Private Eye on the Supreme Court judgment

[Manderleyagain]

I hope the images appear the right way around.

'Lady Justice' has covered the supreme court ruling, and how Starmer and others have struggled with the issue.

On the most recent edition of HIGNFY, Ian Hislop (and Jo Brand) mentioned death threats. It was a shame that neither said from where such threats came, or may be their words were edited. I guess this was not the hill on which he was prepared to die.

Helen Lewis, who contributes to Private Eye, as well as The Atlantic etc, has expressed some GC views on their fortnightly podcast; I've wondered in the past if Ian Hislop has pulled his punches because of a young trans relative or friend's child. I'd prefer that, as a long term PE subscriber, to the thought that he genuinely doesn't understand - or care - why women are so exercised by this matter. But...

Has anyone seen the recent Matt cartoons in The Telegraph? He has a genius ability for combining two current issues into one cartoon.

Example 1: Two people outside the Houses of Parliament with puffs of smoke rising above it (referencing the Papal Conclave to elect a new Pope). Caption: "The white smoke means that Keir Starmer has decided what a woman is".

Example 2: Two male magicians and a sign saying "The Magic Circle". Caption: "This used to be an all-male society, but then Keir Starmer said a woman CAN have a magic wand" (referencing the woman who pretended to be a man to join The Magic Circle in 1991 and has recently been given membership).

Pity they didn't have the balls to cover it properly on HIGNFY

Thanks for the reminder bonfirelady

”So don’t you dare try to cast me as unhinged when you all broke your necks looking the other way”

if the cartoon was aimed at Labour politicians they can respond with pot and kettle. Stopped watching HIGNFY as they were such cowards.

I found that piece, like just about everything Private Eye has done on this issue, which isn't much, extremely disappointing. The hand-waving 'both sides!' tone is a real cop out and to give special mention to Wes Streeting whilst completely ignoring the fact that Kemi Badenoch led the charge against the gender nuts in Parliament, and Sajid Javid commissioned the Cass Review (I think at Kemi's urging) is either so careless as to be insulting, or actively partisan. Bad, bad, bad. I'm sorry I forgot to cancel my subscription last time it came round. I won't make that mistake again.

There are two types of satire. There is the type that observes every inconsistent behaviour of the establishment, questions if this can be magnified to make the establishment look ridiculous and, if so, lets rip. There is the second type of satire that is broadly aligned with the establishment. It will point out egregious errors but is much happier when taking the piss out of views that challenge the establishment.

Sadly, HIGNFY and PE are not only part of the second type but are actually part of the establishment that they pretend to satirise.

I mean HIGNY and PE like to think they're roaring defiance at the establishment, but they're mostly giving us conventional wisdom with an irreverent tone.

I have a sentimental fondness for the Eye, having been a reader since my teens, but it's a bit like hearing Jackson Browne taking to the airwaves to promote his new album of protest songs that really stick it to Ronald Reagan.

Yes! He’s brilliant.

I can’t stand Ian Hislop these days. What a disappointment. He prides himself on the Eye doing those kind of long running stories where things are returned to over months and years and developments reported on which is absolutely perfect for this topic. But it’s just women’s rights so absolutely not worth the effort.

You know, if it were just women’s rights I could almost forgive Hislop. It’s what this movement has done to children I can’t forgive him ignoring. The fact that GP never so much as touched the issue of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones, not to mention massive, mostly experimental surgeries performed on young patients, until after the Cass Review, and even then did so in the mildest terms, with cap doffing reference to ‘trans youth in desperate need of treatment now suffering delays and uncertainty’, really, really appalls me. Similarly that the Eye had nothing to say about some NHS Trusts encouraging trans identified men on a cocktail of hormone treatment to ‘breastfeed’ their newborns the better to experience trans euphoria. And that the Eye simply winked as children were taught they could be born in the wrong body, and told their parents could be lied to by schools ‘affirming’ their trans identities. The list goes on, doesn’t it? The damage done to those young people most caught up in this has been grotesque. And Hislop didn’t think it mattered.

💯

At some point I will rummage in Stonewall's accounts since 2010, and work out how much their total income has been in that time, and roughly how many GN facilities that could have supplied.

Agreed.

I would like to see Ian Hislop "do a John Boyne" (or an Andrew Neil) and state that he hadn't understood it, recognises that others were there before him and is listening now.

