Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Munroe Bergdorf on the BBC

62 replies

TonTonMacoute · 02/07/2025 10:13

Article by Gareth Roberts. I always chuckle at his articles even when the subject matter makes my blood boil.

This section sums it up

Bergdorf goes on. And on. And on. ‘We are constantly told that trans people are an abomination, that we shouldn’t even be friends with trans people, that you shouldn’t employ trans people,’ Bergdorf says, speaking from an alternative universe where that is actually happening.
Who exactly is ‘constantly telling’ us this? Who is saying we shouldn’t be friends with trans people? And which companies have said they won’t give them a job? There aren’t any, because if there were, they’d soon find themselves in court.

The BBC lets lies like this go completely unchallenged, they've completely lost the plot frankly.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-is-the-bbc-so-obsessed-with-munroe-bergdorf/#comments-container

Why is the BBC so obsessed with Munroe Bergdorf?

Munroe Bergdorf's appearance on the ‘How To Be In Love’ podcast series discussion on iPlayer marks a new, desperate low

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-is-the-bbc-so-obsessed-with-munroe-bergdorf/#comments-container

OP posts:
moto748e · 02/07/2025 17:38

MarieDeGournay · 02/07/2025 11:10

Sorry, but I just can't get past 'Lesbians look like Justin Bieber' as an insult.
When I was a young dyke-about-town, looking like Justin Bieber would have been a distinct advantage😄
Not so much looking like JB now though😕

Touch of the young Elvis there.

TonTonMacoute · 02/07/2025 17:52

MinkyMankyPanda · 02/07/2025 15:46

Who is saying we shouldn’t be friends with trans people? And which companies have said they won’t give them a job

OK, but let’s be honest and admit that these things do get said, a lot, on threads here.

There are threads and comments most days that advise avoiding trans people, generalise them as fetishists or normalise considering them troublesome people to have contact with.

And plenty of comments along the lines of refusing to consider CVs where pronouns are stated - or hiring a company who use them in an email signature.

Plus campaigns to boycott companies who show support of trans people, or feature them in ads or content. Or complaining to schools about employing trans or NB people, with advice to move schools etc.

Dislike MB freely - but in fairness, there’s some truth there about the prevailing characterisation of trans people.

So what? This is anonymous Internet forum where people can say what they cannot say IRL. How does it affect the real world?

IRL far more people have been sacked/passed over for a job for being GC than for being trans. People have been hounded from their jobs, had to endure hostile masked mobs screaming abuse at them on their way to work. Have abuse and death threats on their SM feeds, had to go through long, stressful legal cases for stating a biological fact.

How many GC people have attacked trans people (including children) and had it covered up by the authorities? How many trans people have been told by their employer that they have to share their changing facilities with people they don't feel comfortable with? Yet that's not enough for the TRAs, who are still trying to claim that they are the victims.

This massive overreach has completely evaporated most of the sympathy and understanding for trans people that has really existed since the 1960s and 70s.

This is completely the fault of the agressive bullying TRA campaigning, of which Munroe Bergdorf has been a willing and prominent participant.

OP posts:
MinkyMankyPanda · 02/07/2025 21:53

The article is pooh-poohing MB for saying it happens, and in fact it does happen, quite a lot, including here on this board - so what MB said is correct and doesn’t deserve the mockery.

Do you really not have any awareness of the thousands of comments (even just on this board, never mind the rest of the public media and internet) from people saying they would not hire / work with / let their child be taught by / buy services or products from a trans or NB person - or that they’re fetishists who shouldn’t be allowed near children, or manipulative liars and best avoided?

That narrative is very prevalent - it’s very odd if you really don’t have any awareness that it’s a real thing, not invented by MB.

“IRL far more people have been sacked/passed over for a job for being GC than for being trans.”

Is that actually true though? Got any evidence to back it up?

spannasaurus · 02/07/2025 22:01

You could look at the employment tribunals of
Allison Bailey
Jo Phoenix
Maya Forstater
Sandie Peggie

Or look at the treatment of Kathleen Stock at Sussex uni

To see how GC women have been treated

There are many more examples

DragonRunor · 02/07/2025 22:02

MinkyMankyPanda · 02/07/2025 15:46

Who is saying we shouldn’t be friends with trans people? And which companies have said they won’t give them a job

OK, but let’s be honest and admit that these things do get said, a lot, on threads here.

There are threads and comments most days that advise avoiding trans people, generalise them as fetishists or normalise considering them troublesome people to have contact with.

And plenty of comments along the lines of refusing to consider CVs where pronouns are stated - or hiring a company who use them in an email signature.

