I think that Beth did very well. She could have come back easily with the sports question of but why was it ever proposed they complete against women? And point out that they can still complete in the male category or ‘open’ if it is called that.
What she did early on though was point out the absurd circularity of ‘women’s spaces’ remaining ‘safe’ while Anderson kept rounding back to the ‘Twaw’ and ‘there is the exceptions’ everytime. As she pointed out, he used ‘women’ and he means males as well, when women want single sex. So he is obscure and showing how Kier Starmer does it.
All while ignoring that Stonewall has been proven to encourage organisations to prioritise the dismissal of using those exceptions if any organisation wishes to be considered a stonewall champion. Again, if Beth was better versed in this topic, she would have skewered him. Emma Barnett did skewer Nancy like that before where a Nancy denied something and Emma pointed out that stonewall are on record for rewarding behaviour that was the opposite to what Nancy declared.
Was it language for mothers? or was it selection of caters? I cannot remember specifically. But it was clear in Stonewall’s reward scheme that they were at complete odds with what Nancy said. Nancy lied because she knew it was not acceptable that Stonewall did that, but it couldn’t be said on national media.
Either way, Anderson tried the Starmer approach and I hope Starmer took note. It fails, every times a good interviewer doesn’t allow the lie to continue.
And then all the deception is exposed.