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.

There seems to be complaint that EB interrupted nk and attacked her with aggressive questions.

@CriticalCondition

To sum up NK.

Lots of tinkly laughs, hm-mms, I'm a lovely lesbian with a lovely family, I'm so lovely and I have lovely views and I really don't know anything about Kathleen Stock or JK Rowling and SW members make their own decisions, they are nothing to do with me, those decisions are historical, I'm lovely and I'm really not influential at all.

But also we at Stonewall seek and would relish more influence oh yes even though we don't mark workplaces on their adherence to our interpretation of the law but we do, you see, and it is a free service, a benchmarking tool, free, but a paid for service. Thumbs up!

@OvaHere Now that is interesting. I thought at the time she jumped ship before it sank. SW is a poison challace, my feeling is NK was the chump that got landed with it.
Which means they all knew from the start it was toxic rubbish, well anyone with any real brains.
Diden't Julie Bindel say that Ruth Hunt had said to her before they were given a bucket load of cash addopted the T, that she understood the conflict with womens rights?

@Melroses

I come from a stable home and loving family background, but I don't think that is any excuse to push utopian building post modern theory onto a world of people with material lives.

Melroses, you deserve a for this turn of phrase.

It is great to see Nancy start to talk
With a gender critical feminist at the legal at the Middle Temple event the other night and now on Woman's Hour.

NEXT BBC, can we have a debate on the Stonewall 'Gender Identity Conversion Therapy ban'? and get a definition on exactly what it is - between Nancy Kelley, a trans person who's been through CT (if you can find one), a detransitioner, a gender critical feminist, a therapist, a safeguarding expert, a legal expert, Baroness Faulkner EHRC chair, Lord Herbert Minister LGBT envoy and others?

I always think the rising inflection betrays a supreme lack of confidence in the speaker.

Wrt 'Yes, you can be 'GC' but only if you never mention it' - this is the Genderist position on being a lesbian. You are very welcome to say you are a lesbian, (heck, anyone can use the term, it's a free-for-all) but if you actually mention what it actually means and that you are solely sexually oriented to women, that makes you a bigot.

Your lesbian status is permitted as an identity label so that others can use it to affirm their 'gender', but the reality of being a lesbian is unacceptable.

@HoardingFloralBuntingInACervix

I always think the rising inflection betrays a supreme lack of confidence in the speaker.

Wrt 'Yes, you can be 'GC' but only if you never mention it' - this is the Genderist position on being a lesbian. You are very welcome to say you are a lesbian, (heck, anyone can use the term, it's a free-for-all) but if you actually mention what it actually means and that you are solely sexually oriented to women, that makes you a bigot.

Your lesbian status is permitted as an identity label so that others can use it to affirm their 'gender', but the reality of being a lesbian is unacceptable.

Out of curiosity, is a TW allowed to say they are a lesbian that isn't attracted to other TW (so in other words if they were on a date and the other person turned out to have a penis too, would it be bigoted for them to not be interested?)?

EB, Womans Hour, Broadcasting House London W1A 1AA

So, Nancy Kelly said that TWAW - but not biological women
and
that what JKR was not transphobic, but might be hurtful.

The TRA will eviscerate her. She will be dangling off the end of a purity spiral by the evening news.

[quote Fariha31]@OvaHere Now that is interesting. I thought at the time she jumped ship before it sank. SW is a poison challace, my feeling is NK was the chump that got landed with it.
Which means they all knew from the start it was toxic rubbish, well anyone with any real brains.
Diden't Julie Bindel say that Ruth Hunt had said to her before they were given a bucket load of cash addopted the T, that she understood the conflict with womens rights?[/quote]
Yes the general impression seems to be that RH shifted the direction of Stonewall largely for financial reasons. After marriage equality was won they needed a new high profile cause.

Her complete lack of defending her 'side' in HoL debates does suggest she doesn't have conviction in what she was selling as SW CEO. Perhaps she's hoping that eventually people will forget she ever had anything to do with it.

@Pinkgorrilaz Yes, they are allowed. Its 'internalised transphobia' or something to do with validation.
But totally understandable and OK because transphobia...bla

Out of curiosity, is a TW allowed to say they are a lesbian that isn't attracted to other TW

Of course. To say a trans person is not allowed to do anything would be transphobic.

The "I don't know who Kathleen Stock is, or what she stands for, and oh, in fact, I can't even remember her name" defence was deployed only a week or so ago by Jess Phillips. Clearly Kelley thought it was so successful it was worth a second outing.