Plus campaigns to boycott companies who show support of trans people, or feature them in ads or content. Or complaining to schools about employing trans or NB people, with advice to move schools etc.

Dislike MB freely - but in fairness, there’s some truth there about the prevailing characterisation of trans people.

Can you link to some examples? You see, I often see comments around women’s rights (transwomen shouldn’t be in women’s sports/spaces etc), but I don’t remember ever seeing a comment that people shouldn’t be friends with trans people. Employment comments are generally about activists not trans people in general.

Many posters have trans family members or trans friends and colleagues. As long as they stay out of spaces they shouldn’t be in, there’s no problem. MB’s comment is hyperbolic and attention-seeking - in line with trying to drum up interest in a new book

KeepTalkingBeth · 02/07/2025 22:08

Do you really not have any awareness of the thousands of comments (even just on this board, never mind the rest of the public media and internet) from people saying they would not hire / work with / let their child be taught by / buy services or products from a trans or NB person
Literally never seen this on MN

myplace · 02/07/2025 22:11

There are specific jobs trans people shouldn’t have- the Dr in the Sandy Prggie case shouldn’t be a dr, or have any other caring role or one that relies on honesty and integrity. Salesman? Actor? Sure.

Wadha (?) should never have been running a rape crisi refuge.

Would I want to be friends or neighbours with someone whose entire identity revolves around their perception of their identity? No. Tedious and self absorbed.

That’s nothing like persecution for simply being trans, or denying someone a job because they were trans.

WithSilverBells · 02/07/2025 22:22

@MinkyMankyPanda ...or that they’re fetishists...

But the estimates are that most of the men under the 'trans' umbrella are fetishists. Do you have a way of sorting out which ones are and which ones aren't, because we haven't been able to come up with one?

Waitwhat23 · 02/07/2025 22:44

And plenty of comments along the lines of refusing to consider CVs where pronouns are stated - or hiring a company who use them in an email signature.

I wouldn't refuse a CV etc but I certainly think less of anyone who puts their pronouns on anything. It shows credulous, lack of critical thought thinking. I got an email from someone I know who has her pronouns in her email signature. In her case it's nothing but virtue signalling nonsense and I thought 'oh, I thought you were more intelligent than that'.

And I am allowed to think that, in my head. Unless compelled thinking is the next TRA push? (just joking, it has been for a while)

OdeToRoy · 02/07/2025 22:48

In this instance below a TW was sacked for racist comments, then their next employer gave statements in support of them. It almost seems like trans people get more of a chance in employment than a “cis” person would.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5251918-lgbt-champion-has-been-struck-off-for-racism?page=1

I have seen plenty of comments and threads by people with trans friends, trying to balance their support of women’s rights with wanting their friends to live peaceful lives. Or their worry as to what said friends will do in light of the SC ruling. Etc etc.

LGBT Champion has been struck off for racism | Mumsnet

An LGBTQ+ champion who worked as a manager in in a women's mental health unit has been struck off for racist comments In 2016, Sussex Police offered...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5251918-lgbt-champion-has-been-struck-off-for-racism?page=1

hholiday · 02/07/2025 22:57

Thanks for posting this OP. I think I met Gareth Roberts years ago and he was lovely. I’m also a big corrie fan and I always knew we were in for a good’un when his name was on the opening credits. God bless the men who see this for what it is.

Rightsraptor · 03/07/2025 05:40

Who ever says 'don't be friends with trans people'? Nobody here. In fact I'm always amazed at how many people claim to have a trans friend or even lots, since they are supposed to be so few in number.

But I'd never employ one, or anyone I suspected of being an ally, as I know that'd be opening my door to a world of problems. However, I'm not an employer, unless you count the tradies who work in my house from time to time, so that's hardly an issue. If one of those workmen turned up looking like Bergdorf I wouldn't allow him to start work on health and safety grounds alone.

RedToothBrush · 03/07/2025 07:05

There's a file at the BBC with the telephone numbers of their rent a quote trans representatives.

This list contains no transmen and is a who's who of particularly dodgy individuals with a backstory of pretty awful homophobia and misogyny to say the least.

However since the BBC cut it's budgets they don't have anyone who does any research any more, so no one has checked up on the suitability of asking a middle aged man who transitioning later in life and has previously been quoted as saying awful things about violent porn to do an interview relating to puberty blockers and high rates of teenage girls transitioning. Or convicted violent thugs to comment on being 'oppressed by women' using the legal system.

Nor do they check whether Bergdorf is the best person to do an interview with on finding love with Rylan during pride month, despite all the homophobic shite Bergdorfs is on record as saying multiple times.

