BBC debates women's safety - without any women

[TheXXFactor]

This is getting the pasting it deserves on Twitter- fucking outrageous link

Datun - have you listened to the podcast? It's worth it, actually. Not least because NR doesn't really pussy-foot around, and he notes that after he drew the interview to a conclusion they carried on talking for a very long time.

Some of that makes it on to the podcast, including where PL claims that he didn't know that he was going to get a "grilling" and it's not fair as he's not a politician. To which NR responds that PL is trying to make political change eg through advocating for self-ID, which gets PL in a bit of a pickle because it's either a) agree that they are supporting self-ID which is a political issue; or b) say that they are not supporting self-ID which probably means that PL is a nasty, gate-keeping, medicalising TERF (or something)

Most interestingly, there's no direct reference to the programme on PL's own Twitter feed, and it's very unusual for them not to promote something that they have been in...

I'm going to listen to it later.

It's not going to wind me up too much is it?

I think Nick Robinson really tried hard to expose the rigid #nodebate approach of PL. And to a certain extent he succeeded. He didn't back down and he did come back to issues about women's rights.
What was interesting was how this was totally personal to PL. Zero interest in society, justice, women's rights - all about wanting their own validation and rights. Totally self absorbed.
With the added 'wish' that children shouldn't have to go through what PL went through as a child. I can see that there would be no point in attempting to have a debate as PL wouldn't. She was furious when he raised the issue Marie Dean (the trans poster girl male sex offender wanting access to a women's prison) - didn't understand why he was asking.
I thought it fascinating for the exposure of the narcissistic approach - even when he suggested that if you want to change laws, you have to expect questions PL just dismissed it.

I hope that he's going to interview a gender critical woman for balance - but ideally not one of the current people involved in the Labour party issues? Someone perhaps concerned about children? (given that PL focussed so much on children). Maybe Stephanie Davies-Arai or someone like that?

There is one comment saying men aren't going to dress up as women just to gain access to toilets etc.

People seriously don't realise that they don't have to. They can just be men who still dress and look like men yet claim they are women!

I've listened to some of this podcast. It isn't a debate because it's an interview. It isn't about women's issues, it's about transgender issues. Iam usually with people on these matters, but let's all be clear what we're complaining about before we jump on the bandwagon

I'm quite clear what I'm complaining about. There is no way in hell that the BBC would dedicate an entire podcast to someone who wanted to remove all facilities for BME or disabled people, without giving someone from those communities the right of reply. Women don't get a right of reply.

NR may have done a reasonable job of challenging PL, but this is yet more unbalanced coverage of the trans agenda by the BBC. It's not just about this podcast - it's about the BBC's failure to give GC women a voice at all.

It's clear where we are heading: in fact, we are already there, as this tweet demonstrates. Biological men will be allowed to speak for women if they claim to ID as female. A balancing female voice is no longer necessary because men now are women - and actual women need to shut up & get used to it

Yes I thought NR raised very pertinent points but was scared of being painted as offensive by pursuing them, and let PL constantly obsfucate and avoid the questions. Most crucially, asking directly "what is a woman", which question PL somehow within the next breath answered with the stat that 45% of trans people are suicidal.

Problem is that if even asking such questions is presented as transphobic/bigoted/equivalent of racism, regardless of what the answer is, then no mainstream media or politician is ever going to ask them.

Candles - no, I don't think so.

It was interesting to hear PL talking at length rather than their usual cod-journalism for the Guardian or in 280 characters on Twitter. And NR came closer to challenging the pervading narrative than other presenters have done in the past - perhaps this is the start of the oil tanker changing direction, as people start to wake up to the full implications of the proposed changes (as well as what is going on already in the name of transgenderism).

Biological men will be allowed to speak for women if they claim to ID as female. A balancing female voice is no longer necessary because men now are women - and actual women need to shut up & get used to it

This. This is why I will no longer go along with the polite social lie that a man, no matter how convinced or upset or hurt he may be about it, CANNOT BE A WOMAN. I accept, sympathise and support people with gender dysphoria, I accept the right of anyone to dress and name themselves and live as they choose, but not to take on the legal status of something they are in fact not. Not at the cost of 51% of the population.

What was interesting was how this was totally personal to PL. Zero interest in society, justice, women's rights - all about wanting their own validation and rights. Totally self absorbed.

