Anyone fancy adding their 2p to Rory & Alastair’s pod?

I also get the rage whenever someone comments on how Lord Hodge says the judgment shouldn't be seen as a victory of one side over the other and then chastises the women with champagne and cigars. I understood Hodge to be counselling everyone to read the judgment carefully and understand that trans people and women have their own protections under the EA, and not that women's rights are more important than trans' rights. But the internalised misogyny of the majority heard Hodge saying "behave yourselves girls, don't be mean, I know you won but don't make the losers feel bad, eh?"

Wonderfully put! Bloody James O'Brien and soppy Jon Sopel were indignant about the campaigners expressing joy and excitement that they'd won their case.

I think the wife and daughter are (1) a shield - it’s their thinking (2) convenient - it’s Wimmins’ stuff so who GAF, let the girls talk and think about it (in ways I approve obvs) so I don’t have to bother, because I just don’t care about people who aren’t men.

Strangely I think this might be why AC defers to his daughter and wife on this subject.

It's like traditional men who allow their wives to have authority over 'women's things' like laundry.

Thanks - I definitely mean paternalism!

Hi
Patriarchy and paternalism are two different things.
Patriarchy is, broadly speaking, the hierarchical social system which gives men power over women in society. This does not need to be interpreted as literal power, although it has its roots in legal systems which saw women as men’s property, but can include ways of organising which have grown up along male lines - so for example, the idea that we work full-time all our lives to accrue social and financial capital does not account for maternity and childcare which are biologically and traditionally seen as the role of women. Patriarchy is also hierarchical for men, given how power and status in society is constructed economically and politically. This is what people mean when they say patriarchy harms men too.

Paternalism is top down decisions about the welfare of others, broadly speaking, and because of how society is organised, these are usually men making these decisions. It may come with reciprocal obligations, so for example, an industrialist in the past may have provided housing and education for his employees but expected that they attend church and don’t get drunk outside of work. It comes from paternal, so the obligations of a father. Maternalist is about protecting the welfare of mothers and children, I think.

No idea if that is any help, but that is how I have understood the concepts.

These men get a lot of airtime given they’re wrong about major stuff.

Edited to say men as they have that casual male arrogance of their type.

I just listened. The thing that most depressed me about it was the complete ignorance combined with the arrogance to speak in an authoritative manner on the subject.

I also get the rage whenever someone comments on how Lord Hodge says the judgment shouldn't be seen as a victory of one side over the other and then chastises the women with champagne and cigars. I understood Hodge to be counselling everyone to read the judgment carefully and understand that trans people and women have their own protections under the EA, and not that women's rights are more important than trans' rights. But the internalised misogyny of the majority heard Hodge saying "behave yourselves girls, don't be mean, I know you won but don't make the losers feel bad, eh?".

I think they like the money more - I think Katty Kay and Robert Peston might have a different deal that doesn't include ads.

My 16 year old called the US election more accurately than Rory 🙄. She just got back from Miami the day before and heard Rory’s prediction waffling on said “that guys wrong mum trumps going to win”.

So I listened. I presume they have a team of researchers who could've briefed them on what the SC ruling actually said and why this issue is important to women (you know, the old fashioned kind).

But no, AC blethered on in his monotone fashion. RB claimed to speak for ALL progressive liberals in the US which was ironic as, much as he loves to act as though he's the US expert, he wrongly predicted the election result and looked like a right twit back in November.

I gave up when RB started his "explainer" - a regular feature of TRIP where RB talks to the audience as if they have just emerged from a cave.

My favorite bit of TRIP is at the beginning when the pair have to pay the rent by hawking Fuse electricity (or whatever their sponsors called). They clearly think it's beneath them - what with them being such distinguished men.

Was it one of their ‘emergency’ pods? It sounds like TRIPE…

It was just what I expected. Although I was a bit shocked at Rory blithely announcing he was mates with a doctor who ran a gender clinic that handed out puberty blockers. I'd be banned if I said what I thought of them both and it would be a very long post.

I think some supposedly progressive men have a very limited, oddly rather right wing and old fashioned understanding of equality law.

They understand it as paternalistic (is that the same as patriarchal?), so it is bestowed from above as a gift, like charity. The most marginalised and oppressed can be supported, but you don't want anyone to actually threaten the social order. Women are really threatening if for no other reason than numbers.

They understand direct discrimination, because that just means that everyone should be treated equally. ('All lives matter'). Trans women and women are both subject to discrimination and both make some men feel uncomfortable, so the easy two for one solution is to just treat them the same.

Analysing indirect discrimination is a bit more threatening. You might have to understand the causes of inequality, and you might have to give up resources. Best to pretend it doesn't exist.

Rory and his hand wringing over why everyone can't just be more 'liberal' like him

Remember his stupidity over Afghanistan - that it's a much safer and well-run country with this iteration of the Taliban?

Yeah, because the Taliban have shut women & girls up. But that's OK, because they're safe now.

The pair of them are such a joke on this issue. They have SUCH a blind spot when it comes to women - it's like we don't exist. Rory and his hand wringing over why everyone can't just be more 'liberal' like him, he's just so keen to find a compromise, gender neutral toilets blah blah blah. Alistair and his crap about how the trans women in sports has been way overblown, the poor most marginalised community of all time. They really do think they're god's gift

We often listen to a podcast in the car, TRIP is in DHs list… I declined that as I didn’t want to be yelling at it while we were driving this morning. (We had the appalling deportation of men to an el Salvadorean jail for the crime of being South American in possession of a few tattoos so I did a bit of yelling anyway, as it turned out).

Rory on unisex toilets is exactly like that bloke (it's always a bloke) you regularly get in Question Time audiences, who says something like "why not just have a united Ireland?" and then sits back with a smug smile, convinced he's the first person to think of it.

it was the gloating he found annoying. And, well, fuck him

AC clearly has no empathy as he can't/won't relate to JKs experience. Of course she will celebrate because she has been put through hell for years. He's an awful man and the more I heard from TRIP the more his unpleasant nature comes through. I was a fan at first.

Everyone who disagrees with their take on SC should unsubscribe.

What a couple of self satisfied smug twats.

Fairenuff. But any one of the others would be an excellent interviewee. Maybe they think their millions from the pod would be jeopardised.

They have asked JKR - she refused.

She suggested they interview one of the other people listed who is less famous (so won’t do so much for their ad sales) but have more subject expertise.

was RS really saying he has a friend who gives GNR inhibitors to children without a prescription? Isn’t that illegal?

Both AC and RS showed their ignorance of the issues at stake - the really fundamental structural issue about 0.1% of the population deciding that they (as men) can tell women what it is to be a woman. AC & RS were both ignorant, but in different ways.

But they both resorted to the "I know a trans person who just wants to get on with his/her life" trope, as well as "the most vulnerable" trope. They don't see the structural problems. And the consequences for lesbians particularly. Because why would they care - they don't know any lesbians, I suspect. And they're men - they have no skin in this game; it's too easy for them.

They admitted they didn't really understand the feminist issues - well, why not interview
Jo Phoenix
Kath Stock
Rosie Duffield
Julie Bindel
J K Rowling
Maya Forstater
Helen Joyce

All would be appropriate choices for their spin off podcast Leading. Or as interviewees on TRIP - Campbell & Stewart boast about "disagreeing agreeably" - well, let them show us how they do it with any of the above.

But Karen Monaghan on Double Jeopardy is magnificent!