That some people have described
A joint statement by Women’s Place UK, Filia, and Fair Play for Women:
Today, 20th Oct, BBC Woman’s Hour hosted an excellent discussion on the politicization of Mumsnet with feminist scholar Sarah Pedersen (at approx 25mins). The discussion looked at the growth of the popular Mumsnet feminist discussion boards and their role in promoting a nascent women’s movement advocating women’s rights, in particular informing discussion on GRA reform.
Woman’s Place UK (WPUK), Fair Play for Women (FPFW) and FiLiA were highlighted as groups popular with and representative of women’s rights issues. At this point Jane Garvey, the BBC presenter felt it necessary to interject “We have to be clear, which are groups that some people have described, in some circumstances, as transphobic”.
Which kind of boils down to saying that trans activism is more important than feminism, and women should just sit down and defer to trans women instead of continuing to advocate for women’s rights. Otherwise she wouldn’t have said it. The BBC doesn’t interject into discussions of anti-racism the fact that racists consider anti-racism an evil and seditious thing, does it? Why did Garvey find it necessary to accuse three feminist groups of “transphobia”? Because that particular accusation is at the top of the list; it trumps all others. Sexism and misogyny on the other hand are at the bottom of the list. The trouble with women is that they might be terfs, and you just never know. Better not to risk it.
FiLiA, FPFW and WPUK are not transphobic. It is not acceptable for a BBC journalist to repeat libellous comment about us as if it is fair comment or a balancing of the discussion. There is simply no basis in fact for this comment to be made. It is the repetition of misogynist slander to which too many women are subjected.
It reminds me of the way the BBC used to talk about Salman Rushdie – it always “balanced” every damn discussion by bringing in the MCB to see what they thought.
These comments are seriously prejudicial to the reputations of women involved with these organisations, some of whom have previously been invited on the programme.
We urge BBC Woman’s Hour to correct this inaccurate reporting and we would like to thank Sarah Pedersen for her excellent and informative analysis of the feminist phenomenon that is Mumsnet.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for the BBC to correct it.
God. Imagine a discussion of evolution in school classes interjecting with “we have to be clear, this topic has been described by some people, in some circumstances, as ungodly.”
Or if discussions around Black Lives Matter required assurances that all lives matter.
It is very much a BBC way of going about things, which has caused it to be criticised on eg giving non-scientists equal amount in a debate as climate scientists on climate change, or present special interest think tanks as impartial witnesses.
However given the crazy partisanship of so much media these days, it is a fault I can put up with, especially considering there is a lot of good analysis of various matters on the Beeb (not to mention a whole lot of other stuff).
So they’re still welcome to my licence fee.
I just remembered:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDYba0m6ztE
Holms, that’s not funny. I have been told by people that I should do just that…make a concession to student beliefs, and let them know they don’t have to believe.
I refuse to do that. I just teach it. And I still teach that male people have XY and female people have XX chromosomes. I suppose that will get me in trouble someday, even though the evolution thing has not.