Peter Tatchel talking utter nonsense.

[Alucard55]

It is entirely possible that he is incapable of assimilating new information. He was subjected to so many physical beatings, he has some brain-damage.

This is quite a decent article giving the details, and also a bit about his background.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/20/peter-tatchell-retires-interview

Ha's a male supremacist pure and simple.

Despite paying lip service to left wing ideology which supposedly champions the underdog; on a fundamental level he is only concerned with men and men getting what they want at any given point in time., And if women and children are hurt in the process, crickets.
He really does not have any kind of opinion on that, because... see the first sentence above.

This bit in the Observer article

The way he describes it makes the experience sound almost like a chemical high and I wonder whether there is a part of Tatchell that is addicted to pursuing that single, pure moment of serenity when so much of his life is defined by the persistent threat of danger.

I found myself wondering something similar while I was watching the bit of the Heretics interview I could stomach. Perhaps he had a Stonewall-esque need for a new cause and, like them, landed on TQ+.

Something else that bugged me about the interview was him almost certainly retconning LGB with the rest of the alphabet.

I'm finding this one a struggle to get through, because I cannot believe he is the best the TRAs have. His points are so weak. His stupidity is very irritating. AG is not an intellectual heavyweight but he is able to wipe the floor with the most basic of counterarguments. PT's arguments certainly give the impression (as PPs have said) that he is on this bandwagon because it's a cause that fits with his identity as a campaigner, not because he feels particularly strongly about trans people.

From what I saw of it Andrew Gold was very 'kind' to Tatchell. He really seemed to be buttering him up. I think some of that was genuine, some though, from what I've seen from previous Heretic videos, was just massaging Tatchell's ego to keep him talking. That he didn't see through it, or did and didn't care, says alot about his intelligence and character.

This is EXACTLY what I thought when I read the thread title.

I find it extraordinary that he still seems to on all the producers call lists.

Indeed.

But what I found interesting about this one is that he has to respond to direct challenge in a way that goes beyond what happens in small segments on news slots etc.

Andrew Gold is informed enough to pull him up on things, give him space, keep him talking (I totally agree with the PP above who says that it's likely he tactically speaks to Tatchell's ego at times) etc. This is what's new from my POV.

Yes, it's the same nonsense but explored differently. He's not being pandered to by someone ignorant of the issues. Gold is perhaps in awe of his gay rights campaigning and sympathetic to what he went through. I think that's likely. But he's giving Tatchell the combination of the space and the direct challenge that he rarely gets. Helen Joyce would have achieved it at the IME debate (2022, 2023?), I'm sure. But Freda's performance art and wine-slugging somewhat stole the show.

I find it extraordinary that he still seems to on all the producers call lists.

Producers are trying to get a job done and what they want are known quantities: people with a clear speaking voice who will put forward their point of view, whatever it is, in a reasonably articulate manner, don't have a distracting appearance, don’t um and ah or ramble on at a tangent, and know to shut up when you tell them you're finished.

That is why they call Tatchell and not the activists who pour piss over themselves.

His arguments are so ridiculous. He kept on saying that we need "individual assessments " for trans people in sports. Really? Who's going to do that? It would take ages and be so expensive. What about amateur sports, school sports? They count too. They're where everyone starts off, where we might get a taste for it. Even these competitions need to be fair for girls. He really hasn't thought this through. Or maybe he has but doesn't care about women and girls.

Individual assessments He thinks his tw friend is okay because he's smaller and weaker than some women and that makes it okay, but if twaw then some actual women might be barred if they're too big and strong.

Individuals should be assessed. If they're men they don't play in the women's sports. No need to over complicate it.

It's also a really stupid argument when it comes to audiences. When I watch women's athletics, I want to see who the fastest woman is, what a woman is capable of doing. I have no interest in watching a mixed sex group. This "inclusion" ruins sports for everyone.