Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Beth Rigby interviews Iain Anderson

313 replies

Theeyeballsinthesky · 20/07/2023 21:36

He does not do well!

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

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
GrimDamnFanjo · 21/07/2023 17:44

If I'd prepped him for that interview, I'd be on my way out with my P45.
The questions were exactly what you'd expect yet he couldn't string together a cohesive argument.
And yet again women are told we are causing the problem when we say no.
What an absolute fuckwit.

nonman · 21/07/2023 17:50

Actually I think she did a great job by not bringing up the more esoteric ramifications of trans activists on women. It would have become too academic and I’m afraid the academic arguments can often stop addressing real world aspects. She kept it to simple aspects that affect women on the ground. Changing rooms, prisons,sport, hospital wards.
Once these basics are established the other more complex issues can be addressed, and the other stuff is so dystopian that you’d get bogged down in explanations.

Tidyspy · 21/07/2023 17:50

I'm watching it on YouTube now - sunlight really is the best disinfectant. He doesn't have a lot of answers and has said things he can't take back. Shame.

Frustrated by the 'breastfeeding' question towards the end though - I don't think women object to that TRA's photos because of their own issues with feeding, it's out of concern for the baby, and what a transwoman breastfeeding involves, where is the benefit for the baby etc. I wish she'd said that.

But generally thanks Beth, and I hope he keeps getting his arse kicked.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 21/07/2023 18:23

That tweet should come with a health warning. I felt it twist my mind into a knot of confusion, which I took a few moments to undo

Nancy Kelley liked another tweet in his thread criticising Iain and the interview.

https://twitter.com/genderreceipts/status/1682423506867220482?s=46&t=SPorwN-mokktL467rcZ57g

HPFA · 21/07/2023 18:24

nonman · 21/07/2023 17:50

Actually I think she did a great job by not bringing up the more esoteric ramifications of trans activists on women. It would have become too academic and I’m afraid the academic arguments can often stop addressing real world aspects. She kept it to simple aspects that affect women on the ground. Changing rooms, prisons,sport, hospital wards.
Once these basics are established the other more complex issues can be addressed, and the other stuff is so dystopian that you’d get bogged down in explanations.

I've seen a bit of carping on Twitter that "she didn't say this or that" but the reason it was so effective was that she just kept on insisting on answers - there could well have been other issues she might have raised with more time.

We once received a GC oriented complaint letter at work and even I struggled to understand it - my work colleagues were completely bemused! Such a waste.

Manderleyagain · 21/07/2023 18:26

The radio 4 discussion was quite a change in tone for Evan Davies. He was still putting the trans side (ie saying that he thought many trans ppl would not be pleased by what they heard) but dud so as the neitral journalist. Things really have changed.

I don't think we will see more stonewall (or other gender campaigner) interviews, especially with beth. I'm not sure how they will react to this because they are a bit stuck, but I don't think it will be to send foot soldiers out to explain everything to us via news interviews.

AlisonDonut · 21/07/2023 18:33

If you relook at the start of the interview, he starts by saying what a great time it had been. I don't think he was briefed at all on any of the potential questions.

JanesLittleGirl · 21/07/2023 18:34

The questions were exactly what you'd expect yet he couldn't string together a cohesive argument.

This isn't because he was poorly briefed or is stupid. It is because there isn't a cohesive argument that could be strung together.

PronounssheRa · 21/07/2023 18:48

Stonewall’s Chair, Iain Anderson said: “We remain at the forefront of campaigning for trans people’s rights, and I’m sorry if yesterday’s interview caused concern amongst the LGBTQ+ community and its allies. My priority is fighting for trans people & securing a trans equality strategy that will support the trans community”

DworkinWasRight · 21/07/2023 18:48

The “competing rights” stuff and offers to debate - was that an attempt to soften the Stonewall stance, or because he hadn’t been properly briefed?

Boiledbeetle · 21/07/2023 18:54

Whole thing:

On 20 July, Stonewall Chair, Iain Anderson, was interviewed by Beth Rigby on Sky News. The interview was supposed to be an opportunity to talk about 10 years of marriage equality, LGBTQ+ veterans, and Rainbow Laces 10 – all remarkable moments that deserved recognition and celebration.

