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 wonder whether your definition of empirical matches other people's.

Are you aware of Judith Butler? Queer theory?

Yes of course:

Yet you disagree with how trans people describe what it is to be trans.

Nope. The only trans person on this thRead described their experience of being trans . It was pretry much exactly how I have heard every trans person I've ever spoken to describe it.

This thread is giving me distinct vibes of that Friends episode where Phoebe says she doesn't believe in gravity.

I always have to sit on my hands when people start talking about gravity. There is, of course, no such thing.

So if somebody says that they are neither male nor female because they agree with Judith Butler that:

"We act as if that being of a man or that being of a woman is actually an internal reality or something that is simply true about us, a fact about us, but actually it's a phenomenon that is being produced all the time and reproduced all the time, so to say gender is performative is to say that nobody really is a gender from the start."

Would you say they weren't trans?

Finding queer theory convincing or not has nothing to do with being trans or not.

So you are arguing that somebody who reads Judith Butler's writings on gender and so defines as having a non-binary identity, in compliance with the definition of trans provided by Stonewall, is not actually trans?

I'm saying that reading and liking Judith butler does not make a person "non-binary" any more than it makes them a lesbian.

Christ alive, she didn't say that. Have another go.

Also, you do know that we can see what was posted before you edit it to add more waffle, don't you?

Yes she did. She said if a person reads and agrees with Judith butler they will become non binary: which is obviously ridiculous.

The book wouldn't 'make' them anything. It just presents the Idea that gender is performative, not innate, and that nobody really is a gender. Do you think that people who believe this and therefore describe themselves as non-binary are not trans?

Your sticking point on whether somebody can describe themself as agender or non binary seems to be whether they believe that it is normal to be 'cis' gender.

No, she said that of someone reads Butler and agrees that the way they feel is therefore non binary according to Butler's classification, then they fit under Stonewall's definition of trans.

Not that reading Butler made them change their perception of themselves, merely the label tey might attach to it.

Do try harder.

No, it was you that suggested that somebody would 'become' non binary. I just talked about Judith Butler presenting ideas about gender.

Hang on a sec - why are you calling me 'she'?

For all anyone knows, I am a long distance lorry driver called Keith.

Nonsense, you are my trans wife. Now put the kettle on love.

No believing in this theory doesn't make a person non binary; because, being trans has nothing to do with intellectualisation, or theories about things , or philosophies or political ideologies. We had a gender critical ("sex realist" as he called it) trans person on this thread.

Being trans is to have a pervasive, consistent, persistent difference in the brain/ psyche whereby you perceive /
recognise yourself to be other than your birth sex. The pp on this thread continued to have this experience, despite being gender critical and consciously knowing self to be female, nonetheless he could not help seeing himself as male. It is not something that someone can intellectualise, it operates at a much more fundamental level of the psyche,

So please explain late onset prison dysphoria to me, is that operating at a deep fundamental level of the psyche?

But, as you yourself say, Seethlaw consciously knows that she is female despite 'seeing herself' as male. All we ask is that the men with trans-identities (however defined) accept what they consciously know, which is that they are male, and therefore respect women's boundaries.

It is possible that there are some rare cases within the criminal justice system where individuals claim /
feign trans ID to confer certain advantages. Or it's possible this is another made up thing by GCF to justify transphobia. I do not know. Either way being in prison has nothing to do with factually being trans

Yes I know your position on public facilities .