Woman's Hour now: BBC walking away from Stonewall

[nauticant]

Emma Barnett is asking the questions.

@WhereYouLeftIt

I'm actually looking forward to Anita Rani's show tomorrow. She's full-on TWAW - it could be interesting. I stopped listening on Fridays after she tweeted this.

After all, it's possible she's wised up too - EB was a bit TWAW at first. I do find myself wondering - was EB toeing the BBC line of the time, was she a secret terf, of was she TWAW until this gig has exposed her to what's going on?

I complained to BBC about her lack of impartiality after she tweeted that.

“@TheCountessofFitzdotterel
We know that gay men were also over represented (and have been for years) at the BBC.“

Please would you elaborate? Are gay men over represented at the BBC compared to their representation in companies in general?
Or over represented compared to their presence in other creative industries?

Gay men have often, as generally less conforming people, been attracted to creative pursuits. I don’t believe it is just because they were discriminated against in other more conservative jobs, though that must have a bearing too.

Wow. Just listened on catch-up.

That was like listening to a snake being pinned down with forked sticks.
Go Emma. It's been a long time coming but you are totally nailing it.

I'm back on board with WH. Except for Anita Rani's Fluffy Fridays which are like being force fed candyfloss. Her unprofessional and partisan TWAW tweet was the last straw.

@Datun

They should have run the entire thing past the Director of Better.

Amateurs.

So true. For those who missed: job description

@NewlyGranny

If you think about other things we learn, like driving, say, you don't expect to be paying for and receiving ongoing training every year, do you? You put what you earned first time round into practice and get on with it!

If you mess up you get sent back for a refresher, but your whole organisation doesn't have to sit in and pay for it.

Unless what you're learning is such nonsense on stilts that the content keeps shifting and growing, of course, meaning what you learned last year at great expense is now completely wrong and highly offensive ...

I had a similar experience with certain kinds of training, particularly anti-harassment training, in the military. Most of which was completely what you'd expect even if you were doing it for the first time. The standard however was changed every few years so everyone would have to be retrained.

Another that was quite similar was safety training.

What I came to realize is that it was about two things. Ass-covering, with a sub-section of liability, and continuing to provide employment for various groups and HR people. Every year the safety people would get together and say - what can we make more safe? Because you can always do better.

It almost makes one want to cry when you think about the real, useful things we might accomplish instead.

You've got to them love them a bit for this.

Listening on catchup, this is brilliant!

So true. For those who missed: job description

That’s got to be a parody. Please tell me it’s a parody.

After listening to the interview with the Nations person - man - I did listen to the rest of the programme. V. good. Immeasurably better than the drivel of yore. (I’m an old lady and have no time for yummy cooking, celebrity cat cafes, yarn bombing escapades or the other stuff WH has been featuring for about three decades now.)

Thank you nauticant, that was brilliant. I really enjoyed listening to the squirming. Go Emma!

My god that was a pregnant pause!

Ah thank goodness it was a parody. But I had to scroll down a bit to be sure. Nothing - no amount of nonsense - would surprise me nowadays.

Dear oh dear, what a pathetic pathetic BBC response to good questions from EB.

NewlyGranny
If you think about other things we learn, like driving, say, you don't expect to be paying for and receiving ongoing training every year, do you? You put what you earned first time round into practice and get on with it!

Lots of us — nurses, doctors, gas engineers, electricians — have to pay to be registered and have to be assessed every so often, for which we also pay.

@Shedbuilder

NewlyGranny If you think about other things we learn, like driving, say, you don't expect to be paying for and receiving ongoing training every year, do you? You put what you earned first time round into practice and get on with it!

Lots of us — nurses, doctors, gas engineers, electricians — have to pay to be registered and have to be assessed every so often, for which we also pay.

Pretty much anyone with any sort of regulation or accredition has to keep learning and, at the least, recording their learning.

Most jobs - even the "lowest" - would probably benefit from trying to learn and keep up to date with current best practice.

Drivers should have to do theory tests every 5 or 10 years IMHO, and there's worse ideas that 5 yearly or 10 yearly tests.

There’s a difference between paying to keep up registration/accreditation with an established professional body and paying for the privilege of adhering to semi-fictitious rules made up by a lobbying body that exist mainly to further its bank balance.

@borntobequiet

There’s a difference between paying to keep up registration/accreditation with an established professional body and paying for the privilege of adhering to semi-fictitious rules made up by a lobbying body that exist mainly to further its bank balance.

There is... and established professional bodies often - in my opinion - give the impression of being a lobbying body that exist mainly to further its bank balance.

I so want to listen to this but I knew this bloke when I was young and he was an absolute fupnunt, don't think I can bear to listen to his voice after all these years.

@Polynerd

I so want to listen to this but I knew this bloke when I was young and he was an absolute fupnunt, don't think I can bear to listen to his voice after all these years.

It’s worth it, if only to hear him be decisively pwned by Emma.

Dame Jenni has tweeted.

twitter.com/whjm/status/1458849960443756550

Thanks all for support but to be clear I wasn’t sacked. I quit because my 33 years of impartiality on air was no longer trusted!

And as one wise woman comments in the replies And yet all the time it was you who could see clearly and impartially. Thank you for all those years.

[quote FannyCann]Oh dear. Seems quite a lot of BBC workers are about to discover no one is indispensable and jobs with prestigious organisations may not be quite so easy to find just now.

BBC staff vow to QUIT over plans to end Stonewall relationship
mol.im/a/10191733[/quote]
When I graduated jobs at the BBC were like gold dust. Funny to think someone would leave over these issues. Might be good for impartiality if they do leave though.

it's the easiest thing in the world NOT to discriminate

Have to say I disagree with this. We all have biases, some unconscious, I don't think there's anything wrong with being shown how to identify these and actively work to reduce discrimination which might not even be noticed (see Invisible Women for all kinds of examples).

WH was interesting and well done to Emma for pushing on some vague answers. While I agree he wasn't to be expected to make black-and-white decisions on specific out-of-context wording on the fly, it was a great opportunity to air some examples of what might actually be seen as terrrribly sensitive, like calling someone a woman, etc. I imagine a fair proportion of listeners wouldn't have even known some of this wording was used/was a problem.

@WinterTrees

Dame Jenni has tweeted.

twitter.com/whjm/status/1458849960443756550

Thanks all for support but to be clear I wasn’t sacked. I quit because my 33 years of impartiality on air was no longer trusted!

And as one wise woman comments in the replies And yet all the time it was you who could see clearly and impartially. Thank you for all those years.

I wonder if anyone at the BBC takes note of or cares about how many women in those replies to her tweet say they stopped listening to WH after Dame Jenni left?

Dame Jenni has also tweeted to Stephen Nolan

My hero! Keep on keeping on!

twitter.com/whjm/status/1458581489449328643?s=20

[quote FannyCann]Oh dear. Seems quite a lot of BBC workers are about to discover no one is indispensable and jobs with prestigious organisations may not be quite so easy to find just now.

BBC staff vow to QUIT over plans to end Stonewall relationship
mol.im/a/10191733[/quote]
Say what you like about the Daily Mail, but the subheading refers to Stonewall as a “controversial trans group” which is absolutely correct. It’d be good if more media outlets did that, rather than referring to them as a gay-rights charity or similar.

I am going on to war footing next week on our style guide which is straight from SW, and in which i am a cis woman and opposite gender attracted. This broadcast has made it just that bit easier. Thanks emma.