Homosexuality is...

[Funforeveryone]

From the BBC News Style Guide:
"Homosexual means people of either sex who are attracted to people of their own gender"
So I complained about this about 7 months ago, pointing out that it went against the dictionary and medical definitions, took the word from people who are same sex attracted, etc. The BBC responded that their definition of homosexuality had been decided on by them independently while taking into account the views of others, blah blah. A non response.
I complained again, so about 6 months ago. They have finally responded without even any pretence at an attempt at justifying their definition. Any thoughts / suggestions welcome.

"We appreciate you disagree with the definition and although we have no current plans to amend it, we keep the style guide constantly under review.

This concludes Stage 1 of our complaints process. That means we can’t correspond with you further here. If you remain unhappy, you can now contact the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU). The ECU is Stage 2 of the BBC’s complaints process. You’ll need to explain why you think there’s a potential breach of standards, or if the issue is significant and should still be investigated. Please do so within 20 working days of this reply.

I also made a Freedom of Information Act request relating to this definition, but the news side of the BBC is apparently exempt from the Act, and they refused it on that basis.

You could point out that there definition of homosexual goes against the legal definition as stated in the equality act. Also there definition not only is highly contentious is helping biological males to coerce young lesbians into having heterosexual sex which they should be aware of especially since they did an article on this exact issue

Also I think that the Nolan report has some info on stonewall being involved with the writing the style guide

I don’t get what the issue is?

I mentioned the Equality Act in the original complaint - everything was simply ignored. Twice.

@Babadook76

I don’t get what the issue is?

The issue is that gender as a concept that has no actual definition. Unless you talk about presentation, which is clothes, hair, make up.

They are saying that homosexuality is a person who is attracted to someone of a similar gender. So either sex.

Which means two men going down on each other can be called lesbians. Or a heterosexual couple with six kids can be called lesbians, or gay men, depending on their 'gender identity'.

It's a made up, nonsense definition, which does not take into account the reason why homosexuals have been historically discriminated against.

@Babadook76

I don’t get what the issue is?

Their definition means lesbians do dick. The actual definition is a person of either sex who is attracted to their own sex.

Homosexuality is same-sex attracted. Nothing else.

"Homosexual means people of either sex who are attracted to people of their own gender"

I find this weird, partly because "of either sex" is entirely redundant, so I'm not sure why the word "sex" is brought into it? Almost seems like it's there purely to contrast with "gender".

Could equally be "people of any gender who are attracted to..." or even "people of any age/ race/ nationality..."

It seems odd to me that it acknowledges people have to be "of either sex" (even if they are non-binary) themselves but attraction is to a gender?

@bishophaha

"Homosexual means people of either sex who are attracted to people of their own gender"

I find this weird, partly because "of either sex" is entirely redundant, so I'm not sure why the word "sex" is brought into it? Almost seems like it's there purely to contrast with "gender".

Could equally be "people of any gender who are attracted to..." or even "people of any age/ race/ nationality..."

It seems odd to me that it acknowledges people have to be "of either sex" (even if they are non-binary) themselves but attraction is to a gender?

Well yes. If they are deciding to put the term 'of either sex' in their definition, I'd fucking love to hear their definition of what sex is in that context.

OP, you might like to ask them that. When you say of either sex, what do you mean by 'sex'?

This is another example of them using the words that everyone else understands, but they deny, in order to uphold their own fucking argument.

@Babadook76

I don’t get what the issue is?

Homosexuality = sexually attracted to people of the same sex. Homo comes from the Greek and means "same". This has always been the definition and is the dictionary definition. The BBC News Style Guide, which gives instructions to people who work in the news on which words to use, defines homosexuality as sexual attraction to people of the same gender. So a homosexual (gay) man is deemed to be sexually attracted to transmen. A lesbian is deemed to be sexually attracted to transwomen. Presumably the same logic applies to heterosexuality? So a hetero man is deemed to be sexually attracted to transwomen in the same way that they are sexually attracted to women? Where that leaves the huge majority of the population, who are sexually attracted to others on the basis of their sex, not their gender, I don't know. Presumably those billions of people are supposed to find new words to use. Or are they supposed to give up the retrograde habit of fancying people of a particular sex?

