James O'Brien discussing Lauren Hubbard NOW

[ScreamingBeans]

08456 060 973

www.lbc.co.uk/

Who is he talking to? Arguing over what words meant in the 1950s is somewhat pointless.

He’s just another man telling women they are fascists for pointing out biological sex exists.

Wow. Such bad faith argument from JOB. I think he just called the caller a facist.

Obviously someone who is always playing Devil's advocate. Argument for argument's sake with no interest in getting to the truth. Pathetic.

Dreadful. I'm sorry but if you don't have experience in dealing with antagonistic interviewers (ie media trained) I'm not sure you do the debate much good.
The rising pitch against his somewhat bored drawl, then the way he cut her off with a smirk "we got there in the end".
Just painful.

JOB is an utter twat on this issue. Always has been. You might as well listen to shon Faye on the subject for all the objectivity JOB brings to it

What I found interesting though, is how JOB clearly doesn't believe Laurel H is a woman. If he did, there wouldn't be any need to discuss if this woman should be allowed to compete in the Olympics against other women.

I am never sure if these anti-women activists are cynical liars or just so deeply embedded in cognitive dissonance that they can't escape.

It illustrates nicely how some men are just enjoying the chance to suppress women and their interests, and delight in their anger and helplessness, under a veneer of being righteous. The misogyny is utterly blatant.

Yep.

I was out with a couple of friends a while ago and we were chatting about Laurel Hubbard.

Some bloke who had been sitting nearby for about 15 minutes and eavesdropping, got up when her cab arrived, shouted "transphobe!" at us and ran off like the coward he is. He'd had at least 15 minutes to engage in a civilised conversation/ debate if he'd wanted, but name-calling women was preferable, obviously.

What struck me there, is that men like that know exactly what a woman is when they want to abuse someone in the street without the risk of being lamped. He would not have said that to a man, purely and simply because he might have got a challenge in the form of a fist in the face. He knew absolutely that that wouldn't happen with women, so he was free to be abusive to us in public without the risk of male violence. They know what a woman is while pretending we're unreasonable for knowing it too.

The cowardice and dishonesty of these men is staggering.

How old was he out of interest? I'd guess 30s or under.

Disappointed that it seems JOB hasn't woken up to this problem yet, despite numerous attempts to enlighten him.

@Freespeecher yes I reckon he was around 30.

@GNCQ I think JOB may need a man to make him aware, he's got that selective male deafness about women's voices.

Laurel Hubbard failed right away. Her failure proved once and for all that the entire panic about "male advantage" and "males dominating sports" is completely unfounded.

Laurel Hubbard failed right away. Her failure proved once and for all that the entire panic about "male advantage" and "males dominating sports" is completely unfounded.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Did Laurel Hubbard "dominate the sport" or not?

@BluebirdsSong

Laurel Hubbard failed right away. Her failure proved once and for all that the entire panic about "male advantage" and "males dominating sports" is completely unfounded.

Yes. Wasn't it incredibly accidentally useful to the arguments of male born athletes and their future stake in women's sports that it happened that way? Most unexpected.

Whatever Hubbard did at that competition, Hubbard blocked a female from competing - incidentally a working class indigenous young female, who was pushed out of her Olympic chance by a white, very affluent middle aged male. That in itself is beyond unacceptable if you actually care about equality and inclusion.

@BluebirdsSong

Did Laurel Hubbard "dominate the sport" or not?

No Laurel did not dominant - but Laurel is 40 odd and carrying a career threatening injury. An injured 40+ in a sport dominated by 20 somethings proves nothing other than that that individual is way past their prime.

Laurel Hubbard has in the past lifted more than the lift that won the gold, so could easily have dominated.

Laurel made a transparently pathetic attempt at the lift. The whole demeanour was not if someone who had worked for years to get to the olympics and then couldn't perform on the day. The smirk, the giggle, the heart sign. Too smug. She threw it on purpose.

Olympics, Swimming - Mixed 4x100m Medley Relay Final: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p09pxz6t via @bbciplayer

No advantage? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

How many injured 40 something women were at the Olympics?

Did any qualify?

I mean, if Hubbard is a woman (by your reckoning) then how come more unfit 40+ women aren’t competing?

We’re there many injured 40+ men competing in the men’s events? I don’t know.

@BluebirdsSong

Laurel Hubbard failed right away. Her failure proved once and for all that the entire panic about "male advantage" and "males dominating sports" is completely unfounded.

Apropos of Absolutely Nothing At All, Im thinking we should have a FWR readathon.

Wild swans and Animal Farm? Just to remind us how important is that we think the RIGHT thoughts and not accidentally let slip anything incorrect.

Followed by 1984 and maybe One Day in the Live of Ivan Denisovitch.

Laurel Hubbard failed cos they're shit.

The fact that they were at the olympics at all is the proof of advantage.

@BluebirdsSong

Laurel Hubbard failed right away. Her failure proved once and for all that the entire panic about "male advantage" and "males dominating sports" is completely unfounded.

I’m sorry, what?