFuture · 26/12/2024 16:01

Good news! A drag queen won the Strictly Christmas special, it was so historic it was one of BBC News's main headlines.

UtopiaPlanitia · 21/11/2024 14:07

SapphireSeptember · 20/11/2024 02:32

@EdithStourton Ah, so they're just being obnoxious. Yeah, still haven't had a visit yet here. I did buy myself a new laptop as my old one has gone funny (pink and green screen.) 😁 Although even with multiple ad blockers YouTube still sneaks ads past them.

I use the Brave browser (with full ‘shields up‘ setting + adblocker extensions) and so far YT has not been sneaking any ads into videos.

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 19:23

Bodeganights · 20/11/2024 19:06

Is that last paragraph aimed at me?

I think every two years (ish) is in fact far too often. Why dont they wait til it's been sold to then find out if the new owners need a license.

The letters aren't mundane, they are threatening.

They are now checking via emails registered at an address previously, accessing iplayer. If they can use addresses registered with emails, they can look at when houses change hands.

Sorry, I'm not well today and was getting confused about who I was responding to. The last paragraph was in response to @EdithStourton's declaration that she refuses to tell them she doesn't have a TV.

I find it bizarre - replying with a simple statement that she doesn't need a licence would end the matter, but choosing not to do that and preferring to carry on feeling cross about it just seems strange.

What if someone is renting a house/flat? They are responsible for buying the licence, so checking whether the house has been sold or not isn't relevant. I really don't see the issue. I'm expecting a reminder for the property I'm responsible for where no licence is needed, and it doesn't bother me, They're just doing their job, enforcing the law. I will simply tell them that I still don't need a licence for that property.

Bodeganights · 20/11/2024 19:06

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 10:45

Once very two years seems reasonable. They are tasked with enforcing the law, so it's reasonable for them to ask from time to time whether the property is still exempt from needing a TV licence. Why should they trust that everyone who needs a licence will actually buy one? It's their job to ensure that people buy a licence if they need one.

Or do you expect them to keep checking electoral registers to find out who is living at the property now? And then guess whether they need a licence or not?

Sending a letter every two years is not "harrassing" anyone.

I don't understand why you don't simply tell them now that you don't have a TV. That's all they're asking for - to buy a licence or explain why you don't need one. If you don't tell them you don't need one, eventually they will prosecute you, and then you'll have to tell them.

Is that last paragraph aimed at me?

I think every two years (ish) is in fact far too often. Why dont they wait til it's been sold to then find out if the new owners need a license.

The letters aren't mundane, they are threatening.

They are now checking via emails registered at an address previously, accessing iplayer. If they can use addresses registered with emails, they can look at when houses change hands.

EdithStourton · 20/11/2024 17:49

I don't hate the BBC.
I despair them. Different.

It was the tone they took from the off. Yeah, no.

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 16:33

EdithStourton · 20/11/2024 13:34

'Dear @Zita60 , please let us know whether you have been obeying the speed limit recently. if you do not do so, our enforcement officers may visit your property to examine your vehicle and quiz you in person.'

It's the assumption of guilt, and their belief that I cannot live without the bloody BBC, that is driving me up the wall.

Yes, I could let them know. But they can carry on sending me firelighters until the spring.

There are speed cameras and traffic cops that can catch people speeding. In other words, people/machines who enforce the law. The TV Licensing people are the people who enforce the law about needing a TV licence.

If the police suspected you of robbing a bank in London last Wednesday, but you were out of the country on that day and could prove it, would you refuse to tell the police that and give them the proof? Because if you did refuse, the police could arrest you and charge you.

So why is the case of the TV licensing people different?

The requirement to have a TV licence is not to do with whether you watch the BBC. You require a licence to watch any live television.

I really don't see how you can object to them sending you multiple letters when you haven't replied to any of them. You may hate the BBC, but they are required to enforce the law concerning TV licences.

"The licence fee is not a subscription to watch BBC programmes but mandated by law. Under the Communications Act 2003, the BBC in its role as the licensing authority has a duty to issue TV Licences and collect the licence fee."

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

SquirrelSoShiny · 20/11/2024 14:27

MargolyesofBeelzebub · 20/11/2024 11:11

Haha that article is hilarious! The 'safe space' (the whole of Bristol is safe for trans people, I see many walking around happy as Larry/Larette every time I go!), and the idea that Mx Garden was asked to stop playing them's ocarina because of ocarina discrimination is laughable. Maybe they's just terrible at ocarina playing. Thanks for the laugh 😂

Having listened to an ocarina on You Tube I'm not surprised it was banned from the sessions.

