Government Petition For BBC To Record Sex Accurately - Interested?

[NameChangeForPetition]

Hi all,

Already a poster, but have name changed for this.

Recent events have had me writing for the last 24 hours on & off to draft a government petition requesting a debate on accurate reporting of offenders' sex by the BBC. I was up til 2am last night on it and have finished it now - pleased with the wording given the restrictions on number of characters, & with one friend all ready to sign as one of the initial 5 needed...

BUT...

I've got to put my name to it. Like others on here, in the current context that feels like a huge deal. I mean, the odds are that it'll fizzle into nothing, but if it doesn't, there are such genuine risks associated with putting yourself out there on this issue that, yes, it concerns me.

I was on the cusp of going for it, then asked a friend's advice. She's totally on board, rational & understated... yet her response can best be summed up as, "Hell no - don't do it!" She mentioned family & work among other concerns. It hit quite hard.

It maddens me that we're at the point where a woman is wary of putting her name to a carefully worded, factually grounded & empathetic petition asking Parliament to respect the truth and her rights - it's a measure of how bad things are. But, thinking of family & emotional health, it has, regrettably, given me pause.

So. To get to the point.

This friend suggested doing it via an organisation - I wondered about eg. Sex Matters. But then, if they were going to petition Parliament on this, surely they would have done so already (and they don't need my input or words to do so!) Any thoughts?

Alternatively, I wondered if one of you lovely people wanted to join forces. If there's someone out there who's feeling, as I did 24 hours ago, that they'd like to put something together but just can't face the effort to word it - if THAT was the hard bit for you - then I've done it. If you wanted to take over, to take it to the next stage - upload it etc. - then I could share what I've written, you could agree / edit / disregard or re-write as preferred, & I could offer my signature in support...

Then, with your courage and my words... etc. etc. etc.! This whole thing is about teamwork, after all.

I hope this doesn't sound hypocritical or weak, but, rather, is taken in the spirit in which it's intended: I want, so desperately, to take action, but, like so many of us, worry about the implications.

If there's anyone braver - or more foolish! - than me out there... Let me know.

Alternatively, if you'd be up for being an initial signatory, do also let me know. I've not yet decided against posting it myself; it's just a matter of which I worry I may regret more: doing it, or not doing it!

PS Haven't yet sussed the personal message function, but am sure can work it out; maybe just let me know on this thread if you decide to PM me. Or just use the thread.

I'm sorry I don't feel able to help but posting to bump this up
would be very happy to sign of course

Thanks so much. I'm looking into a few other routes, too.

I've emailed the Petitions Committee to share that many women would like to, but feel unable to, use the petitions route to challenge the BBC, asking what they can do about the fear of doxxing etc. that disproportionately affects eg. GC feminists and is damaging to our democracy (maybe allowing petitioners to record their details anonymously, making them available only to Parliament?)

I've also emailed Sex Matters suggesting a petition. It feels a bit forward - I'm sure they've considered it as they focus so closely on this issue - but...

...The time just seems irresistibly ripe for action as people are becoming more aware of this Orwellian misrepresentation of the facts...

Maybe a petition to get the gvt to tell organisations eg. The Police, the BBC to use biological sex in reporting crimes?

>>change.Org
After 10,000 signatures, petitions get a response from the government. After 100,000 signatures, petitions are considered for debate in Parliament.

That's pretty much what I've drafted, designed for that website - it's good to go. But with a focus on the BBC (thought: one focus at a time, it's our national broadcaster, it's caught the public interest right now etc. - tactics).

I'm just concerned re: the implications of putting myself out there if it did blow up - which, of course, is what we'd like!

Well, this website:

Know what you mean. Can it be done with a pseudonym? Robert Galbraith? ..

Googled that. Get the impression there are issues with legality that could undermine any progress the petition makes... :(

Let me know if you find anything different, though!

I wont advise you either way. You're not wrong that there are risks, you're not wrong that there might be fallout for you personally for putting your name to this.

But I will say from personal experience that once you do it there's a liberation you feel for not having given in and you also find new friends and support you didn't expect. What you find, sometimes, is not that there weren't consequences but that you could handle them.

It's entirely your call and I think everybody understands the fear of standing up - because that fear is justified. I'm just saying that you're more resilient than you think. Fear is how so few can control so many.

I'd also like to see this petition and I'm sure others would to. Once submitted it can't be edited I think. So getting feedback before it goes up (from whoever). is a good idea

And if that doesn't work, you could always nail it to Westminster doors in the middle of the night, Martin Luther style.

Look this. We are in a position where we are not confident to put our names to starting a petition about (essentially) saying sex is real and sex matters, for fear of reprisals. Such an unbelievable state of affairs. Where is our free speech? Our human rights. This is shocking.

