Sonia Poulton dropped from BBC Big Questions

[MrsSnippyPants]

twitter.com/SoniaPoulton/status/1101781947108524033

I agree that if one person refuses to appear with another the intolerant person who can't cope with hearing different opinions and proper debate should be the one removed.

This is what the BBC say about people refusing to debate.

Anyone has the right to refuse to contribute to our output and it is not always necessary to mention their refusal. However, the refusal of an individual or an organisation to make a contribution should not be allowed to act as a veto on the appearance of other contributors holding different views, or on the output itself.

When our audience might reasonably expect to hear counter arguments or where an individual, viewpoint or organisation is not represented it may be appropriate to explain the absence, particularly if it would be unfair to the missing contributor not to do so. This should be done in terms that are fair. We should consider whether we can represent the missing contributor's views based on what we already know.

www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/fairness/refusals-to-take-part

The Spectator, which you'd imagine would be more straitlaced, would (imho) be more than happy for Poulton to give her side of the story whereas the BBC shut her down.

The times grow ever-more interesting.

twitter.com/francesbarber13/status/1101910604347047936

Frances Barber has retweeted Sonia's tweet - she is not impressed either.

Who at the BBC thinks they are above their own rules about those who “refuse to debate”.

Are they stupid or arrogant?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6764767/amp/Writer-claims-dropped-minute-BBC-discussion-show.html

We have Caroline Farrow, a conservative Catholic, arguing the GC case vs someone from the Proud Trust who says all the Transpeople have been driven off Twitter by the death threats, while one woman chunters from a sedentary position about why isn't there a transperson in this argument.

Typical of this show, more heat than light.

I caught about two minutes and was so angry I switched off. Caroline was good, though. She has genuinely been bullied and threatened on Twitter so for that other woman to pretend that feminists were threatening trans people was just despicable.

Wasn't Caroline doxxed by Haddock ?

Caroline was excellent, I thought. The enormous huffing and puffing in response to her saying "men cannot become women and women cannot become men" by Jayne Ozanne and the blue haired youtuber because of what an offensive statement it was will have been another little 'WTF?' moment in the middle England types who presumably normally watch this whole reading the papers and drinking coffee. Plus she talked about Miranda's court case, which was canny.

The AWA wanted their batshittery to really connect with the mainstream, and I think their moment might have passed.

Plus she talked about Miranda's court case, which was canny

It is amazing how much of the press seems to have watched that with their fingers in there ears and eyes shut...………..

The BBC always looks like it seems to like to line up a sacrificial Christian for anything controversially LGBT. Now that I can see this works from behind as well, it does appear to be because of BBC choice, rather than the circumstances that this happens.

My Theory:

They had a Transperson lined up, but they wanted to bring their echo chamber with them, so were dropped. That left an unbalanced panel, so one of the GCs had to go.

They genuinely wanted someone to speak on both debates. Sonia would only have spoken on the second one.

Thanks for the encouraging comments though. I could have been better & should have gone more into the Mermaids/police aspects and the actual threats/doxing faced by transwomen but hey hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I didn't see you Caro, but well done with what you did, especially getting the court case mentioned. I know some of the women that are doing well now struggled to get any points over to start when they first went on these programmes but have learned a lot. It is not easy.

We have Caroline Farrow, a conservative Catholic, arguing the GC case vs someone from the Proud Trust who says all the Transpeople have been driven off Twitter by the death threats, while one woman chunters from a sedentary position about why isn't there a transperson in this argument.

Sounds like the discussion was rather lacking in scope?

Completely the opposite, R0. It was such a broad discussion topic there was very little specific focus at all.

Ah, thanks Floral

I've been away for the weekend and haven't watched TV or read much.