Radio 4 now!

[Awning10]

Listen

Fox Fisher seems to be rather keen on the 'fallen in with the wrong crowd' line.

On the other thread about the flounce from the agency, someone linked to an interview FF did for some Brighton University publication, in which they boast:

Earlier this year, I mentored a 14-year-old transguy from Brixton. This was through Gendered Intelligence, which is a fantastic national (and predominantly London-based) support group mostly for teenagers. The guy I mentored was having a really difficult time, having been expelled from his school, and had made some bad choices by getting in with the wrong crowd. I was there to chat with him, motivate him and to help him to start to see a possible future.

A 14-year-old 'transguy'

Mentored? So was that ‘wait and see how you feel - you are still young, underage and mentally a child’ or ‘bind your boobs and call yourself Dave because you have been born in the wrong body (I blame your mum)’.

One dreads to imagine the pep talks, Serenity

Link Here www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000k8zy

it starts at about 54 mins in.

it seems fox thinks JK Rowling needs to educate herself and meet some trans people.

To be fair it's not the first time someone young and desperate to be interesting has thought people older than them know nowt about nowt.

I just listened on BBC Sounds.

I think that was a BRILLIANT interview.

Fox peaked a nation.

The interviewer was gently asking the right questions. There was no need for combat.

Format of simple sensible statement and question asked, mostly about women, JKR and biological sex. Fox responded. I got the impression Fox said what Fox believes. Nobody talked over anybody. Fox completed Fox's sentences.

As a result, to most people, Fox sounded batshit crazy, or perhaps a rather sad deluded soul.

Could not have been a better interview imho. Sunlight!

Fox is very upset about how the interview went. Fox thinks the media is toxic. Just called JK Rowling "a prejudiced billionaire" on twitter.

It is sheer misogyny to beat down a self-made woman like this, a woman who has given millions to charity.

I just re-listened.

Fox began by saying all they wanted was for the agency to re-affirm that they supported trans people and maybe did a training ("re-education") session with All About Trans.

Fox said that they didn't expect JKR to change her views, or anything. Just wanted an open and honest discussion within the agency (whatever happened to No Debate?)

But by the end of the interview, Fox said of JKR, "If she just opened her eyes and saw that transwomen are women, maybe we'd be able to move forward. "

So Fox does really want to change JKR's views, and the agency's, and everyones.

Everyone has to "open their eyes" and "see" that transwomen are women... Well, sorry Fox, but no. You cannot make people believe something that is not true. You might be able to make some people chant it, but you can't make us all believe it.

Please stop erasing the meaning of woman, and the concept of biological sex.

I liked the opening statement about Maya. Nice. Simple. Accurate. Makes the uninitiated go "Eh? You what?"

"The Harry Potter author has been accused of hate speech after comments that began with her support for a woman who lost her job after saying that men cannot change into women."

Factually correct statement in clear simple language.

Fox is upset because it is not going the way that Fox thought it would. Fox, Owl and the other ones thought they would get lots of plaudits and cries of stunning a brave. Fox has spent a bit too long in their echo chamber and is now finding out that most people don't agree with Fox, that most people don't like being told they need to be re-educated and most people think that they have collectively cut off their noses to spite their faces.

If you look at twitter you'll see that FF got the attention they wanted. Now they've pulled the spotlight onto themselves they're painting themselves as a victim of the media.

'I want attention! No not that sort' kind of thing.

Great. That's the way to approach all of this.

Clear, factual statements. Don't get drawn into ad homs.

State the facts, show the evidence. Ask questions. Remain polite.

"If she just opened her eyes and saw that transwomen are women, maybe we'd be able to move forward

If only you'll accept the word of our god maybe we'll be willing to forgive you.

'The interviewer was gently asking the right questions. There was no need for combat.'

Completely agree. Good work Mishal Hussain!

I can't remember if it was here or on Twitter that I saw this the other day, but it made me laugh (in a way).

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

"fallen in with the wrong crowd" - a term normally used for teenagers - to support Fox's delusions of superiority over a 50 year old woman with a huge amount of life experience and intelligence. Trying to make out that she has no agency and no basis for her opinions. Nauseating.

India Willoughby Good Morning Britain from 8:30
15 Jun 2020

transcribed:
"Well I do actually think she's transphobic. I'll be absolutely honest about that, but I think that's down to where she's been educated. I know for a fact that she's got a lot of information from a well known parenting site, which is well known, as you know, for being a recruiting sergeant. These days it's been colonized if you like, by the trans exclusionary radical feminists. (continues)
I mean there's some very oblique terms in that long essay that JK Rowling did. I mean there's a reference there to clownfish. Now clownfish are amazing. Clownfish can actually change sex naturally, incredible. But its used in certain areas as an insult towards trans people. So on the face of it I mean there's an innocent reference to clownfish but JK Rowling knows the weight that clownfish carries yet she used that thing"

Willoughby has long held strong feelings about Mumsnet.

