The gender ideology thread

[Carth]

Fads come and go, there's always been something going on that people want to hang onto the coat tails of until it gets forgotten about for the latest 'new' thing to get involved with.

The trouble is that nowadays there's an electronic/digital trail that leads back to all those bandwagons you now wish you'd never bothered to jump on.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Carth

Fads come and go, there's always been something going on that people want to hang onto the coat tails of until it gets forgotten about for the latest 'new' thing to get involved with.

The trouble is that nowadays there's an electronic/digital trail that leads back to all those bandwagons you now wish you'd never bothered to jump on.

If it was a "Fad" perhaps hunderds of childeren would not have been mutilated, young girls having their breasts removed boys their bells etc etc.

It was pure child abuse.

[Sephiroth]

The 'fad' that Carth mentions is the beliefs of the lunatic element that wish to allow transgender men (who dress like women) into women's spaces.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The 'fad' that Carth mentions is the beliefs of the lunatic element that wish to allow transgender men (who dress like women) into women's spaces.

Actually, it's all the people that once wrote something on Twatter, Farcebook etc trying to be with the 'in crowd' that then try to retract it when the wind blows in a different direction.

@ pip08456 - people who think that's a good thing to do to kids want shooting.

Avarda kedavra….

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr7012ryvyyo

JK Rowling has sent a stinging response to Emma Watson after the Harry Potter actress recently spoke about their relationship and a public disagreement over the issue of gender identity.
Last week, Watson said she still loves Rowling and refuses to "cancel her out" despite their differences on the subject.
But on Monday, the author responded by saying her own feelings towards her "former friend" had soured after she says Watson publicly poured "petrol on the flames" of the debate at the peak of threats against her.
Rowling wrote on X: "Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is."

Seriously, it’s well worth reading a take-down written by a world-renowned author. It’s coldly beautiful: https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1972600904185483427

[Sephiroth]

This is the takedown I like best:

I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.

[Carth]

I read that earlier and wondered if comments would appear here.

This line probably sums up my previous post about 'fads' coming and going.

The writer added that Watson's recent declaratons of love marked a "change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was".

She certainly put her in her place, as nicely as she probably could.

[RichardCoulter]

I'm pleased at the outcome for those (including myself) who made a formal complaint about this. Croxall had no right to alter her script and make a facial expression to put her own views across.

Whist she is entitled to her own opinion, she should not be making it known on the BBC as it's irrelevant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3epwz08ewzo.amp

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I'm pleased at the outcome for those (including myself) who made a formal complaint about this. Croxall had no right to alter her script and make a facial expression to put her own views across.

Whist she is entitled to her own opinion, she should not be making it known on the BBC as it's irrelevant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3epwz08ewzo.amp

yeah the BBC has no credibility on anything full stop. Only women can give birth and the latest court ruling on that bares it out. The BBC could be breaking the law if they push this too far due to the court ruling

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I'm pleased at the outcome for those (including myself) who made a formal complaint about this. Croxall had no right to alter her script and make a facial expression to put her own views across.

Whist she is entitled to her own opinion, she should not be making it known on the BBC as it's irrelevant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3epwz08ewzo.amp

I’m pleased that you helped expose the lack of credibility in the BBC’s internal complaints process.

Croxall was ambushed on-air with a script that used the ludicrous phrase ‘pregnant people’. Self-evidently, only women can become pregnant. This is not a personal opinion, it is science. She quite correctly substituted the scientifically correct term. The term ‘pregnant people’ is so bone-jarringly, brain-achingly stupid, her very brief eye-roll was really rather restrained. Certainly not worth the time and money of an internal investigation. Definitely not worth your time to report, though complaining about people does seem to be a hobby of yours.

Given that her conviction for facecrime comes less than 24 hours after a damning internal memo was leaked, laying bare the extent to which the BBC has developed a nasty habit of censoring coverage of issues like transgenderism and Palestine unless they conform to activist-approved lines, one has to wonder whether the BBC has gone looking for a squirrel to misdirect critical attention from its failings.

Telegraph, paywall-free link:

https://archive.ph/wWdMS

The BBC’s trans coverage is subject to “effective censorship” by specialist LGBT reporters who refuse to cover gender-critical stories, one of the broadcaster’s own advisers has warned.
BBC staff have expressed concerns that the LGBT desk – which is shared by all the corporation’s news programmes – has been “captured by a small group of people” promoting a pro-trans agenda and “keeping other perspectives off air”.
This has led to “a constant drip-feed of one-sided stories … celebrating the trans experience without adequate balance or objectivity”, a leaked internal BBC memo concludes. It said it reflected a “cultural problem across the BBC”, which treats issues of gender and sexuality as “a celebration of British diversity” rather than a complex and contentious subject.

[Jaymoss]

With the blatant editing of the Trump video over the capital building BBC news is now no longer fit for purpose full stop and should not be taken seriously by anyone

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I'm pleased at the outcome for those (including myself) who made a formal complaint about this.

Typical.

Well, seeing as we’re complaining, why not complain about the complaint. It might not change this particular decision but it might just make them pause and realise there is an administrative cost to this sort of politicking.

The web page with the judgment is here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/ecu/ne...l-21-june-2025

And you can complain about it here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/commen...Your%20comment

If you’re so motivated, you could suggest that the BBC has no remit to write contentious social theory into its newsroom scripts, that Croxall was quite correct to make an instant correction to use scientifically correct terminology, and that given what we all know about the BBC’s internal struggles with trans activism, the momentary eye-roll was really very restrained.

Whether or not anyone here complains, I bet the decision gets way more complaints than Croxall did. FYI the original issue was raised off the back of 20 complaints. That’s all. That’s basically our Richard plus a dozen or more members of the BBC’s own internal ‘Pride’ staff network. Hardly anyone at all outside of the BBC had any problem with this.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I'm pleased at the outcome for those (including myself) who made a formal complaint about this.

You complained that someone stated a fact ?