Ofcom will now investigate Talk Tv re transphobia.

[Imnobody4]

Here we go again.

From Good Law Project:

We said we’d sue over Ofcom’s decision to dismiss 22,000 complaints about transphobia on TalkTV – now the regulator has caved.

But we had monitored its output for July 2025, a month in which it carried 11 discussions on trans people. And in every discussion, its hosts and guests consistently spouted transphobic views. TalkTV’s stance mirrors the broader editorial position of its sister newspaper The Times, whose toxic and intellectually dishonest campaign against trans people we believe to be a contributor to the rise in hate crime against them.

x.com/JuliaHB1/status/1996576537894703427?t=VgmnlP9LETiwrihlgEkCqA&s=09

Among my misdeeds, apparently, is that I said this on air: "By definition, if you’ve had to get a piece of paper to say that you are a woman, you must accept then that you are man."

I'm happy to be found guilty of defending women's rights and safety, knowing the actual law, understanding basic biology and knowing what a woman is. 🤷🏻‍♀️

What you have described as the "trans experience" is a delusion.

delusion
noun
/dɪˈlu·ʒən/

something a person believes and wants to be true, when it is actually not true:

yoy can call it a delusion if you wish. I do not think that is a useful, meaningful or appropriate label to apply to trans experience.

I doubt if anyone will have missed your use of 'accused' of being trans. I didn't know being trans was an insult or something to be ashamed of.

You accept that there are some people who claim a trans identity because they see it may benefit them, yes? That may be to be moved to the female prison estate, or to win at sports, etc.

To deny their 'trans experience' and doubt their sincerity in their identity is to fall into the "true trans" camp. This states that only those with dysmorphia can be trans, and others who just want to dress up and pretend are undermining their trans existence and experience. The people in this camp are called 'truscum' by TRAs. These are trans people being othered and maligned by other trans people. I'm not the one gatekeeping.

Sure, I'll clarify then:

Oh Puppy. Everyone accepts trans identifying (or non binary)!people exist. Everyone knows that means they are still the sex they were born as as humans can't change sex. Stating this is not trans phobia, which isn't a thing, it's stating facts, which is not illegal and not abusive. You've been on many threads now, for many days (that I've noticed, possibly longer) trying to persuade everyone that they're trans phobia and trying to explain what being trans is, to people that already understand, and are making no visible headway. Do you think it would be healthier and less futile for you to go and do something else maybe?

It's not an insult or something to be ashamed of.

But it is nasty to use it weapon against someone who isn't trans just because you want to delegitimise what they have to say and patronise them (take a walk outside).

Same when people call me a "man" or use "he". Being a man isn't an insult pr something to be ashamed of, but deliberately misgendering someone
as a weapon to humiliate them is a type of emotional and verbal abuse:

Also, you did react with your clarification, thank you.

You accept that there are some people who claim a trans identity because they see it may benefit them, yes? That may be to be moved to the female prison estate, or to win at sports, etc.

I'm sure these cases exist. Just as there are cases of people claiming to be disabled to access disability benefits. Or people claiming to be gay to access asylum. I believe these cases are very rare and mainly used/ highlighted by homophobic, ableist , transphobic people to erode access to benefits and rights for the vast majority.

Of course someone who claim trans identity to access benefits (there are very few in this case) is not actually trans , any more than someone who claims they are disabled to access benefits is actually disabled. It's ridiculous that you are pretending otherwise.

It's a delusion just like anorexia. I think it's a very useful, meaningful & appropriate label to apply to the so-called "trans experience". Not all "trans people" are suffering from a delusion as the older males tend to be driven by paraphilias rather than delusions.

i wholeheartedly disagree.

Why are you so invested in inserting males into female single sex spaces? Is dick panderer an insult?

To deny someone's trans experience or status is to be transphobic. I am not making judgements on anyone's trans status, you are.

As you are not a HCP & claim not to be a trans identifying male on what do you base your contention that being "trans" is not a delusion or a paraphilia?

