14th October 'Nolan Investigates' podcast - Stonewall?

[Helleofabore]

This sounds interesting.

A special ‘Nolan Investigates’ podcast drops tomorrow afternoon on @BBCSounds. An 18 month investigation into the influence of a lobby group on public bodies throughout the UK. More details in the morning

It seems to be about Stonewall.

Anyone know more about it?

There is some chatter about it on Twitter.

twitter.com/stephennolan/status/1448052827088109568?s=21

twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1448205588253618176?s=21

(Tweet from JCJ says:

Okay, at last, here it is.

The BBC Ulster documentary on the influence of Stonewall on public life in the UK.

Many GC women have been interviewed for this.

Let's take the lid off this thing shall we?

Ben Cohen is a terrible communicator. In episode 6 he's asked a simple question and responds by meandering through a couple of anecdotes without seeming to answer the question. Hard to understand what he's saying. Same with Horcum. So many words, so little sense.

everythingcrossed I think this is an established podcast that covers lots of different topics and has an existing fanbase, so the in-jokes between the presenters is part of their dynamic and presumably one of the things their regular listeners enjoy. A podcast is very different in tone and format to a documentary, which is partly why they can expose so much, so effectively.

(I'm just starting Episode 4 with the delightful "I don't know my chromosomes" Owen, but feel they could have got as far as Benjamin Cohen saying 'I'm no expert" and dropped the mic on a useful piece of work.)

I thought that it was extremely hyperbolic and spent time fannying around with "gotchas" (should LGBT people be represented by non-LGBT allies?)

I think the point of this, which it took them a while to spell out, was that Stonewall themselves no longer endorsed that position. However the BBC, having once been told about allies being better by Stonewall, didn't stop to question how offensive that was because it was treating Stonewall advice as gospel instead of thinking for themselves.

I've only listened to a bit of ep 4 and had to stop because the sheer idiocy of Owen was just depressing. Apparently 'man' and 'woman' and 'male' and 'female' no longer mean anything as you can't tell someone's chromosomes, and yet Owen is adamant that they definitely aren't a man or a woman.
This theme repeats again and again. TRAs desperately stripping language of any meaning so that words become simply an arrangement of letters, and yet they still feel so passionately about those words, which ones they disavow and which ones they claim.
Also the fucking gall of a male person saying sex isn't important. Sure, mate. You're part of the sex that commits 98% of sex crimes and 96% of worldwide murders. You'll never have a period, a smear test, or give birth to a child. But sex isn't important. Arrogant, ignorant little toerag.

so the in-jokes between the presenters is part of their dynamic and presumably one of the things their regular listeners enjoy.

And I get the impression that they know this series is big, so they're taking time out to re-establish who they are for a whole load of people (including internationally) who will be encountering them for the first time.

Which is maybe resulting in them overegging it a bit. Only up to episode 2 - hoping it settles down :)

Ben thinks that the women who want to keep the word ''mother'' are a 'very vocal minority' and he'd like to see a poll.

Let's have a poll. You'd be in for a massive shock, Ben.

What is Hurcum expecting to be protected though? Not being a man or a woman? Protected from what?

I'm just listening to this bit now. Owen wants to know whether, if they are murdered, it would be a hate crime. Presumably being the victim of an ordinary murder (one of those commonplace ones which claim 3 women a week as victims, dismissed by extreme porn advocate Jane Fae as 'boring and pedestrian') wouldn't be special enough.

The other example Owen gives is, what if Owen was expelled by their university on the basis of their gender - would the law protect them?

These are the luxury, navel-gazing, abstract micro-concerns of someone born with a immense amount of structural privilege who wants to enjoy that and claim special victim status as well.

I thought that it was extremely hyperbolic and spent time fannying around with "gotchas" (should LGBT people be represented by non-LGBT allies?)

I also noticed some really obvious points they seem to have missed. But to be fair they haven't been submerged in this for years like many on this board, to me it comes across as an intereu point randomly gets picked up, and then they just go down the rabbit hole. It's as if they are just following leads, investigating and reporting, rather than putting a complete story together from existing sources. I think this is probably a good thing, and will make a lot of people new to this think.

@nauticant

I'll stick with it and see if it gets any better but, based on what I have listened to, I don't think it will change anyone's mind.

They launched their investigation and during it, while trying to avoid responding to FOI requests and trying to run away in other ways, the BBC appear to have decided to move away from Stonewall.

