Naomi Cunningham - entire episode on BBC Scotcast.

[GreenUp]

BBC Scotcast have released a long interview with Naomi Cunningham talking about Sandie Peggie's case and other issues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002mp56?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

They've also posted an article on the Scotland section of the BBC website about the interview.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpvdnm2r47po

Gosh she is awesome. Love that she wants to stay in this fight and clearly sees it as a bit of a crusade for reality.

Fairly enjoyable listen so far but I find it incredibly frustrating that because the BBC has been so captured for so long that they're really behind in how far elements of the conversation have already moved on. Still being on things like 'calling a male he is so very upsetting for that person' is so 2018.

I remember Martin Geissler from his Sky Sports days, he's come a long way to be talking to the fabulous Naomi Cunningham 😄

Also asking Naomi to answer for what JK Rowling or anyone else does is mental in the context of trans identified men taking no accountability for themselves, which he had just touched in. A highly gendered interaction.

I went for the iPlayer version as it's always good to see people's faces in these kinds of interviews if possible.

What a great interview.

It was interesting hearing the interviewer suggesting that there are "two sides" when it came to Dr Upton being a "man" or not. Personally, I use the word male, rather than man, because of all the noise that gets generated by the words "man" and "woman". I sometimes say "biological male" for this reason too.

However..... I think the interviewer sounded a bit odd making this point because Naomi was simply talking about reality. What passes as reality is defined by biology and the law..... and in this case, according to both biology and the law, Dr Upton is indeed a man. It really doesn't matter whether people like me dance around this issue with alternative words - so there really aren't two sides on whether sex is real or not. There are two sides of the debate when it comes to whether that matters or not, and to whether someone's belief in gender identity should be pushed onto the rest of us as if it were factual, but that's not what he was saying.

Instead, he sounded like he was trying to balance an argument of globe versus flat Earth in the way that he said it. In this analogy, what he presumably thought he was describing was the equivalent of "we know the earth is a globe, so how do we best represent that as a map? One side says we should not worry about countries being the wrong size, the other says everything should be kept in proportion". But actually, he just ended up sounded daft, with his desperate need to add so much balance that reality got lost within it.

Just finished listening to the whole interview. NC was very good - clear and down to earth, exactly as you'd expect, even down to the number of times she said 'um'.

I thought it was rather impolite of the interviewer to ask what Sandie Peggie is like and was glad when NC said 'I'm not going to answer that'. Good for her.

That was a very interesting listen.

What I found fascinating was that there were hardly any arguments for, or against, transgenderism, or men in women spaces. It was all very high-level.

And what nailed it, certainly to me, every single time, was the way Naomi spoke.

The calmness and rationality almost do the job by themselves. It's not even charisma, it's just very stark vocal reasoning.

No one listening to a woman speaking like would doubt that whatever it was she believed, it was logical, reasonable, coherent and fair.

And adult.

You can't help thinking that whatever it was Naomi Cunningham did, it would always succeed, and without drama, without confusion, without conflict.

If there were no such things as barristers, you'd have to invent the concept purely for her.

Naomi is wonderful. My irritation was at the numerous “some of our audience will find this all awfully offensive” public service announcements. These are never said when activists say men can be women, so why here? And also Martin gets all het up about what a poor marginalized, bullied, victimized group this is - how he got this far and not realised that a good chunk (majority?) of these men are engaged in coercive, boundary crossing behaviours themselves?

Repeatedly.

It really detracted from the interaction for me. He didn't just give a header warning, but he interjected multiple times to point out her assertion of basic facts was risqué.

Irritating.

He seemed to be very sure that JKR = bad bully, Rosie Duffield = bad bully

Asking NC to speak for them is childish anyway

Were the things he said about their tweets factually correct?

Yes, he was irritating constantly pointing out that some people are going to be offended and it's controversial this, and disputed that.

But next to her stream of calm rationality, he just looked silly.

She's calm, collected, coherent, thoughtful and professional

I already had a ridiculous amount of respect for her but she goes up in my estimation every time she speaks.

I actually think his comments just highlighted how ridiculous thd trans cause is.

Finally managed to find a version I can access outside of the UK. Choose download and then find it in the files app on your phone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002mp56

I've managed to find and watch on BBC iPlayer

It feels like it's not quite the same as the radio edit

He's even more irritating to watch, tensing up every time NC refers to men as men.

It looked very much like he was an example of the people who don't actually believe men can be women but daren't actually say it and have to keep distancing themselves.

Very much.

And i thought it was odd that he was so sure that there are LOADS of people out there 'most of Gen Z' that he was having to advocate for or represent.

He obviously doesn't mix with middle aged women much

I thought the male, middle aged, interviewer came across as quite patronising. He set his stall out as believing the opposite to Naomi, it didn't come across as him doing a Paxman-style oppositional interview, he actually came across more as believing in Genderism and being astonished that Naomi wouldn't submit to demands to just be nice. To me, he was a slightly more polite, Scottish version of James O'Brien 🙄

I thought Naomi explained herself and GC arguments very well and nicely side-stepped his attempts to dig for info on Sandie on a personal level - you just know that whatever Naomi had said about Sandie that he would have painted Sandie as racist or intolerant.

"The law is the law and we know what the law is now.”

Enough said. The End

Yes he was clearly chomping at the bit to say something about Sandie Peggie. But Naomi took the wind right out of his sails by wholly reasonably saying she wasn’t going to discuss her personally.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17Ebjdmoy3/

what is that a link to? some contexxt would be good

He makes no secret that he’s firmly on the side of men pretending to be women but NC didn’t give an inch while remaining unfailingly polite.

This was a link to a Times article about the interview. Hopefully share token below works.

Sandie Peggie lawyer: Scotland can’t shake off trans ideology

https://www.thetimes.com/article/ba3a9abf-4fcd-4dcf-ba48-e059e1e25fc1?shareToken=ab23234c2074a5838645b9b18b8dec9f

Sorry

Its a link to The Times article about NC but I shared them sharing it in fb instead of the link.

Will see if it has an archive link

Thank you