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?

OldCrone
Although this is obviously only an opinion, since it was an interviewee who said this, there should have been a clarification in the same podcast that this is not actually true. Many people listening might believe this is true if they aren't well informed about this issue.

I haven’t finished listening to the episode yet but I haven’t noticed any response to the statement yet. It is frustrating because if you only listened to that you might well think he/she/they must know what they’re saying so there obviously aren’t any problems with self-ID.

Do the people who say that really believe it (maybe because they want it to be true) or do they really just not care about the women and children who have been - and will continue to be - affected?

Seriously though. Listening to Episode 4 and the mayor is Soooooo Dullll. I love how the journalist is just letting him witter on.

Just finished episode 5 and burst into tears. Have sent this podcast to all my friends who I think will care.

@bellinisurge

Seriously though. Listening to Episode 4 and the mayor is Soooooo Dullll. I love how the journalist is just letting him witter on.

I'm listening to that. Owen wittering on about bisexual erasure but then does the same themselves by denying bisexuality in favour of pansexuality.

Also I wonder if punks realise they are queer coding with their green hair and unusual dress?

owen is utterly drenched in stereotypes and rather than challenge the existence of gender stereotypes owen embraces and enforces them.

Do the people who say that really believe it (maybe because they want it to be true) or do they really just not care about the women and children who have been - and will continue to be - affected?

Hurcum has never shown any evidence that Hurcum cares about women and children being harmed by this. I first heard about Hurcum during the Senedd election earlier this year when Hurcum harassed Helen Mary Jones (then a Plaid Cymru MS) with accusations of transphobia. (One of her 'crimes' was speaking at a WPUK meeting.)

Hurcum only cares about Hurcum's special non-binary self.

Oooof this is really going for the jugular!

The genderbread person 😆

Jfc this has been bonkers.

Hurcum only cares about Hurcum's special non-binary self.

Yep I am a bit disappointed that owen wasn't asked why internal subjective thoughts about ones own gender should be held in law as more important than objective facts (sex)

Is I am Leo covered?

www.transgendertrend.com/uk-cbbc-childrens-tv-i-am-leo/

I note the date it was first aired and then the date that referrals to Tavi of teen girls exploded.

Also given that Dr Marci Bowers has admitted that social media / media may well have an impact.

abigailshrier.substack.com/p/why-marci-matters

@GrandmaMazur

The non-binary mayor said ‘there have been no problems in any countries that have self-ID as law’ - I do hope this question is put to someone who has seen the evidence in another episode

It needs to be firmly challenged each time.

The problem is that when you're talking to someone already convinced that reality can be an alternative one based on preferred facts while mentally deleting the convenient, contradicting bits of evidence you don't like - why expect them to be able to show a full and balanced view of reality on any other point?

You cannot convince someone who believes this is an appropriate way to go on in society. What you can do is repeatedly demonstrate: this person is saying this in flat out mental denial of all this evidence because they want to believe x.

It's time for people to realise that many of these stated facts are preferred and alternative versions as opposed to the actual truth. As with the suicide statistics: the answer has to be where. From what. When. Published where. What about this evidence.

And demonstrate: you cannot base law or practice that involves compelling people to rearrange their personal reality and deny evidence to create the preferred illusion for someone else.

People who are adherents of this school of thought should not be able to get into positions of responsibility which require duty of care, impartiality and an ability to face and deal with all the objective facts, even the ones they dislike or which threaten their view points.

Listening to Hurcum explaining the way they feel about themself and the people to whom they were attracted, it seemed to me that what was being described was basically the state of being human. Did anyone else find that?

They couldn't actually define their own sexuality I thought. Desperate to make it sound so much more interesting than ot was whilst simultaneously ignoring the actual question

I couldn't make any sense out of what they were saying.

They just sounded horribly confused and utterly certain.

Absolutely agree Artichokeleaves

Whatever else comes out of this, I hope that the BBC and other organisations in positions of authority and power start to ask proper, targeted questions and demand EVIDENCE.

They have been shown up as dupes and credulous fools. They need to acknowledge their failings and prove that they are capable and willing to raise their standards.

I've listened all the way through to episode 4 at which point I had to stop at the sheer tediousness of Owen Hurcum who genuinely seems to think no-one can guess at the sex they was observed to be at birth...

Sonia is Onit:

twitter.com/soniasodha/status/1448400451397898242?s=21

I'm on episode 6. I am absolutely agog. This podcast is aflame!

I managed to get to the halfway point before I ran out of time last night so 6 is queued up ready. I can't wait to go back to listening.

Bell is bliddy fantastic, isn't he?

So clear, honest and open; unfailingly courteous; very fair and balanced; admits where there are areas he may not know everything about; emphasises the need to wait-and-see because a) most children ultimately become content with their birth sex, and b) (important) pushing the trans agenda means that the underlying problems a child is experiencing (and in his profession view, based on his experience in the field, there is INVARIABLY an underlying problem) - these problems are not addressed. Ever. They are swept under the 'trans" carpet and will remain and continue to psychologically affect that child.

I'm a little bit in love.

Great description, @SchadenfreudePersonified . And me too.

Thank you for the reminder for Dysphoric @NecessaryScene, I think I meant to watch that after seeing the - I think Indian - film maker interviewed by one of the GC orgs, and talking about her cancellation.

@Artichokeleaves

People who are adherents of this school of thought should not be able to get into positions of responsibility which require duty of care, impartiality and an ability to face and deal with all the objective facts, even the ones they dislike or which threaten their view points.

As an illustration of how Hurcum is totally unable to see a point of view other than Hurcum's own, a couple of months ago Hurcum offered to pay a fine for a man who was fined for begging.

www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/bangor-mayor-offers-pay-mans-21350032

Hurcum doesn't seem to be able to see this from the point of view of the people who this man was approaching and asking for money.

In the hearing at Caernarfon Magistrates Court, prosecutor Nicola Williams said Marks & Spencer staff reported that a man would sit outside the shop drinking alcohol and that elderly customers were "fearful" of him when he asked them for change.

Hurcum is sympathetic to the man who is asking elderly women for money, but not to those women who might be terrified when a drunk man approaches them and asks for money.

And Hurcum thinks we can't tell what sex Hurcum is because of Hurcum's brightly coloured hair.

It's time for people to realise that many of these stated facts are preferred and alternative versions as opposed to the actual truth. As with the suicide statistics: the answer has to be where. From what. When. Published where. What about this evidence.

Absolutely this. Their allies just keep on quoting this ad infinitum.

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.

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

It's a non existent problem.

I've listened to them all now. I do hope it gets a vast audience. I've also emailed them to thank them for making it.

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.