India Willoughby, Question Time Thu 2 Feb 2240

[Consufed]

India Willoughby is going to be on Question Time tonight. BBC1 10.40pm.

Yes because they damn well know how preposterous the notion really is. They know exactly what he is. If they can't stand by the courage of their convictions thrn hth do they expect us to.

OMG I had assumed that 'if I was raped what prison would I go to' was a slip of the tongue but no.... that was a fully formed thought India had and broadcast to everyone.

😂😂😂

I think most men who speak of rape in connection themselves are at risk of being imprisoned. Because they are less like to be the victim than the perpetrator.

I'm worrying about her, too.

Unlike the MRAs who barrack women's meetings and marches, she hasn't covered her face, or worn a paramilitary "uniform" of all in black, she's not hiding behind a placard or a megaphone, or supported by umpteen of her friends - she's very vulnerable and so is her family. These are horrible people she's contradicting.

This...beautifully expressed.

It must be difficult to realise that the affirmation and fawning from people around you is not necessarily genuine.

IW is happy to berate and coerce people into complying.

You would have to be a fool to think that any coerced compliance is coming from a genuine place.

I think what you witnessed wasn’t any penny dropping. IW was just frustrated by an inability to coerce everyone in the room. Dammit you people with free wills, free, thoughts and free words!!! Do what I say damn you! Do it because I say so!

It's amazing to me how many of them are admitting 'we don't know, we don't have enough information'... as to whether the rapist is male or female! So they are openly admitting there needs to be some criteria which is the opposite of what they have been proclaiming.

Thank you Venus 😊

Anyway I can't watch any more. Watching people proudly lie and wilfully misrepresent things over and over and over is too depressing.

It's the sheer weight of the dishonesty that gets me down. We can all see it. It's dishonest and it's disgusting.

twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1621284905299722241?s=20&t=yAKcsRP9ZdhAmljOT8gmpA

Link to the Ella clip from QT Twitter (hopefully)

It's just such a RELIEF to hear this stated so clearly and firmly for all to see.

Broadly I agree with not commenting on appearance. However, this is a person who absolutely believes that their appearance is what makes them a woman. That the extensive cosmetic surgeries they have undergone to alter their features is what gives them the right to access women's spaces. India often says (and I think did so on QT) 'where should someone who looks like me go?' India seems to believe that the more surgery they have, the stronger and more undeniable their right to womanhood and the rights and spaces women have fought for, while simultaneously fighting to be listened to and taken seriously, not judged on their appearance.

I think India's carefully, expensively constructed mask of femaleness should not be verboten (especially as it seems that the process of India's transformation is incomplete and their appearance often noticeably alters between media gigs.) It's one of the aces India feels they hold, and proof that they are 'more of a woman' than us cosmetically unenhanced, barefaced womb-havers.

Glasgow people are generally straightforward thinking.
Neither the young woman or the young man who spoke had a Glasgow accent.
I thought she sounded American and him English but I'm not always the best at guessing accents.
Anyone better at accents than me want to take a guess?

Haven't read every single message on here but did anyone notice how deferential FB was to India? (I know she didn't want India to feel ganged-up-on and that's understandable.)

But at one point, FB said something like, "if you'll forgive me, India, I need to get round everyone" and you can hear India in the background say "Yes" 😂. India gave Fiona permission to continue.

Sugarfree yes agree, American or Canadian and English.

Just catching up - India really is a windbag.

Windia.

Windier?

She totally fails to make sense and the comment about being sent to a male prison if she is raped really is a case of 'paging Dr Freud'.

It's like Fawlty Towers. I'm so embarrassed for her that I can't watch without cringing in agony.

The snp woman can't say isla is a man, because she has passed a law that would allow isla to be a woman in law if he wants. As far as I can tell he would meet the criteria for a grc under the bill. If she says 'that ones a man' the question will be 'then why do you want him to be legally female for all purposes?'. If she says 'that one's faking it' the question is 'what does faking mean under self id?' I know nicola has almost said he's faking, but that is a dangerous road for them to go down.

And who's to say Isla's trans identity is not genuine? Yes it's convenient, and he's inherently untrustworthy, but if the criteria in our society and law is that what matters is how he sees himself (& that's what's claimed) then who's to say it's not true. Not nicola, not no one.

And that's where we are.

India even got away with an incorrect answer on Pointless. Nobody else ever has. I was so disappointed in Richard Osman.

Whaaaat? Was is acknowledged that the answer was wrong but she kept the point? (Or i guess that isn't how it works on pointless but you know what I mean).

The answer to a question was "tenterhooks", and India answered - quite clearly "tenderhooks" and this was repeated by Xander, as per usual, and acknowledged by Richard, who then repeated both right and wrong answers, confirmed it wasn't quite right, but credited the right answer (IYSWIM).

Bearing in mind that I've seen competitors lose questions on something as simple as saying a plural instead of a singular noun, or a mispronunciation, or (as Willoughby did) making a small error which meant a wrong answer, I was a bit miffed. Should have scored a straight 100 points, but was allowed to get (whatever) points were allocated to the right answer.

(Yes - I'm petty. I don't like cheating)

As someone who failed their English gsces I love posts like this, as I generally have no clue as to what the hell is a noun, a verb an adjective etc.. Although I can remember watching the birds outside the window whilst primary school teachers droned on about them.

Even i understand the above now!

I was reading some hideous paper about why men can become women <a class="break-all" href="//(www.cambridge.org/core/journals/hypatia/article/trans-women-are-or-are-becoming-female-disputing-the-endogeneity-constraint/090DEAA53EA17414C5D3E8D76ED5A75C" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">here) and it struck me that there may be something that we need to stop doing when trying to find common ground

From this part here:

"Both the Beauvoirian and Butlerian approaches, broadly speaking, agree that there are concepts we call sex (male and female) and gender (man and woman). The core distinction, I take it, is one of direction. On the Beauvoirian approach, sex is prior to gender, such that the concept of woman is understood as a series of roles and norms that are interpreted from and imposed upon people who are female. On the Butlerian approach, on the other hand, gender is prior, such that we categorize bodies as male and female in order to fit the socially constructed roles of man and woman."

I think there is something in the interchangeable way in which we use female and woman that seems to be causing some of the confusion and animosity. IW does not refer to 'herself' as female, but does refer to 'herself' as a woman. And in some ways that does line up to what many GC's believe - that gender is more variable.

Maybe all I am saying is that we need to get our words right here - use female in all interactions to be totally exact.

Both the Beauvoirian and Butlerian approaches, broadly speaking, agree that there are concepts we call sex (male and female) and gender (man and woman). The core distinction, I take it, is one of direction.

I'd have to go back to de Beauvoir but she was mainly talking about 'woman' (as a social expression of femaleness) and as defined by socially constructed femininity (in a patriarchal society where this was defined by men for their benefit and pleasure.

India is the gift that just keeps on giving ...