The draft is below.

A few details: 1) It looks brief, but is right up* *to the character limit on each of the three sections. 2) The second section doesn't directly address the prompt, but this is intentional; if you look on the website, the three sections are published as three sequential paragraphs creating an overall argument without sub-headings, so I've written them to fit this final presentation; 3) It's deliberately focussed on a very specific issue, & worded to encourage a wide range of signatories. It's also, quite simply, what I believe.

Dunno if it looks likely to achieve that, of course! 😅

If anyone is interested, please do get in touch. In the meantime, I'm hoping for a reply from the Committee (incl. on its validity as it's organisation-specific - see standards outlined on website) and/or Sex Matters now too, so am not uploading anything for a while at least (if ever!)

What do you want us to do?

Address BBC bias to prevent it from misleading the public about offenders' sex.

Tell us more about what you want the Government or Parliament to do.

Reporting on "sex or gender identity [should be] accurate” and journalists should not publish "misleading information” (IPSO). However, the BBC refers to trans women offenders as “women” and “female”. In contrast, it upheld a complaint of bias after a presenter mentioned trans sportswomen are male.

Tell us more about why you want the Government or Parliament to do it.

This has concerning implications for democracy. Re-defining "woman” and “female” to describe male offenders erases the words women need to advocate for sex-based rights, erodes public trust in the media and inflames tensions in this debate. The public cannot be aware of, understand, and discuss concerns such as single-sex provision, prisons and robust data collection without clear language and accurate information. Our national broadcaster must not distort public understanding of these issues.

@Fruityful 😂

That's very well-written. It's concise, clear and relevant. The only thought I had is if it would gain more traction if it generalised in both directions rather than specific examples being focused on MtF. But there are strict word limits and this is the most important consequence. I don't think it would make any difference and quite possibly would detract. So well done, imo. That is excellent work. I'm sure it would get quite a few sign-ups from here and if it can get featured in more mainstream places, it should get more. Even if you don't put this up under your own name, you should still be proud of it.

Thanks so much, Fruity. Posts not getting much traction here today - not sure why - so input especially appreciated. :)

This is what the ‘BBC Style Guide’ says

’Transgender, or trans, is an umbrella term for a person whose gender identity differs from their sex recorded at birth. A person born male who lives as a female, would typically be described as a “transgender woman” and would take the pronoun “she”. And vice versa. We generally use the term and pronoun preferred by the person in question, unless there are editorial reasons not to do so. If that’s unknown – apply that which fits with the way the person lives publicly. If reporting on someone who is making their transition public, it may be appropriate to refer to their previous identity to help audience understanding. It may also be appropriate to refer to a transition to make sense of some stories.’

They also have the category ‘gender / sex’. As if interchangeable. What a load of bs. So simplistic, so facile. So basic it’s embarrassing. No consideration of context or reality. Or consequences.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsstyleguide/g

Is this within the remit of parliamentary petitions?

There could certainly be one on accurate recording of crimes by ONS and police forces, but I don't think parliament actually has control of the language used by the BBC. If it doesn't, the petition won't be accepted.

I think the wider point about the difficulty of raising a petition at all is an excellent one. But no point putting effort into one that will fall at the first hurdle.

I'm not sure. But getting it debated would carry some weight in and of itself. And if Parliament doesn't have the remit to do this then it highlights that the BBC is a law unto itself in a way.

The point is it won't get get debated.

A petition will not be accepted to go up on the site for signing, never mind getting any government response or debate, if the matter is not within parliament's remit.

And of course the BBC is 'a law unto itself' (although less than it should be). It may be a state-funded broadcaster, but it is specifically and explicitly set up to be independent of government.

https://petition.parliament.uk/help

"Standards for petitons
Petitions must call for a specific action from the UK Government or the House of Commons. Petitions must be about something that the Government or the House of Commons is directly responsible for."

OP, I don’t think the government has any authority over the BBC or other media sources.

What the government can do is insist that all official statistics must record sex accurately. I would support a petition asking the government to do this.

Gender identity could be added as an extra option (not an alternative), and would be relevant in some cases eg crime statistics. But correctly recording sex is essential.

Statistics are worthless if based on incorrect information, and we know that is happening now.

Agree with last few posters. Parliament does not control the BBC.
Could it be recast as a petition on recording the sex of criminals? There was a thread on that recently and I presume Parliament would get a say in this.

I would sign it if it went up, but I agree I don’t think it will be accepted as I don’t think it is within the remit of Parliament. I would definitely sign one to address the root cause which is to force police forces to record crime by sex.