Woman's Hour 18/11/2021 Nancy Kelley CEO of Stonewall

[Abitofalark]

From the programme notes:

"Nancy Kelley is CEO of Stonewall, the largest LGBT rights charity in Europe. She speaks to Emma about her organisation’s work and gives her reaction to recent high-profile withdrawals from Stonewall’s Diversity Champions workplace inclusion scheme, including the BBC."

Hmmm...yes, we've heard - and dissected - the previous pronouncement from that quarter about the BBC pulling out of the Stonewall scheme. Let's see what waffle and spin come out in this interview.

TeamRex As a nearly 60 yr old lesbian who was involved in activism before Stonewall was even formed, I had the same reservations. Apart from anything else, I thought the in-your-face defiance of the sentiment a little outdated; more appropriate to, say, 1987 and the vicious and lethal mismanagement of the AIDS crisis than 2007 when a lot of ground had already been won.

They still can't read a room..

How it has got this far without someone in authority saying "You have the reasoning of a four-year-old", I do not know.

Stonewallians wouldn't consider this a problem. After all, according to them, the average four-year-old has more than enough emotional and intellectual maturity to declare themselves trans, and their schools and parents should support them on their chosen pathway to medical, and probably sexual, exploitation.

Just listened to this. Thought it was brilliant. I thought EB was extremely generous to let NK talk about anything other than the shitshow stonewall has created around itself. I agree with the pp who said there will have been some conditions for the interview, which were probably, you have to ask me about this other campaign, can't ask me what a woman is etc. But EB did such a brilliant job.

When she said, "I stand with JK Rowling... is trending on twitter," did anyone else think that pause was meaningful?! For a second I thought, omg is she actually saying that? Hahaha!

Brilliant interview, cheered me right up and I love, love, love all this sunlight!

@CompleteGinasaur

TeamRex As a nearly 60 yr old lesbian who was involved in activism before Stonewall was even formed, I had the same reservations. Apart from anything else, I thought the in-your-face defiance of the sentiment a little outdated; more appropriate to, say, 1987 and the vicious and lethal mismanagement of the AIDS crisis than 2007 when a lot of ground had already been won.

They still can't read a room..

‘We’re gay and it’s none of your business, any more than your personal life is my business’ would make more sense, but obviously isn’t a pithy sound bite.

The Lib Dems, Labour, Greens will look like absolute idiots and only the Tories will have been able to say "we never thought that". And we'll be stuck with a Tory government forever because we'll lose all the people with potential but not enough gumption to say what they know to be true.

My guess, one of Labour/LD/Green will cling to the line. The other two will abandon, dump the Stonewall advisors and the people taken in by them, and try to rebuild. TRAs will flock to the 'one true party'. And they will be consigned to electoral oblivion

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

It is interesting what was NOT said on today's interview, the questions which were not asked.

I'm convinced that the House of Lords has a plan behind this - get the podcast out, get WH done, push for a news night or force Andrew Marr to do an interview - get public enquiry through in the full headlights of the media.

That's where they'll have to define what a woman is. And so will the politicians who are upholding this nonsense. The Lib Dems, Labour, Greens will look like absolute idiots and only the Tories will have been able to say "we never thought that". And we'll be stuck with a Tory government forever because we'll lose all the people with potential but not enough gumption to say what they know to be true.

Well if they haven't got the gumption to say what a woman is then they shouldn't be in any position of power or responsibility. If they haven't got enough political nous to realise that this is the only battle worth fighting right now, then they don't deserve to be in power.

I live in Scotland and this stuff scares the shit out of me. I want the SNP to be completely discredited by all this but I fear we're rapidly becoming the woke annex to the UK, that what we'll actually get is independence, cut loose from the mainland, and women's rights will be destroyed.