We took part in the interview because Stonewall has always been engaged in difficult conversations on behalf of the LGBTQ+ community. The interview largely focused on highly detailed elements of trans policy issues and Stonewall’s position on these remains unchanged.

The world-leading Equality Act protects many communities – including LGBTQ+ people – it took years to draft and is a finely-honed, balanced, and complex piece of legislation that Stonewall believes works effectively.

Sport should be open to everyone, including trans people, and this includes elite sport. Out of hundreds of thousands of elite athletes, a small handful are trans. We believe including trans people & players in policy development that is both evidence and research-based.

Stonewall believes trans people’s rights should be fully respected and it is past time that conversations around the trans people’s lives should be used as a political tool. Instead, we’re calling for political leaders to develop a meaningful strategy for trans equality that ensures trans people are properly supported, included and able to participate fully in society.

Stonewall’s Chair, Iain Anderson said: “We remain at the forefront of campaigning for trans people’s rights, and I’m sorry if yesterday’s interview caused concern amongst the LGBTQ+ community and its allies. My priority is fighting for trans people & securing a trans equality strategy that will support the trans community”

Editor’s notes:Stonewall’s current positions on key elements of yesterday’s discussion are set out below.

Equality ActThe Equality Act is a world-class piece of legislation that’s been operating well for 13 years.
Since the Equality Act 2010 came into force it has provided an effective defence against discrimination in employment and in the provision of goods and services for people who hold one or more ‘protected characteristics’. This is legislation that works well, and of which Britain can be proud.

We do not think the Equality Act should be reviewed, but we do think the Statutory Code of Practice could clearly include intersex people, asexual people and non-binary people.
It works well because it understands that people can experience discrimination on multiple grounds and it treats all of those grounds equally. We do not believe that people’s rights are in competition.

Single-sex exemptionsThe Equality Act 2010 already supports the operation of single-sex services, where this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It also permits the exclusion of trans people from those single-sex services where this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This means that trans inclusion is the universal practice in day–to–day single-sex spaces such as toilets and changing rooms, but trans inclusion is not a universal practice in single-sex specialist services.

As Beth Rigby pointed out, in 2015, we recommended for the removal of these clauses in a submission to a parliamentary inquiry based on consultation with trans people at the time.

It is really important to say that we do not advocate for the removal of the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. When the Equality Act was first introduced, Stonewall did. That was because we were worried that they would be applied in a blanket way and would be used to wholesale exclude trans women from many single-sex spaces. We know that that has not been the case.

The bar set in the Equality Act, which is that trans women and trans men—although it is mostly used around trans women—access to women’s spaces should only be restricted as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, is very high. There has to be a very specific set of reasons to exclude trans women from single-sex spaces. Although we dearly wish that no single-sex spaces wished to exclude trans women, trans men or non-binary people, we also recognise that, for the minority of spaces that want to, it is probably not a particularly safe service for those trans people to access.

Trans people in elite sportWe believe that trans people should be able to thrive and flourish in everything they do, and that includes sport. There has been a huge amount of focus on a literal handful of trans women who are competing at an elite level.
The Equality Act rightly presumes the inclusion of trans people as its starting point, and this includes in sport. The Act does allow sporting organisations to discriminate on the grounds of sex if it is a ’gender-affected activity’ or in order to secure ‘fair competition’ or ‘the safety of competitors’, but they must be able to justify it with evidence as proportionate.

We believe that decisions on guidelines should be informed by robust evidence and developed in consultation with players and athletes with direct experience. No two sports are the same. The physical and tactical skills and attributes needed for different sports are highly varied, as is the profile of players competing across grassroots and elite levels. It’s vital that when they make decisions on inclusion, sports use data that is high quality and specific to both the sport and the level at which the game is being played. Given that trans people take part in every sport, it’s also vital that sport bodies consider the experience of trans inclusion in their sports to date.

While sport-specific evidence bases are developing, we urge sport governing bodies not to exclude the tiny number of trans people competing an elite level.

