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/

Male/female can refer to either gender or sex. 'Biologically male' denotes biological sex.

By that reasoning, 'male' or 'female' should probably always be distinguished by stating either 'of male gender' or 'biologically male'. Using just the words 'male' or 'female' is now too ambiguous in modern life.

[Caveat: this only seems to apply to humans. Animals can still be referred to as male or female and everyone knows what that means. For now...]

So close to cancelling my licence fee.

But Cbeebies is needed.

Male/female can refer to either gender or sex. say what now?

First they came for "man" and "woman"

Edited to add: Then they came for "male" and "female".

Now look on the web and you will find plenty of people and stes that claim transwomen are biologically female

Any person with a penis is male.

It would be ludicrous to see any media source as having 'the facts' about everything.

The problem here is what people consider to be subjective belief. This is where Forstater cam be problematic as it specifically says that 'sex is immutable' is a belief not a fact. But what is the option when sex is being defined as nothing to do with a complete body and a whole person, and is stated to be (eg) something assigned at birth, or a 'collection of data points' that is mutable?

Anyone with a penis is a man. Simples

Anyone whose body is formed around the production of small gametes is a male, even if he was born without a penis, has lost his penis or has had his penis removed.

Male/female can refer to either gender or sex.

Well they bloody well shouldn't. Gender has its own perfectly good terms, 'masculine' and 'feminine', without diluting the specific meaning of male and female.
Of course this linguistic shift is entirely deliberate by the colonisers.

I am pretty confused by the BBC's stance

It seems to me that the BBC could be holding one of two positions.

That the question of whether self-id trumps sex is a matter of opinion and Justin Webb was biased by voicing an opinion on this matter. This is my reading of the wording of their judgment. By this logic, it is then open season for complaints to the BBC on the many many articles that endorse without balance the opposite opinion (ie self-id trumps sex) for being biased in favour of the opposite opinion

2nd alternative - that self-id always takes precedent over sex to the extent that sex is no longer mentionable and that this is such a settled fact that it does not need any consideration of balance. If this is the BBC's position then there is no need to consider alternative opinions and indeed any voicing of them is considered bias.

If it is the second one then I guess then that is a matter for way above the heads of the complaints people and one for writing to MPs, FOIs etc on exactly when this became BBC policy that any mention of sex is automatically bias.

Gender exists, in some people's minds - even if you don't believe in it.

From the OP link:

A listener complained that the comment amounted to Webb giving his personal view on a controversial matter in breach of the BBC’s requirements on impartiality.

There is fuck all controversial about it. It is a simple matter of fact. Facts should not be 'controversial' or disputed. It is not Big Endians against Little Endians

Gender exists, in some people's minds - even if you don't believe in it.

Yes, Gender is fantasy.

Yes, a million times. So true. You and Orwell have got it so right.

So do God and the Devil and pixies. I am not required to join anyone else’s thinking just as you are not required to think or believe what I think and believe. Did you think forced religion was a good thing?

The BBC seem pretty confused themselves. They now start the Scarlet Blake report with “A murderer who led a man to his death” not man or woman or transgender woman but let’s just stick with “murderer”
Would love to know how many complaints they received about the reporting

If every single person has not sent a letter of complaint to the BBC you are part of the problem, enabling this by not standing up to be counted.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints

take 2 minutes. Get ChatGPT to help you write it. BUT WRITE IT.

So in addition to Sturgeon's 'rapist gender' we've now got 'murderer gender'. With the linking characteristic being that both are male. And that both parties trying to find a way to describe these males without saying 'male' are going for total incoherence as their best option in their attempt to find a path between an ideology they're in hock to, angry nutjobs who will attack if they speak the Forbidden Words, and a general public increasingly fed up with all this shit.

It's like Sorry I haven't A Clue, doing both the 'describe something without using the word' game, and a few rounds of Mornington Crescent.

My complaint letter

Letter of Complaint to the BBC
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to express my deep dissatisfaction and anger regarding the BBC's recent decision to uphold a complaint against Justin Webb for his comments during a discussion on the International Chess Federation guidelines. This decision not only undermines the very essence of factual reporting but also sets a dangerous precedent for the distortion of impartiality within your broadcasting.
Asserting facts should never be conflated with imparting opinion. The necessity for impartiality lies in the realm of subjective debate, not in the dissemination of verifiable truths. To illustrate, stating that the Earth is not flat but spherical is a reflection of scientific consensus, not a breach of impartiality. Similarly, the discussion of biological realities should not be deemed partial or biased.
The implication of your ruling suggests an alarming shift towards a landscape where factual accuracy is sacrificed at the altar of perceived impartiality. This not only misguides the public but also compromises the integrity of journalism. The case in question, where biological distinctions were made in the context of a sports advantage discussion, should not be misconstrued as bias but recognized as a necessary part of factual discourse.
By upholding this complaint, the BBC inadvertently signals that acknowledging biological sex in any context may violate your impartiality guidelines. This stance is not only scientifically untenable but also a disservice to the public's right to informed and accurate reporting.
I urge you to reconsider this decision and the broader implications it holds for journalistic integrity and the pursuit of truth. Your commitment to impartiality should not entail a disregard for factual accuracy.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]

Open letter here signed by 70 writers and journalists.

https://twitter.com/JournalistJill/status/1763525599723741557/photo/1

I'll attach a picture for those not on X but not sure it'll be readable.

It's not a 'view,it's a cold,hard fact you fucking dinkles.

Female and male are biological descriptions so the BBC is failing to use language accurately.

I’ve done it a few days ago re Scarlet Blake.

I’ll make them take it/me to Ofcom.

Publicly protesting the BBC would be a good start in direct action.

Good grief. Lord save us from such nonsense.

I used to know a homeless guy who was 100% convinced he was best mates with Cliff Richard.