Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Celebrity Traitors

157 replies

hholiday · 08/10/2025 07:17

Apparently features Stephen Fry, which seems absolutely the right thing, given how he has already betrayed women/ gay/ lesbian rights.

Also Tom Daley - similar. Which other celebrities should go in there on these grounds? Gary Lineker? David Tennant?

Much though I love Claudia, I think the women’s rights version should be hosted by JK. And be Harry Potter themed.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Thread gallery
5
KnottyAuty · 27/10/2025 20:35

Ereshkigalangcleg · 27/10/2025 20:29

Aw FFS. That was a great show so I’m a bit gutted. Big fan of Tracey Edwards - and I believe that one whole night was bought out by a WRN meet up. The unlawful mixed sex loos at the Southwark Playhouse were absolutely horrendous also. Not keen to go back there…

Ereshkigalangcleg · 27/10/2025 20:24

Good call!

KnottyAuty · 27/10/2025 20:13

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/10/2025 09:28

John is Pete’s brother, he’s a plasterer 😂

Surely he should be a Joiner as that alliterates?

KnottyAuty · 27/10/2025 19:58

TiredOldHen · 08/10/2025 15:41

Without even thinking, Emma Watson, Daniel Radcliffe, the red headed one, David Tenant, Billie Bragg, the cast of Maiden Voyage…..I think it’s going to be a depressing long list, is there a correspondence champions list any where I could read to cheer myself up?

The cast of maiden voyage?!

NoBinturongsHereMate · 27/10/2025 19:29

In an actual fight, absolutely, but he has a smaller total 'presence' - quietly dressed, quietly spoken. Stephen and Jonathan are loud and flamboyant as well as large.

crossant · 27/10/2025 18:44

NoBinturongsHereMate · 27/10/2025 09:16

Very gpod points, @hholiday.

I was also struck by the Big Dog theory picking the 2 most physically imposing men.

I think I'd be more intimidated meeting Joe Marler in a dark alley than either of the "Big Dogs"

RedToothBrush · 27/10/2025 18:35

Its definitely shown up the difference between those who have emotional intelligence and those who are regarded as intelligent and how status affects matters.

Nick is academically and emotionally intelligent
Jo Wilkinson and Jo Marler have proved themselves as emotionally intelligent.
As has Alan Carr.
Jonathan Ross has demonstrated his dominance is down not to his emotional or academic intelligence but more to do with his social status.
Kate has demonstrated how she fits by never displaying an opinion.
Lucy has proved her lack of confidence in challenging Jonathan's status.
David has shown he's academically intelligent but thick as mince when it comes to emotional intelligence.
Cat has flown under the radar precisely because she lacks status.

Nick, Jo, Jo and Alan have definitely impressed me most.

It will get interesting when it gets traitor on traitor though.

SerendipityJane · 27/10/2025 18:12

Amauve · 27/10/2025 17:31

Nice use of a disgusting expression to try and prove your point. Ever heard of Jonestown?

Er, it's Jonestown that led to the phrase - they are inseparable.

Amauve · 27/10/2025 17:31

Jallypally · 08/10/2025 17:13

I’m not sure you can win hearts and minds on here when it comes transphobia. Everyone seems to have drunk the Kool-Aid. All you can do is keep calling it out and hope someone will step back and take a look at themselves.

Nice use of a disgusting expression to try and prove your point. Ever heard of Jonestown?

WimbledonWhites · 27/10/2025 12:13

It’s definitely been interesting to see Stephen Fry shown up. Also interesting to see the other “big dog”, who on this issue has been more on the JKR side, play an absolute blinder.

And an underestimation of Alan because of his camp persona.

Thedevilhasfinallycaughtupwithhim · 27/10/2025 12:06

Stephen might be a “brilliant intellect” but he’s not very astute.

Swiftie1878 · 27/10/2025 10:26

Fantastic TV. Absolutely riveting.

Maaate · 27/10/2025 10:06

Justnot · 08/10/2025 22:34

You lot are on fire

It's witch burning season again

Maaate · 27/10/2025 10:03

Ereshkigalangcleg · 27/10/2025 09:27

The fawning over Stephen Fry’s intellectual brilliance was nausea inducing!

From David and Nick no less!

BruachAbhann · 27/10/2025 09:55

yes, a very interesting psychological experiment. I think Nick, in trying to pretend to ally with who he thinks the traitors are, has scuppered any chance of actually getting out the traitors. He should have aligned himself earlier with a few faithful to target a traitor. A very selfish approach. Deliberately going against what he knows to be true purely for personal gain. I could draw some similarities to how certain people behave around the trans issue.

