BBC Reply to complaint about Ben Hunte 'analysis' or article about trans atheletes

[LiterallyProblematic]

Thanks for getting in touch with us regarding an article on the BBC Sport website titled "Trans female athletes must lower testosterone levels, IAAF rules."

I understand you feel our LGBT correspondent Ben Hunte is political biased in favour of transgender issues.

Firstly, I’m sorry about the delay in getting back to you. I know people appreciate a prompt response and unfortunately we’ve taken longer to reply than usual – please accept our apologies.

All staff working for BBC News, though clearly entitled to hold personal opinions and beliefs, are acutely aware that their views should never in any way influence their work for the BBC, nor should they be apparent to our audience. It is important to recognise however that a fundamental part of the role of our correspondents is to offer analysis, using their experience and knowledge, but this is not indicative of bias.

Furthermore, we feel in this instance using the term 'cisgender' is appropriate as it accurately differentiates between the transgender athletes in the article.

Nevertheless, we do value your feedback about the article. All complaints are sent to senior management and in this case the BBC Sport team every morning, and I included your points in our overnight report of audience feedback.

These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your concerns have been seen by the right people quickly.

Thanks once again for getting in touch with us.

Kind regards

This is the article but I'm not sure how to clicky link. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50049449

Wow. So it’s ok to offend women with “cisgender” because it’s accurate.

Fair enough we should be able to use accurate terms for TW then, no?

Typical.

I complained to the BBC about Ben Hunte's homophobic reporting, which conflated sexuality with gender identity (see below) and once again the BBC defended Ben's biased and incorrect reporting.

'Prince William: 'I'd support my child if they were gay'' (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48774280).

This is a 'journalist' who was asked to publicly condemn the attack on Julie Bindel by Tattletown earlier this year. Instead Ben did not use his voice and remained silent.

Add it to this thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3296433-BBC-Bias-Collecting-Examples-here?pg=7&order=

Cisgender is a disputed term and the BBC should not be using it as though it were not.

And sorry to derail, but here's what an editor at The Independent replied to me about using the term cisgender (when reporting on the women from Get the L out)

While I appreciate some disagree with the term "cisgender", we do not consider it to be a derogatory term.

I would definitely go back with a follow up complaint

'cis' implies that people are content and compliant with the gender stereotypes and restrictions placed on them by society. given how damaging those stereotypes and restrictions are for women it's a very offensive and damaging term. the BBC should not be using it

I would follow up, more that cis is inaccurate and excludes all those people whose gender identity does not match their sex yet do not wish to participate on the basis of gender identity

For clarity you have women who do not consider that they are cis gender because their gender identity does not match their sex ( gender wise they are therefore men/transmen or none binary. Appreciate this may seem odd, but it's a literal logical reading of what trans actually is based on stonewall definitions ) who will nevertheless play as women because they see sex not gender as the relevant factor for sports participation

They really are being trans terrible exclusionary, and sexist. in refusing to acknowledge the clear sex difference in how on average transwomen and transmen behave. obviously there are transmen for whom gender identity and body dysmorphia are both more significant, and there are transwomen who would never expect inclusion on a female team, but on average, there is a clear sex difference.

Given the legal definition of hate crime is based on the perception of the victim of it being "hateful", using a term you've been told is considered offensive about a characteristic protected under the equality act seems a bit foolish, no?

This makes me so cross. Cisgender is a made up word to force people to assume an identity. I'm not bloody Cisgender I'm a woman. I don't identify as a woman, I AM ONE BECAUSE I AM FEMALE!! Grrrrrr The BBC can f@ck right off. Rant over.

The thing that gets me about the blanket application of cisgender to women is that it “assumes their gender” by making assumptions based on their presentation and stereotyped norms, but we’re constantly told by trans advocates how offensive it is to misgender and/or to assume another person’s gender. By lumping women (adult human females) into one great big old cisgender category, we don’t get to define ourselves and no account is taken of our individual views or preferences. The imbalance in courtesy, respect and acceptance us glaring. And, yes, on that basis it is hugely offensive.

The BBC are defending that rubbish on the grounds that it’s analysis? Jesus - the last line talking about how many elite transgender athletes can you name is not analysis. Any decent journalist would analyse why and come up with the answer that it takes time for the impacts to filter through. 2020 is going to open a lot of people’s eyes to this.

While I appreciate some disagree with the term "cisgender", we do not consider it to be a derogatory term.

Hmm...

While I appreciate some disagree with the term "yid", we do not consider it to be a derogatory term.

Furthermore, we feel in this instance using the term 'cisgender' is appropriate as it accurately differentiates between the transgender athletes in the article.

