Webberley vs Gold

[RachelFanshawe]

Another interview where she comes across as an evil lunatic and it’s clear the interviewer is viscerally repulsed by her no doubt.

I haven’t watched it - not sure it’s available yet - but I usually find Andrew Gold a decent interviewer.

Well now I can’t find it! 🤔

Interviewing is an awesome task, i have done it myself in the past.

Found it!

The fundamental thing is she doesn't accept that transgenderism is a psychological condition. Maybe that's deliberate because she wants the cash, maybe she really is that captured or thick, but once you replace the need for drugs and surgery with counselling or psychological therapy, little or no "gender affirming care" is necessary.
Webberlery criticised Helen Joyce because she's a statistician and again she's sitting opposite someone who isn't a "specialist", but Andrew's reasoning and explanation is so much clearer and accurate than hers.

She really is doing the rounds isn't she, anyone would think she has a book to flog, as she hasn't she must have something else to flog.

Is she setting her self up to be the international voice of the 'trans' movement? Trying to get on to the lucrative lecture circuit?

There must be some reason behind it all.

Nobody portrays men as dangerous, statistics show they are more dangerous than women that why over 100 years ago women (and girls) were given desperate facilities.
Her misogyny is quite astounding.

Separate facilities (not desperate) although we desperately want the to be single sex.

Oh, god 😬 Had to stop watching this for the sake of my equilibrium!
Webberley answering "What makes you a woman?"
"Well, I just am! I don't know how, I just know."
She doesn't need to look "down there" to know she's a woman.
She's a fucking doctor.
Argh.

Andrew Gold is a perfect clone of one of the best bosses I ever had 😍

They’re expanding their business to the US

Found it. I knew I wasn’t imagining it.

Wasn't it fascinating how different she was with Andrew? Far less patronising. Far more polite.

I think she actually came across far worse in this one than she did in either JBs or HJs debates. I think because Andrew was simply asking questions. Why is anorexia a mental illness but gender confusion isn’t? Why can’t I identify as black?

Simple questions like this are difficult to wriggle away from.

I think Gold did a quite incredible job of coming across nice and smiley and friendly and stressing that he cares, whilst really asking the toughest questions that she just couldn't answer, and really trying to hold gender ideology to account. I think one could make an argument for it being the single best GC interview content I have ever seen.

The idea that she would have walked off set if the interviewer had been a woman is one I think highly plausible. Her misogyny, disingenuous, refusal to answer the question and utter lack of an argument is so far off the scale it's breathtaking.

It might be that some trans activists see the present moment as a pivot point with respect to the Supreme Court judgment. There are a lot of people in the Establishment who clearly want it to be ignored and for things to carry on just as they did in the past. If they achieve this, then they can roll back some of the return to sanity achieved over the past several years.

She’s set up a new clinic in the US. The centre of gravity is very different there, she’ll look like she’s taking on the terrible people of TERF island.

I loathe Webberley but she’s playing journalists / activists like a fiddle here, their vanity is flattered and they think they can be the one to “destroy” her but actually she just wants more people to have heard of her, so mission accomplished…

I think that the online activists and online influencers pushing transition are perfectly capable of funneling vulnerable kids to places where they can get medical interventions. I think a lot of this sort of content is preaching to the converted (trans activists don't like Andrew Gold) but hopefully it will make some of his viewers more GC and get some off the fence.

She is apparently trying to break into the US market.

So will need US doctors to be willing to sign up to join her drug subscriptiom service.

[(Edit)
What @Dolphinnoises said better👍)

She really comes across as a true believer. Either that or a consummate actor. She speaks such extraordinary nonsense with complete sincerity.

But what an idiot! Had she really never come across gender diverse people in all her life? And did the world really only ever mock gender diverse people until she came along? And how phenomenally offensive of a doctor to state that recognising a condition as a mental health condition is offensive!

I wonder whether there’s a transcript. I don’t think I can bear to listen to her disingenuous waffle for over an hour.

She only heard of transgender people ten years ago?

She must have been living under a rock. But she monetised her new knowledge pretty quickly.

I found it much easier to listen to than the Bindell debate and a bit easier to listen to compared to Joyce. Gold does not hold back when challenging.

I don’t think Bindel did particularly well in hers. She kept drifting off into imaginary scenarios with Dave and Diana, giving Webbers opportunities to interject with faux polite “I’m sorry, who is Dave?”, patronisingly nodding and coming across (to the uninitiated) as the reasonable one.

Her whole schtick with the women was adopting the air of someone arguing with a stroppy child.

Andrew aced this one in that he came across as genuinely interested and more neutral which she found far more difficult to counter.

Presumably a key difference was that Webberley was engaged in a dialogue with Gold whereas the Bindel and Joyce ‘debates’ were chaired.

I haven’t seen the Bindel one, but the Joyce one was far from a discussion and was more of a parallel Q and A with one chance to answer each question before moving on.

Gender ideology is based on distorting the common meaning of words. The only way that the Joyce interview would have been meaningful, would have been for language and terminology to be agreed prior to the Q&A and for the chair to be able to state/ correct facts.

I've just watched it - I think that it was better than the Joyce one but I think that it was because the format was better....

What I wish these interviewers asked when Webberley bangs on about believing trans people and trans people exist and we have to listen to them - is WHY do we have to accept and accommodate the wishes and lived experience of a tiny minority of people on the basis that they feel uncomfortable - but the wishes and lived experiences of much larger numbers of female people feeling unsafe or unable to use female spaces don't count or matter....!?

I agree about the format. I also think that HW is one of those women who vastly prefers men to women and interacts well with them. Her attitude towards HJ and JB was generally patronising and contemptuous. She clearly disliked them. With AG her demeanour verged on flirtatious at times, which made it oddly unsettling to watch.

I was interested that, having dismissed HJ belittlingly as only a mathematician, she waxed lyrical in the Gold interview over her love of mathematics. My degree is in Maths and I regularly use that fact to confound doctors, especially consultants, who try to patronise me. I have found that Maths scares them, and a couple have told me that it was the A level that the struggled most with, so I drop it into the conversation at an early stage to establish my intellectual credentials. Consequently I was surprised at HW’s attitude to HJ. (I should add that I’m a pretty mediocre mathematician, but never mind, it does the trick.)

The moment when he brings up Ritchie Herron (a well known detransitioner) is remarkable. She goes from saying how important it is to respect what you call people, and use the pronouns they’ve chosen for themselves, to saying “I’ve never even heard of him. Is this someone with a big social media following? What was his name again, was it Richard?”

She’d done a relatively good job of appearing like a person doing horrifying things with good intentions up until that point, but that’s when the mask really slipped for me. The contempt with which she reacts to mentions of detransitioners was awful. To claim you’re not even aware of them, to be that dismissive of them - it was horrible to watch.

A normal doctor would be aware of and calmly acknowledge the cases that had gone wrong, and look for how lessons could be learnt to stop that happening again.

Easy - the most marginalized and vulnerable deserve all of the rights, hateful regressive bigots deserve none of the the rights.

[Not my opinion, to be clear]

I do agree that both parties in this sort of conversation need to agree terms before they start.

I have a son. HW would describe him as AMAB.

Should I have taken him to the doctor at 17 when his periods showed no sign of arriving?

What if he had decided to identify as a girl at 16? THEN should I have taken him to the doctor when his periods didn’t start?

Why not, Webberley? Because he’s a…. ? What’s that?

On “passing” in female spaces; If my blind grandmother wants only women to care for her, is it OK for a man - just a plain old “cis” (to use her term) man with a feminine sounding voice to provide intimate care?