Im not denying anyones trans status.

You said that there are people pretending to be trans to access benefits. I acknowledged this may happen, as it does with all characteristics, although it will be exceptionally rare as there are really very few "benefits" to be gained from pretending to be trans.

Pretendinf to be trans to get benefits doesn't make a person actually trans or change what being trans is. Any more than pretending to be disabled to access disability benefits means a person is actually disabled or changes what being disabled is.

All this is obvious.

It might not be useful, meaningful or appropriate but it is, in some cases, accurate. I agree it doesn't apply to the fetishism males who claim to be trans. In those cases 'delusion' would apply to the people who believe and support their claims that they're women.

Because it's not "redefining women" . There is no threat to that definition at all- that's just black and white thinking and moral panic.

I don't understand. How can you say that, when at the very same time, you argue that "woman" should start meaning other than what it has always legally, biologically and socially meant, ie. "an adult human female", with female itself defined as "being of the sex developed around producing large gametes"?

its simply recognising that within the definition of woman there is diversity and nuance.

Yes, there is. There's room from trans men, who are women who feel like they are men. But trans women belong to the diversity of men, not women.

I disagree with your understanding of what "woman" "has always legally, biologically and socially meant". so do a lot of people. ,

All right, so let's try this one.

"Being female" is being of the sex which is centered around producing large gametes. That's the biological definition.

"Having female experience" is any one of the myriads of ways of "being female", including being a trans man.

Trans women's bodies are geared around producing small gametes. Therefore, they are not female and cannot have female experience.

It is not possible for society to quickly and clearly identify who is "actually trans" (your words, not mine), from someone pretending to be trans in order to access a single-sex space, or to access a sporting competition, or to access grant funding intended to promote women in research, or anything else. I wasn't actually meaning benefits as in welfare.

Whether someone is "actually trans" or "pretend trans" does not change their biological sex, which is what the language and the law is based on. It is not some nebulous feeing.

No one here is denying that a biological man can wear what he wishes, but it does not make him a woman, any more than me wearing trousers and a waistcoat would make me a man. The issue is when people try to manipulate and change the long-understood meaning of words to erode hard-fought for rights.

It is not possible for society to quickly and clearly identify who is "actually trans" (your words, not mine), from someone pretending to be trans in order to access a single-sex space, or to access a sporting competition, or to access grant funding intended to promote women in research, or anything else

I understand this argument, however , I don't believe this is anything like the problem you think it is. I don't think it reflects reality or makes sense rationally to believe that this could become a widespread problem. This is fear and moral panic about trans people being recognised and having rights.

I wasn't actually meaning benefits as in welfare

Nor did I. I meant there are very few advantages to being trans. Period.

The point is there exist in the world people who have a cognitive difference whereby they perceive their sex to be other than their birth sex. This is not an ideology or contrived projection- is a fundamental psychic experience based on a developmental difference in the brain.

Wow, wait! There is exactly zero evidence that being trans is "based on a developmental difference in the brain". You don't know that; nobody knows that, because nobody has ever found evidence to that end.

These are the people that we need to find ways of accommodating in society

Agreed, but why does that mean including trans women in the women category? There's literally no need for that. Take the old toilet chesnut: all that's needed is for men to accept trans women in their toilets (which, by the way, they already do...), and trans women have zero need to use women's toilets. Problem solved!

Wow, wait! There is exactly zero evidence that being trans is "based on a developmental difference in the brain". You don't know that; nobody knows that, because nobody has ever found evidence to that end.

I think this is an appropriate way to describe it based on the body of scientific evidence.

However, you can put my precise language (developmental difference I. The brain) aside and replace it with yours (something wrong in the brain/ psyche) - it doesn't change the point.

What rights do trans people not have?

How many examples of men accessing female single-sex spaces do you need before it becomes a problem?

What scientific evidence would that be ?

I certainly didn't miss it...