Anti-Social on R4 now on the girl guide and single sex spaces

[Missproportionate]

FYI
Anti-Social on R4 now on the girl guide and single sex spaces

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live/bbc_radio_fourfm

Yes these errors made by the so called legal expert were infuriating.

She should have explained that a boy identifying as a girl is still a boy, and whether or not he has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (and I think she was wrong to say it is not possible for a child to have the PC Of GR) he has no more the right to join the Guides than any other boy. She fell into the trap of implying that possessing the PC of GR means that someone gets to change their sex for the purposes of the PC of sex, when actually they are two different protected characteristic which do not, for Equality Act purposes at least, have anything to do with each other.

Yes, and he just so clearly doesn't understand what he doesn't understand!

How dare he denigrate single-sex girls' schools - it's his DD who would be attending, not him! So what if he finds them "intimidating". It's probably because he subconsciously sensed the single-sex girls' school wasn't designed for him.

Idiot.

Thank goodness for Milli.

Oliver needs to read this:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62je1g000eo

I thought that the most surprising thing about that article was that the BBC considered those findings surprising.

Oli another disgusting man putting responsibility for the behaviour of adult men onto 4 year old girls.

Just started listening and my first thought is why the heck is one of the guests male? (And a dj). What possible relevance could his viewpoint be to the guides????

Just started listening and my first thought is why the heck is one of the guests male? (And a dj). What possible relevance could his viewpoint be to the guides????

Janie Hampton ‘s book is well worth a read

janiehampton.co.uk/books/how-girl-guides-won-war/

Relevant to that book I was shocked to hear that during the war over 500 girl guides were hanged by the Nazis for their resistance work.

I was amazed about how the guide badges were so rigorous they were basically qualifications

Christ that man. What a fucking selfish sexist prick. Poor old boys, slaves to their hormones (though also, we shouldn't just think of people as their sex, that's so old-fashioned, we're all basically the same, except the lads can't be expected to behave because hormones), and why shouldn't the girls sacrifice their learning to sit next to them and calm the down. Awful, awful man.

He also seemed a really weird choice of guest. NOt involved in Guides, not involved with TRA stuff. Just some random bloke who seemed to be of the opinion boys will be boys, we should be kind to boys who think they aren’t boys, girls are emotional support humans for boys, and a charitable organisation bound by law should abandon national oversight and make decisions on a grassroots basis. Also single sex schools are scary

Yes! There's another contradiction I'd not spotted. There were so many...

I see from LinkedIn that poor old Oliver stopped being an i columnist in January 2025 and he’s just scrabbling around for work now.

I bet the mother of his two kids he’s no longer with is grateful for him trying to do stuff to raise his profile. Or he could get an actual job.

I bet the mother of his two kids he’s no longer with

I assumed he'd bought them.

☹️

Aah, I feel such relief in finding this thread! I looked for one on Friday. I listened to the show in my car. Pretty sure other drivers would have observed my ever increasingly angry hand gestures and shouting at the pathetic WhatAboutOliver.

Oliver's insistence that boys should be supported (by girls) and their transgressions against girls overlooked because they have such a hard time going through hormonal changes poor loves had me seething. Does he think pubescent girls don't have hormonal changes that affect them greatly? Does he think we should stop trying to raise young people into decent adults by guiding their behaviour at every stage, yes even (perhaps even especially) when they're thinking with their dicks??!

Well behaved girls should be honoured to be chosen to be support humans for naughty rascal boys, according to him.

Oliver stank of a pale stale male who has never quite gotten over some formative memory in his teenage years - probably a girl rejected his advances.

This was another thing I was furious about. Why the fuck had they invited A Man to give his opinions on an issue affecting women and girls?

Why the ever loving fuck should his voice be amplified over the many, many knowledgeable women who would have been happy to speak on the subject? And yes, I mean in the role of being against single sex spaces. I may not have agreed with anything that the Oliver role had to say, but the "part" deserved to be given to a woman.

The BBC have endlessly managed the debate on women's rights by putting together groups of men to discuss what little wims should be allowed to have. While studiously avoiding as much as possible any of the nasty kind of women who aren't dick panderers.

Men like Oliver believe that the only point of women is as resources for men. He is one of the walking examples of why women need sex based rights to be able to achieve equality of access to life, and to be able to function; too many fuckwitted men, handmaidens and cabinet members would never permit it if they had any legal choice at all.

I wonder if the usual TRA are avoiding the discussion?

I think the TRA wanted trans identify boys and their parents to speak, but few are, so random guy who is willing to talk about anything at a moments notice, gets the gig.

The lack of trans activist input was also present on the debate in Parliament this afternoon. I think the more clever ones have realised that putting forward their views is debate and that needs to be avoided. It often goes down badly with "civilians". Their application of influence needs to return to the shadows to be at its most effective.

The idea that any male thinks his opinion that girls shouldn't be allowed an activity just for them has any merit at all is a joke. Not a girl, never was a girl, never will be one - wind your bloody neck in.
There's reasons girls choose guides not scouts, the fact they have chosen a single sex activity already tells you what you need to know Oliver. They have already cast their vote by joining up.

You'd think all the senior people in the guides who are determined to be 'inclusive' would have been better placed to defend their views than random man. Were they not asked or did they just turn down the opportunity?

Too busy being outraged and posting on Facebook?

The GATE group seems to be a lot of hot air. I really don’t understand why if they care so much they don’t just schism off. Take their knowledge, passion, experience of Guiding and set up their own version. SCouts does/ did this periodically (eg Baden Powell Scouts and the British Boy Scouts)

The Trefoil Guild is already a related entity to Guiding which accepts both men and women as long as they agree to promote the aims of guiding. Currently its for over 18s only, but i dont understand why this structure cant be leveraged and groups that want to accept biological boys who identify as girls come under the trefoil umbrella, and those who want to stay as single sex, stay under guiding's umbrella.

https://www.trefoilguild.co.uk/