The article credits Wes Streeting with having done this - and rightly so... Although Wes does unfortunately still seem attached to the clinical trials of PBs for now, so he's still on the same journey that others are further along.

Now is the time for Ian Hislop to do this. If he's serious about speaking up, it's not enough to say that his words were cut from an episode of HIGNFY. The impact on children is the way to hold his hands up at having got it wrong - and really hold the politicians' feet to the fire. Yes, it's a serious subject but the scope for satire is there too - I don't have it to hand but there was a fantastic parody thread on X about supporting children in their right to be their authentic selves through smoking cigarettes ("at 3 years old they may not be ready to smoke yet but if they identify as a smoker, it's important to listen to them. Maybe give them one to hold so they get time to see if it's right for them" etc - paraphrased).

Yes, that would be a good way for Hislop to claw his way back from this dereliction of duty. Can’t say I agree with you about the Streeting part of the piece so much. Yes, Streeting is almost alone amongst senior figures in his party for taking this seriously and it’s good that he made the ban on PBs outside clinical trials permanent, but the commissioning of the Cass Review and the initial ban on blockers was nothing to do with him. Badenoch in particular deserves a mention and it’s pretty shoddy not to give her one given that she really stick her neck out on this when it was deeply unfashionable to do so.

Can’t say I agree with you about the Streeting part of the piece so much. Yes, Streeting is almost alone amongst senior figures in his party for taking this seriously and it’s good that he made the ban on PBs outside clinical trials permanent, but the commissioning of the Cass Review and the initial ban on blockers was nothing to do with him. Badenoch in particular deserves a mention and it’s pretty shoddy not to give her one given that she really stick her neck out on this when it was deeply unfashionable to do so.

Oh, I agree. I was thinking of Streeting as an example of someone who a) is later to the party than others on recognising what's going on and b) has made it clear that he accepts this and, crucially, that he has changed his mind.

Kemi Badenoch, Rosie Duffield, Neale Hanvey, Sajid Javid, Victoria Atkins and many others in Westminster deserve credit for what they have done. As do many Scottish ministers in Holyrood.

Absolutely— I don’t recall seeing much mention of Joanna Cherry, for instance. It just infuriates me that Wesley come lately gets the glory in this piece while the braver politicians, mostly women, get ignored. At least Rosie Duffield is acknowledged in the WhatsApp group column.

Hear hear.

And not just ignored, most of those women have taken hell on toast for daring to speak and did from the start. Men never need to try or do much at all.

Too right. Until I see Hislop issuing a full and frank apology to J K Rowling, Maya Forstater, Graham Linehan, and the other, less known, early voices who stood down the fury of the TRA movement at its high tide, at great personal cost, I will hold him in pretty low regard.

Too little, too late. They can just fuck off

My first thought about the article was "good article". My second thought was "And where were YOU?"

The Nursery Times was quite funny and even a little bit risky (the wolf!)

(You meaning Private Eye)

Apart from not crediting those who were earlier and more pivotal than streeting I think the artical was good. It covers alot and is written by someone who fully understands what has been going on. It's difficult to articulate this whole bloody thing in a concise way because there's so much of it and it's so maddening. It's sounds bonkers. But the writer (possibly helen lewis?) managed to explain it in a way that sounded calm and sane. Readers who haven't been up on it will have learnt alot.

I agree with the 'too little too late'sentiment. They have covered things, but mainly issues around the edge - the way the press covered something, something in rotten boroughs, something about embarrassing political interviews...

The main central issue should have been right up their street. The supreme court ruling makes us ask the question - how did it happen that an erroneous and discriminatory version of the law has been pushed forcefully in every part of government and all our civil society institutions for over a decade? The Eye could have been investigating it and covering it as it happened, but i guess Hislop didnt see it. We now know that the resulting mistreatment of women, some truly vulnerable women, was unlawful. And yet still the media, politicians, academics, trade unions, employers, all jump to ask 'what about trans woman who will be affected by people getting the law right?' But never 'what about the women who were affected by people getting the law wrong?'

They still could cover the issue properly as it unfolds, and they should.

I think I will write a letter to them. I would encourage anyone who is still a reader to do the same. I'm not naive enough to think there will be a change of course, but I believe some journalists there have wanted to cover it.

Spotted in the current issue

The Eye cautiously sticking its neck out!

Maybe this is one of those signs, like when Tim Pool does a podcast promising to reveal some exciting esoteric knowledge, and you know that Tim having heard of something is a sign that everyone else knows about it.