EdithStourton · 20/11/2024 13:34

'Dear @Zita60 , please let us know whether you have been obeying the speed limit recently. if you do not do so, our enforcement officers may visit your property to examine your vehicle and quiz you in person.'

It's the assumption of guilt, and their belief that I cannot live without the bloody BBC, that is driving me up the wall.

Yes, I could let them know. But they can carry on sending me firelighters until the spring.

MargolyesofBeelzebub · 20/11/2024 11:11

Plasmodesmata · 16/11/2024 17:24

Here you are, enjoy reading about Mx and theys ocarina
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgmgrel7rlyo

Haha that article is hilarious! The 'safe space' (the whole of Bristol is safe for trans people, I see many walking around happy as Larry/Larette every time I go!), and the idea that Mx Garden was asked to stop playing them's ocarina because of ocarina discrimination is laughable. Maybe they's just terrible at ocarina playing. Thanks for the laugh 😂

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 10:45

Bodeganights · 20/11/2024 09:29

Not true, even if you tell them you dont need a license, they still harass you. Less often sure, but they still send snotty missives.

My son owns his house outright and told them 10 years ago he didnt need a license, they left him alone for two years and then started up again. It works out roughly every two years they start up the process, but they should either trust that those who need to will get one and those that dont should not be harassed.
Or lobby for a different format of funding. This is the worst of all permutations of funding the BBC.

Once very two years seems reasonable. They are tasked with enforcing the law, so it's reasonable for them to ask from time to time whether the property is still exempt from needing a TV licence. Why should they trust that everyone who needs a licence will actually buy one? It's their job to ensure that people buy a licence if they need one.

Or do you expect them to keep checking electoral registers to find out who is living at the property now? And then guess whether they need a licence or not?

Sending a letter every two years is not "harrassing" anyone.

I don't understand why you don't simply tell them now that you don't have a TV. That's all they're asking for - to buy a licence or explain why you don't need one. If you don't tell them you don't need one, eventually they will prosecute you, and then you'll have to tell them.

Bodeganights · 20/11/2024 09:29

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 05:02

Why don't you simply tell them that you don't have a TV?

I did this with a property I was responsible for that no-one was living in. I called them, had a perfectly reasonable conversation with them, and that was the end of the matter.

If you don't respond to them, they'll keep sending you letters telling you that you should have a TV licence. Anyone who has a TV is required by law to have a TV licence, so they are simply enforcing this.

Not true, even if you tell them you dont need a license, they still harass you. Less often sure, but they still send snotty missives.

My son owns his house outright and told them 10 years ago he didnt need a license, they left him alone for two years and then started up again. It works out roughly every two years they start up the process, but they should either trust that those who need to will get one and those that dont should not be harassed.
Or lobby for a different format of funding. This is the worst of all permutations of funding the BBC.

EdithStourton · 20/11/2024 09:02

Sure, but I'm not constantly badgered about whether I break the speed limit or not...

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 07:16

EdithStourton · 20/11/2024 06:56

Because they're treating me as guilty until proven innocent. The attitude of enforcement is aggressive and unpleasant.

They have every right to keep asking you to buy a TV licence unless you tell them you don't need one.

You could have stopped this right at the beginning, after the first letter, by telling them you don't have a TV. That's exactly what I did, and I've had no letters from them since.

You refuse to do what they ask, namely either to buy a licence or else tell them why you don't need one. It is the law that everyone with a TV needs a TV licence, and it's reasonable for that law to be enforced.

EdithStourton · 20/11/2024 06:56

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 05:02

Why don't you simply tell them that you don't have a TV?

I did this with a property I was responsible for that no-one was living in. I called them, had a perfectly reasonable conversation with them, and that was the end of the matter.

If you don't respond to them, they'll keep sending you letters telling you that you should have a TV licence. Anyone who has a TV is required by law to have a TV licence, so they are simply enforcing this.

Because they're treating me as guilty until proven innocent. The attitude of enforcement is aggressive and unpleasant.

Zita60 · 20/11/2024 05:02

EdithStourton · 16/11/2024 21:21

The BBC keep sending us threatening letters because we haven't paid our licence fee and haven't bothered to let them know that we have no TV, don't watch iPlayer (though I regret missing the latest Mantel) and watch nothing live either

This sort of shit increases my determination to continue to be petty and unhelpful. I don't feel obliged to tell anyone that I'm not breaking the law. Innocent until proven guilty and all that,

As for inclusiveness - I was reading or listening to something the other day, cannot recall what, that wittered on about inclusion of every protected characteristic except a) being a woman and b) disability.

