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. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Can you explain why "a pervasive, consistent, persistent difference in the brain/ psyche whereby you perceive /
recognise yourself to be other than your birth sex." justifies the TRA demand that trans people should bs treated as if they actually are the opposite physical sex?

Why is a male bodied person's perception that he is/should have been* female bodied in any way relevant to the experiences, needs and history of those of us who actually are* female-bodied?

Why should his voice have any weight whatsoever when it comes to the needs and realities of female-bodied people?

Why is it considered "reasonable" by people like you that female-bodied people give up the resources, protections and political and social voice we have fought for against the weight of centuries of oppresion and exploitation of us that was inflicted on us exactly because we are female-bodied to accomodate a commonality you insist exists yet cannot even describe let alone prove?

Why do you care so much for the existence of this theoretical difference of mind of trans people, yet so little for the undeniable embodied reality of female people and all that brings with it?

I know you will not answer this in any meaningful way, but nevertheless these questions need to stand to bear witness to your total disinterest in and neglect of the needs, rights and voice of the female half of humanity.

So what is yours? Trans-identified males in women's spaces? Yes or no?

I'm not going to get into an argument with you about that.

It's a simple yes or no answer. Even you should be able to manage that .

That's a 'yes' then🙄

well its not actually . Because, again, no everything in life is a basic and black and white as you would like it to be. Very few things are in fact.

OK, I'll narrow it down. Toilets, rape crisis group counselling sessions, changing rooms, sports.

Anything less than an unqualified 'no' is a 'yes'. Possibly a qualified yes, but still a yes. We see you, Puppy

Some years ago, a well-known Irish politician said that questioning another well-known contemporary Irish politician was like playing handball against a haystack. There was only a dull thud and the ball never came back.

This thread reminded me of that. With puppy as the haystack, obviously.

I personally wouldn't call it "wrong", in the same way that I wouldn't call , for example, having autism being something "wrong" with the brain.

I don't "have autism", I am autistic, and when I can't go supermarket shopping because my sensory sensitivities are too acute, there's definitely something wrong with my brain that day.

What gives you the right to overrule the words Seethlaw and I use to describe our respective experiences for the sake of virtue-signaling how "non-stigmatising" you are?

So, that's a Yes then. If you can't categorically say "No Male Bodies in Woman-only Spaces", you are saying "Yes, At Least Some Male Bodies in Women-only Spaces".

You may fail to acknowlege where your assertions lead, but nevertheless they do indeed lead there.

The quality of TRAs on here has really dropped off a cliff recently.

We see you, Puppy

I find this creepy. Please don't.

But you seem to believe that people are who they tell you they are.

And you are telling us. With a megaphone.

I don't "overrule" how you describe your experiences. You are of course free to describe them as you wish, and that's totally valid.

I don't chose to describe them that way myself, nor do many autistic and trans people. It's not about "virtue signalling".

I really don't care what
you think of me, I thought I made that abundantly clear by now?

Id just rather people didn't say creepy personal stuff.

Thanks.

I find arguments in favour of allowing males to access female spaces creepy.

and you are welcome to your opinion on my arguments.

Just please don't be personal. Thanks.

'We see you' isn't creepy, it just means we can see what kind of person you are. As you keep showing us.

It doesn't mean we're literally peering through your front window, as you well know, or would if you identified as a person of any intelligence.

I find it creepy and personal.

if you identified as a person of any intelligence.*

Im not interested in engaging in personal arguments and insults:

Thanks.

🤣🤣

Well, you do you - as the kids say

Maybe the last clause was a tad de trop, but I stand by the rest.

I don't know, I find that Puppy's posts are much more entertaining if I imagine them in a Skeletor voice, possibly with references to "puny humans"

🤣