Glinner streaming on Triggernometry this evening

[BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted]

On the Triggernometry YouTube channel at 9pm. I like the Triggernomtry fellas and they interview a lot of interesting and erudite people. Last one was Gad Saad and worth your time

I don't think either of them really understand the full implications of what they are talking about.

They are treating it like any other free speech issue - the right to state sex is real. They obviously haven't a clue or care about the safeguarding issues. Which is fine, it's will have no impact on them.

I think they do have a wide range of interesting guests on. I'm not convinced about Konstantin's assertion that that 'challenge' guests, with the exception of posie when she stated that no man can be a woman. However, they do always let guests speak and have their say.

It's one of the better channels out there that cover this kind of stuff. They do allow their guests to speak and don't insert themselves or their own views too much into it (which probably isn't that easy to do).

I also like that they do (outside of covid) actual studio interviews. I find the fuzzy FaceTime stuff a bit wearing sometimes with these types of interviews. It's nice to have a crisp format where you can see more than just a selfie view.

Hi all,

A couple of things to add to the discussion.

• we removed a few seconds of the interview on legal advice where a specific allegation was made about a specific person which has never been tested in court. We are told that, legally-speaking, that means the allegation is difficult to defend in a defamation case and as a broadcaster we are jointly liable with the speaker for allowing the allegation to be made.

• the comments about us seeing this through the lens of free speech are entirely accurate. The issue of free speech is a much broader societal issue than the trans issue or safeguarding. If we have a society where free speech exists, you are then able to argue for and achieve policy and legislation results if there is merit in your cause.

If you don't have freedom of speech, then it allows a group of loud crazies

(pressed ctrl+enter by accident)

If you don't have freedom of speech, then it allows a group of loud crazies to shut down others as TRAs are doing to feminists now.

But woke feminists have been doing this to others as well.

So you're right, the trans issue is not a hobby horse for us. Frankly, until we started looking into it we didn't really understand what the big deal was because it is an issue that "only affects a tiny handful of people". Now we see the serious problems that are being ignored in this area but our focus is much broader.

Woke ideology is fundamentally about undermining the founding principles of Western civilisation like freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the scientific method as a means to ascertain truth. That's our hobby horse, if you like.

Thank you all for watching the show and supporting us.

Triggerpod Thank you! I got a bit of fluff in my eye reading that...

@Triggerpod KK, just wanted to say that I really enjoyed watching your interview with Titania McGrath and Andrew Doyle on 1st March at the Bill Murray.

Seems like such a long time ago now...

Thank you for coming @TheRealMcKenna - what a different world that was haha :)

Is it just me, or do the Triggerbods remind you of anyone???

It's a sad indictment of Channel 4 and the BBC that they no longer do interesting, in depth interviews like Triggernometry are doing.

I would like them to have more lefties on. I liked the trade union bloke, but there are so few lefty people who are out there stating their ideas, who aren't idiots.

But I'd really like to see them facilitate a discussion between people who disagree with each other. I'm not sure there's even a way of doing that anymore though, or whether they feel that fits into what their channel's about.

I'd also like them to have Meghan Murphy on, I wonder if they're still shocked by the idea that people with penises are men. They genuinely looked perturbed by that truth when Posie Parker said it. As Douglas Murray has it, everyone knew this until 5 minutes ago, so it really amused me to see how uncritically the Trigger boys had swallowed the kool aid. I suspect they've changed their position since then though, I think they may be a bit more aware of it.

@Triggerpod Maybe Triggernometry should ask Steph to come on?

Steph doesn't seem to like what other people say, so Steph could tell Steph's side of the story perhaps?

(Or is Steph afraid that what is good for the goose is good for the gander erm transgoose and Steph might find out what it is like to be on the receiving end of legal challenges?)

Dr Harrop might be up for doing an interview?

Or anyone who advocates that women are not adult human females - I'd be really interested in hearing what they have to say.

Yes, I'd be interested in hearing literally anyone who advocates that men can be women set out their stall for an hour.

They won't, because it's a spiritual belief and not something that can be rationally argued.

Spiritual beliefs are fine, obviously. So long long as you don't coerce participation from others.

Woke ideology is fundamentally about undermining the founding principles of Western civilisation like freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the scientific method as a means to ascertain truth. That's our hobby horse, if you like.

Yes, I agree with that. The idea that you can potentially be criminalised for speaking the truth is terrifying. I think you're doing a great job with the podcast.

Exactly, Quillink - I do think woman=adult human female, and that there are massive mistakes being made in policy which will have harmed children and adults...but, I also wonder if I am in a silo of people who agree with me.

You know that Mitchell and Webb sketch where they are Nazis and Mitchell says "Hang on, are we the bad guys?"

