Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Graham Linehan on the chapter about him in Jon Ronson's new book

511 replies

impossibletoday · 29/08/2026 21:50

Graham Linehan on Jon Ronson's new book

My ex-friend Jon Ronson may be a case study in the corrupting toxicity of trans ideology. An interesting read.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/29278d258cf0921b

My ex-friend Jon Ronson may be a case study in the corrupting toxicity of trans ideology

His book chapter about me stands as an indictment of him and the cowardly social class of people who refuse to confront uncomfortable truths

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/29278d258cf0921b

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 10/10/2026 10:49

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 10:27

A bullock is obviously biologically different from a bull. It is genetically the same but biologically different. GC people have got their terminology wrong.

Biologically a 15 year old girl isn't a child. If she has gone through puberty she is an adult human female. But we don't categorise people biologically now, which is a good thing.

Everything in this post is wrong, wrong, wrong.
The age of consent is 16, the age of adulthood is 18, so a 15 year old girl, is both legally and morally still only a child, and the same goes for a boy. Adult's have sex with children is wrong, wrong, wrong, in case you think you unhinged bollocks make's it right.

Helleofabore · 10/10/2026 10:55

The difference between castrated male cattle and sexually mature male cattle is driven by hormones. Just the same as in humans. And of course, having no testes.

To declare that they are ‘biologically different’ to a bull is misleading. They are still male cattle.

Theeyeballsinthesky · 10/10/2026 11:01

Awww I see @JennyShaw is doing her regularly weekly bump for this thread

it's almost as if it's deliberate....

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:08

Shedmistress · 10/10/2026 10:46

Still a child according to law, not sure this will stand up in court Jenny.

According to the law, yes. The law doesn't have to be strictly biological. A 15 year old girl is biologically an adult human female if she has been through puberty. It is easy to tell the biological differences between a girl who hasn't been through puberty and a girl who has. Breasts, pubic hair etc. It is not easy to tell the biological differences between a 15 year old and a 17 year old.

Earlier this week on Woman's Hour there were schoolgirls who wanted to change the law. They said that the law that makes it illegal to show a pornographic movie with an actress who was pretending to be a pre-16 year old is good. It should though be extended to 17 year olds because 17 year olds are children too.

There was nothing wrong with what she said. If society decides that 17 year olds are children that's fine. It's very curious though that the boundaries of who is a woman is changing in different directions. In one case people insist on biological realities, in another case they insist on ignoring it. And they are usually the same people.

GC people are so used to using the word 'biological' incorrectly that they resist the scientific definition that everybody else uses.

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:11

Theeyeballsinthesky · 10/10/2026 11:01

Awww I see @JennyShaw is doing her regularly weekly bump for this thread

it's almost as if it's deliberate....

I've been accused of being obsessed with Graham Linehan. I'm also being criticised for wanting to do other things apart from spending my life online. You people you have your own little terminology that makes sense to you in your own little world. I don't know what you mean by "bump" and I don't care.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/10/2026 11:12

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:11

I've been accused of being obsessed with Graham Linehan. I'm also being criticised for wanting to do other things apart from spending my life online. You people you have your own little terminology that makes sense to you in your own little world. I don't know what you mean by "bump" and I don't care.

It’s internet terminology, not just FWR, mate.

Shedmistress · 10/10/2026 11:14

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:08

According to the law, yes. The law doesn't have to be strictly biological. A 15 year old girl is biologically an adult human female if she has been through puberty. It is easy to tell the biological differences between a girl who hasn't been through puberty and a girl who has. Breasts, pubic hair etc. It is not easy to tell the biological differences between a 15 year old and a 17 year old.

Earlier this week on Woman's Hour there were schoolgirls who wanted to change the law. They said that the law that makes it illegal to show a pornographic movie with an actress who was pretending to be a pre-16 year old is good. It should though be extended to 17 year olds because 17 year olds are children too.

There was nothing wrong with what she said. If society decides that 17 year olds are children that's fine. It's very curious though that the boundaries of who is a woman is changing in different directions. In one case people insist on biological realities, in another case they insist on ignoring it. And they are usually the same people.

GC people are so used to using the word 'biological' incorrectly that they resist the scientific definition that everybody else uses.

