Beth Rigby interviews Iain Anderson

[Theeyeballsinthesky]

He does not do well!

https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1682117673277337600?s=46&t=aWQLrPtVicDNf6MQpq5WVg

This is why they needed no debate, once the debate happens they turn into incoherent fools.

Iain Anderson strikes me as a bit of a weathervane who will change position depending on the direction of public opinion. Once a staunch tory now Labour (as they gain a sniff of power), and also seems to be softening on this issue.

I don't think either side of the debate could trust him.

'I thought he came across as a desperate weasly toad.'

Exactly what I thought. What a pathetic show from him. Not a clue about the impact of any of this on women and no interest in engaging with it either. Flannel and fudge all the way through. Beth was great

As others said, compare his waffle to the likes of Helen Joyce, Kathleen Stock, Julie Bindel, KJK, who are rock solid when challenged and explain everything in a clear and calm way. Facts on their side, see?!

Btw, I didn't know that Sharron Davies had been on Triggernometry! Will be watching that later 😃

😂

I’ve often wondered if Beth Rigby is a bit terfy…

she’s certainly well-informed on our side of the debate!

and it’s not just about elite sports (don’t think I missed that little evasion). Amateur sportswomen also deserve fairness, which means no bloody men

Quite. Pretending it doesn't matter at grassroots level is so disingenuous. How does Iain think that elite female athletes are created? They don't appear magically from a lab somewhere with their sporting greatness ready to go.

They start as young girls at grassroots, girls who need fairness and belief in fairness to grow and develop to hone their talent. They need role models that aren't adult women pressured and cowed into handing their sports over to men.

If they don't have this why would they continue in sport to become elite level? Many just won't, they'll drop out young because being forced to compete, change and shower with boys is hell for them.

I've never watched Beth Rigby before and thought that was excellent.

There was a point at about 23 minutes where Iain looked as if he was going to cry. DH suggested he needed a support animal.

I really hope the full interview is uploaded to YouTube so I can watch it whenever I get Imposter Syndrome. Can't believe he's apparently an expert in communications. That clip where Beth Rigby asks him about Lia Thomas and how he would feel if he was one of the female competitors and he goes 'Oh, I'm not very good at sports!' (or words to that affect) was so pathetic and dismissing of women. I hope this is a turning point for how people feel about Stonewall's stance on trans issues.

https://www.youtube.com/live/DtDvBTMxDfI?feature=share

it is under the ‘live’ tab

I've followed Beth Rigby on Twitter for a while and noticed last year she retweeted a post from JKR about her charity. This was in the midst of one of the twitter pile ons JKR has to suffer. I wondered at the time if it was a subtle show of support for JKR. I've also read an interview with Beth where she was asked who she would like to interview and she said JKR. I've always thought Beth would be across all the issues, she was excellent last night. She's just replied to Maya Forstater on Twitter to say she wants to do more on this.

I guess thought that Beth will be refused interview requests from stonewall supportive people now. Unfortunately, she will be rejected and dismissed as right wing and fascist.

I remember the Stonewall campaigns to overturn Section 28 and bring in equal marriage. Thru impassioned argument, inescapable logic and true advocacy for human rights, they turned my opinion around.

Now they're a shower, an embarrassment, pure amoral lobbyism.

Neither Stonewall nor Iain have tweeted about it yet. I wonder why? 🤷‍♀️

Anderson's main aim, it seems, and his main goal for the Labour Party he has recently joined, is to " have a strategy for this conversation".

He cannot deal with the actual conversation, this is very apparent, but he wants to play around with how it is coming across. He wants to change a few words, put emphasis on certain things - but also to avoid the nitty gritty of the actual conflict.

He uses the word 'conversation' in order to deflect from the fact that it is actually a fundamental disagreement.

He is just like Kier Starmer. Avoidant. Non committal and evasive.

I’ve had a girl crush on Beth for several years. Her political interviews can be forensic, she knows her stuff and asks the questions the public want to ask.

She excelled herself yesterday, not letting him get away with his deliberate word salads. Thank you Beth!

The bit I was annoyed at was when Beth didn’t ask why Lia can’t compete in the men’s.

India What'sisface on Twittsville - Has Stonewall been infiltrated?
Yes. Yes it has. By you you weapons grade bullshitting gaslighting toxic piece of nonsense.
Oh what a glorious interview it was. I've always loved Beth. Beth for Empress of the World!

The answer is that Lia is not quite elite level in the male category, but can easily smash all the records set by once-in-a-lifetime athletes like Katie Ledecky, in the female category. Lia likes to win. Lia chooses glory over basic fairness.

She did mention, or imply, the possibility of a third category, though.

Yes, I'd love a transcript - his non-answers and self-contradictions would be even more self-evident in writing.

I don't think he is " softening" so much as detecting a very obvious PR failure. I imagine he sees himself as a strategist, for the Labour party, in how to communicate this issue to the public.

Remember Kier Starmer was talking about " building consensus" around the GRA/Self Id - by which he basically means trying to find a way to " reassure" those hysterical, nervous women about his intentions to allow any random male into women's single sex spaces, services and categories.

Once women have been thus " reassured" they can rest their little heads in peace. He wants to talk about how best to talk about this issue -whilst simulataneously avoiding it.

Yes which was also annoying (and wouldn’t work). It was as if it was so unthinkable that a man could not compete in a man’s race (because of his feelings of not wanting to be a man) that they would have to restructure the whole system.

Maybe, but this is the obvious solution to protecting womens categories as things stand.

He was utterly awful.

sweating, grimacing (I think he imagined it was a smile), repeating himself and gibbering absolute nonsense.

It was BEAUTIFUL 😂

I think a third category is the way to go. It would immediately become blindingly obvious that NO transmen (women) were winning anything and that the category was almost exclusively made up of mediocre males.

Said males wouldn’t bother competing because they’d know they had no advantage, so the category would end up with no entrants, it would peter out and the world would be deafened by the sound of pennies dropping as the few remaining supporters of men competing in women’s sports would finally go “Oooohhhhhhh…”

I noticed he used the american term "trans folk" which seems to have been gathering pace recently. I think it is part of the new communcation strategy to make trans ideology kind of harmless and cuddly.