Emma Barnett interviews Endometriosis South Coast Steph Richards and Trustee Jodie Hughes

[ChristinaXYZ]

You can listen here - it starts around the 22 minute mark.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001scsj

Ooooh This sounds golden.
I shall listen on my way to work.

This is one of those interviews that listening to once is just not enough! The first time I think I spent much of it going "oh my god SR is saying the quiet bits out loud!"

The second time I was able to fully appreciate how much of an actual shit show it was for Steph and Jodie.

If Steph’s statement is correct it really is a tiny charity: turnover £160 a week, and Steph isn’t getting paid.

So CEO is a big title for a small unpaid p/t job.

And maybe the full equal opps recruitment that I would expect from a charity for paid employment isn’t so crucial.

That's a good point. With no due diligence apparently given this individual has a history of being threatening to women which is publicly available.

As is so often proven to be the case these days 'Diversity' only means what certain people want it to mean to suit their agenda. Not actual diversity, naturally.

And also. I know why people are saying transwomen want to be involved in women's charities about women's diseases for 'validation' but we all know what that really means - it's as plain as day.

I'm looking forward to the next announcement that the old flasher round the corner from the cinema that used to be regularly there to terrorize young girls (not anymore so presumably he's enjoying himself in women's toilets these days) has become CEO of a raincoat charity.

Tbh I would have no objection to a man being the CEO if they had relevant experience and a genuine interest in advocating for women (i.e. a consultant gynaecologist). What really irks me is the disingenuous nature of this. It's all about self validation and riding roughshod over women's rights and altering the language to sideline women, a word which is now seemingly only ok if it refers to men. So now men have two words to describe themselves, 'women or men' and we have nothing!

Emma is a brilliant interviewer. When is she going? They really need someone like her to fill her shoes.

Putting this out there. How much lobbying do you think there is for a TW to be a new presenter?

That article from Emma about her experience of infertility is so hard hitting. No wonder she wasn't having any of it from this CEO.

There's another piece in the times about Emma's interview; does anyone have a share token ?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/radio-4-presenter-clashes-with-trans-woman-over-inclusive-language-gkv8xjnwg

I know I'm a dissenting voice here, but I feel this interview was all wrong. Why should some crappy tiny charity be awarded air time on one of R4's most prestigious programmes, just so that the star presenter can make them look shit? It's taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

If Woman's Hour is really interested in how trans-identified men are infiltrating the women's charity sector, they ought to interview Mridul Wadhwa, CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis, and ideally have someone like Julie Bindel or Helen Joyce on to explain why such an appointment is so devastating for women.

There's space on wh for both types of interviews.

The interview is featured in the Telegraph today

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/15/endometriosis-not-gynaecological-condition-says-founder/

https://archive.ph/RIsSX archive link

Doesn't hold back.

Thanks for this WarriorN. I was able to read it by pasting the URL into an archive site. Good article although as a written summary of the interview it doesn't get across the incoherence of this pair or the tone Steph took with Emma. Or 'the voice'.

Yes, I was listening to a WH episode a couple of weeks ago where she mentioned that she was in a lot of pain due to that.

She also wrote a book on periods.

I agree to some degree. They’re easy pickings in many ways. But it also speaks volumes as to the righteousness and narcissism of the Left and trans ideology. I imagine never once did either of these two think they were going to go on WH and do anything but correct the world’s transphobes. They would have been so utterly convinced they were going to show everyone how right they were. Worst of all, I imagine that even now, post-interview, they will be utterly convinced they’ve been victims of an egregious assault and will be wah-wahing on Twitter or in their own circles, with their friends telling them how awful they’ve been treated. There will be no contrition at all.

Are there bigger fish to fry? Absolutely. But it’s unpicking the entire ideology one stitch at a time, and slowly unravelling it like Dougal’s jumper.

Here @WarriorN

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/8aabef92-8405-11ee-ab78-b8f8e234f1ae?shareToken=bf9add8244b4cd1e15b2bfcb22efe23c

Actors protest that transpeople need to be portrayed by trans actors. When D&I discussions arise there's always emphasis on 'lived experience'.

But when there's a chance for a man to get a foot in something exclusively female, none of that matters.

But corgi, which male trans person would come on WH and discuss their fresh appointment? And at the time of Wadhwa’s appointment, wasn’t Jane being told she could not do an interview like that?

This must be a subject close to EB’s heart and I imagine she was keen to nip in the bud endometriosis being the latest vehicle for TRAs to advance trans at women’s expense. Also, her extensive experience of this debilitating disease and its effects must in practice give her some cover to interview a little more forthrightly than is normally apparently allowed.

I take RoyalCorgi's point about easy pickings.

I believe decisions about guests are often made by the show's producers and I'd take a punt on Emma Barnett only finding out about this one after the booking had been made, which would be another reason why she was so pissed off.

Real JKR vibes from Emma here. Love her for it!

Much as I am 100% behind questioning the erasure of the word "woman", my only complaint about the interview is that EB spent too much time on that issue and it wasn't properly landing. Where she really scored hits was when she asked incredulously about whether we have to "rebrand" the disease as not being about women in order to get funding. there was SOOOO much there she could have gone down on that path. Similarly, her incredulity that Steph was focusing on the 29 men who suffer from endometriosis rather than the millions of women. I kept wanting to get a calculator out to make a quick calculation of the percentage of sufferers who are male! .

One thing that really came through for me was that Steph appeared to be not very smart, quite uneducated and barely coherent. Jodie was marginally better but the hysteria in her voice talking about it not being gynaecological just had me rolling my eyes.

I don't know - it's possible that Wadhwa wouldn't agree to be interviewed. But all the more reason, in that case, to have someone like Helen Joyce/Kathleen Stock/Julie Bindel or any other of a number of brilliant women come on the show to talk about why it's a bad appointment.

That's what I, a longstanding R4 listener, want from Woman's Hour. I want passionate, knowledgeable, articulate women talking about their area of expertise. What I don't want is to have to listen to two nonentities who know jack shit about fuck all parading their ignorance.

Thank you!

Royal, Stock has been on woman's hour, certainly. I'm sure Julie has been in the past, though perhaps not about this particular issue.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0b3ch0k

Kathleen Stock: ‘It’s like a terrible dream to see your name plastered over every wall’

In her first interview since resigning, Kathleen Stock talks to Emma Barnett about her experiences at the University of Sussex, including weeks of protest on campus by students who objected to her ‘gender critical’ views, and called for her removal.

In her book, Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminism, Stock argues that it isn’t possible for people to change their biological sex, and that someone’s sex should sometimes take precedence over their gender identity.

The University said they would not sack Stock, and ‘vigorously and unequivocally’ defended her right to academic freedom and lawful freedom of speech, free from bullying and harassment.

She describes what her last trip to campus was like in an exclusive interview with Woman's Hour and Newsnight.

It's Helen Joyce who's been apparently black listed, (according to her via people at the bbc who've told her) which I agree is absolutely not on.

They're the sort of 'feminists' who are still in denial that there are any differences between men and women; between the sexes, and resent that being a 'woman' has certain sterotypical implications. Ironic in that they are now supporting men to perform these stereotypical representations, to the cost of other women.