A 'celebrity' I would add to the list is Catherine Connolly, our new Irish president who's not quite sure what a woman is and uses the whole 'be kind and inclusive' line.

Shedmistress · 27/10/2025 09:35

They do seem more scared of Ross than Fry that's for sure.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 27/10/2025 09:27

The fawning over Stephen Fry’s intellectual brilliance was nausea inducing!

Columbidae · 27/10/2025 09:25

I agree @hholiday. It has been interesting to see the comparable dynamics at play.

Joe Marler can see what's going on but can't make any headway - not just because people don't want to go against JR who they clearly suspect - but Joe doesn't have the status and isn't part of the establishment. I noted that when he objected to the chess groupings Jonathan and Stephen dismissively undermined him as just "Joe being Joe". Stephen at least, as a faithful, didn't even consider him worth listening to. I'm glad he's now got an ally in Nick.

It was frustrating seeing Celia be convinced Stephen wasn't a traitor largely because of their personal connection, rather than because she had objectively analysed his behaviour. I appreciated that Lucy challenged her on this.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 27/10/2025 09:16

Very gpod points, @hholiday.

I was also struck by the Big Dog theory picking the 2 most physically imposing men.

Thedevilhasfinallycaughtupwithhim · 27/10/2025 09:01

MollyScout · 08/10/2025 14:56

I’m a woman and a lesbian and neither Stephen Fry or Tom Daley have in any way betrayed my rights. But then I’m also not a transphob.

Don’t speak for all women or all lesbians please.

Edited

Could you explain to me why you think male offenders should be housed in women’s prisons?

hholiday · 27/10/2025 08:58

Resurrecting this thread (probably to the annoyance of all non-feminists) , just because I think the Celebs version has offered a fascinating insight into how certain trends - not last gender ideology- have been able to take hold in the arts.

Firstly, there is a huge reluctance to engage in any kind of critical thinking. When anyone tries to get them to think differently, as both Joe Marler and David Olusoga have both tried (in different ways), they end up being accused of ‘traitor behaviour’ themselves. Regarding the gender debate, you can see why it became easier to dismiss JKR and gender critical feminism, rather than think logically about it.

Secondly, as others have pointed out, there is a definite hierarchy and a need to be liked by those in positions of power – their careers depend on it. Not only does it make it far less likely that famous people will go against the grain and say something that may prove unpopular, they are also far more willing to accept people at face value. ‘They are who they say they are’ comes from a need not to be seen to be judging others, upon whose good opinion your career depends, but it’s obviously proved disastrous on both the traitors and, much more seriously, for gender ideology. You can’t compromise safeguarding because you want to be liked.

And thirdly, as JKR said in her brilliant response to Emma Watson, neither of these things really matter to celebs because, as long as they play the game, they are insulated from the real-world consequences of most of the pronouncements they make. As JKR said, Emma won’t have to use her local leisure centre or go to a high street changing room - at least not without security in tow. Stephen Fry can look down on the whole debate as unkind and unseemly because it literally has no impact on him. It’s been quite fun to see him and so many of the other celebs, who have been so gutless on this debate, fail to catch any traitors so far - it’s probably the nearest thing to a consequence any of them is likely to face for not thinking through the impact their opinions have on other people’s lives.

OP posts:
ZeldaFighter · 11/10/2025 20:47

Jallypally · 08/10/2025 17:13

I’m not sure you can win hearts and minds on here when it comes transphobia. Everyone seems to have drunk the Kool-Aid. All you can do is keep calling it out and hope someone will step back and take a look at themselves.

In 2010, Labour politicians created new legislation to bring all discrimination legislation together in one clear law. Race relations, age discrimination, homophobia - all were brought together to be dealt with fairly.

That legislation stated 15 years ago that trans people were protected from discrimination, victimisation and harassment BUT single-sex exemptions were essential where sex matters such as changing rooms, prisons and domestic violence refuges.

I am not transphobic because I believe that women need safe single-sex spaces, however upsetting that is for men who believe they are women.

Theroadt · 11/10/2025 19:17

Greyskybluesky · 09/10/2025 11:18

You're on the feminism board.

My bad - I’m sorry I thought I was on a different board 🤦🏼‍♀️ As you were, then 👍🏻

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/10/2025 08:03

NoBinturongsHereMate · 09/10/2025 20:48

The 'rights aren't pie' argument is one of the reasons FWS were very clever to base their case on the women on public boards regulations. Those right are very clearly pie, and easily shown mathematically.

If there are 5 board places for women and a transwoman takes one of them, women go from having 5 slices of pie to having 4. If transwomen take 5 places, they have all the pie and women have none.

And men have all ten pieces.