When she said, "I stand with JK Rowling... is trending on twitter," did anyone else think that pause was meaningful?! For a second I thought, omg is she actually saying that? Hahaha!
Definitely a meaningful pause I reckon. I thought exactly the same.
What a breath of fresh air EB is and what a brilliant journalist.

@Awkwardy

The Lib Dems, Labour, Greens will look like absolute idiots and only the Tories will have been able to say "we never thought that". And we'll be stuck with a Tory government forever because we'll lose all the people with potential but not enough gumption to say what they know to be true.

My guess, one of Labour/LD/Green will cling to the line. The other two will abandon, dump the Stonewall advisors and the people taken in by them, and try to rebuild. TRAs will flock to the 'one true party'. And they will be consigned to electoral oblivion

SNP also down the trans rabbit hole.

Even if Labour did do an about-turn, I wouldn't trust them.

@TamzinGrey

When she said, "I stand with JK Rowling... is trending on twitter," did anyone else think that pause was meaningful?! For a second I thought, omg is she actually saying that? Hahaha! Definitely a meaningful pause I reckon. I thought exactly the same. What a breath of fresh air EB is and what a brilliant journalist.

💜💚🤍 Emma!

NK’s upward inflection is very very irritating. Either she’s spent too much time watching Neighbours or she’s doing it deliberately, to sound less assertive. Her statements sound like questions.

It was wrong if NK to more or less say that JKR should not have voiced her opinions because she has too high a profile not to cause harm. What about the idea that all it takes for a wrong to flourish is a good person to say nothing? ( About safe spaces for women, about not harming young people’s bodies etc)

Also it was misleading of her to say that though JKR, as a well known figure, should not speak of women in a refuge needing a space without men/TW in it, of course an ordinary woman asking for it should be helped. What is happening is that they may not be helped. What if they don’t dare ask? There was a thread on here only the other day where a victim of sexual assault or rape was not allowed a space without TW in the crisis centre ( though TWs could had the option if their own space or the men’s space too) as that would be against the policy of inclusion of the rape crisis centre. So where is the help available for that woman in reality.

As for Scotland not having removed the word ‘woman’ following criticism from SW over terms of sex, there is a thread tonight about a current Scottish cervical cancer screening letter which does not mention ‘woman’. So was what we were told at the end of WH true?

What about the fact that there had to be a House of Lords debate, and a fight, to keep the word ‘ mother’ in a bill? Presumably the influence that made some people want it omitted came from Stonewall?

Listening to this now. Haven’t RTFT yet….but bloody hell!!!! Emma is on fire and Nancy is incoherent and inconsistent. And I suspect her mealy mouthed, ‘I don’t know about that, please be kind’ is not going to please the TRAs because as we know it is complete kowtowing to the ideology or be treated as a gender apostate. As for anyone else who’s not up to speed on this she wouldn’t be persuading to her cause.

Hoping Emma gets on to Alison Bailey and Stonewall’s influence there.

Loved that interview.

TBH NK came over as, let's say, lacking in intellectual heft. And the giggling and the mumsiness and the upward inflection were bloody grating.

James Kirkup has a different, and rather generous, take in the Spectator:

www.spectator.co.uk/article/in-praise-of-stonewall

Grumpyosaurus
“And the giggling and the mumsiness and the upward inflection were bloody grating.”

But it all gives the impression that, “I am gentle? I am kind? Nothing I say is unreasonable? [and my voice is so high and sweet no one will quite hear what I am saying]…..are you a little strident and aggressive by comparison, Emma?”

And that will probably work with lots of people?

Hem hem.

[quote JustSpeculation]James Kirkup has a different, and rather generous, take in the Spectator:

www.spectator.co.uk/article/in-praise-of-stonewall[/quote]
Another good article from James. He's right to acknowledge that if Stonewall are moving on from #nodebate, then that's a good thing. If they can be dragged urged to engage with the discussions about competing rights, third spaces, safeguarding children and vulnerable women instead of all the hate and accusations they've been throwing at everyone who dares to raise questions, then that's a win.