Working with anti-trans groupsStonewall has always, and will always, sit down with anyone who has a respectful position towards the LGBTQ+ community and wants to advance our progress and build alliances to do so. Stonewall’s ethos was and remains the organisation that is ‘in the room’.

That said, we have never used our precious resources on dialogue with people who are vehemently against LGBTQ+ communities, and that will remain true. Our focus is on working with politicians and decision-makers, business and societal leaders who can make a difference to LGBTQ+ people’s lives.

Boiledbeetle · 21/07/2023 19:03

James doinh his impersonation of Iain being interviewed.

https://twitter.com/DreyfusJames/status/1682437430366838791?s=19

https://twitter.com/DreyfusJames/status/1682437430366838791?s=19

Theeyeballsinthesky · 21/07/2023 19:05

That statement - im on The way out so all I can say is they really are ice cold power mad cunts aren’t they

OP posts:
NicCageisnotNickCave · 21/07/2023 19:06

That statement is very long for a clarification… it’s almost as if Stonewall have concluded that their chair made a complete twit of himself!

Boiledbeetle · 21/07/2023 19:07

NicCageisnotNickCave · 21/07/2023 19:06

That statement is very long for a clarification… it’s almost as if Stonewall have concluded that their chair made a complete twit of himself!

The fact that's it's taken all day to sort it says it all!

AlecTrevelyan006 · 21/07/2023 19:23

It was obviously very stressful in the Stonewall offices today. We won't be seeing IA doing any more interviews any time soon.

Boiledbeetle · 21/07/2023 19:24

AlecTrevelyan006 · 21/07/2023 19:23

It was obviously very stressful in the Stonewall offices today. We won't be seeing IA doing any more interviews any time soon.

I imagine he's currently locked in a store room in their offices somewhere.

JanesLittleGirl · 21/07/2023 19:30

That statement can be paraphrased as:

"We are very sorry if IA's inept interview gave the impression that Stonewall gives a fuck about women. Please be assured that there is no space or service that we will not fight for men to be included in."

DuesToTheDirt · 21/07/2023 19:30

Just watched the clip, he doesn't answer the questions at all does he.

purpleros · 21/07/2023 19:36

JanesLittleGirl · 21/07/2023 19:30

That statement can be paraphrased as:

"We are very sorry if IA's inept interview gave the impression that Stonewall gives a fuck about women. Please be assured that there is no space or service that we will not fight for men to be included in."

in a nutshell

purpleros · 21/07/2023 19:38

they're going to be on the hunt for a suitably militant TRA to replace IA before
the month is out,
surely?

Madcats · 21/07/2023 19:52

By issuing a press release, presumably journos at the Telegraph, Daily Mail and (fingers crossed) Observer are now more able to write a piece or two.

What a super day for Stonewall

popebishop · 21/07/2023 19:54

As Beth Rigby pointed out, in 2015, we recommended for the removal of these clauses in a submission to a parliamentary inquiry based on consultation with trans people at the time.

It is really important to say that we do not advocate for the removal of the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. When the Equality Act was first introduced, Stonewall did. That was because we were worried that they would be applied in a blanket way and would be used to wholesale exclude trans women from many single-sex spaces. We know that that has not been the case.

The bar set in the Equality Act, which is that trans women and trans men—although it is mostly used around trans women—access to women’s spaces should only be restricted as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, is very high. There has to be a very specific set of reasons to exclude trans women from single-sex spaces

Hmmm....

Manderleyagain · 21/07/2023 19:56

This bit sums up their position on single sex spaces. I really wish this could be tested in court properly because I don't believe it. I think they're wrong.

They say the bar for excluding tw from female spaces is very high.

There has to be a very specific set of reasons to exclude trans women from single-sex spaces. Although we dearly wish that no single-sex spaces wished to exclude trans women, trans men or non-binary people, we also recognise that, for the minority of spaces that want to, it is probably not a particularly safe service for those trans people to access.

So their reason for it being legal to exclude tw is not because women need that sometimes but because women who want to do that are nasty bigots who will make tw unsafe anyway.