Joe Lycett

[theDudesmummy]

I had never heard of this guy before today (I am not a fan of stand up comedy) but I do listen to the political podcast The Newsagents, and they had him on as a guest. He sounded like a sensible person until he suddenly started talking complete faux-naïve bollocks about the trans issue. Something about how how boring it would be if everyone in society was expected to be the same, or some such stuff, and therefore anyone who opposes trans rights is being "boring" as well as wrong. Anyone else hear that? Is this guy in general a TRA or just stupid?

@Betweenthe2 , there are lots of different points that @Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g is making in the post. Can you clarify which ones she is wrong about and why?

He makes my teeth itch; it doesn’t help that he calls himself ‘mummy’

He's not bloody pansexual, he's a gay man who's getting older and trying to stay relevant. He's very clever but doesn't really care about women when he has a career to maintain. I generally like his stuff but a lot of gay men just don't give a shit as it doesn't really affect them.

@CurlewKate I am afraid it is not bullshit! I really did not know who he is (and not much the wiser now really, apart from knowing he is a "pansexual" stand up comedian who some people like and some people don't). I may have heard the name of course, but not registered it because he wasn't of any interest to me.

Ever considered that my news sources for British politics may be different from yours perhaps? My DH is very interested in British politics and lived in the UK for 15 years, he wouldn't even know who Ricky Gervais is if I was to ask him! People pay attention to different things you know! I probably know the names of plenty of people whom I consider to be important social commentators and who you haven't heard of.

He totally passed me by. I wouldn't know him if I fell over him.

So you know what you can do with your bullshit.

I used to really like him. Not now

If a lot intelligent people feel differently to you I'm surprised that you haven' considered the possibility that you're wrong.

I'm sure we've all considered the possibility that we might be wrong about various things, then weighed it up and decided we aren't, like everyone does. Lots of intelligent people feel the same as well though.

I think he’s your stereotypical gay man who hates women and hides it under a veneer of civility and “I’m so cool”.

I appreciate that he made a programme on the sewage issue so fair play to him for that.

Also heard him on Radio 4 recently, saying he wanted to raise the property prices in his suburb so he achieved that by throwing a rainbow flagged street party and getting his 'hood listed on some American gay site as being a gay hot spot. He claimed that as a result, property prices have gone up.

So he likes to put his celebrity to use, but I suspect he's just jumped on the Pan bandwagon for likes. But I don't know and not really interested.
Whether he would be an ally to women in these times is another question.

I always raise an eyebrow at him defining as Pansexual as from what I can see he is almost exclusively into guys - he flirts outrageously with men but the energy with women is virtually non existent. I'm only going by what I see on TV but his humour is quite camp and Carry On- ish. No problem with that if you like a certain amount of oo-err missus type innuendo.

Thought he was with a woman last year……

He gave the money to charity. Surely better than shredding it?

Much better, but what a stupid thing to say in the first place.

Also heard him on Radio 4 recently, saying he wanted to raise the property prices in his suburb so he achieved that by throwing a rainbow flagged street party and getting his 'hood listed on some American gay site as being a gay hot spot. He claimed that as a result, property prices have gone up.

He spent years on that project and it was the subject of his last tour. It was pretty impressive, I have to say.

So he likes to put his celebrity to use, but I suspect he's just jumped on the Pan bandwagon for likes. But I don't know and not really interested.

He has always described himself as pansexual. It’s nothing new.

Would have got a lot less attention (on Beckham) that way.

That's Eddie Izzard, I think.(The woman bit.)

@theDudesmummy " I probably know the names of plenty of people whom I consider to be important social commentators and who you haven't heard of."

Probably. But I wouldn't be proud of the fact.

Self interest not that interesting, nor is pansexualism, yawn.

@OneMoreTime23 "He's the guy that said he would shred £10k if David Beckham became ambassador for the 2022 Fifa World Cup in Qatar.

But then he went back on it and just shredded"

He didn t "go back on it". He never intended to shred the money in the first place- because, whatever else he is, he isnMt a psychopath! It was a publicity stunt-he gave it to charity.

I wouldn't have been able to pick him out in a crowd of two.

I listened to the News Agents and I wondered if he was naive or whether it was faux naivety. He ignored the entire trans debate (is that really possible for someone so immersed in current affairs and social media?). His take is that it’s all down to not liking people being different. He then went on to imply Ricky Gervais was attacking trans people because they’re different. No recognition of the impact of the TRA movement on womens’ rights, lesbians, children, massive increase in adolescent girls believing they’re born in the wrong bodies, impact on fairness in sport, safety for female prisoners.

I think he was being disingenuous and playing to his audience. He’s a shit.

(I’m actually more disappointed in Lewis Goodall for not challenging his view, and then retweeting the attack on Gervais)

Can’t speak for the poster you’re responding to, but I can honestly say I have considered this and continue to consider it. I’ve challenged my assumptions, read extensively the views and arguments of the other side and so on.

And despite becoming only more confirmed in my initial beliefs (it’s hard to read a lot of the reasoning on the ‘other side’ and not be amazed by how flimsy it is), I still hold the view that I may be wrong.

Now tell me: do you genuinely believe TRAs and their supporters listen to GC arguments in good faith and are prepared to consider they may be wrong? Or are their positions generally characterised by a refusal to engage, misrepresentation, smears and appeals to emotion?

@CurlewKate eh what? I am not "proud of" anything. I was just pointing out that different people have heard of different people, and that I am quite sure there are people that I have heard of that you haven't, just as you were aware of this guy and I wasn't. What's the big deal?

I know. I think you tagged the wrong poster.

No, definitely Lycett. I was surprised because I thought he was gay. Maybe it was something he said live as I can’t find it elsewhere. He definitely said he was with a woman and “loved pussy now”. 🤔

(Don’t follow Izzard anymore.)

As for Joe Lycett, I’ve heard him before on this subject and it was very much the usual righteousness-cum-scolding.

No idea how deeply he has considered the argument. I don’t think being intelligent and switched on necessarily always translates to taking the trouble to interrogate difficult subjects.