I wish I had a transcript of the interview to go over all the instances of contradictions and nonsense that didn't add up. I can only remember bits and pieces that flit through my mind randomly.

One of the things I forgot to mention earlier was the bit where she seemed to be saying that it would be acceptable to have separate services without men (I think this was in connection with refuges but someone here will correct me if not), so long as everyone could have access to services.

This struck me as disingenuous, since if that were indeed the Stonewall position, there would have been no need for the mantra of TWAW, insisting on rights to women's spaces and all the aggro and bother about erasing words for women and the indoctrination of organisations all over the land. What is this if not trying to get off the hook when confronted about its stance?

@Hazelnut5

The latest cervical cancer screening campaign in Scotland does not use the word ‘woman’. It’s ‘those eligible’ or ‘anyone with a cervix’. www.gov.scot/news/cervical-screening-campaign/

I’ve had a lot of ads for it, and they’re all the same. No mention of woman anywhere.

I wrote to my MSP to complain and got a feeble reply back which completely missed the issue: It is important to note that not only women are eligible for a cervical screening appointment. Trans men, non-binary people, and intersex people may also be eligible to attend and it is important that the wording of the campaign reflects this.

So much for NK saying the Scottish Government hasn’t erased gendered terminology.

This is unforgivable. It's of a piece with Camden Council slapping themselves on the back for painting a rainbow crossing on a road which is a positive danger to people with vision problems as their assistance dogs can't make any sense of it. The RNIB and others pointed this out but it was more important to make a statement in Pride month.

I would say that putting people's lives at risks for no good reason is a lot closer to literal violence than stating that menopause only affects women, to pick one example at random.

@Abitofalark

I wish I had a transcript of the interview to go over all the instances of contradictions and nonsense that didn't add up. I can only remember bits and pieces that flit through my mind randomly.

One of the things I forgot to mention earlier was the bit where she seemed to be saying that it would be acceptable to have separate services without men (I think this was in connection with refuges but someone here will correct me if not), so long as everyone could have access to services.

This struck me as disingenuous, since if that were indeed the Stonewall position, there would have been no need for the mantra of TWAW, insisting on rights to women's spaces and all the aggro and bother about erasing words for women and the indoctrination of organisations all over the land. What is this if not trying to get off the hook when confronted about its stance?

You can re-hear the programme via BBC sounds app or here www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007qlvb

@ScrollingLeaves

Grumpyosaurus “And the giggling and the mumsiness and the upward inflection were bloody grating.”

But it all gives the impression that, “I am gentle? I am kind? Nothing I say is unreasonable? [and my voice is so high and sweet no one will quite hear what I am saying]…..are you a little strident and aggressive by comparison, Emma?”

And that will probably work with lots of people?

I wonder if it works better with younger people. I'm 60 and I found the endless upswings at the end of sentences and the faux folksy manner absolutely infuriating.

[quote JustSpeculation]James Kirkup has a different, and rather generous, take in the Spectator:

www.spectator.co.uk/article/in-praise-of-stonewall[/quote]
James does what many in the media do: refer to 'the trans debate' - which he opens with: "This morning saw a profound breakthrough in the trans debate." and repeats later - but the rest of his article goes on to show why that is a misomer. If only there had been debate, is the thrust of it. I mean, there are other objections too, notably that the non-debate 'debate' is as much about women's rights as trans. Hey media, how about mentioning those?

But he does point out some of the more egregious things Kelley has come out with, such as putting 'gender critical' views with things that are outlawed, instancing anti Semitism, among others. The more you look at that, the more brazen and shocking it seems.

Interesting that he mentions working with Barnett. Was he at The Telegraph when she was there by any chance?

Thanks Alpinechalet, for posting the link to the BBC. I do know that it's listenable to again on iPlayer which I'm not on, as it happens, but I did mean a transcript that I can read, rather than re-listen.