BBC Bitsize - Pronouns

[OhHolyJesus]

I mean I'm not surprised but Bitesize is used by schools through the country as a supposed reliable, unbiased source of education material.

mobile.twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1319025713475952641?fbclid=IwAR0rTBD2j5PKOeTKvYSSX90c4RUDmJDo7Zg613qnDBXNaAncv3J8epYWLSQ

You can complain here:

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint

Or email your MP and cc MPs Safe Schools Alliance on info@safeschoolsallianceuk.

In the tweet thread there are some people already complaining. I'm not a defund the BBC kind of person but I can see why license fee layers are questioning what the BBC are doing with their money (there is a website 'BBC complaints' that's all about biased Brexit coverage).

It's like listening to people read off a script sometimes.

Like TWAW? TMAM? Like 'Acceptance Without Exception'? Like 'It doesn't exist' with regards to a certain condition?

This thread has been very enlightening about things I've been wondering for a while.

I loved the responses on the BBC Facebook page; it's very heartening to see.

Yeah, all the nopes. And the thread is there for anyone to see the gaslighting. It all should be seen in context for it was astounding.

and yet trans people regularly face abuse and assault in the streets and the workplace

Whereas women of course sail through life never ever being abused or assaulted

Women are murdered at the rate of 2 a week but yeah sure it’s TW who are the ones really suffering here

And you know there Could have been common cause with women & TW on pushing back against male aggression but instead TRA chose to scream nodebate & push aggressively into women’s spaces and that opportunity has been lost

@CharlieParley

Yes, jj1968, all of those rights violations and many more are happening to other groups discriminated against on the basis of sex, religion/belief, sexuality, age, disability or race/ethnicity, too.

And yet proponents of self-id argue that other protected groups must give up their rights in order to redress the rights violations experienced by those who identify as trans - even though other disadvantaged groups are not responsible for those rights violations.

How do you justify that?

I don't think anyone is being asked to give up any rights. I haven't called for a change in the law that would affect anyone else's rights. I support the EA 2010 as it stands.

And yet trans people are still discriminated against in jobs, housing and services

Illegally

You think three year waiting lists are adequate?

Absolutely not, but it is hardly unique to trans specific treatments.

And yet trans people still face harassment and assault from men

Illegally.

More ID and birth certificates so trans people aren't accused of fraud every time they use a bank or locked up if they go through customs in some places

All(?) ID can currently be changed without a GRC. A birth certificate can be changed with a GRC which is not expensive and has concession rates available. It is not particularly onerous either compared to, for example, getting disability benefits.

and yet trans people regularly face abuse and assault in the streets and in workplaces

As do BAME people, and women, and gay men, and disabled people, and....

Transgender people have the same rights as everyone else under the law. Shitty things happen to people in all the protected characteristics unfortunately, despite discrimination being illegal.

Sorry, thread too fast, mine above was in response to more gaslighting re penis in women's shelter

It's very peculiar and it sort of makes me think of 'you lot' as a bit of a hive mind. But I shall try and avoid it in future.

You're going to need to, because it was made very clear on another thread that attacking groups such as trans people and gender critical feminists through negative generalisations isn't going to be tolerated by the moderators. And I'm sure the rules apply to you as much as anyone else.

I support the EA 2010 as it stands.

Including the single sex exemptions?

I don't think anyone is being asked to give up any rights.

Are you serious?

This is still on the Stonewall website.

www.stonewall.org.uk/women-and-equalities-select-committee-inquiry-transgender-equality

And many of those groups frequently get out on the streets in numbers and protest against their rights violations. And I have joined them many times. My point was if the gender critical view is what women want as a collective then why can't you put more than 50 people on the streets? Where are the people risking arrests and livelihoods like there are in other movements? Why aren't there any gender critical activists in jail given you claim to be fighting against the forced extinction of women? It's all a bit insepid don't you think? I'm not sure the Suffragettes would be impressed.

I don't think you've been paying attention, jj.

This just isn't true is it. My point was very clear that that person lived in a shelter for people with severe mental health problems, that there was no way of telling from a few tweets exactly what they had done, that sharing sexually intimate photos of them across the internet without their consent was out of order and quite possibly illegal depending on the country and that the women who ran that project had asked you to stop.

Nope.

This person told us from a few tweets, exactly what they had done.

And you said that they were the one who was 'sexually humiliated' because women were drawing attention to it.

You also said the woman whose business was targeted was a liar, crazy, needs to be subject to ACAS ruling, among other things.

This is the very definition of gaslighting.

Exactly, GrouchyOwl.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

I support the EA 2010 as it stands.

Including the single sex exemptions?

Yes I've said that many times.

@jj1968

And many of those groups frequently get out on the streets in numbers and protest against their rights violations. And I have joined them many times. My point was if the gender critical view is what women want as a collective then why can't you put more than 50 people on the streets? Where are the people risking arrests and livelihoods like there are in other movements? Why aren't there any gender critical activists in jail given you claim to be fighting against the forced extinction of women? It's all a bit insepid don't you think? I'm not sure the Suffragettes would be impressed.

Goady and ill-informed

@GrouchyKiwi

I don't think you've been paying attention, jj.

Shall we count the current court cases?

That's good jj. So you won't mind if the government provide guidance making it explicitly clear that women's rights to privacy and dignity, and risk to women, are things which need to be considered on an equal basis to trans issues when deciding on policy around males in female spaces?

What person, who has all their rights secured and thinks that women have no hope of getting what they want, spends all their live long life on a feminist board, trying to intimidate the women? What's the point?

@Datun

This just isn't true is it. My point was very clear that that person lived in a shelter for people with severe mental health problems, that there was no way of telling from a few tweets exactly what they had done, that sharing sexually intimate photos of them across the internet without their consent was out of order and quite possibly illegal depending on the country and that the women who ran that project had asked you to stop.

Nope.

This person told us from a few tweets, exactly what they had done.

And you said that they were the one who was 'sexually humiliated' because women were drawing attention to it.

You also said the woman whose business was targeted was a liar, crazy, needs to be subject to ACAS ruling, among other things.

This is the very definition of gaslighting.

There's no such thing as an ACAS ruling so of course I didn't say that. I said there are two sides to every story and that I wasn't prepared to immediately accept the testimony of a business owner over their workers in an industrial dispute. What I also said is that from her own statement she made it very clear she had not followed grievance and harassment procedures in line with ACAS standards and as such was at fault in her role as an employer.

Why do have to lie about everything I say?

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

I support the EA 2010 as it stands.

Including the single sex exemptions?

jj1968 supports the Stonewall version. Which is to say, of course jj1968 supports the single-sex exemptions but believes they do not apply to those identifying as trans.

Apart from, obviously believing as demonstrated once again in this thread, that most women don't actually want single-sex provisions, so their loss is no biggie other than for the few misguided women and girls who do. And they don't count.

Shall we count the current court cases?

Oh yes, you're suing a few people, how frightfully middle class.

So feminists are bad if there are no court cases and bad if there are court cases?

Oh yes, you're suing a few people, how frightfully middle class.

It's a lot more effective than protesting on the streets, and you will note that they are funded by hundreds of women paying what small amount they can. Grassroots action from women who care deeply about their rights.

The Facebook post has been removed. It was almost entirely critical of the concept - I expect that’s why. Or maybe complaints were listened to?