Nor do they fact check claims by lawyers who have dubious track records on the subject. And they promote obvious grifters.

Because literally all they see is a box ticking exercise - look transperson job done. It's actually grossly transphobic. They are picking representatives from the community who give a bad impression. They don't pick a wide range of political opinions from the community. They just pick a preselected bunch who are all politically aligned and particularly extreme.

It's shockingly bad, that the BBC don't make any effort to rectify this and diversify from the usual suspects. It speaks volumes about journalistic integrity and lazy attitudes that have crept in.

It also exposed the BBC because a little later down the road when scandals really do implode on this, they are going to get caught with their metaphorical pants around their ankles with all the receipts. We can see the scandal a mile off - like others before.

The amount of due diligence and critical thinking on display is shocking.

RedToothBrush · 03/07/2025 07:38

MinkyMankyPanda · 02/07/2025 21:53

The article is pooh-poohing MB for saying it happens, and in fact it does happen, quite a lot, including here on this board - so what MB said is correct and doesn’t deserve the mockery.

Do you really not have any awareness of the thousands of comments (even just on this board, never mind the rest of the public media and internet) from people saying they would not hire / work with / let their child be taught by / buy services or products from a trans or NB person - or that they’re fetishists who shouldn’t be allowed near children, or manipulative liars and best avoided?

That narrative is very prevalent - it’s very odd if you really don’t have any awareness that it’s a real thing, not invented by MB.

“IRL far more people have been sacked/passed over for a job for being GC than for being trans.”

Is that actually true though? Got any evidence to back it up?

Well my son has been taught by a transperson. I didn't stop it. I don't think activism in schools and educational settings is appropriate though. That includes saying some is a woman when they are clearly a man and vice versa. The trans person is there to teach, not politicise. Schools are legally not permitted to politicise too. So it's a relevant criticism.

Children who are labelled as trans from age 4 ARE being abused by authorities and parents because that child does not have capacity to understand.

Pronouns are toxic and not a neutral thing. You can ignore pronouns. People - including non trans people - who are activists about forcing others to also do it are going too far and are overstepping at work. You can be employed without politicising your workplace. Activism in the workplace causes conflict - it doesn't matter what the cause.

Boycotts of companies who are acting in ways which are anti-womens rights and may have unlawful equality policies is the choice of a consumer. Being pro women's rights is NOT anti-trans.

Being pissed off at Bergdorfs previous employer for not doing due diligence on Bergdorfs is fair game given Bergdorfs comments which are out of line with child safeguarding and it's relevance to the said job role.

Generalising activists who are at a protest as fetishists when a sizeable number are dressed in attire which a normal woman wouldn't dream of wearing in public is a reflection of reality. Unfortunately there is a sizeable group of AGP characters and it is relevant to discussions for various reasons. It can not be ignored because of 'politeness'. We should be asking difficult questions on this and we should be getting answers rather than being told to shut up about it, because sexualised behaviour using women is unlawful and not ok. Seeing multiple serious interviews with transwomen in fishnet tights should raise your eyebrows.

I do think it's reasonable for women to object to seeing interviews with the likes of Kellie Malone by respectable news channels about abuse or Bergdorf about LGBT persecution or safeguarding or certain lawyers bleeting about 'corrupt' judges or Jane Fae about women's rights. Or just the regular rent a transwoman on a section relating to transmen or young females. Because this is tone deaf to the rights of others groups and safeguarding. It's not appropriate and highlights an enormous amount of poor decision making and due diligence in guest selection. These rent a quotes are 'not the only gays in the village' but given how media organisations have them on speed dial it's a problem. It's poor media representation of a minority group which gives a negative impression of the community as a whole. We aren't the ones promoting this. It's ironic as it's arguably working against the interests of transpeople because the gatekeeping on who gets airtime is dubious to say the least. It speaks volumes that less extreme views within the community (which we do know exist) aren't aired publicly more often.

Time and again it comes down to lack of safeguarding and diligence on the part of organisations and power that is leading to these problems. Women are objecting because of these failures in responsibilities and duties of care - some of which are written into law. Not because they hate transpeople.

The framing time and time again is to blame women for the failures of those in positions of authority to do their fucking jobs properly and protect all relevant parties.

It's not ok. Tarring all women as anti-trans for sticking up for themselves and children - in a lawful manner - is misogyny.

TonTonMacoute · 03/07/2025 17:44

“IRL far more people have been sacked/passed over for a job for being GC than for being trans.”
Is that actually true though? Got any evidence to back it up?

@MinkyMankyPanda are you for real? There are many as a PP has listed.

Name one case where a TW has been sacked purely because they were trans.