INDIA WILLOUGHBY for Pink News APRIL 24, 2018
Britain’s rampant transphobia has me worried for my life
(extract)
what is supposed to be a family-friendly parenting site has it’s claws out for the trans community.

And it all feels very orchestrated. (continues)

I totally get why many women might have concerns about this, given there have been so many ridiculous over-the-top debates where the scenario of sex-offender in a dress is trotted out.

It just doesn’t bear up to scrutiny though. Honestly. Self-identification in no way incentivises someone to commit a sex offence. It doesn’t make it easier or more likely.

Waving a piece of paper or shouting “I’m a woman” is not going to buy any leniency from the police or courts. (continues)

I defy anyone to visit Mumsnet right now, look up transgender, and tell me that the vicious and mocking threads about trans people would be allowed about any other demographic. It’s the stuff of pitchforks and lanterns. The same rhetoric about race, religion on sexuality would lead to prosecutions and official condemnation

There’s even a debate about introducing a new trans Section 28, clamping down on educating the public about what transgender is.

Justine is adamant there’s nothing transphobic on Mumsnet. Only reasoned debate. She wants transgender visitors to Mumsnet to be “happy and supported.” It feels reminiscent of when Cruella de Vil opens a home for stray dogs in 101 Dalmatians.

As I say, take a look for yourself. Trans groups are more than happy to debate any subject Justine or her murky corner of the web wants – but the material on the site isn’t a discussion. It’s vicious, nasty persecution

Mumsnet’s reputation for transphobia is fully deserved. Hardliners openly strategise ways to make life tougher for trans people" (continues)

It’s all very similar to the way the National Front used to operate.

I’m sure most people who use the site are decent folk. They want nothing to do with the rabid mouth-frothing going on by so-called “feminists.” (continues)
www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/04/24/india-willoughby-transphobia-opinion-worried-for-my-life-mumsnet/

Surely most people agree with what Fox is saying in that clip even though it was articulated in a rather clumsy way.

No, Fox is wrong.

Don't we all feel uncomfortable with kids being taught the ins and outs of obscure sexual practices or the pride pictures of children mixing with furries and rubber men?

Why would children need to learn about 'rubber men' or obscure sex practices to learn about gay relationships? It's not as though they are routinely taught about Cynthia Payne and Fifty Shades of Grey to better understand heterosexual relationships.

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g

I can't remember if it was here or on Twitter that I saw this the other day, but it made me laugh (in a way).

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

My dad used to say that!

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g

I'm a bit late to this, but that case from 2016 was my immediate thought as well.

I really would recommend people to read the judgment to understand what happened:-

Re J (A Minor) (2016) EWHC 2430 (Fam)

It really was quite shocking on all sorts of levels.

Not surprisingly, the judge had a few things to say about the Local Authority:-

[75] Transgender equality has received a great deal of attention in recent times. I believe that in this case the profile and sensitivity of the matters raised by the mother blinded a number of professionals from applying their training, skills and, it has to be said, common sense. They failed properly to investigate M's assertions, in part I suspect, because they did not wish to appear to be challenging an emerging orthodoxy in such a high profile issue.

In case anyone thinks that this might be some crusty old out of date dinosaur of a judge, he said:-

[74] My experience in the Family Division leaves me with little doubt that some children, as young as 4, 5, 6 years of age may identify strongly with their opposite gender. Such children can experience rejection and abuse arising from ignorance both on a personal and institutional level. Though none of the parties referred me to it, I have read the House of Commons Select Committee report 'Transgender Equality', dated 14th January 2016, which investigates the challenges in securing sensitive NHS care and accessing affirming educational environments for transgender adults and children. It is important that such children are listened to and their views afforded respect but, to my mind, they are ill served by premature labelling. What they require, as F has so capably demonstrated, is the opportunity to develop their identity in which ever way it evolves. J was not only deprived of that space and opportunity by his mother, he was pressed into a gender identification that had far more to do with his mother's needs and little, if anything, to do with his own.

And talking of the father, he seems to have impressed:-

[69] Mr Baker asked F whether he thought J might be behaving as a boy because he had been told that this would please the Judge and therefore facilitate his return home. F was prepared to engage in the hypothesis. I formed the impression that he had not reached an absolute conclusion that J will continue to identify as a boy, though he thought this the more likely outcome. This struck me as neatly illustrating Dr Hellin's view that F is a 'moderate' person able to 'countenance…uncertainty'. F's simple and instinctive position is that he loves his son unconditionally and will continue to do so however he turns out. F has, in his quiet, self-effacing manner shown remarkable resilience in extremely trying circumstances. He works with increasing confidence with the agencies who have let him and his son down so badly and he does so without bitterness or rancour. Throughout the entirety of the private law proceedings F's character was traduced, he was excised from his child's life, his concerns were not listened to by the professionals involved in the case. Many fathers in such circumstances would have walked away. He did not, he stood by his son throughout the seemingly endless proceedings and was ultimately able to rescue him. He has now earned the respect of all the professionals involved in this case to whose voices I add my own.