All the TRAs are like this. They literally cannot conceive of another perspective than their own. They cannot conceive of other people (especially women) having their own inner lives. You can't converse with them because they aren't talking to you: they're talking to a reflection of themselves in the mirror. Any words from you that aren't solely about validating them will be perceived as an attack. Narcissistic supply is their obsession and the tiniest refusal to give it results in a huge tantrum of narcissistic injury.

It's why older, experienced women recognise it so well. It's identical to the modus operandi of the domestic abusers or potential domestic abusers older women have either had to escape or learned how to avoid before ending up having to escape.

I feel for the young women who haven't learned these lessons of patriarchy yet and are flag-waving for these abusive men. Time and experience will show them the mistakes they are making.

It’s a pity that it’ll be a few years before they realise the flags they’re waving ought to be red ones.

On a twitter thread about this I saw someone saying that its amazing that transwomen are getting say in this rather than women. Then someone saying women need a voice as its to do with their rights being removed. Then the first person saying women do have a voice and get to give opinions, as Paris got to give their opinion and Paris is a woman

So yet again a case of transwomen are transwomen when it suits, but also double up as women when it suits

Having listened to it, I actually think NR did a pretty good job. He had a good grasp of a lot of key points, asked about transphobia and prisons. There were quite a few things that didn't get picked up - eg inaccuracies about Paris's claims about the law etc but as an interviewer you can't pick up everything and it is complicated. This is an interview slot so wouldn't have a balancing voice - it comes down to the interviewer to provide that. Although agree would be good to have a balance with another interview with someone who is gender critical, and/or perhaps a transwoman on the other side of the debate. Who are our best spokespeople?

I thought the tweets that introduced it were the main issue - describing Paris as a woman and like a suffragette when a. She isn't legally, without a GRC and b. Describing her that way is basically accepting the premise of the argument many are challenging. Also setting it up as a discussion around women's safety rather than an interview with a transactivist.

Did anyone else noticed Paris basically saying she thought the whole Self-ID thing was basically a bad idea but she thought they had to follow through now?

Also totally agree with this:

What was interesting was how this was totally personal to PL. Zero interest in society, justice, women's rights - all about wanting their own validation and rights. Totally self absorbed.

And Lang Cleg's response here:

It's why older, experienced women recognise it so well. It's identical to the modus operandi of the domestic abusers or potential domestic abusers older women have either had to escape or learned how to avoid before ending up having to escape.

I haven't personally experienced domestic abuse but I know how to spot a penis-owner without women's best interests in mind a mile off. You can smell it.

OlennasWimple

Datun - have you listened to the podcast? It's worth it, actually.

No, I haven't. And I probably shouldn't have commented without listening.

I do, generally, always read links and see exactly what an opening post is all about. But on this particular occasion, I knew that Lees would drive me so mad that I decided to forego the experience.

I've noticed, of late, that I am becoming more reluctant to expose myself to what transactivists say publically on TV/radio/in the press.

I can see, with such clarity, how they are misleading and hoodwinking people, that my frustration levels go into the stratosphere.

The lies, the twisting, the arrogance and self interest are sometimes just too difficult to swallow.

And Lees is one of the worst, for me.

I think I will keep it in my back pocket, as something to possibly watch later, when I need a fresh injection of righteous fury!

I'm not sure that you will have that reaction, Datun. I didn't.

The person who decided to promote the podcast with such a misleading tweet should be shot - it's far more about PL than about the specific issue of women's safe spaces.

Personally I find PL kinda fascinating, and I agree with him on certain things (like Brexit!). But also problematic for all the obvious reasons.

NR is a more robust interviewer than PL is used to and it shows.

Men already do dress up as women to hide cameras in changing rooms and to wand in the women's loo.
Under the new rules they won't need to sneak any more. Any man who identifies as trans will have unfettered access to women's changing rooms and loos.

Paris Lees is far too old to be acting like a petulant teenager. Maybe he thinks that's what women are like. In any case, even if we were to pretend that he's a woman his opinions on harassment etc are so far out of step with most women's that he'd be the wrong person to ask about this stuff even if you were 100% determined to pretend he was a woman. It's like asking someone from UKIP to represent the average immigrant's views on immigration.

Just listened to it. Was trying to do some work at the same time, but around 30 mins in I just had to put my pen down and really listen.

Initially I found myself warming to PL. It does help that she sounds just like my Mum and Auntie as we come from Nottingham. And she did cut quite a sympathetic character when talking about her early experiences. I've no doubt that she has gender dysphoria which is eased by being seen and treated as a woman. I've also no doubt that her understanding of what that means is quite different to mine.