Negative comments on Internet forums are made every minute about all sorts of people, it's not restricted to TW. You might care to look at the comments Simone Biles made about Riley Gaines.

OP posts:
CassOle · 03/07/2025 18:33

MrMenno has a video about Bergdorf. Oh, the duper's delight smirk on Bergdorf's face...

OuterSpaceCadet · 03/07/2025 19:46

TRA doesn't= trans. Many TRAs are so-called cis allies.

I think it's entirely reasonable for a woman to want to avoid people who hold misogynist and homophobic views.

As red toothbrush pointed out, the people making the generalisation that trans people are all fetishist boundary violating males are the likes of the BBC and Guardian who don't appear to know any other trans people and seem desperate to give the misogynist dudes a platform.

OuterSpaceCadet · 03/07/2025 20:49

Why was my post deleted? It wasn't about a specific trans person. It was about the Guardian/ BBC generally only ever showcasing misogynist transwomen (as opposed to transmen and transwomen who do not subscribe to extremist gender ideology).

The entire crux of my point is that I know there are plenty of trans people who are NOT misogynist or homophobic.

It also specifically pointed out that it's TRAs and not trans people that many women want to avoid.

I fail to understand how that's broken talk guidelines unless insulting the BBC has been added?

OuterSpaceCadet · 03/07/2025 21:39

Oh, reinstated. Thanks mnhq
Weird that it happened though

RedToothBrush · 04/07/2025 03:54

Exactly.

The BBC and other outlets are platforming voice which are extreme. They could platform moderates. But they actively choose not to do this.

Instead they are platforming individuals which are particularly problematic given their history and wondering why there is so much criticism.

It's ridiculous.

It should be about moderation and reflective of multiple views.

We are where we are because these people were so heavily fawned after, rather than seeing how widespread their views were.

Itsnottheheatitsthehumidity · 04/07/2025 06:55

I don't dislike MB because they are trans. I dislike them because they are a horrible person and a total piece of work. If I met MB I would be polite, but only because I am shy & hate conflict. If they want to accuse me of anything, it's for "being kind", just not in the way they want be to be ie a bully.

EdithStourton · 04/07/2025 07:27

The BBC, for reasons best known to itself, seems to enjoy platforming extremists.

It's a sure-fire way to kill sensible debate, as any sensible person interviewed has to spend all their time refuting the total bollocks put out by the other side.

MinkyMankyPanda · 04/07/2025 08:06

TonTonMacoute · 03/07/2025 17:44

“IRL far more people have been sacked/passed over for a job for being GC than for being trans.”
Is that actually true though? Got any evidence to back it up?

@MinkyMankyPanda are you for real? There are many as a PP has listed.

Name one case where a TW has been sacked purely because they were trans.

Negative comments on Internet forums are made every minute about all sorts of people, it's not restricted to TW. You might care to look at the comments Simone Biles made about Riley Gaines.

Some GC people have lost work - agreed.

What I’m challenging is the statement that “far more” people have been sacked for being GC vs being trans.

I’m asking for the evidence to back that up. And so far not seeing it - presumably because it’s not true.

The number of people who have lost work due to being GC is NOT far more than the number who have lost work for being trans. That’s just a lazy nonsense getting thrown out to justify being unpleasant about a trans person this board dislikes intensely.

spannasaurus · 04/07/2025 08:08

MinkyMankyPanda · 04/07/2025 08:06

Some GC people have lost work - agreed.

What I’m challenging is the statement that “far more” people have been sacked for being GC vs being trans.

I’m asking for the evidence to back that up. And so far not seeing it - presumably because it’s not true.

The number of people who have lost work due to being GC is NOT far more than the number who have lost work for being trans. That’s just a lazy nonsense getting thrown out to justify being unpleasant about a trans person this board dislikes intensely.

Have you got evidence to back up your claim that more trans people have lost work than GC women. Can you list any of those names?

BundleBoogie · 04/07/2025 08:22

MinkyMankyPanda · 04/07/2025 08:06

Some GC people have lost work - agreed.

What I’m challenging is the statement that “far more” people have been sacked for being GC vs being trans.

I’m asking for the evidence to back that up. And so far not seeing it - presumably because it’s not true.

The number of people who have lost work due to being GC is NOT far more than the number who have lost work for being trans. That’s just a lazy nonsense getting thrown out to justify being unpleasant about a trans person this board dislikes intensely.

How about you produce a list of trans people sacked for nothing more than being ‘trans’ ,(not the ones sacked for sex offences, breaching safeguarding rules at children’s charities or any other crimes) and we’ll compare lists?