Midday today on Radio 4, new programme AntiSocial talks about the toxic conversation on social media about trans rights and women's rights

[nauticant]

Midday today on Radio 4 is a new programme called AntiSocial which is about how debates on social media can turn nasty. The series starts today with:

Why is the conversation about trans rights and women's rights so toxic?

This week, two sports governing bodies decided that trans women should not compete in women's categories. Other sports announced they would review their policies. There's a row about that, but beneath that is a deeper argument about how the tensions around gender identity are discussed and debated.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0018h14

I'm going to listen to this. Adam Fleming is the BBC's chief political correspondent and presents Newscast. He comes across as a thoughtful type. I'm hopeful.

It'll be interesting to watch thanks, but don't know why it's 53 minutes long.
"Because of raging misogyny" doesn't take long to say.

Fingers crossed it doesn't attempt to 'both sides' it. Many thanks for the alert OP will definitely going to listen in to this.

Thanks for this. I've a horrible feeling it will be annoying to me. Adam fleming is normally a political/Westminster bbc journalist isn't he? I wonder if they will consider the role that journalists have played in making it so toxic - by vacating the room and failing to get to grips with the issue properly for so long.

The discussion was not mediated through or moderated by neutral journalism that stepped back and asked insightful questions. It was left to be a dysfunctional mess. (On the whole I mean. There were a few trying to shine a light but as an institution journalism has either been partisan on this, or pretending not to notice. Until very recently).

Why is the conversation about trans rights and women's rights so toxic?

Hopefully I am wrong but it looks like it's set to be a "both sides" discussion.

The discussion is toxic because men are furious they cannot claim oppression and make women shut up.

I will try and catch it and hope they do a good job. Is this the first episode? Quite brave to start with this subject.

I'm going to listen to this. Adam Fleming is the BBC's chief political correspondent and presents Newscast. He comes across as a thoughtful type. I'm hopeful.

One thing I've been going on about for a while now is that more of the "big" BBC articles on the trans issue are being written by people coming from a proper journalism background rather than an activism/journalism background and the difference in tone is evident. Even the Guardian has experimented with this of late.

However, what the programme will be like is another matter. Will it be about people who are "anti-trans" campaigning for trans people to be "excluded from playing sport"?

I just came to post this but you got there before me @nauticant!

This is apparently the first in a series of podcasts
Peace talks for the culture wars.
In an era of polarisation, propaganda and pile-ons, AntiSocial offers an alternative: understanding, facts, and respect. Each week, Adam Fleming takes on a topic that's generating conflict on social media, blogs, talk shows and phone-ins and helps you work out what the arguments are really about.

We shall see...

Was wondering if anyone had spotted this!
I’m not feeling too optimistic. I alway find Adam Fleming a bit underwhelming. But hoping to be proved wrong.
It will be “both sides”, no doubt. I’m happy with that as long as both sides are represented accurately and it’s clear where the actual literal violence is coming from and it’s clear that the mainstream (pro respect, anti inclusion of males in female sport, prison etc) is extremist GC in the eyes of the TRAs. But I suspect it will be “both sides are as bad as each other and everyone especially womb carriers needs to be kiiiiiiind”

thank you so much for posting this

Here's the Beeb's Media Centre briefing about the series: www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2022/antisocial

It's just started. An interesting format and they're definitely heariing from opposing sides, ie Milli Hill and the founder of Steph's Place. Among others.

Transwoman rep Steph acknowledges biological sex so is not typical of the hardest line TRA position.

Indeed.

❤️ Milli Hill

That isn't why I don't the term cis bbc lgbt woman. And then you use the term assigned at birth without explaining it

Listening with interest

Lauren Moss, the LGBT and identity correspondent of the BBC, and a vast improvement over Ben Hunte, seems to have said that "gender identity" is one of the protected characteristics. She's no fool and I'm mystified how she would misunderstand such a basic point.

Appears to be heavy on feelings and light on probing facts or specifics from the bit I have just heard.

The bbc LGBT correspondent has just completely misrepresented why we object to being called cis, and stated that most people identify as their birth gender. FFS.

She said the objection to cis is that we don’t like all these extra divisions or some such - seems to have completely missed the point that we do not identity as women: we do not have a gender identity and it is sex that matters for us.

(Disclaimer: we = I and some others I know; aware there are many views here)

It’s so disappointing to be misrepresented this way.

Hmm, Adam asks Steph about pile ons 'So how did that feel?' but directs Milli 'So without going into how it felt, what did you do afterwards?' She ignored that and told him.

Yay! Go Milli on questioning assigned at birth and gender being a protected characteristic!

Ooh yes, Milli picking up the assigned at birth used by the BBB LGBT person.

I don't mind it so far. Both the two main guests have been on more or less best behaviour.