Ironically, under the old honour system I'd probably have no problem with her identifying as a woman, using women's facilities etc. I would think she'd pass very easily. I think some of her views are pretty silly and/or reprehensible, but I also feel that way about Nadine Dorries and I'm expected to share a toilet with her.

It was also clear that she doesn't actually really support self ID.

However when NR started asking some serious questions the mask slipped rather. It was frustrating to hear her cite totally untrue facts unchallenged (countries where self ID is already in place have no problems - OH RLY?), but I think this pod cast was a good thing. Anyone listening with an open mind would have picked up very quickly on how weak the arguments for self ID are.

BUT now NR needs to balance by interviewing the mighty Karen Ingala-Smith or similar. I'd really like to see how she does against a similar grilling. I'd love to hear our arguments tested in public.

If those who listened were to send the BBC rebuttal in the form of print outs from This Never Happens.com I wonder if they would consider having honest people come on to discuss national issues.

I think some of her views are pretty silly and/or reprehensible, but I also feel that way about Nadine Dorries and I'm expected to share a toilet with her

I've nearly finished listening to this podcast and have struggled to understand what is going on in this interview. PL doesn't answer questions just asks more questions in reply (in a very antagonist way) and uses being offended to deflect answering any serious questions. It's impossible to follow (for me anyway) & PL throws about all sorts of stats which I would like someone to challenge her on. All I can gather is that she thinks that anyone who says they are a woman (or presumably a man?) should be believed and that this is already happening and the self ID won't change anything (can't see what all the fuss is about) just speed things up...

Has PL fully transitioned or is she still "with penis"?

I am fully down the rabbit hole with all of this stuff. The mind boggles!

Should I be concerned that a trans friend of mine (man but likes dressing up/make up etc) has been liking PL's instagram posts? I am worried he may be support of the TRA logic but have not dared to bring this up in conversation...

I finally caught up with this today. I'd been avoiding it as I find Paris objectionable, but it really highlights what an easy ride he is usually given during interviews. Nick quotes Debbie Hayton asking "if anybody can define as a woman, then what is a woman?" and Paris just dismisses this as "boring".

Paris gets riled. Very interesting. I can see why he has not promoted this podcast on his own Twitter feed.

This was on Paris' feed I though how true

OP, here is the BBC reporting a crime committed by a man. The headline saying it was a woman, is completely unnecessary and misleading.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-london-43127415?twitterimpression=true

Sorry to resurrect this but I have received the BBC response to my complaint today:

"Thank you for contacting us about ‘Political Thinking with Nick Robinson’ broadcast on 9 February.

The interview with Paris Lees had not specifically been scheduled to coincide with the centenary of the Representation of the People Act, but the timing of this edition of Political Thinking meant it was appropriate to discuss the interview within the context of changing attitudes in society towards the rights of different groups.

Paris Lees had recently been prominently featured in UK Vogue magazine as one of the ‘New Suffragettes’ and it is fair to say that many people see a link between trans rights and women’s rights. Paris Lees, a journalist and transgender activist was on the programme to discuss her experience of being a trans woman and her views on how the media discusses trans issues. The interview was intended to explore changes in the way some people think about gender and explore what the political and social implications of that could be.

The format of the podcast is for Nick to have a long one on one conversation with an invited guest, and this has been the format for this season of the show. The aim of the podcast is not to be a head to head debate but instead an opportunity to hear from politicians and activists about their wider beliefs, motivations, experiences and political goals, whilst still probing their positions and ideas when required.

There were several issues raised during the Paris Lees programme. This was a lively interview, in which Nick repeatedly challenged Ms Lees on several points, and put to her arguments made by those who don’t agree with her views on these issues. It wasn’t necessary to have someone on to counter Ms Lees’ opinions, as Nick robustly scrutinised the points she made, and reflected some of the concerns being raised in the public debate on trans rights.

In fact, when the interview ended, Ms Lees took issue with Nick on the manner in which he had “interrogated” her. We included this conversation in the podcast as we believe it further highlighted the different perspectives on how the issue of trans rights should be discussed, and gave an insight into the process of conducting the interview. "

Is it my imagination or is there a glimmer of hope here? There is an obvious demarcation of transwoman and woman in this reply. They say "explore changes in the way some people think about gender" and clearly say that Paris Lees is a transwoman and not a woman.

Could the BBC, or at least some elements of it, be stepping back from the brink?