@OvaHere Yes, I very much think she is betting on people forgetting she has anything to do with it.

And she would probably get away with it too, if it wasen't for those meddling....Women!

Remarkable interview. The tide is hopefully turning.

That statement from JKR's office at the end - "we do not wish to make a statement" is not surprising but is interesting...

Does it mean that EB has had an off record chat with JKR? Because I bet that would be helpful for filling EB in on some of the issues.

I hope the pair of them met up for a chat over tea and tunnocks teacakes.

Packingsoapandwater Thank you for the star - I will wear it all day.

It is up on Sounds now:
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0011lrs

Did Kelly deliberately set out to sound like a simpering, giggling, 'ooh I don't know anything more about that than has been in the papers' even though it's my fucking job to know the ins and outs of 'that' fuckwit - or is she one, and that's how she ended up in the Stonewall seat when the music stopped?

Also - I won't be forgetting what Ruth Hunt did.

Not ever.

Out of curiosity, is a TW allowed to say they are a lesbian that isn't attracted to other TW (so in other words if they were on a date and the other person turned out to have a penis too, would it be bigoted for them to not be interested?)?

When I've seen this discussed, the answer has mostly been the other penis would trigger their dysphoria, so of course they get a pass.

Basic rule of thumb; Gender is always supreme over every other consideration, and if you are an adherent of Genderism and have enough of the special status labels (ie TW, Non-Binary etc.) and are actually male, you get what you want. So a MtF trans person claiming to be a lesbian will be able to assert their boundary clearly. A lesbian will not.

In the case of a FtM trans person claiming to be a gay man, coercing an actual gay man, the FtM trans person has status over a gay man by virtue of the supremacy of gender. Dissenting gay men are pretty much the only penis-bearers who do come as low in the hierarchy as women, trans-identified or not. Genderists have made a few forays into guilt-tripping straight men, but unsurprisingly haven't made much progress.

Genderism has always been about male power. They are allowed boundaries. Women are not.

[quote Fariha31]@Pinkgorrilaz Yes, they are allowed. Its 'internalised transphobia' or something to do with validation.
But totally understandable and OK because transphobia...bla[/quote]
Ah! Another heads I win, tails you lose scenario!

@HoardingFloralBuntingInACervix

Out of curiosity, is a TW allowed to say they are a lesbian that isn't attracted to other TW (so in other words if they were on a date and the other person turned out to have a penis too, would it be bigoted for them to not be interested?)?

When I've seen this discussed, the answer has mostly been the other penis would trigger their dysphoria, so of course they get a pass.

Basic rule of thumb; Gender is always supreme over every other consideration, and if you are an adherent of Genderism and have enough of the special status labels (ie TW, Non-Binary etc.) and are actually male, you get what you want. So a MtF trans person claiming to be a lesbian will be able to assert their boundary clearly. A lesbian will not.

In the case of a FtM trans person claiming to be a gay man, coercing an actual gay man, the FtM trans person has status over a gay man by virtue of the supremacy of gender. Dissenting gay men are pretty much the only penis-bearers who do come as low in the hierarchy as women, trans-identified or not. Genderists have made a few forays into guilt-tripping straight men, but unsurprisingly haven't made much progress.

Genderism has always been about male power. They are allowed boundaries. Women are not.

Excellent explanation. Thanks.

@WhereYouLeftIt

Did Kelly deliberately set out to sound like a simpering, giggling, 'ooh I don't know anything more about that than has been in the papers' even though it's my fucking job to know the ins and outs of 'that' fuckwit - or is she one, and that's how she ended up in the Stonewall seat when the music stopped?

She reminded me of Dolores Umbridge, which is ironic...!

She reminded me of Dolores Umbridge, which is ironic...!

Brilliant!

@OvaHere

Talking of Ruth Hunt she is very notable by her absence in all HoL debates on these issues considering she is the main reason a lot of it is now being debated. All of a sudden she appears to have nothing to say.

It took Stonewall a very very long time to find a replacement for Ruth Hunt. Anyone with half a brain could see it was a poisoned chalice where the CEO was being expected to defend the indefensible while trashing their own reputation and dignity. Ruth Hunt breathed a sigh of relief to be out of it and decided to keep her head down leaving her successor to deal with the mess she’d made. The sad thing is, if they’d decided not to adopt such a rigid ideological position they could have done so much more. Campaign for better healthcare, more research, third spaces. A way of ensuring trans people can take part in sport without damaging womens rights. Not controversial. Would have improved things for trans people.