Is Jenni Murray right about transgender?

thatbags, depends on BBC rules.

I used to work in a job, where I would have been fired and rightly so, if I disclosed what I knew from work[I knew the finances of many in the town].

So what I said in my own time in public, while not even working, was part of my contract[I cant remember if it was a written part or not].

I suspect Jenni Murray, even by being freelance, has rules outside of work which she has to abide to, to be able to keep working for them.

I first encountered "lady boys" (their term, not mine) in Thailand. The ones I saw had a certain apparently female beauty. Until they moved. Men walk from the shoulder and women walk from the hip. I don't think any surgery can change that because their bones, muscles and basic physiology have already formed before they have any gender surgery or hormone treatment.

The above is not a value judgment. It's a plain, straightforward observation.

That observation aside, it was a very good show.

But JM was not speaking for the BBC when she expressed her opinion. She was speaking for herself. And even when she's presenting a BBC programme like Woman's Hour, she's surely allowed to express her own personal opinion. Why ever not? She's not the mouthpiece of the BBC. So long as it,s clear that it's a personal opinion she's expressing, the BBC has nothing to fear.

And they can always give disclaimers to cover employees' opinions.

This is Danielle (formerly Dave) Muscato: www.daniellemuscato.com/

Make no mistake: what you see is a picture of Danielle POST transition. Danielle feels like a woman, and that that's all the transition needed.

I admit struggle with the concept of Danielle and her penis in my sports club changing room. I wouldn't if she'd had the surgery.

Until recently, I had assumed that most transwomen fully transitioned ('bottom surgery'). But only 20-30% do.

I like to keep you on your toes, anya

Lucky Well what saddens me is that vulnerable women prisoners were sexually exploited by a 'trans woman ' prisoner with a penis; that women in a women's refuge ( in Canada) were sexually assaulted by a self identifying trans woman with a penis; that violent crimes committed by trans women are being recorded as crimes committed by women; that safe women only spaces such as changing rooms are being threatened; that we won't be able to specify( if that's our wish) that we want a 'real woman' to carry out our cervical smear or discuss our vaginal dryness or sexual dysfunction problems; that gay women who refuse to have a trans woman with a penis as a sexual partner are accused of being transphobic ; that women only sports events and other competitions are under threat; that women are now supposed to accept being defined as not being a trans woman by being described as a cis woman; that all our hard won rights as women are under threat by a well organised group of misogynists ( many with penises) . Yes, there's plenty to be sad about as we sleepwalk into a topsy turvey Humpty Dumpty world where any man can decide to be a woman and we women are just being precious snowflakes who should just 'suck it up' ( probably literally).

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39173398

What makes the BBC think it has the right to control what views its employees express in the written media FFS??
It's not as though she made these remarks on Woman's Hour. It was in a newspaper

Do these stricture apply to all employees or just high-profile ones?

Commenting on the issue, a BBC spokesman said: "Jenni Murray is a freelance journalist and these were her own views, however we have reminded her that presenters should remain impartial on controversial topics covered by their BBC programmes."

So the BBC are right?

08.46.14. x post

Anya, I'm glad I have a business to run and a job to go to. Looking at the amount of time you spend on here, it appears this is where you devote your time. I'm not offended at all at what you think of me. I was just sharing my own thoughts as are the other posters. If anyone seems offended, that person seems to be you. Time to breathe into the brown paper bag if you don't mind me saying. Enjoy your day!

Don't believe everything you read on GN ....pass it through a reality filter first.

True Anya. True. I am trying!

Anyway I'd better get moving as I've thing to do, places to go and people to meet.

Same here.

Attempts to stifle debate and free speech are taking us down a very slippery slope;

But there must be rules a the BBC[the same with every employer] about what a broadcaster can say and not say while not at work?

Don't believe everything you read on GN ....pass it through a reality filter first.

Anyway I'd better get moving as I've thing to do, places to go and people to meet.

"The BBC says it has warned Woman’s Hour host Dame Jenni Murray to stay “impartial” after she spoke out about transgender women in a newspaper column.

That's far from a 'warning'

The BBC is actually reinforcing its policy to be impartial.

My first thought was absolutely Luckygirl. Bu then I thought that she said her views to a newspaper.
And I cant decided if that muddies the waters a bit, for a broadcaster, though not at work, to do that?

But yes it shows blatantly, that the BBC is far from impartial. But I think a lot of people knew that already?

Though I am still surprised and somewhat saddened, that their lack of impartiality is so clear to see.

I would have thought it obvious that I was calling the opinion 'outrageous' Bags but apologise if my post was ambiguous.

As for 'name calling' if I think someone's opinion is narrow-minded and bigoted then that is how I see it and tough if it upsets your sensibilities. These same people are not afraid to upset other posters whose children, or indeed the poster themselves, make suffer from gender identity issues, but oh dear! let us not upset them or challenge their narrow mindedness.

I am truly shocked that Jenni Murray has been issued a warning. There are no grounds for this action and we should be very worried indeed about the impartiality of the BBC. Attempts to stifle debate and free speech are taking us down a very slippery slope; and for that to be evidenced in the main GB broadcasting outlet is wholly unacceptable.

She is entitled to her opinion and to voice it - it is truly dreadful that the BBC has bowed to pressure over this.

Although Jenni Murray has a right to her opinion, I agree with Anya and Luckygirl on this issue.
I thought also that Granby gave a very moving account of her little girl and was brave to put it on this thread.I am pleased that her daughter is now happy.

Bags sometimes I wonder at your role in playing Official GN Devil's Advocate

It's sad when the debate sinks into name calling. That's why I only visit here occasionally.
Just to clarify my thoughts..........people can do whatever they like, I don't have an issue with it as long as it does not infringe my own rights. I would not want to share a toilet or shower with a woman with a penis.

I don't think the purpose of Gransnet discussion threads is to change people's opinions. The purpose is to allow people a place to express their opinions.

anya, it's not outrageous for someone to express an opinion, whatever the opinion or belief happens to be. Or were you just saying the opinion was outrageous, not that the expression of it on this thread was outrageous? I hope the latter

Ankers there's no point in trying to change the opinions of narrow-minded bigots, especially narrow-minded old women (real or not).

why am I picturing Madam Defarge?

My main point was though..................do they have a womb and can they give birth? I believe this two biological issues is what makes a woman a WOMAN. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

I've just read that Jenni Murray has been given a "warning" by the BBC. If this is true, then the BBC is not being impartial, which it is supposed to be. Such an "impartiality warning" from a supposedly impartial and apolitical organisation is wrong. She is being given the warning because she is not toeing a certain line, which shows the BBC has a specific political position on this issue. It shouldn't have if it wants to be called impartial.

Why can't the BBC just give a disclaimer about all opinions expressed? Surely that's the only way it would be showing impartiality? It's supposed to report viewpoints, not make value judgments about them.