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?

I've binged ep 1-4, saving the rest for the (long) train journey to FiLiA, tomorrow!
I need to sleep, now

So given the timing, does anyone else think that the investigation and FOIA requests that went into this series are at least partially responsible for the number of orgs that have pulled out of Stonewall?

Good man, Nolan.

Listening to ep10 now and just had a lightbulb moment.

At least 2 charities in NI told me they had to use ‘gender’ in their literature (including monitoring forms and registration forms) because it was a requirement of their funders

Who is a massive funder for charities?

BBC Children in Need

Have the BBC been pressurising charities to use Stonewall language as a pre-requisite for receiving funding?

Charities I might add that are trying to run single sex services to females.

Females like me who may have chosen to self-exclude on the basis that it’s no longer clear if they are single sex services.

And if they have insisted on Stonewall language, have they also insisted on Stonewall’s version of the law, namely that they can’t exclude males identifying as women?

Effectively running down services for women (if women self exclude who will fill the places? Or even trust charities for women that can’t use the word women?)

O.M.F.G

Comic Relief is BBC and mention women and girls but always gender

www.comicrelief.com/what-your-money-does/gender

Sorry that wasn’t clear. I mean that you may be on to something Sacreblue

BBC Children in Need

Have the BBC been pressurising charities to use Stonewall language as a pre-requisite for receiving funding?

Charities I might add that are trying to run single sex services to females.

Unnerving and good thought. CIN is the BBC's corporate charity so it is feasible.

More on funding:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3534389-LGBT-Foundation-one-of-many-charities-to-jump-on-the-publicly-funded-trans-gravy-chain

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3458395-Looks-like-the-National-Lottery-and-Stonewall-have-picked-a-side-in-the-cotton-ceiling-debate

Mayor Owen Hurcum's world salad was so vast it could end world hunger.

It's now been made available for listeners outside of the UK

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p09yjmph/episodes/player

This podcast needs a lot more people to listen to it. I did a search on Facebook and only GC Facebook pages are sharing it.

@Eucalyptustrees

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.

Hahaha v good

I've just finished episode 4 and had to pause at regular points to get through the mayor's monologue. What on earth do even they think they sound like?

Sacreblue bloody hell! The tentacles reach everywhere

mulling over episode 2 over night

Nolan makes the point that he knows a few gay people at the BBC, none of whom are members of the LGBTQ+ network. If gay people working there don't bother with it, then who is it for? Gay people who don't agree with the Stonewall line feel unable to use it.

there seems to be this massive, homophobic assumption that all gay people think the same way that is implicit in well meaning people leaping to do Stonewall's bidding in the name of 'LGBTQ+ rights'

This is really going down with people I had no idea were even interested.

People weren’t interested because it didn’t affect them directly, or the ‘couldn’t see the problem’, or ‘be kiiiiind, be kiiiiiiiind!’. They just can’t ignore it now - now that it’s been given three reign and is playing out to the natural conclusions (word women being taken out of literature around pregnancy, childbirth, cervical cancer, menopause...). Listening to the ‘activists’ promoting this really is like seeing that the emperor has no clothes (and is obviously either bonkers or gaslighting for the hell of it).

@WarriorN

This is really going down with people I had no idea were even interested.

Are more people going to find and visit the naughty corner of MN?

@Mrsjamin

This podcast needs a lot more people to listen to it. I did a search on Facebook and only GC Facebook pages are sharing it.

I agree - it needs to be somehow packaged to attract the sort of audience that only listens to a single favourite music station.

Not that I have a clue how this could be done.

Only managed to get to episode 4 last night, I will binge the rest over the weekend.
That major guy was ridiculous, it was so cringey almost like a parody of all this nonsense.
It’s quite clear how this issue has so many self indulgent hangers on, who never seem to look outside themselves and believe that their thoughts and beliefs should be of supreme importance to everyone.

I really hope this whole story gets reported far and wide, the BBC and others have a lot serious questions to answer.

Ofcom has a huge case to answer and we need a broad investigation by the Charities Commission.

@Mrsjamin we all need to share it. I have shared it to people who have no idea about sex and gender. They hear it rumbling but don’t know what is going on. They are genuinely happy to have it explained to them. Then I shared it with my MP and his wife. Then the CEO of the large company I work for. My friends. My family. The parents of my friends. Some colleagues. It is up to US to get this out there and people listening carefully.

I wonder if there could be a campaign to send this link to all MPs, even if they are not GC they can’t ignore the issue of BBC’s lack of impartiality and use of public money to push an ideological agenda. That is a national scandal.

How do we get this debated in the commons?

I am 15 minutes in to ep 16. Why is it only men discussing the erasure of the word mother so far?

But Ben Cohen is doing their usual… misusing language. There has always been two meanings of the word of mother and father (one meaning for those who have contributed a sperm/egg to offspring and one for the nurturing role) and it never required a change of language. Until now and this concept of language making people ‘unsafe’.

Hurcum was wittering on about the necessity for puberty-blockers, and how awful it was to have to" go through the wrong puberty". I would be very interested to know what is the "right puberty" for "bi-gender, gender fluid, genderfuck, two-spirit, pansexual" etc etc etc" - especially when no-one can even DEFINE what these are.

He also said that the gender-reassignment act "wasn't clear" as it didn't specify that the reassignment had to be surgical/physical, so obviously Stonewall wasn't lying when they said transgender people were a protected group, because of course it could just be "social" gender that is reassigned .

He complained about this lack of clear definition * (as if anyone in their right and could have predicted this sort of bollox arising) and said that government should make it clear (by that he means make it clear that social "reassignment" was included, obviously) - and yet he can't even coherently describe, let alone define his own "gender".

*I have to admit, I do not know exactly how GRA is defined, but I'd be surprised if it doesn't mention surgery and hormones and he is fibbing/unaware. hear how flustered and uncomfortable he is - he speaks so quickly, waffles, blusters - he hasn't got a clue himself what he is talking about.

Yu can

Listened to the first few episodes of this and am hooked.
Totally embarassed for the people who like the mayor who is just a mass of contradictions and waffle; the David Bell interview was gripping; the epsode about erasure of the word 'mother' in Scotland maternity services was rage inducing.

I have just discovered that the company I work for is a Stonewall champion and am bitterly disappointed, but it makes sense now why their 'inclusivity survey' started off with asking about gender and identity.

Hurcum was wittering on about the necessity for puberty-blockers, and how awful it was to have to" go through the wrong puberty". I would be very interested to know what is the "right puberty" for "bi-gender, gender fluid, genderfuck, two-spirit, pansexual" etc etc etc" - especially when no-one can even DEFINE what these are

Recent publication that considers the ethical case for ongoing suppression of puberty:

Notini L, Earp BD, Gillam L, et alForever young? The ethics of ongoing puberty suppression for non-binary adultsJournal of Medical Ethics 2020;46:743-752.

jme.bmj.com/content/46/11/743.abstract

The commentaries in response are interesting.