Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

All Hail - Justin Webb Today Programme

41 replies

SidJS · 09/12/2019 12:20

I know this was touched upon on another thread - but how great was Justin Webb this morning??!!!

Radio 4 Today Programme 1 hr 13 mins in - sorry can’t log into BBC to provide a link.

Yes - he is a man - he could do serious damage to a woman - that’s why we need female only spaces...

Today Program is finally keeping the dream (female only spaces) alive

OP posts:
NeurotrashWarrior · 09/12/2019 12:23

Yep they're doing well!

Uncompromisingwoman · 09/12/2019 12:41

What is so shocking is to realise that we have got to a place where Marks and Spencers, John Lewis, parts of the NHS etc have removed women's rights to same sex changing rooms, health treatment etc at the behest of some very dodgy groups / individuals without any democratic discussion about the risks to women and children that this poses. Add to it the grooming of children in schools by lobby groups and it's a perfect storm. About bloody time that the BBC started covering it.

SawingForTeens · 09/12/2019 13:03

Yes the BBC is covering it now, but has any party leader apart from Jo Swinson been asked these difficult questions? If not, why not? Self ID is being used as a stick to beat Swinson (as it should be) but how would Corbin answer the "what is a woman" question? Notice that it is the woman who is being grilled on this every time. There are two male party leaders who are not even asked to address this. Or so it seems. Have I missed them being put on the spot?

BoreOfWhabylon · 09/12/2019 13:03

He was great. I wonder if the Beeb will now apologise to Jenni Murray?

Trewser · 09/12/2019 13:05

sawing The Lib Dems have put this policy front and centre of their manifesto so its not surprising they are being quizzed on it.

It's a bit rich to imply sexism when JS has no idea what a woman actually is. How does she know she's a female leader?

SawingForTeens · 09/12/2019 13:16

It's a bit rich to imply sexism when JS has no idea what a woman actually is

You are right Trews Grin

Re-vamping the GRA was also in the Labour manifesto, I believe. And Corbin has said TWAW. So somebody at the BBC, please, ask him how a transwoman is as a woman. Or just "what is a woman?",
"why do we segregate by sex?"

MikeUniformMike · 09/12/2019 13:22

I heard it, and it crossed my mind that they asked JS, because she is a woman, and that they would not have asked a male party leader.
She didn't come across very well.

ThePurported · 09/12/2019 13:30

And Corbin has said TWAW. So somebody at the BBC, please, ask him how a transwoman is as a woman.

I'd like to know why he didn't say a word about the horrible behaviour towards women attending the WPUK meeting during Labour conference. It can't be that he is too busy. He found the time to talk about 'his pronouns' Hmm - is that really more important to him?

BoreOfWhabylon · 09/12/2019 14:02

Justin wants to know how we think the other party leaders would answer

twitter.com/JustinOnWeb/status/1204029997192765440

AnotherNightWatering · 09/12/2019 14:19

but has any party leader apart from Jo Swinson been asked these difficult questions?
It's almost like Justin was reading this thread!

MockersFactCheckMN · 09/12/2019 14:32

Interesting family history to Justin Webb.

Nice Guy.

dayoftheclownfish · 09/12/2019 14:57

I find it very frustrating that only Swinson gets this question. It's so fundamental - and I would just love to see it put to Corbyn, Johnson, Sturgeon et al.

SawingForTeens · 09/12/2019 14:58

Well, Boris Johnson would probably say "waffle waffle waffle... Sword of Damocles... waffle...Pericles...etc etc".

However DH says BJ is a devoted fanny hound, so he's got to know what a woman is. I am reminded of this quote: “They are like glistening wet otters frolicking.” Yes, he said that. Ok, it was about women's volleyball. But still.

SawingForTeens · 09/12/2019 15:02

...and just to be clear it was a BJ quote, not DH!

somebrightmorning · 09/12/2019 22:51

So he said:
“JW: I take that point but surely, we are talking down the line, you’re not in the studio here but if you were in the studio here together, you could be all sorts of things superior as it were to me in terms of brain power, in terms of courage and all the rest of it, but if we were face to face, a male and a female, the fact is that I could do you enormous damage because of my male body, the way I am, that is a fact isn’t it, and that is what feminists say, that because of those facts, it is really important that there are places where women are protected across the board not by some individual assessment but just across the board?”

SonicVersusGynaephobia · 09/12/2019 23:16

He was very brave to put it to her (and an audience of millions(?) in such clear, stark terms.

He's male. He could harm her is many ways she simply could not do to him, if he chose to. We all know it. So does Swinson.

LatinforTelly · 09/12/2019 23:19

It was very effective because the words he chose were quite brutal. I flinched a bit at them and thought, that's a bit much, Justin. But it got the point across more effectively than saying the more sanitised 'men pose a risk to women' or similar. I could do you damage. Blimey. But is is the crux of it.

somebrightmorning · 09/12/2019 23:19

Agree because lots of people won’t get it

LatinforTelly · 09/12/2019 23:20

Sorry I am such a slow typer, that was a cross-post. I don't normally just paraphrase other posters! Blush

SawingForTeens · 09/12/2019 23:30

Justin Webb has stated the obvious, that men have a different power level than woman, something people like Swanson did not even try to think through because no debate and TWAW. This c&p is by VMisaMarshmallow on the thread but I think it is a good fit for this thread because it outlines where we are going if we follow through with this:

"If you make the legal definition of ‘woman’ into anyone who signs a piece of paper to say they are then you make ‘woman’ a meaningless term.

