Can we just talk about BBC Woman's Hour

[Charliethefeminist]

I know it's been mentioned in passing but I think the dismal refusal of this programme - run and presented by women who I am sure think they are feminists - to discuss the GRA, to allow a voice to women's fears, to investigate Girl Guiding, to talk about Linda Bellos and the persecution of feminists, to look at Woman's Place, Let A Woman Speak and Standing for Women, to address the concerns raised by prison policy, to explore the problem for rape crisis centres and refuges, and to dissect the silencing of gender critical women, is one of the most egregious failures of journalism l have ever seen.

It’s embarrassing for Woman’s Hour. Jane Garvey 100pc sees through this bolleaux and we know Jenny Murray does but they’ve been silenced clearly which is embarrassing for them as senior women at the BBC. Comes to something when the Daily Mail does a better job for women than Woman’s Hour.

Fi Glover otoh (big mates with Jane Garvey) wrote a (somewhat pointless) piece the other day about how much she likes James O’Brien. Which, given that all he does is make pronouncements on what women should accept purely to signal his own cool lifestyle credentials - makes me doubt her judgment. To be fair though she’s definitely the lighter end of the Fortunately podcast. I know she’s not on Woman’s Hour but I see her as part of the coterie.

James O brien has displayed exceptional misogyny with his dismissal of women's concerns over losing single sex spaces. Fi Glover is not paying attention.

Why is everyone so sure that JG is GC?

Well, it is the BBC.

Yes. 2 things:

The BBC has failed and is failing in its duty of being impartial and accurate in anything trans-related. They most definitely are not on the women's side in this.

The BBC news website has dumbed down enormously in the last couple of years. Radio 4 hasn't . But maybe Women's Hour is the exception in Radio 4?

Have just emailed them asking why they are not talking about proposed changes to GRA, obviously hugely important to women.....
Agree it’s crap they haven’t covered it yet.

When Matthew Wright is a shining light of women's free speech and Women's Hour isn't, we really are through the looking glass.

The presenters of Woman's Hour (along with Ruth and Eamonn, and all the Loose Women presenters etc) have their careers to lose if they get piled on by the trans borg. And they will. Just look at what happens to JK Rowling, Alison Moyet etc if they so much as 'like a tweet'.
Their agents will be telling them 'fgs, keep OUT of this debate. It's dangerous to your career'.
We need courageous women in the public eye to stand up and remind the TRAs that the Ian Huntley's, Karen White's et al are bloody dangerous to women and children. But like many of us, they know how much they have to lose. So it is left to the brave and politically courageous women that we see on here to lead the way. There is a shift in public perception and it IS becoming easier to be gender critical and to call out the misogyny and women hatred. So maybe... just maybe....

I've noticed there are certain topics they avoid with a bargepole. I actually find the show generally a bit simplistic, it could be far better. I'd like to see a lot more women being able to phone in too about important issues which affect them personally rather than people talking about their latest album/new violin and stuff.

I bet you get a response that there's special coverage planned which will be too little, too late, too pro trans and an excuse in the future to say they were part of the battle that other women won.

Yes, agree with OP. I've emailed several times now, asking why they're not saying anything. I haven't had any response at all.

It's shameful. I rarely listen these days because if they're not covering this issue then frankly they don't deserve to be called Woman's Hour and they don't deserve me as a listener. Someone, somwhere at the BBC is in thrall to Stonewall and the trans lobby and is attempting to stifle debate.

I was talking earlier today with a GC friend who said we're going to have to have a kind of feminist ground zero and start all over again once this is over because so many of the institutions we thought were there for women have been tainted and shifted to centre men. Woman's Hour is one of those.

we're going to have to have a kind of feminist ground zero

Prescient

I agree

Why is it so hard to find out who the editor is grrr
Also they have formal links with Women's Aid (infiltrated) and Fawcett Sciety (happy with 100% male parliament if I remember rightly?), plus they won a Diversity in Media award last year (I'm cynical but for 'diversity' and 'inclusion' I always read T) plus of course this

They had asked for people to contact them regarding sex and gender a while ago, probably in relation to the GRA. I'll try to find what they asked for.

I think one if the contributing reporters on all this is young and woke unfortunately.

Agreed, it makes a mockery of the programme - they are not discussing the huge elephant in the room....
I think we need all concerned MNers to email, email, email and then email again.

And of course there is Twitter - @BBCWomansHour

I'm surprised people are confident JG is GC......my impression is that she's horribly woke, though I'd be delighted to be proved wrong.

I have sent lots of emails about their non discussions...not one acknowledgement. I always listen to Womans hour and there is usually something of interest. But yes the elephant is stomping around the room and they all have their fingers in their ears and blindfolds on. It may well be the editors. It is about time they responded to all of us who have contacted them. I am not entirely sure about JG being GC given the amount of time she has given to the boys in dresses.

Not being GC means not being a feminist. How can you be a feminists St if you don't know the difference between men and omen?

Oh, you get the spelling mistakes

Anyway, what sign has JG given of being GC

Notably a person who was clearly a man talking about birthing and midwifery topic as if they were female

Was she not also sappy with AC

JG did give a hint of being GC recently... can't remember what the discussion was about - something around the Millicent Fawcett statue perhaps?? - but she said something about 'women being told to budge over yet again' which made me think that, yes, she's onside and being held on a leash.

But I could be wrong.

I think they're having a week of programmes on the subject of 'gender' this October. I've been hoping that this means they're going to tackle it properly and thoroughly, instead of just doing the five minutes of head to head soundbite bickering that usually constitutes debate on this. And I hope that their remit means that they are unapologetically able to cover it from a feminist (small f) perspective, as they do everything else.

Yes, I'd heard something about a programme (or programmes) given over entirely to gender, too.

To be honest I don't know whether to look forward to it or dread it..... it's so gut-wrenching when you think there will be decent coverage and then it's just a load of fawning over men in frocks.

What about a mass mailing to Points of View? They could ask the editors about it. If they can devote hours to the bloody Archers they could respond to this