Are Transwomen male or female? Ask the BBC

[Justme56]

https://pressgazette.co.uk/the-wire/newspaper-corrections-media-mistakes-errors-legal/justin-webb-bbc-today-trans-complaint/

Would letters to the chair make a difference, rather than complaints? Also to the Culture & Media Secretary?

Thinking along the lines of out of line with charter, possibly illegal cf Maya, and therefore potentially costly?

And what about a licence fee strike? Would love to have a prosecution go forward where the defendant says they identify as someone who does not own a TV.

Just a note of warning - If you do make a complaint to the BBC remember to check your junk email as they require you to verify the link they send within 60 minutes. I hadn’t realised they did this and so now have to resubmit my complaint.

Justin has integrity, unlike his colleague JV over on R2. He stated a fact - that the murderer being discussed is male, not female - so I don’t understand the basis of looking into a nutty complaint about him. Does the BBC not allow their (flagship) radio news programme to be factually correct?

I always thought that in interviews, Justin appeared to cut women off more than men, so I find him frustrating to listen to. But now he’s gone up in my estimation!

Already deleted the BBC app…

Can someone tell me what the John Lewis thing was?

Some people believe the earth is flat. This is a viewpoint, it isnt true.

Some people believe that transwomen are women. This is a viewpoint, it isnt true.

If flat earthers complained to the BBC every time reference is made to our planets properties as a sphere or a globe would the BBC take that complaint seriously?

The fuck they would.

Whatthechicken · Yesterday 19:36

He was stating a fact, how can a fact be wrong? I am terrified for my daughter.

That's exactly what got me to take note of what's happening, I worry about my daughter. She coming up to 11 and is full on TWAW, with close "trans girl" friend. She thinks that misgendering is worse than the racism she's experienced.

SlumberDearMaid · Yesterday 20:56

Being GC is still extremely niche. And it’s dangerous to put your head above the parapet. When you go onto SM, everyone’s TWAW and #bekind….

I think you're right to an extent, but many people are probably technically GC, without really thinking about it; many people will roll their eyes, or comment "FFS" on news articles. Mumsnet is social media, as is Twitter and you can now comment in a GC fashion, with little fear of being deleted, or banned.

But, bearing in mind some of the recently settled and indeed, ongoing cases, where women have been harassed and bullied, I well understand the fear of putting one's head above the parapet. You are very likely to win a lawsuit, but at what personal cost?

The problem with the Maya judgement is that it protects gender critical views as a ‘philosophical belief’. BBC news reporters shouldn’t be sharing their philosophical beliefs at work.

But, ESPECIALLY in a highly controversial area, they do need to be clear about facts.

That humans are sexually dimorphic, and human sex is immutable, isn’t a ‘philosophical belief’ it’s just fact. We need some sort of legal protection for stating facts, however much some people are distressed by the truth.

If a publicly funded broadcasting service can’t explain the facts of a news story to the public, what the fuck is the point of it?

https://twitter.com/simonjedge/status/1763455402044170722

BREAKING: A BBC panel has reprimanded Sir David Attenborough for breaking impartiality rules and referring to the earth as spherical, after a complaint from the Flat Earth Society

😏

I wonder if they'll do Richard Dawkins, next. And Robert Winston.

I am hoping that this decision may in fact be a good thing - an unequivocal statement of restrictions on stating facts which may force a rethink from the BBC. Daily Mail and Telegraph have both written about it.

👌🤣

Unfortunately I think that would be him giving his personal ‘belief’ within in his BBC role. That is not allowed.

It was not been established by the Maya case that she could talk about the reality of sex because it is ‘true’. Only because it is a reasonable belief. ( I think. I am not in the legal profession.)

Simon Edge bang on the money, as usual.

It was not been established by the Maya case that she could talk about the reality of sex because it is ‘true’. Only because it is a reasonable belief. ( I think. I am not in the legal profession.)

Yep.

Beliefs are protected, stating verifiable facts isn't.

Perhaps for the same reason schools don't usually have a ban on bullfighting, because no one realised it might actually be needed?

It is the new BBC English that once was so revered

The famous BBC are also now even basing their language standards on the sort of English used by Greater Manchester police. (This is accordingly to the BBC themselves in their response emails to those complaining about some of their recent reports.)

Exactly

Cases alleging discrimination can only be brought relating to the "protected characteristics" in the Equality Act 2010.

Those who drafted that Act did not anticipate having to make "telling the truth" and "stating facts" protected characteristics.

So, is the BBC position that the only way to describe a transwoman is by never alluding to that person's sex? It's impartial to just not talk about it? Deleting pronouns is impartial. Staying silent is impartial. Turning a blind eye is impartial.

I'm not sure they've thought this through.

🤣 A good idea. And get very angry and file a complaint if the BBC takes up the story and happens to report that we are part of a cohort who are actually women.

Imagine if he said said something as plain and unglamorous as saying 'a man'.

No rainbows. No glitter or Otherness. Just.....a man.

wtf is supposed to be the difference between 'male' and 'biologically male'?
The latter is mere tautology, 'male' is a purely biological descriptor.

A world where the Daily Mail has the facts, and the BBC and Guardian continue to brainwash...

Looking at a few BBC articles it appears male and female have several meanings. Biological when discussing single sex spaces and sports but also reference to having a ‘male’ or ‘female’ gender identity. I guess when you have legislation that introduces the legal fiction of changing sex, it creates this utter mess.

Unbelievable, outrageous and frightening that referring to a biological male as male is not allowed.
Does anyone have ideas on how to escalate this? How can this be allowed to stand? Do we write to MPs? Or the BBC Board?