to think that Eddie Izzard is

[Singlenotsingle]

just another rich person trying to persuade poor people to give their hard earned money to other poor people? I've just seen him on one of these tv ads guilt tripping people into donating to a worthy cause. Whilst I can understand and sympathise with the people who need money, I can't help but think it would be better if the said Eddie Izzard put his hand in his own pocket first. rather than flouncing around in full make up and nail varnish trying to be a politician

I know - I'm totally U, aren't I?

Well done, Eddie. With any luck, that’s the last time those young women will challenge a man that makes them feel vulnerable IN THEIR OWN SPACE WHERE THEIR MOTHERS HAVE BEEN TELLING THEM FOR YEARS TO SPEAK OUT ABOUT STRANGE MEN!

You showed ‘em.

Wtf made him think he was entitled to use the ladies loos in the first place? Just dressing in female clothes does not make you female (or am I missing something?) It makes you a man in drag. Probably not all that welcome in the Mens' loos either!

(Rumour has it)He used to open for the tv show red dwarf as there warm up act for the live tapings Robert Llewellyn (kryten from red dwarf) asked if he could return the favour as it were and be a warm up act for one of Eddie izzards shows he said no

🤷‍♀️ hey it's the only bit of trivia I know

I hate the adverts too if I'm honest 10 years of austerity and some rich person is paid to ask money off me for people usually in another country chuggers in the streets do you care about children getting clean water? What about deaf children what about blind children it's always CHILDREN never adults because they don't photograph sympathetically

Anyone else got the save the children banner advert at the top of the page?

I really do not mind adverts for charities. It's the celebrity element that bothers me. Bit o do see celebrities may be vsigjt between a rock and a hard place.

Caught

Tbh, reading the account of the toilet situation, I can quite believe it was intimidating for EI. Teens - male or female - can be intimidating. Obviously allowing for the only hearing one side of the story bit.

My question though is, when did sexuality as opposed to sex (or even gender if you want it that way) become the defining factor for which toilet you use?

Sexuality is about who you want to have sex with. Being other than heterosexual has never been (to my knowledge) a pass to decide to use a different toilet - or a pass to force someone out of one.

I have some sympathy with post op or on the journey to op trans people wanting to use the toilet to fit their preferred gender (and am well aware of the many difficulties around that) but I'm not certain sexuality should be lumped in?

Sexuality isn't being lumped in (is it?)
I don't think women have a problem with lesbians in female space, they aren't a threat.
Men are. Men in skirts, men in trousers, men that look masculine, men that look feminine. Even gay men can be violent, and a woman has no way of verifying a man's sexuality.
Ideally, a woman shouldn't have to worry about any of them ever, but least of all in one of the few spaces where she ought to be absolutely assured of avoiding them.

I used to love Eddie Izzard until I found out he was a complete self-obssessed twat. He had his beret pinched whilst walking down the street and a full police enquiry ensued. What a fabulous use of already-tight policing resources. Again - what a twat!!

because a vocal group on Mumsnet will leap at any chance to attack someone's gender variance

Gender is a load of misogynist shit and as plenty of us have already said, we're completely in favour of people messing with it, subverting it etc. That's what Izzard was doing in the 'man's dress' days.

But all the nonsense about girl / boy genes, ladybrains etc isn't subverting or transgressing gender. Completely the opposite. It's reinforcing it.

Tom, I was taking directly from The quote above where EI was in the toilets. They said "I think that was the first time I was overtly intimidated because of my sexuality" it's the use of sexuality rather than sex, gender, preference. If EI thinks they should have access because of sexuality doesn't that start, yet another, different conversation?

I guess it depends on what he means by sexuality.
He could mean sexual orientation, or he could mean his own personal 'sexuality' in a more abstract sense, just as two strait or gay people can have their own individual sexualities.

But if he means the latter, it suggests 'because of his own predelictions' which is not a reason to be in a female space.
And if he means the former, it means 'because of my sexual orientation', which equally can't be a reason - can it?

It doesn't really make much sense either way. I can readily accept he was a confused young man at 23 though. No excuse, but to be 23 and TV in the 80's or early 90's would not have been particularly easy.

