BBC claim 'Grover is a self-declared ‘TERF’ - an acronym that stands for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist.” TERFs’ views on gender identity are widely considered to be hostile to trans people.'

[ArabellaScott]

Bullshit, BBC.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07ev1v7r4po

Make a complaint here:

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

I'm trying to imagine them using any other slur, even one that has been reclaimed, in that manner.

This is the only mention of terf and the BBC are very clear on its usage. I mean, I can only agree with her.

"Grover is a self-declared Terf, which stands for "trans-exclusionary radical feminist". Typically used as a derogatory term for those considered hostile to transgender people, it has also been claimed by some to describe their own gender-critical beliefs."

Is the BBC missing the point, or side-stepping neatly around it?

You are missing the subtle manipulation here.

That's understandable. When manipulation lines up with your worldview it is harder to spot.

I'll point it out to you.

"Grover is a self-declared Terf, which stands for "trans-exclusionary radical feminist". Typically used [by who?] as a derogatory term for those considered [by who?] hostile to transgender people, it has also been claimed by some [who?] to describe their own gender-critical beliefs [which are?]"

Do you see it now? The use of the passive voice in the phrase "typically used" obscures that TERF is not an everyday term, but one used by highly partisan political gender activists, a group who are far from neutral and therefore a group whose assessment of what is "hostile" to trans people should not be taken at face value.

Similarly, the passive voice in "claimed by some" hides exactly who objects to genderist demands (mostly women) and obscures the basis on which these objections arise (the reality of sex, the fact of sexism and the needs that arise because of it), denying the reader the opportunity to draw their own conclusions as to the validity or otherwise of these objections.

Finally, contrast "Typically used", implying a commonly accepted standard understanding, and "claimed by some" implying a disputed, minority perspective.

Overall this statement is far, far, far from objective, and a great example of how to use language to delegitimise a valid position without having to actively engage with it.

Oh the bbc said it, how surprising. Sal Grover is in the right, the hostile one is the man emulating a woman. Off to make a complaint, thanks for the link.

There are people who are logic-chopping, hair-splitting, barrack room lawyers. I don't know of any slick acronym to describe these people but I am certain that @DadJoke wouldn't adopt that acronym.

Thanks, Flirts. That is a very clear explanation. I'll put that in my Stage two complaint, if that's okay with you?

'Typically used as a derogatory term for those considered hostile to transgender people'

Also totally inaccurate. As has been said many times, feminists aren't 'hostile' to 'transgender people'.

We just want female only spaces, services and rights, based on biological sex, like virtually ever person who's ever lived wanted until five minutes ago when someone decided that men who call themselves women are the most oppressed group in the world.

It very carefully says "considered" hostile to transgender people. This is neutral language.

Some people consider that terfs are hostile to transgender people, for example, pretty much every single transgender person.

Now, clearly, Grover either doesn't think terfs are hostile to transgender people, or she does and she doesn't care. The BBC does not take a position on this.

It carefully does not say who is doing this "considering".

This is not neutral langauge. The BBC absolutely is taking a position.

Some people consider that terfs are hostile to transgender people, for example, pretty much every single transgender person.

Nonsense.

Yep I was going to say this Arabella. They are plenty who know fine. The BBC apparently have a higher percentage of trans identified staff compared to the general population so of course they are on the tra gender identity ideology side. Not neutral whatsoever.

"Typically used" means its most common usage. It's most common usage is a derogatory term. It doesn't for a moment suggest it isn't derogatory. This is neutral.

It has been claimed by some (Grover and some others gender critical people) - the BBC doesn't have to lay this out to be neutral.

TERF is used an insult most commonly. It's occasionally claimed by gender critical people. This is neutral.

Not setting out the gender critical position is neutral.

In my view it puts far too much emphasis on Grover and her beliefs, but I can live with that.

Setting out one position, but not the opposing one is now a neutral position. I see.

You've missed the point. I didn't say "typically" somehow means "not derogatory". What I am calling out is the BBC's use of the passive voice to obscure the partisan nature of this "typical" use, and the contrast of "typically used" implying a standard, accepted usage, versus "claimed by some" implying a disputed position, when in fact both positions are partisan and disputed.

From the BBC's phrasing one woudl not know whether the phrase is "typically used" as a common phrase across a wide ranging and varied section of society, or "typically used" by a small politically aligned group. These are two very different things. Of course it is the latter that is the case. This is significant so if the BBC were truly neutral they would be clear about exactly who does "typically" use TERF as a derogatory term.

Yes of course. Although might be worth waiting in case @DadJoke helps me refine the arguments ;)

It is literally typically used as a derogatory term. That means in most instances of its use it’s derogatory. It’s not otherwise used. This is factual
and indisputable. I do not see what your issue with this is. It makes no difference whether a lot of people use it, or only a few. It’s derogatory.

They could have added “by transgender people, most feminists and LGBT people” but that is superfluous even if it wouldn’t affect its neutrality.

FlirtsWithRhinos · Today 21:44

Thanks for your excellent analysis there.

They could have added “by transgender people, most feminists and LGBT people” but that is superfluous

Amd also wrong, and partisan.

"by trans rights activists and others who support the replacement of sex with gender identity as a derogatory term for people who do not agree with them" would be accurate.

Sal Grover was peaked by "trans" men's (edit for clarity: men who pretend to be women) behaviour. She used to be in favour of them till she experienced what they're like.

Why the hell shouldn't women be hostile to predatory fetishists? All our hostility amounts to is wanting men to leave us alone and to have sex-based rights - something we here in Australia, among other countries, are fast losing.

Thinking again today, I also reject your assertion that being explicit about who "typically" uses the word TERF as a derogatory term is "superfluous".

Sure, it's superfluous to you because you already know the context (although as noted above, your "neutral" assessment is actually pretty biased), but to anyone who does not know the context it is important to be specific because otherwise they might incorrectly assume the "typical" use is widespread rather than confined to a specific political stance.

And, since someone like yourself who already knows the context already knows what TERF means/how it is "typically" used wouldn't need the explanation at all - ie to such a person the whole statement would be superfluous - clearly the target audience is people who do not have this context and therefore who do need the full picture. The full picture being not just that a certain usage is typical but also within which group(s) it is typical.

To do otherwise is partisan and manipulative, and I'm sure you would not support that. If the Trans Activist case is true and just it should be able to stand up in the light of full information not hide behind half truths and implications.

Most feminists, most women and I'd wager a majority of Gays, Bisexual and Lesbians (certainly lesbians as they are female) support Grover's views.

Trans supporters are in the tiny fringe minority. Poll after poll shows this, it's a fact, sorry.

BBC is failing in its educational remit when it introduces a novel political term without explaining it (just telling us what various factions think of it).

If they explain it, readers can judge for themselves whether it's derogatory, or implies anti-trans hostility.

I suggest:

Grover is a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist). TERFs believe that women are disadvantaged because of their female-sexed bodies (smaller and weaker; able to give birth), and that the fight against that disadvantage is not relevant to transwomen, because they do not have female-sexed bodies.

Well, I can dream, I suppose.

Is there anything to suggest Grover is a radical feminist at all? One can want crossdressing men out of women's spaces without being any sort of feminist. I also suspect the BBC has no idea what radical feminism is, any more than the TPAs who use the term "terf" do.

Well, she is claiming to be a TERF, and that's what it stands for. But maybe she thinks it just means sex-realist?