@bishophaha

"Homosexual means people of either sex who are attracted to people of their own gender"

I find this weird, partly because "of either sex" is entirely redundant, so I'm not sure why the word "sex" is brought into it? Almost seems like it's there purely to contrast with "gender".

Could equally be "people of any gender who are attracted to..." or even "people of any age/ race/ nationality..."

It seems odd to me that it acknowledges people have to be "of either sex" (even if they are non-binary) themselves but attraction is to a gender?

Yeah, it just doesn't make any sense. Beyond the issue of who is attracted to whom it's just incoherent.

I suppose it's an indication of the level they are working at. They aren't thinking through what they mean, it's some kind of dogmatic committee-speak.

It is odd that their guide to language is exempt from FOI even if news related issues are (my guess the latter might be to keep news sources protected).

I wonder if you were given the correct information?

I agree with the poster above who says that there is no need to say ‘people of either sex’. They only need to say ‘people who are attracted to the same sex’.

It might be that it applies to the whole news division but the purpose it to protect the news specifically. In which case they are hiding behind a technicality. It could be worth appealing but I don't know who you would appeal to.

To appeal, you first ask for an internal review (by the BBC) then if you are not satisfied with the answer you can appeal to the ICO for a decision. Doesn't cost anything I don't think and perfectly doable by individuals (gets a bit tricky beyond that if not happy with ICO decision as then get into court proceedings, but no requirement to continue). Definitely worth doing, just involves writing a letter I think.

I would argue it is a form of conversion therapy imposed on gays and lesbians by gender ideologues who seek to replace sex with gender.
The term is subtlety coercive not only because there has been no public discussion but also evidenced by the threatening language transwomen use towards lesbians who reject the idea that women have penises and who are not sexually attracted to those who have them.

I would include the following link a site that compiles hate speech by transwomen toward lesbians who reject viewing them as sexual partners. [There is a similar site that compile transmen hate speech against gay men who are averse to having transmen as sexual partners.]

terfisaslur.com/cotton-ceiling/

It's gaslighting, goady bullshit. If they'd said, "people attracted to their own gender" it would be nonsensical as always, but most people would think gender is just a synonym for sex. However they don't want you to think that, they want you to think sex is irrelevant.

When the EHRC finally clarify their discrimination guidance, I hope they're up to speed enough to confirm what homosexuality actually means in law.

Everyone seems to be saying look, we don't have to change anything, the law is clear.

So let them reiterate it. Not the stonewall 'ahead of the law which we thought we could change, but cant' version.

Perhaps the guidance should be renamed the BBC NewSpeak Style Guide?

“Sophoclesthefox

Perhaps the guidance should be renamed the BBC NewSpeak Style Guide?“

Yes. They are losing credibility as leaders in setting the standards for the English language which is what they used to be considered around the world.

I think the aim is to change the definition on the BBC, so that in the future it can be argued that dictionaries should change theirs.

@Babadook76

I don’t get what the issue is?

The problem is that homosexual people - people who are attracted to people of the same sex - have been horrifically discriminated against historically. Often endorsed by or even enforced by the law. This discrimination still exists although is more subtle now.

If you muddy the definition of homosexuality then it is much harder to identify that discrimination.

Have you seen the new BBC pronouns, sorry, 'papers' advert currently popping up just before the headlines on News 24? In It's a Wonderful Life, the worst possible fate for a young woman - a single, minimal-make-up librarian - is now no longer even called a woman at all (progressive!), while the diver has something of a Lia Thomas vibe, or maybe she's just big boned.

You’ll need to explain why you think there’s a potential breach of standards

This bit is key. You need to point to particular parts of the standards and explain how this breaches them, or potentially causes a breach.

www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/information-for-industry/bbc-operating-framework/content-standards

See also here:

www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/

I'd be looking in the sections on accuracy, impartiality (especially the subsection on matters of controversy) and harm or offence.

Also, regarding the EA, BBC are bound by the public sector equality duty:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/public-sector-equality-duty

@Datun @bishophaha

I think the “of either sex” is a type of prudish (and incorrect) way of stating “sexually attracted”.

Without it, the definition is “people who are attracted to people of their own gender”.

But someone could be intellectually or physically attracted to someone of their own gender/sex without wanting to have sex with them.

It’s a definition trying to remove sex from homosexuality which I would argue is pretty important to the concept.