I'd like to check that I'm not a bad guy - but, the trans community has, so far, not come up with anything logical or measurable AFAICS.

So, yes, if Harrop/Haden/Bradley/editor of Pink News or Diva had a chance to speak in a long form interview, well, maybe I'd learn some stuff to help me see their POV.

I really can't think of anyone other than Triggered who'd be able to do this.

I watched it last night and i thought Glinner came across really well (even though i disagree with him and smart a bit when he uses female pronouns and the word woman to talk about men -argh! Please don't insult women's integrity as a distinct group that excludes all of those born male G it feels domineering - a bit 'bros before hos' - but I'm sure he doesn't intend to come across that way). He seems like such a good guy - unpretentious, kind, brave - ready to take the blows for women and what is right.

What bothers me a bit is the triggernometry guys don't seem to make any distinction, when it comes to free speech, between 'the right tell the truth about your oppression' and 'the right to be an antagonistic little prick who gets off upsetting and offending people' without state interference. Throughout the interview they seem to conflate the two in a way that suggests they are using the noble cause of the former (without actually giving a shiny shite about the oppressed who are silenced from speaking about their oppression) to dignify and justify the latter- (the freedom to be a kind of pigtail-pulling little shit).

Although defending freedom of speech means all speech and that you can't defend the former (speaking the truth) without also defending the latter (deliberately antagonising others) - it doesn't make being antagonistic and deliberately offensive some kind of virtue. There's a kind of pomposity about the way the triggernometry pair seem to keep trying to make it so. I agree that freedom of speech is absolutely fundamental, but the reason it is so is because of the right to tell the truth and the right to be offensive is because the truth will offend people. Setting out to offend for its own sake though, is just being a dick.

I agree vivarium.

Triggernometry has interviewed males who identify as women before. I'm interested in those who are more personally removed. The policymakers, academics and politicians who want us all to believe that men can be women and vice versa. Why? On what basis?

@OutsiderIndoors

What bothers me a bit is the triggernometry guys don't seem to make any distinction, when it comes to free speech, between 'the right tell the truth about your oppression' and 'the right to be an antagonistic little prick who gets off upsetting and offending people' without state interference.

There is no distinction to be made, that's why we don't make it.

Either there is free speech or there isn't. Any distinction in these areas will be used as a wedge to destroy free speech for your "noble" causes.

That is exactly what has happened with the trans issue. For years, the concept of "hate speech" has been allowed to be proliferated unchallenged and now feminists are surprised when it's used against them.

Setting out to offend for its own sake though, is just being a dick.

You may not like someone being a dick but unless you defend their right to be a dick, you will soon find that someone thinks you're being a dick for refusing to accept that "trans women are women".

In fact, if you speak to young people who subscribe to this nonsense that is exactly what they will tell you "OK OK, maybe trans women aren't literally women but WHY BE A DICK ABOUT IT?"

Totally agree @Triggerpod

You may not like someone being a dick but unless you defend their right to be a dick, you will soon find that someone thinks you're being a dick for refusing to accept that "trans women are women".

Absolutely. 30 years ago I had a discussion with a friend where he was saying the BNP should be banned from saying whatever racist policy it was they were proposing because it was "wrong". I defended their right to say it and said we had to argue to win the argument, not ban them.

Part of my argument was "what if one day something you believe is classed as wrong?". As a "right on" lefty, I never thought I would have views considered ban-able, but here we are.

Well we all saw what letting Nick Griffin onto the TV to spout his shite did for his popularity...

Yes, @Triggerpod.

I think this trans and feminism issue is opening lots of (especially) women's eyes to the serious limits on free speech which many of us don't often encounter (since we're rather well conditioned to stick inside that Overton window...).

I really enjoy Triggernometry in the main but they were far harder on Posie than they are on men. Most notably Harry the Owl.

During the Posie interview, if they mentioned India Willoughby as an example of “someone born in the wrong body” once they mentioned him ten times. Went on and on and on about “surely it’s just courtesy to refer to a transwoman as she and her? Isn’t it? Did not you think?” etc. etc.

At one point one of them says that it’s “obvious” that transwomen shouldn’t compete in women’s sports but still seemed confused as to why. Someone needed to encourage him to think a bit further....

“Transwomen shouldn’t compete in women’s sport” ...... well done! And that’s because they’re........? Come on you can do it. Little word. Three letters.....?

As a "right on" lefty, I never thought I would have views considered ban-able, but here we are.

Exactly, @testing987654321.

“Transwomen shouldn’t compete in women’s sport” ...... well done! And that’s because they’re........? Come on you can do it. Little word. Three letters.....?

Bigger, stronger, faster, capable of opening jars and parallel parking?

capable of opening jars
Easy, you just break the seal with a flat knife. Small hands are innovative hands.