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. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Yes, you're calling me a liar and a bigot and saying I don't understand the lived experiences of trans people who I know based on how they describe their lived experiences to me.

Because those experiences don't fit your ideology.

You have never explained what you think the most basic words, such as "male" and "female", or "man" and "woman", mean to you. You have been asked repeatedly to do so, and have never done it. Everything else depends on those words, so just saying, "I don't agree with how you understand those words", doesn't help at all!

Except I didn't call you a liar or a bigot.

Do I believe what you are saying is a true reflection of the lived experiences of trans people? No. Does what you are saying reflect common prejudices about trans people that really have nothing to do with trans experience? Yes.

Does that mean I think you are a liar and a bigot? I have no interested in passing judgement on your person:

Mate. Just use the gents. Nobody will hassle you.

You can't just claim to be disabled and get benefits and a blue badge.

Despite an apparent increase in self diagnosis on tiktok, autism diagnoses are not just handed out to anyone.

Asylum seekers cannot just claim to be gay to avoid deportation.

You are still making it sound like a disorder that somebody might acquire after a stroke or a car crash, which isn't very helpful for people who want to argue that trans women actually are women.

I don't have a single , exhaustive definition for these words. These categories are diverse and complex. There is no single way to be female or be a woman . Yes I can say that female people almost always have xx chromosomes, but not always. Female people almost always have a uterus and ovaries but not always. Female people often give birth. They often have periods, but not always. They often share common life experiences and challenges (too enumerate to list) but not always. Female people have historically almost always been diminished, degraded, objectified and seen as inferior, but not always. And so on,

Literally just spent 10 minutes looking at the many, many threads on trans reddit where trans people are saying exactly that. You don't need to to be gender dysphoric to be trans. With the definition of gender dysphoria being the distress a person experiences due to inconsistency between their gender identity—their personal sense of their own gender—and their sex assigned at birth.
Precisely what your narrow definition is.

At what point are you going to give it up?
This is really quite embarrassing for you now 😬

You don't need to be dysphoric no. That's not the same thing. Dysphoria is about distress.

I hesitate to reference this, but...

Well actually there’s a woman on another thread claiming she knew her son was really a girl before he could speak so that blows your theory out of the water doesn’t it? Unless of course she’s lying?

Why does it blow my theory out the water?

I don't have a single , exhaustive definition for these words.

Well then, they are meaningless - literally: they have no meaning if you can't define them.

In which case, sure, trans women can be female, but so can all other men. Everyone is both male and female, and neither male nor female, since those words don't mean anything. And single sex spaces make no sense anymore, so let's eliminate them: no more men's and women's toilets, no more men's and women's wards, no more men's and women's sports. Just a single space for everyone who is male/female, which is everyone and noone.

So how does a male know he’s a woman and not a gender non conforming man? You’ve just blown your argument out of the water (again). Bless you, it’s eco img a bit sad now.

Can you please explain this a little more, because right now I'm afraid you are simply describing a symptom, not the actual cause. And this half-explanation does not in itself justify the clsim that trans women "are" women, or that sex "is" more than biology on which culture has been laid.

So tell me - because if you truly understand what being trans is, this will surely be easy to answer -

Does having "a cognitive/ psychic difference in the brain, such that your perceive / recognise yourself to be other than your birth sex" mean being one sex but with a deep and aching wish you were the other sex, maybe like a blind person has a deep and aching wish to see, or a lonely little girl has a deep and aching wish that she had been born as one of the popular kids instead?

Or is it actually being, in an innate mental way, in ways we don't yet understand, the other sex, implying that sex is not in fact a descriptor of the body but of the mind?

Because take away the emotional manipulation and neither definition actually justifies the demands being made of women in its name.

Neither definition changes the fact that people with female bodies do exist and do face social and physical consequences because of those bodies, and neither a man's deep feeling that he should have had a female body, nor a man's deep feeling that women don't need to have a female body, changes the embodied experiences and needs and self knowledge of the people who actually have a female body one iota.

Because these are things that are entirely to do with the experiences of women, and so no experience or feeling, no matter how genuine, of a man is relevant to them.

So regardless of which definition you go for, in fact regardless of any definition you go for that places more weight on a man's idea of himself as a woman than the embodied fact of female existence, outside of his own mind, in the reality where all the other women of the world live, his experience of "womanhood" is simply not relevant to who women in the original female sense are and what women in the original female sense need at all.

No definition of woman that is stretched to include male people is more relevant to the needs and experiences and reality of female people than the simple old fashioned sex based definition and there is sinply no way round that.

Why not? What's more complicated about it? At 3 children think Santa is real, that all men are called Daddy, it's not like they have deep and meaningful thoughts. They get upset when their banana is broken. They are not that bright!

That's the black and white thinking again. Just because we don't have an exhaustive definition for something doesn't mean it's meaningless. Not everything in life is all or nothing

How would a nine month old know what gender it is and how that relates to its sex? You’ve just blown said beeping trans was knowing there was a disconnect between your sex and gender, so how would a nine month old know? Unless of course thst mother was lying?

They aren't complex.

Sex is a universal system that can be used to categorise male and female across all living species.

I suspect you are leaning very heavily on people who have disorders of sexual development, but you might as well argue that being born with a hole in the heart is just another way to have a heart.

We can diagnose disorders of sexual development because we do understand how humans and other mammals reproduce and how to define male and female.

The concept of 'trans' disappears if we can't define sex.

They often have periods, but not always.

In women, the absence of periods signifies pregnancy, malnutrition, menopause, medication, illness, a particular point in the monthly hormonal cycle.

In men it just means its Tuesday.

3 year olds are incredibly bright.

Well it does mean that those words mean nothing. So you’ve just denied the existence of transpeople. If no one can know what a woman is, there can be no trabs women. If no one knows what a man is, there can be no transmen. Bit transphobic don’t you think?

Hahahahahahaha. No. No they’re really really not.

"That's the black and white thinking again. Just because we don't have an exhaustive definition for something doesn't mean it's meaningless. Not everything in life is all or nothing"

Definitely going to try this line the next time I get a parking ticket.

She said her child knew at 9 months?

I would find that very unlikely. How would she determine/ evidence that?

This lying thing you guys like to weaponise though... it's weird. She probably wasn't "lying" why would someone do this? She's probably projecting a perception or belief. People do that a lot:

Definitions of mutually exclusive concepts, such as male/female, need to be black-and-white. We need to be able to identify whether someone is male or female, in order to know what rights they have, which spaces they can access.

Let's try another way: how would you identify the sex of some random person out there? It's a mental exercise, so we assume you have access to all their documents, to the details of their body down to their chromosomes, and to their lived experiences. How do you determine whether they are male or female?