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?

@WomaninBoots

Got to episode four. The sing song voice telling the kid about the hundred genders just made me want to scream. And the NB Mayor was a gift. He pretty much said that "cis" people are a bunch of stereotypes.

Cis people are a bunch of stereotypes but telling a boy who likes pink that means he's a girl isn't based on stereotypes at all, no way!

I notice TRAs seem to do this projection stuff a lot, almost like whatever they are doing themselves has to be projected out and pinned on to someone else instead.

Listened to the whole thing.

JFC, why does Ben Cohen have to bring up 'I'm Jewish, you know?' In EVERY INTERVIEW?! It's like his personal trump card, except it's a joker and trumps the sum of f all.

Absolutely staggered by the whole thing. I felt frustrated for the first 3 episodes because some things were going by without challenge that I thought really needed to be stabbed there and then, but it actually doubles back quite a lot as it goes through and I think it covers the whole range of issues and positions really well.

It is amazing how an investigation into one lobby group's influence on one organisation can open such an enormous, all encompassing Pandora's Box of fuck in such a short space of time.

I agree that Nolan's interview style makes for so many sunlight opportunities - whether it be arguing a contrary point to David Bell to elicit a thoughtful, knowledgable response or allowing Owen H to vomit alphabetti spaghetti about... i don't know what... I really couldn't follow it. All I know is that he used the word 'community' more times than you can shake a stick at and made it sound like a tale of 'I had no friends and I was sad. Then I went online and found some friends and now we're all special together' (i.e. quite sad, really)

It was stunning altogether.

And although none of it surprised me. Many of us have been aware that this must be going on for a while now - it was just glorious to hear it all laid bare.

'No debate' (or engagement) from SW or the BBC. Not shocked.

Just finished ep 3.

It is quite interesting to hear Ruth Hunt unapologetically stating Stonewall is a non-democratic organisation. I wonder what would make them change tack at this point and seek any sort of compromise. Or are they so deeply entrenched that they can never compromise.

JFC, why does Ben Cohen have to bring up 'I'm Jewish, you know?' In EVERY INTERVIEW?

It made cohens attempt to explain 2 spirit even more bizarre, which really was something

Episode 3 has clarified for me that I too can now be special: I'm agender.

Episode 4!

The journalist who wrote that article is Thompson from the podcast. I find it significant that they're giving him rein to hammer home how serious this is rather than handing it over to someone who will toe the usual BBC line.
Thank you nauticant, I missed that.

Finally the wheels re starting to come off the Stonewall juggernaut by virtue of good old fashioned journalism. Well done to Thompson and his colleagues for doing what journalists are meant to do - shining a light on abuses of power and corruption wherever it resides.
And well done for their skills in enabling so much self revelation by such skilful questioning.

The BBC are now reporting on the investigation.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58917227.amp

It surreal that they admit in the article the BBC wouldn’t provide certain pieces of information for the investigation. I suppose they’re getting it all out there so they can say they’ve been upfront, whilst still not preociding the info

Here's a twitter search showing what Stephen Nolan is getting in incoming tweets:

twitter.com/search?q=(to%3Astephennolan)%20until%3A2021-10-15&src=typed_query&f=live

Overwhelming in number showing HUGE interest in this work, overwhelming in support of the work, and where tweets express dislike, well, they look like they're coming from unhinged people.

Many journalists are going to be looking on in envy.

I think comments can be sent to the BBC complaints page (there is a comments tab) as well as directly to the producers [email protected]

I will be doing both, simply because I'm so bloody grateful someone who works at the BBC knows how to do journalism (Newsnight notwithstanding).

About bloody time.

Episode 4!

Oh yes… just finishing it now.

I am sure that OH has no idea just how completely superficial they made NB sound. All about stereotypes.

And said the quiet bit out loud. ‘Queer coding’ mmmm! And signaling belonging to a particular community.

I can’t dispel the sense that none of them know what others even mean when they use these labels?

@Helleofabore

Just finished ep 3.

It is quite interesting to hear Ruth Hunt unapologetically stating Stonewall is a non-democratic organisation. I wonder what would make them change tack at this point and seek any sort of compromise. Or are they so deeply entrenched that they can never compromise.

Just thinking….

Stonewall achieved the end of section 28 and then gay marriage. Then they had to find a new funding stream.

How far would they have to go on trans rights before reaching the same point? And would they actually want to reach that point?

It made cohens attempt to explain 2 spirit even more bizarre, which really was something

Surely, as two spirit is the uber explainer that makes the whole of gender identity a thing, the CEO of THE gender identity news platform would be able to educate like the CEO he is.

No, apparently he's just heard about it from someone else.

NDAs are used to protect intellectual capital.

I can understand the protection of training material/methodologies. however, the content is the key. These institutions were told by Stonewall to erase the word "mother", "woman" introduce pro noun use etc. I don't care what bullshit, blue sky thinking thought exercise they used to train staff to do this. I want to know the reasoning and evidence they used to persuade these institutes that this was the correct/legal/ethical thing to do, and I want to know who signed off on it.

@Helleofabore

I can’t dispel the sense that none of them know what others even mean when they use these labels?

Of course they don't. There's no room in the chat about who they are for listening to any other they.

Ideally you'd need to see the NDAs. When they're properly written they have a defined scope and often from that you can discern something about what they're intended to achieve.

Stonewall achieved the end of section 28 and then gay marriage. Then they had to find a new funding stream.

How far would they have to go on trans rights before reaching the same point? And would they actually want to reach that point?

Perhaps their grand plan is to grind biological women (the ordinary kind, none of the fancy identities) so far into the ground that eventually, we become the most marginalised. Stonewall can then sweep in and "rescue" us via some expensive, Ponzi, workplace training schemes.

@refusetobeasheep

Episode 4!

It can identify as episode 3 if you like

This is doing my head in how people just slip from talking about male/female to masculine/feminine.
What has one got to do with the other? seriously?

In general, the absolute lack of substance behind any of the language. There's just nothing there. There's talking about male and female then the rest of it conveys zero information. None.

Wow, absolutely loving the way you have to wear the right clothes and have the right hair to be seen correctly as how they are. (Queer-coding as mentioned above).

This is disgusting. To deny that you care about physicality while in the same breath saying how essential it is that you look a certain way.

I've never heard Ruth Hunt speak before. I have read her words but not heard her voice.

Is it just me or is she really quite U?!

If they say 'it means different things to different people' one more time I'll scream.

None of then know what any of the words they use means!

Surely by now Jolyon Maugham will have launched a crowd funder to pay him talk about to suing everyone at the BBC in the press?

I await the new committee being set up.