Passing on the discomfort to young girls is never the answer though.

I used to think Eddie was amazing (seen him live a couple of times) until he went On Question time during the brexit referendum. He was an unbearable, over bearing, patronising arsehole (and I voted remain) and he even managed to make Nigel Farage seem normal.

Torn (Sorry not Tom!) I suppose you're right, perhaps they do mean sexuality in a way that I don't. Which may remove my argument? Perhaps?

I agree it can't have been easy by a long way. I also agree that making it someone else's problem isn't/wasn't the answer.

I do think that someone so clear on their definitions wouldnt have used their words lightly. For me the inclusion of sexuality suggests something other than just "I am a women" - particularly when they spent so much time and energy denying that at the time. It makes me uncomfortable given the massive rewrite of history that has happened in recent years.

*straight - I've lost all literacy! I'm tired!

In EI's case we are dealing with a moving target... his memoirs may well be dramatised, or written at least with the help of someone else, some of the memories are 30 years ago, and during the last 30 years (like anybody else) he'll probably have changed many of his opinions and views, and now we are viewing it through today's lens and in today's rather charged Trans climate.

I don't know the guy, none of us do, he's probably entitled to be a fuckwit like the best of us sometimes. His fame / public persona also clouds things. I can remember thinking quite highly of him for being brave enough to be an open TV back in his hey day. After that, no real opinion about him. Quite impressed with his marathons as a physical achievement, but it tells us nothing about him inside. It probably tells you something about his strength of character (good or bad) though.

I've not followed his views on his or other people's sexuality / orientation etc, so not in a position to judge. My gut feeling was he made a damn lousy choice to go into a woman's place, but that's purely based on a dramatic account from a memoir - it's not really the best evidence to go off either way. Still, he seemed happy enough to have it published, so should be happy enough to have a view taken on it.

A very succinct and balanced view, thank you. I'm not quite sure where I stand for a wealth of reasons (daughters, trans child, mother, women - to name but a few). I've not been comfortable with EI for a while and I'm not totally certain why or why it's my business tbf. Thank you for an interesting conversation.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-37409551

In fairness, the police were involved straight away as it was at a rally - masked brexiteer twunt nicked it - I am surprised it went to court but a twunt is a twunt. The beret was taken in evidence and the guy arrested at the scene. All of that was on camera so I guess the police wanted to make a point of pursuing it further.
eddieizzardsstolenpinkberet is my next user name - have not seen him in it since 2016!

I’ve got complex thoughts about Eddie izzard.

1. Some of his stand up was pure genius.
2. His trans position enrages me.
3. Totally humbled by his fundraising charity work.
4. Find his name very hard to remembers. Spent 2 days very recently refusing to look it up and trying to remember. Infuriating! May call any early memory loss ‘an Eddie Izzard moment’ (perhaps not).

Moment’ from now on.

1. Given 3 above, if I saw this ad it would make total sense that he is fronting a charity drive. I haven’t seen the ad - why do you think it is targeted at poor people ??

Heron Point 4 Ad.2: But in all likelihood, you’ll forget the name you’re using for the things your forgot...

OrchidInTheSun.

The reasons are complex. The vast majority of people going to food banks are referred by the DWP because they have misbehaved in the view of that department, e.g. by not turning up for meetings. Hence there's a delay in processing benefit claims. They've been around for years here and on the European continent.

Just one in five of those helped by food banks cite low income and foodbanks are better IMO than throwing benefits at people who often spend them on tattoos, fags and lager, leaving their children to go hungry.. I've seen this with my own eyes where I live. The number of people using them is exaggerated anyway

fullfact.org/economy/more-1-million-people-used-food-banks-last-year-s-not-what-evidence-shows/

Someone needs to come up with a solution to those things, but just politicising it - as 'evil Tories conspiring to make the life of people on low incomes' - is wrong...

Anyhow, this doesn't negate the fact that taxes are rising at the highest levels I've ever known in my entire working life and I'm in my mid 50's.

'evil Tories conspiring to make the life of people on low incomes' as miserable as possible - is wrong.

Ffs it’s totally out of order to mention Savile in any connection with Eddie Izzard.