B****y BBC

[Sausagenbacon]

Listening to PM tonight, where the story is at the top of the program.
Who do they talk to?
Michael Foran. Obviously a thoroughly decent chap.
Then
A tw, very against the whole thing, obviously.
But what about one of the women who led the appeal. Or any woman.

listening to Nicky Campbell on R5 now.
Julie Bindel and Michael Foran on, plus a TM from an organisation I've never heard of, of very low calibre. JB and MF excellent. Interesting that they don't seem to be able get someone from Stonewall or Mermaids on.

It really is.

And it's all biological men rushing to make it all about MEEEE. No TiW allowed. The likes of Robin Moira and other mediocre bods in need of a usp to stand out.

It's still the same this morning in the media. Oo er missus, we are not allowed in the women's changing rooms and other faux detriments.

No questions at all about how we got to the stage where we all crowdfunded FWS all the way to the Supreme Court. What an achievement that was for women. Very little recogniton of that fight to get there and the reasons why it was necessary.

The Supreme Court was unanimous. Clear in it's statement that protection for trans people exists in law, whilst making it very clear that Sex= Biological Sex in certain areas of law as opposed to Certificated Sex in others.

So ya boo sucks to those who try to remove our legal hard-won rights to dignity and privacy.

.

Maybe calling it out as mansplaining in interviews is what is required.

I should have done the same. Whenever you're feeling fed up with the world a couple of episodes of The Detectorists will put you right.

Pub?

I’m enjoying listening to Nicky Campbell at the moment - and Susan Smith from FWS speaking so clearly and reasonably, she's brilliant.

Helen Joyce was on Times Radio this morning. Times Radio has been great so far today actually.

Don't bother with Jane Garvey. She is uninterested and uninformed on this subject. She said yesterday in discussion with Adam Boulton that when she did Women's Hour they had to cover it but judging by the programme's postbag women weren't actually at all interested in gender issues.

I wonder if the media thought that the judgement would go the other way, and hence lined up a succession of trans activists to crow about it? Then oops, the Supreme Court decided unanimously the other way.

I will never forget Jane Garvey’s sycophantic, fawning interview with Aimee Challoner, back around 2018. If you’ve never seen Aimee in the flesh, you might not realise just what it takes to pretend this hulking being should have access to female only spaces. Aimee was vulnerable, but just not in the way Jane Garvey wanted us to believe.

Michael Foran is really well qualified to talk about this. He's been involved in the field for some time

And when she interviewed Eddie Izzard and kept calling him Suzy-Eddie until he asked her to pick one name or the other 🙄

It's frustrating that trans people (usually men) bang on about needing to be in women's spaces and it's a violation of their rights if they can't be there. Yet they hardly ever talk about the real intention behind the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

You can't deny a transperson a job because they are trans.
You can't refuse them a hotel room.
You can't refuse to serve them in a pub, cafe, shop or restaurant.
You can't bypass them on a housing list.
You can't sack someone for coming out as trans or for being trans at work.
You can't refuse to sell them something if it's for sale, like a house or a Mars bar.
You can't refuse to treat them if they are ill.
Until the law made same sex marriage legal, trans people couldn't get married to someone of the same biological sex. And to be honest, this was the main reason for creating gender reassignment discrimination. There were cases where men identifying as women married other men and their marriages were annulled.

I'd like to see the trans movement discuss the real discrimination they face as listed above rather than insist on invading women's spaces.

She said yesterday in discussion with Adam Boulton that when she did Women's Hour they had to cover it but judging by the programme's postbag women weren't actually at all interested in gender issues.

Possibly because most women genuinely interested in women’s issues recognised decades ago that WH was mostly patronising fluff and had given up on it. I think I stopped listening in the early 2000s.

Nearly spat my drink out when Radio 4 just described Helen Joyce as coming from the “Human Rights charity” Sex Matters
(and waves at @borntobequiet )

For heaven's sake, did anyone listen to Radio 4 news at 1pm - meant to be the whole "world at one" thing - with NOT A SINGLE WOMAN talking about the judgment - but men, only men, including the man who "identifies" as female talking about his cancer?

Not get me wrong, of course all sympathies and good wishes to the man with cancer, but how the fuck is that relevant to the Supreme Court judgment?

The BBC is a cesspit of overpaid smug luvvies who all need to be sacked.

True, but what the men said suggested to me that people are more willing to speak out at last. Let's see what kind of momentum develops out of all this. I've worked in a wide range of environments including the corporate, and the "corporate viewpoint" is like no other. A lot of people will genuinely be in shock. Stages of grief and all that.

This is a line they're trying, Kate Osborne, Labour MP, lesbian and TRA had a piece published in LabourList within a couple of hours of the ruling, saying that biology isn't clear — though not elaborating. This is one of the official lines of defence: obfuscate, confuse and reconquer.

Waving back!

I complained too. It's now been changed (see screenshot when uploaded).

But still not impressed with the overall "but what about the poor trans people?" bias of their reporting.

Wondering how many complaints are flying into the BBC about their outrageously biased coverage.

Mine went in 3 minutes ago and I am still seething.

Mine went in yesterday morning even before the verdict, for the R4 headline news.

I’m sure Kate knows exactly what the biological differences are between males and females.

Just caught Scotland Tonight on ITV just now - three panelists clearly petrified of cancellation. Tone very much a hedged "I do believe rights should be based on sex but what about the twaaaans?" 😔 Toxic debate bingo, shaming the celebrating with champagne, women's sports should be on a case by case basis ("women's darts? I don't care about that! But running, swimming is different"). This wasn't a victory said multiple times. Lots of scorning of women and big concern for men.

Grow a bloody spine!

This was an extraordinary landmark achievement brought by heroic Scottish women in a grassroots campaign, and the most our country's news can muster is But what about the menz???

I had the BBC survey emailed this week and responded that I want more bio women than trans men. It should be proportional to the population - 51% of our population is female, not trans.