Womans Hour Wed 23rd April.

[impossibletoday]

Apparently the women from FWS will be on.....

https://x.com/millihill/status/1914732862894694516?t=dVRYwM118BO_24mO21-05g&s=19

It matters because it is another indication of bias.

My 77 year old mother, who head butted more glass ceilings, (and broke a few) than these pampered idiots have had hot dinners, has been raging for years, and was delighted last Wednesday.

I’d still really love to know what the usual presenters were doing that was so pressing that they couldn’t find the time to fit in a pre-recorded interview. You’d have thought any half decent journalist would have killed to present a story like this, whether they agreed with FWS or not.

Has anything changed in the BBC off the back of Stephen Nolan's report on Stonewall in the BBC and Ofcom? Or did they simply deny there was any bias or influence, and use Nolan's programme to prove that in some form of twisted logic? I always found the "everyone's complaining about us, so we must be doing fine" argument spurious, when one side's complaints come from a culture where "hate", "violence" and other ordinary words have taken on a whole new meaning.

Janice Turner in her Notebook today:
"Late to the party
You run the flagship BBC radio show for women and — wow! — two Scottish women, their arms raised in victory, are pictured outside the Supreme Court on the front page of every national newspaper. They’ve made history! Everyone is talking about their seven-year battle for this landmark ruling on what the hell is a woman.
If you were the Woman’s Hour editor Karen Dalziel, wouldn’t your journalistic instincts tell you to rip up your running order, (maybe cut your 4,000th item on the menopause) and rush these women to the studio? Er, no. Next day, hilariously, WH had a man, Joshua Rozenberg, explain the ruling.
Apart from a brief appearance on World at One, Radio 4 ignored the women: they weren’t interviewed on the Today programme, nor PM, whose presenter Evan Davis sounded delighted to find in Lord Sumption a man to trivialise and misrepresent the judgment (while failing to name the Equality Act correctly), with no balancing voice.
Finally yesterday, after substantial social media pressure, Susan Smith of For Women Scotland appeared on Woman’s Hour. A whole week late. Hey, Karen, what a scoop!"

Bias by whom? The interviewer, the sound engineer who recorded the interview, the producer who edited it? We just don't know and never will. I'm just glad that WH actually interviewed the stunningly good Susan Smith who got all her points across so clearly and well. It was a triumph for her and for FWS.

The BBC.

Same here. I am pleased Susan Smith was given a clear run at her answers. She’s brilliant.

The important thing (imo) is that clear run at the answers. Those listeners who have never really grasped the detail of what this is all about are now actually hearing the GC side of the story properly. Also, our national broadcaster has effectively been forced to start airing properly the GC arguments. Otherwise it would just look absolutely ridiculous given the court ruling.

Listening again; so much time given for answers.

the clip online I interpret as someone on radio really concentrating on their questioning and the answers.