FPFW disinvited from discussing Martina's comments on 5Live

[TransposersArePosers]

Nicola WIlliams was invited to speak about Martina's comments along with RM. This on the FPFW facebook page

We were then disinvited after Rachel McKinnon publicly refused to participate if we were included. We discussed this decision with editor Philo Holland explaining how this is a frequently used tactic to silencing opposing views. It contravenes BBC editorial guidelines to allow a guest to veto the appearance of another

So the BBC being biased again, what a surprise. And a GC voice being no platformed. Why is it that these individuals are frightened to go up against the common sense facts??

I’m late to this thread because of half-term and have been musing about why the BBC and other media are so keen to give a platform to biology deniers.

After all, the BBC recently revised their approach to debating climate change, deciding that in view of the overwhelming evidence there is no need to invite a climate change denier to provide a counter argument when CC is discussed.

Yet NW is prevented from presenting facts, because someone who thinks feelings count more than biological truth says so.

Al1ce the Beeb only stopped putting climate change deniers on as 'balance' after a legal judgment on doing that went against them.

That’s interesting Anna I hadn’t realised the approach changed after a legal ruling.

Still it’s inconceivable that - say David Attenborough - would be disinvited from a discussion about ocean pollution by the owner of a plastics factory.

I think the BBC are using these issues as a way to educate it's audience, rather than a debate.

The are starting with the premise that it's possible to change sex/ the definition of women and female has changed. That's why they don't want GC women to speak, because that opens the 'what is a women debate'.

They don't want to discuss their new definition of women, they want to treat this as a lesson about prejudice.

Oh absolutely. It’s very much a let’s educate the bigots approach. handily presented as a debate.

A debate without any actual women who should, one guesses, stick to talking about the weather.

A debate where facts are inconvenient.

I suspect that it is not the BBC per se, but it, like every other organisation, is taking its lead from its LGBT inclusion/equalities officer.

I asked a question, fairly recently, in a local branch of Blackwell's books, about what was stocked and what was not - and I was guided to their LGBT officer. They are running the show.

"taking its lead from its LGBT inclusion/equalities officer."

There are more than 400 transgender BBC employees.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5905129/BBC-chief-stunned-secret-staff-sex-survey-reveals-417-workers-transgender.html

recruitingtimes.org/news/23597/bbc-amazed-after-secret-survey-reveals-that-417-of-its-staff-are-transgender/

The whole 'lets educate' aspect of the BBC.... yes. Call the Midwife is getting steadily more teeth grating by the episode with all the condescending social messaging it's trying to stuff in.

If they feel called to enlighten the plebs then the best of luck to them, but that's the end of their public funding. If they're a group with a specific political line sharing propaganda and educational materials to further that point then they can sell it to the people who are willing to pay them for it. Public funding has to be neutral and objective, and if they're charging everyone then they have to represent everyone.

Any of their content worth it (CTMW first in line) would be snapped up by Netflix or Channel 4 in a heartbeat anyway.

Is anyone willing to help me out with writing a letter of complaint to the BBC in a way that doesn't allow for a cut and paste answer that they've given everyone else?

So angry about this but even angrier that they are trying to dodge the truth. I'm not great with words but want to protest.

I had the same copy and paste job as everyone else. I’ve just emailed them again, I know it makes no difference but lying annoys me!

I got the same shitty non-reply. I'm going back for a follow-up and cc'ing Ofcom and Feedback. Patronising lying fuckers.

Datun, would it be ok to include Nic's comments in my follow-up? And as predicted, they totally ignored my point about having a discussion about women in sport with NO WOMEN present.

Educating the peasants. Patpatpat here's a biscuit. Fuck OFF.

twitter.com/sagatiaej/status/1098213451271421953

So, how the fuck does that work?

This scientific study proved that trans women have less bone density, muscle mass and strength than cis men BEFORE hormone replacement therapy. Other studies show that after treatment they lose even more:

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8756328213000562
Incase anyones blocked^

Smartieshavetheanswer - I cant imagine you will get a bespoke reply whatever you put. There's loads of us, who have all written independently so presumably have all different letters/angles, that have received the same copy and paste answer. I've followed mine up so will probably get another standard response .

Would love to know how apparently being weaker than average men, means having no advantage over women. I can well believe that longtime HRT removes some of the advantage, but the arguments this past week have been utterly insane. My fave I think was the 'but actually, transmen have a huge advantage over men'

Apologies for being off topic but a few years ago I listened to a podcast (I believe it was an interview with Phill Jupitus) and one thing discussed was the destruction of the BBC. He said people were being employed who were there specifically to run the BBC down so it could be sold off. The NHS was also discussed. I always think of that when I read the threads on the BBC here, that calculated decisions are made to discredit the BBC so it loses its worth.

Sorry, last posts were meant to be in the LM thread as they came from the replies to LM. Fit here too though really.

BBC is utter shite. And lying/disingenuous twats too it seems.

Note the conclusion of that study (of 25 TG people - not clear how they were recruited for the study?)

Transsexual women before the start of hormonal therapy appear to have lower muscle mass and strength and lower bone mass compared with control men. These baseline differences in bone mass might be related to a less active lifestyle.

Also note, Vitamin D levels were lower, that sounds likely to be causally related to the observed bone differences... I wonder whether the TG people were matched against males who spent similar amount of time outdoors with similar amounts of exposed skin (no sunblock or spf makeup)?

@teawamutu

Yes I'm sure it would. She was happy for her comments to be on a public forum.

@teawamutu

Whilst you're at it, you could point out the obvious logic, that does not need Nic's confirmation, that how could McKinnon publicly refuse to debate with someone who hadn't been invited?

I wonder if the lower Vit D levels and less active lifestyles were due to time spent gaming/on computers? Is there a link with living in a misogynistic online fantasy echo chamber and thinking you can change your real life ‘avatar’ too?

In any case a study of 25 inactive men has no relevance to active men who wish to compete in female sport.

Vixxxy

"BBC is utter shite. And lying/disingenuous twats too it seems."

It certainly is and the majority odf people have no idea how bad they are.
Yesterday and the day before, the BBC breakfast show was wall to wall promoting of the US flyovers to commemorate the 75th anniversary of ONE US aircraft which crashed in Sheffield on 22nd February 1944 - 10 airmen were killed - all very tragic.
However, another incident occurred on 22nd February 1944, which was reckoned by many at the time to be a war crime - the bombing of Nijmegen in Holland by the same US bombers which left well over 700 civilians dead. It was the BBC's Dan Walker who led this "crusade" to remember 10 dead American airmen, pity he couldn't remember the 55,573 RAF Bomber Command crew who perished in WW2 which works out at 25 airmen each day for the entire war.

brill.com/abstract/book/edcoll/9789004292017/BP000005.xml

Thanks Datun, I do intend to use screen shots and comments from RMck too. Along with expressing my confidence that this is surely a misunderstanding, rather than a deliberate attempt to mislead, but still...

Have remembered that they also didn't address my point about the presenter debating whether a colleague should be sacked. Useless fuckers.

Staying up for 5Live Tonight:

twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1099710579428769793

Thanks for the reminder, Millytant, I would have forgotten!

That is a disproportionate amount of transgender employees at the beeb. Hardly a fair, or proportional, representation of people in our country, is it? Which is why it's hardly surprising they're so biased on this issue.
I think the media and entertainment industry at large is completely out of touch with the rest of humanity on this subject.