Hmm...

Furthermore, we feel in this instance using the term 'yid' is appropriate as it accurately differentiates between the faiths in the article.

Ben Hunte is simply not up to basic journalistic standards of reporting. It’s embarrassing and the senior reporters and management know it.

Of course if you report ‘cisgender’ as a hate incident based on gender it would be reported as an increase in ‘transphobic hate crime’.

There is a long-running dispute between the family of John Sullivan and the retrospective editing of Only Fools And Horses:

www.ofah.net/blog/jim-sullivan-on-only-fools-and-horses-cuts/

In particular, any mention of anyone being black or Asian, however friendly, is cut, as is any mention or suggestion of anything relating to homosexuality.

No because calling someone cis is actually transphobic. It's refusing to accept that they do not have a gender identity that is at odds with their sex

I'm thinking of sending this to them.

"I object to the term cisgender because it implies that I have a gender identity and that it matches my sex. Like a large proportion of the population, I don't have a gender identity. The BBC should respect the rights of those of us who don't identify with any gender not to be labelled as cisgender as we find it offensive to be told what our gender category should be."

I consider "gender" to be something which other people categorise themselves as, and I do not wish to be included as part of that.
I consider it a hate crime against me, if someone refers to me as "cis-gender male".
I am a man, an adult human male and my wife is a woman, and adult human female.

I watched a BBC Alba documentary on Rosie Reilly the groundbreaking Scottish footballer. Back in the 70s football was definitely not for girls in Scotland - the SFA banned women from playing and threatened to shut down any club allowing women to use their facilities. Rosie was given the belt every day at school for playing football and eventually expelled for it.

Eventually she became a professional footballer in Italy and was banned from playing for Scotland because of it when they were eventually forced by EUFA to have a women's team.

Rosie refused to follow the gender rules of her home to the extent she became an Italian citizen and played for Italy instead. She's still a woman, albeit one who had to pretend to be a boy in her youth in order to be allowed to play football. Would the BBC call her cisgender?

Here we have another practical example of the 8th rule of misogyny: Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.

Er, if the appalling term 'cisgender' is to be forcibly used despite women explaining clearly that it misgenders them, it enforces their political involvement in something they haven't chosen and may not agree with, and that many find actively offensive because despite that offense to them it's accurate....

then I presume of course it works both ways and it's fine for women to equally use accurate but offensive terms? Basic social contract. I will respect you and be polite to you if and only if you show equal respect and politeness to me.

For a group so desperate for us all to adopt the TWAW motto, why the need to differentiate then? Maybe TRA's should focus on having transwomen and transmen accepted as just that, obviously giving them the same rights and protections men and women have. They have this bizarre notion that if we don't accept TWAW that we want them to disappear or die, that we are denying their existence.

Absolutely @CeridwenTheWitch

I'm disappointed to see my long post deleted. I wrote it with consideration and it is not clear which terms I used that are deemed unacceptable. I'm waiting for Mumsnet to hopefully clarify with me which terms I'm not allowed to use so I can hopefully rephrase it and post it again. It's so frustrating having language curtailed in such a way.

Ok, I've re-read the email and will post again with some rephrasing and removing the paragraph that the moderator felt was not acceptable. I am not trying to offend people, these are my beliefs, and I am posting in good faith. There are lots of trans people who acknowledge their biological sex and prefer the term transsexual to describe themselves, I don't think they would have a problem with what I wrote. Here is my post with the offending paragraph removed, fingers crossed it won't be deleted again:

To me, 'cisgender' is an offensive term that should not be used. I consider it part of this large scale societal gaslighting that is currently happening where the meaning of words are being changed and new words are being made up in order to get law and policy changed to advantage certain people and disadvantage others. Furthermore:

• It assumes we are all, as a society, happy to play 'the gender game' and that nobody is gender critical;

• It implies all of us have always had gender identities and that's how society has been arranged, when in fact, all of us have always just had either a male or female biological sex and history and society has been influenced and designed around that fact;

• It assumes that all of us believe that men can be women, and that there are two types of women, ones with male bodies and ones with female bodies;

• It makes women a subset of our own sex;

• It implies that women are happy to go along with stereotypes of wearing dresses, liking pink etc when in fact women have been challenging these stereotypes for decades;

• It also implies that women who dress in more 'masculine' ways are not really women which is offensive because clothes don't make us women, our biology does;

• It implies that women are somehow 'the privileged type of women' because we are 'women born in female bodies.' This then allows trans activists to use terms like 'cis privilege' to influence law and policy.