Sunday 1st March The Big Questions BBC1; Women's Rights

[MrsSnippyPants]

Interesting guest list!

What was the Christian poet called?

What was she talking about forced abortion in Tibet? I’m not aware of this in Tibet specifically, it sounds horrific, I can’t believe she actually thinks feminist campaigners would be in favour of this?

Forced abortion is about overriding women’s bodily autonomy, just in the other direction, so I doubt any of the feminists present would have been down with that. Complete red herring.

If she's pro life, then yes, I think there's a sizeable chunk of the movement that think Feminists are in favour of the situation re forced abortion and sterilization in China, sex selective abortions etc.

It took me a long time to get to grips with what people I thought were 'the opposition' actually thought, and there are a lot of people invested in keeping misinformation flowing about.

God, that was awful. I can't imagine that anyone watching that without a settled view would have learned anything,. I hate these massive issue free for all 'debates'.

If SH was unbooked for reasons of SH's past convictions etc, fair enough.

Hope SH wasn't deplatformed at the behest of anyone GC though. Partly cos I think it's much better to point to deplatforming only being on one side - and because SH getting publicity is VG for women's rights IMO.

Since when an expert on housing, though?

II think Rosa was wasted here it’s not the right format for her skills.
The time slot before had Harry Miller on Politics North (Lincs and Yorks version). That was pitched much better at the Sunday morning tv viewer. Harry spoke to camera in front of a display of British values and talked about the Tesco car park. He clearly doesn’t have Rosa’s skills and missed the Jane Fae lies about Ian Huntley, but every sound bite was on message. Whereas individual sentences from Rosa didn’t stand alone. For instance the point about females academics getting a 7% pay rise might not go down well in the supermarket car park.
The feminist point might have been better served by Hayden.

I love Rosa & her hat. Her appearances in front of parliamentary committees are astonishing. But Sunday morning tv needs a Posie arguing for women, or a Stephanie for sunlight.

The Rosa comment that stuck with me was that there are only 25 black female professors in the UK.

For people living in my area 25 black women professors would seem like a lot. I don’t know any professors. Male, female, BAME or not. I think Rosa’s point was that it was really low compared to the overall number of professors. And the number of black Women in the UK.
But I don’t think Rosa’s point would hit home with the Sunday brunch audience

The Rosa comment that stuck with me was that there are only 25 black female professors in the UK.
Yes, but out of context - I’ve no idea how that compares to the number of professors overall, proportion of black women in the population etc - I assumed it is a gross underrepresentation but it’s not clear just from that soundbite unfortunately.

Have the BBC indicated why SH was no longer invited to the show? I don't see the point in deplatforming. People's views and opinions should be aired so the general public can assess them against other people's informed arguments.

Hope SH wasn't deplatformed at the behest of anyone GC though. Partly cos I think it's much better to point to deplatforming only being on one side - and because SH getting publicity is VG for women's rights IMO.

Why are some people described as GC/ GC 'allies' calling for censorship & no-platforming?
These controlling behaviours don't do women standing up for sex-based rights any favours.

Preventing Steph Hayden speaking only protects other males who identify as women.

Preventing Steph Hayden speaking only protects other males who identify as women.

Hmm - that sound about right.

I am disappointed at the cancellation - it would have been the making of that show.

The GRA review is dead, it's a relief to not hear about it
We should still be debating it - we have de facto self-id through institutional and organisational capture and until this is rolled back the conversation is still valid.

Preventing Steph Hayden speaking only protects other males who identify as women.

That's why I don't think complaints came from women's groups. Why would women's groups prioritise the image of male transpeople?

It's more likely because they are a 'woman with a criminal past'. Allegedly.

It's more likely because they are a 'woman with a criminal past'. Allegedly

Not allegedly. Their criminal past is in the public domain.

Ms Wilson told the court the claimant had a previous conviction relating to an affray with a golf club in 1999.

She said Ms Hayden had been before criminal courts on 11 occasions for 21 offences and had spent six months in prison for obtaining property deception.

But Ms Hayden noted all her convictions were spent and her last court appearance was 10 years ago.

She said she had been convicted of petty crimes like handing in a bad cheque at a petrol station and railway fraud.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7978797/Mother-two-called-transgender-woman-man-racist-series-offensive-tweets.html

I think Hayton complained about Hayden's appearance, and offered Haytonself instead.

I do not think this is a helpful intervention, and frankly, quite in keeping with other such interventions in the past couple of weeks.

Oh, and look, after a debate about women's rights on national telly, we're discussing males sticking themselves centre stage again.

It’s pretty poor behaviour to invite someone to appear in a programme and then axe them an hour before the show is recorded. I’m no fan of this person but I do think they should have done their research prior to inviting her, not afterwards.

It's more likely because they are a 'woman with a criminal past'. Allegedly.

I doubt very much if BBC Big Questions excludes guests who have a criminal past, regardless of their sex.

They decided to avoid the transwomen issue so Hayden was no longer required. That’s my perspective.

FloralBunting I realise it was inappropriate to compare Harry and Rosa. Just that it was adjacent programmes on the same channel for a similar audience. It seemed that Rosa was debating the wombats in the studio, and winning but there were people in their kitchens around the country half watching. Right now there are people around the country left with the impression that Rosa is ungrateful for a free 7% pay rise. I know that’s not what she said, but people are watching snippets of the programme in that time slot.

One, I think you've mixed me up with someone else, I've not made any points about Rosa and Harry.

Sorry, misread 14:15!