BBC 100 Women List - Gender is contentious

[highame]

I'm sure there was a thread but I can't find anywhere. Did it get deleted. Anyway, here's a good article by James Kirkup

www.spectator.co.uk/article/gender-is-contentious-the-bbc-is-pretending-it-isn-t

This is yet another fine article from James Kirkup
The continuation of this argument is that including transwomen in the category of women is harmful to natal women and against the interests of natal women. These harms can take many forms. In law and policy, the 'transwomen are women' approach can mean the erosion or removal of boundaries around single-sex spaces. In culture and society, 'transwomen are women' diverts attention from — and potentially devalues — the unique experiences that natal women have based on their female biology and socialisation.

And when finite resources are allocated, 'transwomen are women' means that some things that might otherwise have been allocated to natal women are given to people who were born male. It is a simple statement of fact that because the BBC awarded some places on its 100 Women list to transwomen, those places — and the status and acclaim they bring — cannot be given to natal women.

He has a fine way with words

I think suffice to say, we're not allowed to comment. If we want this thread to remain, best not to say anything.

I’d love to buy James a pint some time. His work in this area has been outstanding - sensible, thoughtful but never dodging the underlying conflicts. James - if you are reading, a sincere thank you and a virtual pint. 🍺

Thanks for the link.

Grimly holding on to the - what, fourth attempt? - at discussing this.

What I find interesting is that Twitter is discussing this point freely, but we don’t seem to be able to have the conversation here. Come on Justine, you are better than this.

I thought I'd seen a thread but then reasoned it must be an old lady moment. Not the case, well that's cheered me right up.

Maybe we just keep bumping this thread so that lots get to read a very fine article

Bump

@Franca123

I think suffice to say, we're not allowed to comment. If we want this thread to remain, best not to say anything.

What on earth could be controversial about discussing this?

Including TW on a list celebrating women means less women are included on the list. Fact.

'Old lady moment'

WTAF - ageism and sexism in one comment

Please do not write off older women in this way. It's not light-hearted or funny. It's everyday sexism and casual ageism

Why can't we discuss it? How is it different from any of our other similar conversations?

I won't say anything controversial, but this is an issue we should be allowed to talk about.

I have noticed a number of threads disappear today.

Yes I'm confused too about why we can't discuss this? Why so much censorship of women's issues on a forum that is eponymously FOR women i.e. Mums.

OMG. Why would we not be allowed to discuss this? That's crazy. Have TSSCOP yet?

WTAF - ageism and sexism in one comment and proud of it. In fact I just had a second old lady moment, having to get my specs to read your comment. Eyes getting tired just before brandy time.

All through the thread I'm going to continue to have old lady moments

I wonder if this thread will be deleted, too.

There's been more threads than Covid variants on this today

Poor James, he keeps saying that he is retiring from this debate, and then some new injustice drags him back.

I don’t even know how to ask what we’re not allowed to say! Uh… what is the correct formula for ensuring this thread is not deleted? Is it okay even to ask this? I will now proceed to make an uncontroversial comment.

This is a very good article. I agree with it. James Kirkup is a fine journalist and I am grateful to him for his work in this area.

I think a whole thread of this might get boring but you know what, maybe we should just fill the thread with saying uncontroversial nice things and keep it bumped.

A good article yes, thanks for posting. I recently finished the Nolan podcast which I found so enjoyable, agree that this stance is lacking in impartiality - but I suppose they would argue that not including transwomen would be taking a stance too? It’s all very depressing.

V interesting article.
I'd comment but I do believe it's against site rules.

Placemarking to read later

It's ludicrous if MNHQ won't allow this list to be discussed! I can't fathom why they'd presume anything anyone might want to say is going to be transphobic...? My comment before was about overrepresentation of media and Hollywood/fashion vs underrepresentation of athletes. I scarcely think that can be interpreted as some sort of nasty comment about trans people (and absolutely wasn't intended as such).

Why can't we discuss a list like this?

free bump

Has the BBC learned nothing from the Nolan investigation?

As ever a thoughtful article from James who has persisted in covering the debate. So glad that the Spectator is allowed to cover the issues. Let's hope other social media and media organisations continue to do so.

I wonder if certain threads have disappeared today because they draw attention to evidence that our national broadcaster's editorial policies have been influenced by its membership of a certain scheme. Anyway, all the deletions etc convinced me that I needed to make time today to make a complaint to said broadcaster.