Andrew Gold Vs Helen Webberly

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

q

I like his less overtly combative tone sometimes, feels like Louis Theroux in some bits.

HW is still on the advertising campaign to get more money though.

Just finished listening. I think he has a point in suggesting she is so wedded to what she has become involved with he is right to say she just cannot now admit it maybe was social contagion gone mad.

Whatever the case she just has zero actual evidence. Another good listen along similar lines is the most recent one concerning the BBC and safeguarding concerns around them having pushed the pro trans agenda.

https://seeninjournalism.substack.com/p/seen-in-journalism-podcast-episode

Andrew does very well I thought, his usual calm measured approach and she falls in to a few holes she digs for herself. Of course the people who agree with her won't see it.

Ok. So I know why SHE'S doing it, but why are so many people agreeing to interview/debate this person? Why give her the publicity she's after? Surely it's better to ignore her and hope she goes away.

I think just to generate clicks, "buzz" and revenue for the podcasters

After no debate reigning, and so few trans activists willing to be challenged on what what they’re saying, perhaps people were keen to interrogate ideas no matter who the person holding them was?

I think it’s shocking to see a doctor make these crazy claims, and think it highlights the issues with gender ideology well

She's not completely stupid, is she? She's talking to the converted (she's not interested in the unconverted who listen to the podcasts). And she's getting a huge amount of free publicity to bring in new business.

Wow, Gold is a great interviewer. Facilitating the space for his guests to humanise themselves & justify their stances while being combative is a very rare talent these days.

HW certainly doesn't come across as the monster some portray her to be in fact downright decent & incredibly personable even if you don't agree with her.

Nobody thinks they are evil…

Particularly if scientific medical consensus globally backs them up.

Yes, she's really doing the rounds. She's been on ones I've never heard of. I wonder how many more?
(Have read the thread on the latest one where she outright lies about not knowing who someone is that she was on a tv show with)

downright decent & incredibly personable even if you don't agree with her

😂
do some background research FGS

Oh my goodness.

AG: I could identify as black.
HW: Well you can't. Black is a colour. It's not an identity, it's a colour.
AG: But I might have some black ancestry.
HW: You may do, yeah, but you're not, you're white skinned.

Jaw, meet floor.

I mean, the rest of it is jaw-dropping too - that was just the first thing that I couldn't believe she'd actually said out loud, and I had to rewind to check I'd heard her correctly. It's hard to believe she said the rest of it out loud too, but she's making money out of the rest of it. She's preaching to people who want to believe what she says; people who already believe her will be reassured by what she says. But this comment is something else entirely.

I'd like to hear more about the idea that there are certain things that you can identify as and others that you can't, and the effect of identifying as something. 1) A "biological male" says that he is a woman (and perhaps he feels that he is one). Therefore he is a woman. In fact, he has always been a woman. Therefore he should have access to women's changing rooms, rape crisis centres and prisons (sharing a cell with a woman and showering with the women) and must be allowed to compete in women's sports. 2) A "biological white man" says that he is a black man. He has always lived in the black community and feels black. This is a terrible thing to say. Of course he isn't a black man and has no right to apply for scholarships set up for black people.
Who decides what you can and can't identify as?

I wonder what Helen would have said if she was asked if Martina Big has transitioned to black, and whether she is now transblack or not?

Maybe GenderGP can flog melanin injections?

The stupid thing is that your example (2) is a man who could be part-black even though his skin does not show it. He could do everything black men can do (run, walk, impregnate a woman). Dependent on his facial features he could darken his skin, and do his hair, and due to where and how he was brought up, pass pretty damn near perfectly as "black" (note - I say that knowing that many mixed race people are referred to as "black"). Identifying as black is almost 100% about experience of being black, and the white man could gain that experience. In contrast a TW is highly unlikley to pass, and if they do they still don't have the experience of living in a female body.

IMHO an identity is cold hard fact (a truth about yourself which is objective and which you think of as ery important in terms of how you see yourself) or it is a pointless aspiration, which is of relevance only in the head of the person concerned.

Don't, you'll give HW ideas! I had to google Melanie Big - looks the same as David Walliams in Little Britain to me.

Simple, I think?

One group includes men deciding who can be in their group, which must be respected.

The other group is women. The odd, not-quite-humans who make wittering noises nobody can understand. How could comfort creatures make decisions? It's ridiculous.

Yes, there's a difference between the verb and the noun. I am a woman. I don't identify as a woman. But I suppose being a woman is part of my identity (even if I would prefer to be a man). To some women, being a woman is a very important part of their identity, and to others it's much less important.
Imagine this (which is something that can and does happen) - You have a black father, let's say he's from Kenya. You have a white mother from Wales. You're a twin. Your twin sister is black, with similar facial features to her father. You look very much like your mother. Are you white or black? I think plenty of people would say that you are black. If you say that you're black, are you black, or are you only identifying as being black, in the identifying as a woman when you're a man kind of way? Can you choose whether to be black or white? And what about if your skin is white but your facial features are those of your African father? Or maybe you look like your mother but have hair like your father's? And does it make any difference if you live in the black community, or in the white one?

It would have been interesting if Gold could have unpacked this a bit more. I would like to have heard what would have happened if a subsequent question had been, "could a person identify as Jewish?". I wonder if Webberley would have been as quick to dismiss the question. Gold would have picked her up on it if she had been.

Her casual dismissiveness was what got to me. Discarding women's trauma, voices, privacy, consent - all horrible but not a surprise. But to dismiss black identity so rapidly though - that was a shock and really spoke to me of someone who was ready to dismiss anything at the altar of her grift. And I think that's something that Gold could have pressed her on. How far is she prepared to go?

In fairness to Gold, she was spewing such a lot of sewage that he did an extraordinary job of interviewing her!

Several reasons; 1)give someone enough rope…..
2) sheds more light on a movement that has no basis in reality

3) Shows it’s impossible for anyone to make a coherent argument that humans can change sex (see point 2)
4) it highlights the harms and abuse being done to children when you have a ‘dr’ spouting children can choose their preferred sex and be prescribed puberty blockers
4) For parents who have an indoctrinated or child who is struggling with their mental health it gives them the ‘permission’ they need to not collude with their child.
5) it’s entertaining to watch her and gets the ratings up!