Takeaway: no one who has clout gives a shit about you if you are female and/or disabled. But call yourself 'zir' and they're falling over themselves.

FML.

Why don't you simply tell them that you don't have a TV?

I did this with a property I was responsible for that no-one was living in. I called them, had a perfectly reasonable conversation with them, and that was the end of the matter.

If you don't respond to them, they'll keep sending you letters telling you that you should have a TV licence. Anyone who has a TV is required by law to have a TV licence, so they are simply enforcing this.

SapphireSeptember · 20/11/2024 02:32

@EdithStourton Ah, so they're just being obnoxious. Yeah, still haven't had a visit yet here. I did buy myself a new laptop as my old one has gone funny (pink and green screen.) 😁 Although even with multiple ad blockers YouTube still sneaks ads past them.

EdithStourton · 17/11/2024 09:45

SapphireSeptember · 16/11/2024 22:41

@EdithStourton Yeah, I'm getting them too! (Although my super terven friend who doesn't have a TV licence hasn't got any, her and her husband own their house, nor has another of my friends, her and her husband also own their house.) I'm in social housing. We have theories about this. Mainly that they think someone living in social housing doesn't know their rights and must be watching TV, and is a soft touch. They're going to try visiting next. It's all to 'the legal occupier' otherwise I'd have more theories about how they view single mums on universal credit (although I'm on mat leave I do get help from UC.) We know a lot of women get sent to prison for non payment of the TV licence, far more than men do.

We own our own house so it's not that.

They asked WHERE WILL YOU BE ON 13 NOVEMBER? saying that an agent might visit. I forgot all about it. No one came.

I await their next threat with interest. I did mean to save them all but I think DH has been using them to light the fire.

SapphireSeptember · 16/11/2024 22:41

@EdithStourton Yeah, I'm getting them too! (Although my super terven friend who doesn't have a TV licence hasn't got any, her and her husband own their house, nor has another of my friends, her and her husband also own their house.) I'm in social housing. We have theories about this. Mainly that they think someone living in social housing doesn't know their rights and must be watching TV, and is a soft touch. They're going to try visiting next. It's all to 'the legal occupier' otherwise I'd have more theories about how they view single mums on universal credit (although I'm on mat leave I do get help from UC.) We know a lot of women get sent to prison for non payment of the TV licence, far more than men do.

INeedAPensieve · 16/11/2024 22:29

Ah I haven't managed to catch up with tonight's Strictly yet, it's been better this year as well and I just about managed to convince my MIL to watch it from last week (she didn't want to watch it this year after last year) but if she tunes in and sees the drag queens she'll refuse to watch it again as she really hates drag queens. I'm not a big fan of them either but my MIL feels very strongly that it is offensive womenface. She doesn't like their overly sexual name puns either and doesn't think it is appropriate before the watershed (if indeed the watershed even exists anymore, I'm genuinely unsure if it does).

MelodyMalone · 16/11/2024 21:25

EdithStourton · 16/11/2024 21:21

The BBC keep sending us threatening letters because we haven't paid our licence fee and haven't bothered to let them know that we have no TV, don't watch iPlayer (though I regret missing the latest Mantel) and watch nothing live either

This sort of shit increases my determination to continue to be petty and unhelpful. I don't feel obliged to tell anyone that I'm not breaking the law. Innocent until proven guilty and all that,

As for inclusiveness - I was reading or listening to something the other day, cannot recall what, that wittered on about inclusion of every protected characteristic except a) being a woman and b) disability.

Takeaway: no one who has clout gives a shit about you if you are female and/or disabled. But call yourself 'zir' and they're falling over themselves.

FML.

Or old.

EdithStourton · 16/11/2024 21:21

The BBC keep sending us threatening letters because we haven't paid our licence fee and haven't bothered to let them know that we have no TV, don't watch iPlayer (though I regret missing the latest Mantel) and watch nothing live either

This sort of shit increases my determination to continue to be petty and unhelpful. I don't feel obliged to tell anyone that I'm not breaking the law. Innocent until proven guilty and all that,

As for inclusiveness - I was reading or listening to something the other day, cannot recall what, that wittered on about inclusion of every protected characteristic except a) being a woman and b) disability.

Takeaway: no one who has clout gives a shit about you if you are female and/or disabled. But call yourself 'zir' and they're falling over themselves.

FML.