Woman's Hour Jo Swinson Now - 6th Dec

[AbsintheFriends]

Andrea Catherwood (?) interviewing and being quite tigerish. Seems to be in a mood to take no shit.

I agree that the leading parties both need a grilling on this too. I would like to see Dawn Butler in the hot seat. It might not be in the current Tory manifesto but they set the ball rolling on this shit show.

Is it just me or has Dawn Butler been keeping (or been given) a pretty low profile during this election campaign? I'd love to see her position scrutinised too.

I'd like to think she'll lose the Women's brief after all the stirring she did when the manifesto launched.

Is it just me or has Dawn Butler been keeping (or been given) a pretty low profile during this election campaign?

Dawn Butler and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Sitting in a tree. K.I.S.S.I.N.G.

If they dont interview any of the other parties about this then all these interviewers, however much they think they are bigging up their CV, are hypercrites

The have to give all parties equal airtime during the election but it is easy enough to argue that they should spend that times discussing that party’s manifesto pledges rather than those of other parties. And as it is not in the Conservative’s manifesto, I could see that they would object to having to discuss the pledges of a party that won’t win power instead of the conservative’s manifesto.

I wonder when jo Swinson first thought of herself as a woman - when she had her first period, when she developed boobs, when she had her first kiss, when she first got the vote, when she left school etc etc... might be there was one thing or a series of things or just a general feeling that she hadn’t really been aware of but one day just realised.

And then when did she feel that she was no longer a woman but a ciswoman (auto correct changed that to CIA woman! ) - and what were the thing(s) that trigged that changed? How does she feel different now and why?

What a dreadful interview, essentially saying anyone who questions this is hysterical and reducing the issue to showing your birth certificate to get into toilets.

The fact that she seemed unable to separate the issue was astounding although the Ferring Pharmaceutical donation seems to explain it.

I wonder if anyone wants to give Jenni Russell from the Times some support?

twitter.com/jennirsl/status/1202958209058852865?s=20

Just listened.

Ouch.

Just listened and laughed out loud at the 'enthusiastic one' answer to 'what kind of feminist are you Jo Swinson?'
Emma Barnett on fire and JS came over as the stupid idiot that she is.
Had to email women's hour to congratulate Emma for being so fab and grinding JS into the ground. Journalism at its very best.

At least two of the 'womanshour RUINED MY DAY' (that is a direct quote) and 'Will never listen again because of Emma' tweets are by the same person. Read the thread and play spot the dismayed activist.

Isn't 'enthusiastic' something of a euphemism for 'shit'?

If someone told me they were an 'enthusiastic tennis player I would assume they weren't much cop.

She certainly is an enthusiastic feminist our Jo.

Wonder if that deserves its own thread, @MrsSnippyPants ?

It might not be in the current Tory manifesto but they set the ball rolling on this shit show.

It was the newly set up all party Women & Equalities Committee which started the ball rolling back in 2015, not the Government.

All detailed here, 8 Sept onwards:

www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/women-and-equalities/Formal-Minutes/2015-20-Parliament/Formal-Minutes-2015-16.pdf

This being in the LD manifesto has shone a light on it like nothing else has done. And the BBC saying ‘but what about women?’ gives everyone permission to speak out about this now.

It’s not a niche/online/weird feminist thing: it’s a policy position of a mainstream party and our broadcasters, rightly, are finally asking the right questions. If they can, we can.

Wow TimeLady I hadn't seen that before.

All the usual suspects and you really have to dig deep to find any gender critical women being listened to!

Thank you TimeLady I stand corrected.

Although I do recall the likes of Maria Miller and others in the party pushed it hard for a while.

Thank you for that TimeLady. All the usual suspects. If you were not in the know you might assume that all those with traditionally female names were actually female too.

I've noticed that some people really don't like the more aggressive style of interview|

I know what you mean, like John Humphreys - but the interviewer in this case was not aggressive - just persistent. She had a lovely voice too. Great timbre. Authoritative.

It was just awful .
I was waiting though for her to be asked to define a woman when we got the tw are w line. Missed opportunity as we had to listen to jo carving us up into categories...

Emma's dealing with not just the socialised belief that women being assertive/authoritative are not being nice, (compare her style to Piers Morgan or other well known male interviewers) but also the encourage myth that this subject should only ever be discussed with kid gloves and special care, and usual standards should not apply.

Right, Grim - I was listening to it with DH in the car - and I groaned when she started that list, and DH muttered "FFS." Then added "I just don't know who the fuck to vote for."

I wondered if she was going to include "angry women", can't remember which transactivist had that in the list, think it was Jane Fae but may not have been

It gets worse: the Committee's role is described as

The Committee fills "a gap" in previous accountability arrangements - the Minister for Women and Equalities and the GEO will now be held to account by a select committee for the Government's performance on equalities (sex, age, race, religion or belief, sexual orientation, disability, gender identity, pregnancy and maternity, marriage or civil partnership status) issues.

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/women-and-equalities-committee/role/

When I queried why it said gender identity, the only protected characteristic with the wording changed, this is the response I got back yesterday:

The section of the website you mention specifically refers to “the Government's performance on equalities” and is discussing equalities in a policy setting rather than listing protected characteristics as they appear in the Equality Act 2010. The phrase ‘Gender identity’ has been used when explaining the Committee’s remit on the website since the Committee was established in 2015.

I'm calling bullshit. The consultation was a farce as far as the Committee was concerned. They expected it would just be rubber stamped.

Note the timing - 2015. When did Ruth Hunt and Stonewall adopt the T?

Hmmmm.