If it’s a term that holds no legal meaning then all our sex based protections are gone, if you can’t define sex you can’t protect those of us who are marginalised because of it.

If it’s a term that holds no meaning you have taken away woman’s vote. You can’t measure what natal women vote for if the catagory ‘women’ includes men. You can’t assess how women feel about issues that effect our lives if you can measure who women vote for. Women can’t come together as a group to use our democratic rights to influence positive change for women if the group ‘women’ includes men. Women can’t use media and social discussions to raise awareness of issues that effect us when a significant number of ‘women’s’ voices come from men.

There’s no way to measure the gender pay gap if ‘women’ includes men. There’s no way to assess how many women are in senior positions in employment if some of those ‘women’ are men. There’s no way for any woman who is unfairly passed over for promotions on the basis of her sex to complain when her employer can claim that 50% of the male managment are women. There’s no way to assess how many women are in STEM subjects when ‘women’ contains men.

There’s no way for any single sex prison, hospital, mental health facility, dv refuge or any other single sex facility can turn away a man when ‘woman’ now includes any man who signs a form.

Making the legal definition woman something any man can opt into, without any ‘transition’ of any sort makes the term women meaningless. Doing so wiped out all our sex based protections and all our rights in one go. You maybe a woman yourself, but if your not you were certainly birthed by one. You may also be married to one, or have sisters, daughters or other women you care about. They are the people whose rights you are erasing.

This will decide my vote now (most likely spoiled ballot) and will do in every election following. I will endeavour to vote in every single local election as well, and any candidate who is willing to stand up and vote against party line on self ID bill will get my support. More over I will explain this to every other woman I know, to my family, friends, school mothers, teachers, hcp and so on. I know a lot of women, I suspect that’s true of other women on this board do also. At some point one party will release what a large % of votes that is, as more and more women are aware of this. Will it be your party or will it be the reason you loose? Females make up 51% of the population, and our erasure of rights effects us all. That’s a lot of votes for whoever is smart enough to figure that out."

Needmoresleep · 09/12/2019 23:36

In fairness to interviewers, the other parties have made clear how they will use the first 100 days. The Tories will push on with Brext and Labour plan a massive nationalisation programme. It is not clear how either will work so there are lots of questions to ask. And either way we can be sure there will not be any parliament time for gender stuff.

What would the LibDems do in their first 100 days. Well they wont push ahead with Brexit, and they dont plan a major nationalisation programme. They will plant trees, but that hardly makes for a robust interview. Reform of the GRA is a flagship policy, and is something that some interviewers are delighted to be able to tackle. Nothing about them picking on the woman.

As it happens the LibDems wont get elected so it does not matter. Apart from the possibility of a LibLab pact. Jo may then demand self ID as the reward for the LDs supporting John McDonnell's agenda. I hope she is beginning to realise how unpopular that would be.

MissLawls · 09/12/2019 23:47

The thing I don't get is how Swinson and the Lib Dems ever thought this was a winnable policy! I mean they didn't have to make it front and centre but they did. She tweeted about it, several tweets in a row. Proudly proclaiming her woke credentials. And Labour isn't much better. Do they ever get out of their bubbles and actually listen to real voters on the ground? This is all so top down. It may be popular in certain small circles but it was never a policy to go out and win millions of voters.

stumbledin · 10/12/2019 00:39

I think we are all being bought of by how many parts of the media are focusing in on Swinson about this issue.

Because on one level it doesn't matter what they think as they will not be forming the next government.

The is just the media doing what it always does, it finds what they think is an easy target and then they all pile in. they dont care about the issue, they just like getting the boot in. Not sure why Jo Swinson is so unpopular, which is what the media is playing up to, but think as with Theresa May she is being treated differently.

So seriously, if any of us really care about the issue of women's rights, stop going all super fan because some people in the media as picking on Jo Swinson.

Both Labour and Tory are committed to reforming the GRA. Labour is intending to make mis gendering a hate crime.

Challenge the media to challenge them.

If they dont then it proves they dont care about women's issues, they just like giving someone in a weak position a good kicking.

We will either have a Tory or a Labour Government. They are both committed to reforum the GRA in favour of self id etc.. The media not challenging them.

Stop being bought off by this media misdirection.

By the end of the week we will have a Government committed to reforming the GRA and undermining women's rights and it wont be a Lib Dem Government.

This is just total two faced media hypocracy. they are just showing off to each other. And we are the muppets lapping it up as though it was actually a serious advance on behalf of women's rights.

I bet no one from the BBC will even think for one second to ask the two main parties why they are promising to undermine women's rights.

LemonGingerCakes · 10/12/2019 00:57

What’s sad is that it’s needing men to come along and add their voices to women’s (Ricky Gervais is good as well) for us to be listened to.

Trewser · 10/12/2019 01:37

Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems made it one of their main policies. Of course she should be held to account over it.

And if she IS a media scapegoat that demonstrates how much people hate this ridiculous policy, then good. Hopefully it will be a lesson to the Conservatives not to bother going any further with this plan.