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. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think even Butler would give Puppy the heave-ho

Why does that make you so angry? It's simply naming the norm,
in order to enable recognition of the minority. It takes nothing away from you.

Nah. You're just trying to wind people up mate

How do you know that something is food? Fungi are edible or poisonous; some are indeterminate. Which ones will you eat? All the ones you see as edible or indeterminate plus some poisonous ones? Or will you run a fungus identification class and suggest that it's all far to complex to be able to define which ones to accept as food and which ones to reject?

[In the case of fungi, the proportion that are indeterminate is quite large, whereas the people whose sex is not straightforward to determine are very few indeed.]

Of course if is not all they are doing, they are also accusing people of being transphobic.

Cis is not acceptable. We are not Roman Gaul.

Roman Gaul????

Why is cis not acceptable? It's simply naming the norm / default to enable recognition of the minority.

At least I'm trans. You're not even trans, and yet you prescribe who can and cannot be trans: they have to have that ~speshul feeling~ or they are not really trans. Well, sorry to say, but you're not trans, so you don't get to tell ANY of us whether we are trans or not, whether we do trans properly or not. AGPs are just as trans as I am because they say they are, which is the ONLY acceptable definition in the trans community, which you don't get to redefine because, again, you are not trans! Stay in your line, Puppy.

No, it is short for cisgender and we've said over and over that we don't have genders.

Feel free to call people who self identify as such cis, you are misgendering anyone who doesn't specifically state they are cis.

Should I respond with a ‘lol’?

Because I am describing what happened to me and perception of the event. It was a boundary being crossed in my view considering the history of interaction.

Am I not allowed to do that now? I have to remain silent because you asked?

Cisalpine and transalpine Gaul was a Roman way of naming the areas divided by the alps. I'm sorry that you don't know that. Cis is not a word to apply to humans. We have a perfectly good word for women that needs no prefix, also for men. People who decide they don't fit that can use whatever prefix they like but the rest of us don't need one just to make them feel better.

It's actually only strong evidence that he thinks he is trans. I have no evidence to say whether he is trans or not, just his word that he says he is, but not his word that he meets your definition. I'm sure that he's somewhere under Stonewall's trans umbrella at the moment, but I don't know where, and I don't know whether he's been indoctrinated into a belief system or whether he has some neurological disorder, or whether he's deluded, or whether it just somehow suits him to take on a trans identity which has some benefit in the circles he inhabits.

Puppy is incredibly dismissive of Seethlaw, who to be fair, is the only one here with any authority on the matter.

Apart from me, of course 🤣

Indeed. For all we know, cisgender people might be just as rare as transgender people. Maybe the norm is agender. Or non-binary.

I'm not telling anyone who they are or aren't.

Im simply describing what being trans is - as it exists in the real world. Not people's projections or stereotypes . What it is.

Im sorry that you are angry with me-
it is not my intention to anger you;
I only wish to speak up for what is right and true. Because it's important,
I also think you have said a lot of things on this thread, that would upset a huge majority of the trans community, and also seem to be quite self deprecating of yourself.

I am sorry for your personal struggles.

It's imposing an identity onto us that we do not in fact feel, based in an ideology that we reject and indeed experience as nothing more than the same old sexism female bodied people have faced forever.

And I have no doubt that you know that perfectly well.

So while you may not agree with us, pretending you don't understand why women are angry at being misnamed as "cis" is not bring honest.

And next time you clutch your pearls at someone suggesting you are being economical with the verite, I will remind you of this post.

You are, you told me I wasn't trans.

Why did it make you so angry when you were accused of being trans, or male?

I would say that Someone thinking they are trans is strong evidence that they are trans.

I'm sure that he's somewhere under Stonewall's trans umbrella at the moment

have you asked him?

Because I was called that as a weapon to humiliate me and shut me up/ discredit my opinions. Like the poster who said "mate no one will care if your use the male loos". The intention is to humiliate.

Because I know perfectly well you don't believe you are trans, you are just on the wind up.

Me too! I've demonstrated my transness as a non-binary agender man!

You don't KNOW that at all.

And you're a transmedicalist. That would also upset a huge majority of the trans community. But at least I'm not pretending to speak for them.

and also seem to be quite self deprecating of yourself.

Ah yes, the good old "there must be something wrong with you" chesnut, coupled with the fake sympathy. You're really out to pull all the "arguing in bad faith" stereotypes, are you?

Of course I do. It's perfectly obvious from the conversation I have had with you.