'I thought she was an adult as she had been through puberty your honour' is kinda, well, not the sort of thing a feminist would say that's for sure.

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:21

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 10/10/2026 10:49

Everything in this post is wrong, wrong, wrong.
The age of consent is 16, the age of adulthood is 18, so a 15 year old girl, is both legally and morally still only a child, and the same goes for a boy. Adult's have sex with children is wrong, wrong, wrong, in case you think you unhinged bollocks make's it right.

You've missed to point entirely of what I am saying. I'm not saying that 15 year olds are children. I'm saying they are NOT children because in our society we have moved away from strictly biological categories of people.

In our society we used to believe that 12 year olds should get married and have children. We don't believe that any more. In some parts of the world they still believe that.

When GC people say that a transwoman is a man, they are wrong in two different ways. Firstly by saying that categories of people have to be biological and secondly by going against the precedents in the English language that distinguish biologically altered animals. A bullock is not a bull, a gelding is not a stallion and a capon is not a cock.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/10/2026 11:25

Shedmistress · 10/10/2026 11:14

'I thought she was an adult as she had been through puberty your honour' is kinda, well, not the sort of thing a feminist would say that's for sure.

Well no.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/10/2026 11:26

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:21

You've missed to point entirely of what I am saying. I'm not saying that 15 year olds are children. I'm saying they are NOT children because in our society we have moved away from strictly biological categories of people.

In our society we used to believe that 12 year olds should get married and have children. We don't believe that any more. In some parts of the world they still believe that.

When GC people say that a transwoman is a man, they are wrong in two different ways. Firstly by saying that categories of people have to be biological and secondly by going against the precedents in the English language that distinguish biologically altered animals. A bullock is not a bull, a gelding is not a stallion and a capon is not a cock.

Holy non sequitur, Batman!

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:27

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/10/2026 11:12

It’s internet terminology, not just FWR, mate.

Yeah well the internet has become idiotic hasn't it. That's why I would recommend reading a book occasionally. I've just finished reading 'The Castle' by Jon Ronson. It's really informative.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/10/2026 11:29

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:27

Yeah well the internet has become idiotic hasn't it. That's why I would recommend reading a book occasionally. I've just finished reading 'The Castle' by Jon Ronson. It's really informative.

Well yes, that’s what the thread is about, isn’t it?

Datun · 10/10/2026 11:29

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:21

You've missed to point entirely of what I am saying. I'm not saying that 15 year olds are children. I'm saying they are NOT children because in our society we have moved away from strictly biological categories of people.

In our society we used to believe that 12 year olds should get married and have children. We don't believe that any more. In some parts of the world they still believe that.

When GC people say that a transwoman is a man, they are wrong in two different ways. Firstly by saying that categories of people have to be biological and secondly by going against the precedents in the English language that distinguish biologically altered animals. A bullock is not a bull, a gelding is not a stallion and a capon is not a cock.

But a man without a cock isn't a woman, ffs.

and those animals don't become cows, mares and hens!

MrPrettyDamnCosmic · 10/10/2026 11:34

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:08

According to the law, yes. The law doesn't have to be strictly biological. A 15 year old girl is biologically an adult human female if she has been through puberty. It is easy to tell the biological differences between a girl who hasn't been through puberty and a girl who has. Breasts, pubic hair etc. It is not easy to tell the biological differences between a 15 year old and a 17 year old.

Earlier this week on Woman's Hour there were schoolgirls who wanted to change the law. They said that the law that makes it illegal to show a pornographic movie with an actress who was pretending to be a pre-16 year old is good. It should though be extended to 17 year olds because 17 year olds are children too.

There was nothing wrong with what she said. If society decides that 17 year olds are children that's fine. It's very curious though that the boundaries of who is a woman is changing in different directions. In one case people insist on biological realities, in another case they insist on ignoring it. And they are usually the same people.

GC people are so used to using the word 'biological' incorrectly that they resist the scientific definition that everybody else uses.

If society decides that 17 year olds are children that's fine.

UK society at least has decided that 17 year olds are children that’s why it’s enshrined in law.

PrancingPanda · 10/10/2026 11:44

Anyone under 18 is a child FGS. What is JennyShaw blathering about?
A transwoman is a man- otherwise they would be women!
Wrong in 2 different ways eh? Bless

Cailin66 · 10/10/2026 11:50

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 10:27

A bullock is obviously biologically different from a bull. It is genetically the same but biologically different. GC people have got their terminology wrong.