Nolan comes across as a bit of an arse and apparently unsophisticated and uncouth. This scandal won't be exposed by people who present and behave nicely.

This could be why Hurcum and Cohen agreed to be interviewed. They think he is just some hick from the sticks local radio bloke they can mess around. But he is one shrewd operator , well able for these lads. Nolan has been an unofficial mouthpiece for the Ulster Unionists so I'd say he knows a lot about lobbyists. Help from any quarter much appreciated though!

Has Nolan blamed Bobby Storey yet?

He is unlistenable now on Radio Ulster due to his loyalist tendencies and bias. BUT I am really glad he and his team have produced this podcast. Nolan, for all his faults, is a very influential figure in broadcasting.

@dolorsit

I have to admit I have had to pause listening to episode 4, just after the explanation that having green can be an example of queer coding.

Obviously unaware of punks, goths and alternatives.

Or old wimmin with over-bleached hair.

Mine's gone green before

I think the format suits the issue well. We're drenched in this stuff, most people aren't .. it actually takes a long time to explain this topic, it's so multi stranded and so mad. Stephen playing dumb with his innocent questions will open a few eyes. I'm incredibly grateful to them for making it.

And Nolan is also a really good interviewer, his interview with Bell is a masterclass. Very impressive.

I agree that it's good that they are keeping it entertaining and lighthearted. It will get a far wider audience listening to the issues and asking questions for the first time.

@everythingcrossed

Sorry to be an agnostic about this podcast - I've listened to the first two episodes and, while I consider myself GC, I thought that it was extremely hyperbolic and spent time fannying around with "gotchas" (should LGBT people be represented by non-LGBT allies?) rather than spelling out the issues at hand. It also keeps bigging up the presenter, rather than just getting on with the meat of the situation. I'll stick with it and see if it gets any better but, based on what I have listened to, I don't think it will change anyone's mind.

I too thought that the first 2 episodes fell a bit short, but I think they are setting the scene more than anything; It's about 2 naive employees of the BBC suddenly realising that something is going on and a change of culture has crept up on them. I think it's setting up the context as to how the investigation began - they are not strident GC feminists or particularly invested in LGBTQ+. They are just ordinary Joes, looking at their own employer, the BBC, and following the trail from there. Stick with it. 3 and 4 set up the bat-shittery of self ID and none binary. Episodes 5 and 6 are mind blowing, and totally what the GC cause has been trying to get people to understand for years. Am about to listen to 7, I feel very hopeful the following episodes will be just as good.

I thought it was refreshing to hear actual investigative journalism instead of opinion pieces or journalism which automatically begins with the viewpoint that anyone critical of gender ideology is an uneducated, hateful bigot.

It also made me think about all the emphasis organisations put into staff pronouns and rainbow badges when higher pay, secure employment and guaranteed holiday and sick pay would improve so many workers' lives. The BBC uses talent pools, which is just another term for zero-hour contracts, and many of the people actually involved in making programmes, as opposed to head-office based jobs, are employed via agencies or on short-term contracts. Diversity and social mobility would be far better served by tangibly better employment practices instead of schemes of negligible value.

Yes esma

It’s weird how rules are being enforced on made up stuff like gender identity

Who made up this gender identity stuff and mangeD to get governments. Council’s business's industry politicians to believe it

Quite mind blowing

Who decided all the 100 plus genders. And got people to go along with it

Also who made up the pronoun stuff ?

Omg episode 4.

You are quite right EsmaCannonball. The BBC wastes a lot on such nonsense , including scams like Stonewall. Also some of the presenters salaries are eye watering. I just Googled Nolan there as I only know him by reputation , living in Cork as I do. £405, 000 per annum.

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/q7haca/the_bbc_is_going_after_stonewall/?sort=confidence

For anyone interested in how it's being received on the "feminism should centre men" site.

Episode 7 - about the law - am punching the air and tap-dancing on the kitchen floor!

How exciting, I'll listen to this later. Glad it's getting sunlight and it sounds promising!

Episode 7, about Stonewall making up amendments to the Equality Act, really shows Benjamin Cohen up for the clueless hack that he is.

@NecessaryScene

Bell is bliddy fantastic, isn't he?

If you want to see more of him, check out the documentary on YouTube. Quite a lot of him in there, and I don't think it's got enough attention.

Thank you.

I will.