Biologically a 15 year old girl isn't a child. If she has gone through puberty she is an adult human female. But we don't categorise people biologically now, which is a good thing.

How is a bullock biologically different from a bull? Do you think a bullock is some kind of cow? Do you think removing the testicles of a male calf changes their biology?

borntobequiet · 10/10/2026 12:04

I recall another poster given to usernames of fictional characters, though their contributions were slightly more coherent.

Helleofabore · 10/10/2026 12:28

Castrated male animals are not ‘biologically different’ to other male animals of the species though.

They might be developmentally different and they have been medically altered through castration.

They are still male animals.

It is significantly inaccurate to describe them as ‘biologically different’. Removing a body part does not make an animal ‘biologically different’ to the others in the same species that have that working body part.

lcakethereforeIam · 10/10/2026 12:43

I think what the pp is getting at is that biology, as an overarching thing, is generally not binary, it depends what you're looking at. It's usually bimodal; hormone levels, height, etc. When a male calf is castrated it's testosterone levels will plummet if it's started the cattle equivalent of puberty. If it hasn't then they will never reach the levels that a bull would have circulating in their system. The lack of testosterone may affect some of the way they grow, their secondary sexual characteristics won't develop the same way, if at all. What castration of a male of any mammal will not do is turn it into any type of female. Sex is one area of biology which is strictly binary.

borntobequiet · 10/10/2026 13:00

Well I’m “different” because I’ve had my appendix removed. But it hasn’t turned me into anything else.
Ridiculous arguments from genderists.

I wonder if an unwanted appendix could be repurposed as a fake penis? Oops, didn’t mean to give anyone ideas. But if it occurred to me, I bet it’s occurred to someone else.

borntobequiet · 10/10/2026 13:18

Oh, apparently it’s not suitable, though it can be used for urological reconstruction.

MrPrettyDamnCosmic · 10/10/2026 13:27

borntobequiet · 10/10/2026 13:00

Well I’m “different” because I’ve had my appendix removed. But it hasn’t turned me into anything else.
Ridiculous arguments from genderists.

I wonder if an unwanted appendix could be repurposed as a fake penis? Oops, didn’t mean to give anyone ideas. But if it occurred to me, I bet it’s occurred to someone else.

Edited

I wonder if an unwanted appendix could be repurposed as a fake penis?

If it could it would only be a pretty weedy winky as the average size of an appendix is only 5-10cm long x 0.6cm wide.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 10/10/2026 13:31

JennyShaw · 10/10/2026 11:21

You've missed to point entirely of what I am saying. I'm not saying that 15 year olds are children. I'm saying they are NOT children because in our society we have moved away from strictly biological categories of people.

In our society we used to believe that 12 year olds should get married and have children. We don't believe that any more. In some parts of the world they still believe that.

When GC people say that a transwoman is a man, they are wrong in two different ways. Firstly by saying that categories of people have to be biological and secondly by going against the precedents in the English language that distinguish biologically altered animals. A bullock is not a bull, a gelding is not a stallion and a capon is not a cock.

I'm not sure I'm the one missing the point, the age of consent was set at 16 to protect girls from being married off at 12.

In the days when we thought it was acceptable for children to get married the average life span was about 24 years, we don't see it that way anymore because we no longer live in a medieval world but a modern world, and in the modern world the average life expectancy is about 80 years. That's what allows us to move the age of consent and adulthood not biology.

The parts of the world that still think it's acceptable for girls of 12 to be married off have cultures that revolve around medieval religions. Which has no bearing on the fact that a male is a man and can never be a woman, if the language convention of calling a castrated bull a bullock should be followed then a castrated man should be called a eunuch, not a women because a women is not a man who's been castrated, a women is a adult female human.

ArabellaScott · 10/10/2026 13:39

A bullock is not a bull, a gelding is not a stallion and a capon is not a cock.

Idly wandered onto this thread. It's an interesting new angle, that's for sure.

lcakethereforeIam · 10/10/2026 13:44

Bullocks are also not heifers, geldings are also not mares, capons are also not hens. That's why words were coined to distinguish castrated males from uncastrated males.