BBC calling President Zelensky *Mr*Zelensky

And there we have it.

I have seen Eddie Izzard in Harrogate dressed as a man. Confusing.

AGAA4

I have seen Eddie Izzard in Harrogate dressed as a man. Confusing.

I think it all depends what production, film etc he is in.

When it comes to acting he is a man.

Surely he is a man whatever he does.

Oreo

Surely he is a man whatever he does.

Oh definitely, but he likes us all to go along with the pretence that he is a girl

If we did that would make us all liars…

He wasn't acting he was at writer's convention and was there all evening dressed as a man.

AGAA4

He wasn't acting he was at writer's convention and was there all evening dressed as a man.

Probably because he is a man!

In spite of mascara and painted black nails, yes of course he is a man.
He isn’t a transwoman either what he is could usefully be called a show off.

Oreo

In spite of mascara and painted black nails, yes of course he is a man.
He isn’t a transwoman either what he is could usefully be called a show off.

He is definitely a show off but he is a woman. He has told us so!

😆

Syracute

AGAA4

I don't think Eddie Izzard has anything to do with this discussion. Most on here aren't 'nodding along' to his/her gender issues.
It may be better to start another thread about Eddie Izzard if posters want to discuss him/her.

Suzy Eddie Izzard identifies as a woman and the BBC presenter should have identified her as such . It’s easy to check on line . It’s disrespectful otherwise.

The BBC should show President Zelensky the courtesy and accuracy of using his title whenever they are using President Trump or Vice President Vance in their reporting. Do you not have any opinion on that Syracute?

Does that go for any self identification? Can I self identify as an Asian man and the BBC should also identify me as such (for the avoidance of doubt I'm factually a white woman)? Eddie Izzard has publicly stated that he slips from boy mode to girl mode by, for example, changing his shoes from flats to heels. And you take him seriously? His biology definitely states he's male so the descriptor 'man' is quite correct.

The point about Zelensky is quite clear - is the terms used are Trump Putin and Zelensky, thats OK, but if anyone of them are Mr" or President/PM then they should all be addressed as such.

I did find one entry today where it was President Zelensky and Putin however...

Thanks Rosie 51, your understanding that Eddie Izzard moves between feeling female - male and dresses accordingly. So far as I’m aware, s/he’s never asked to be pronounced as female (unless he’s feeling girly)
He’s an excellent actor and for all I know, might be a likeable person. What he isn’t, is an adult female human being.

Whereas, President Zelensky is the President of Ukraine.

Iam64 100% accurate 👍🏻

Can someone please explain what 'dressed as a man' means, if 'man' doesn't mean 'adult human male'?

Oh come on Doodledog get with the 'moment' .....'man' means whatever anyone wants it to mean....could be an adult human male, could mean woman who likes jeans and a checked shirt alongside a short haircut, or could mean an androgynous being with blue hair and fake breasts.... you surely aren't expecting a definitive definition, not while we're in Humpty Dumpty land where “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean neither more nor less.”

I just think the undermining of President Zelensky by calling him Mr is playing into the hands of President Trump who has done his best to demean him.
The situation is serious as it's clear Trump wants a new president for Ukraine who will be easier to manipulate and the upshot would be Ukraine becoming part of Russia.

The situation with Eddie Izzard is not on the same scale but much has been made of it. Eddie has said of the reporter calling him the man that it doesn't matter and isn't bothered if s/he is addressed as Suzy or Eddie.
It's hardly going to change the world but the Ukraine situation, if Trump gets his way, will.

AGAA4 Eddie Izzard isn't going to change the world, much as he sees himself as a trailblazer; but the idea that 'gender' is the same as sex may well do just that - it would have done had Stonewall had its way.

In a world where sex (as opposed to 'gender') is optional, women have nowhere to call our own, no sex-adjusted categories in sport, no right to meet without male supervision, and no words to describe us as women and girls, so we can't even talk about female concerns as there is no vocabulary to do so.

Any research into sex-based societal differences, from pensions to employment to health are meaningless when figures for male and female participants can't be compared with any accuracy, so targeted initiatives stop.

Crime figures are similarly skewed - even definitions of crimes such as rape are impacted. Rape has always meant 'non-consensual penetration with a penis' (ie male sexual domination that could lead to pregnancy, STDs, etc) but we are now told that women (or more accurately 'men who say they are women') can commit rape, so there is a call for the definition to include penetration with an object. I won't stop to a discussion of which is worse, as that is absolutely not the point. The point is that when we even think about removing a massively significant crime from the 'books' in order to mollify those who don't see women's rights as remotely relevant, we should be asking ourselves why.

Personal dignity (eg dealing with periods) and safety when vulnerable, eg in changing rooms, hospital wards and public toilets, where women and girls might be ill or in a state of undress is lost when men can access all areas.

Women's categories in the Arts are pointless when (for example) a man can win the Women's Prize for Poetry or whatever, so a female perspective on life goes back to where it used to be in the days when women used male names to be taken seriously. It goes on and on and on.

This is not about discrimination, and it is not a triviality - it is much more serious, and however much we are told it is about 'being kind' we really need to protect our daughters and granddaughters from the insidious sidelining of women and girls. The tide has turned a bit, but we can't rest on our laurels.

I disagree, it is one of the reasons I no more trust the BBC, than I trust the conspiracy theorists. They will say anything. They have fallen so far so quickly, my guess is if you looked back say two years ago you would find me on here defending the BBC. Now I just view them with despair. I happened to hear PM the other day on the events in Syria, the reporting was dire. So yes I am sure their reporting on Ukraine was poor.

Doodledog that is the most significant explanation of all the real issues at stake as I see them too. Thank you.

Yes doodledog is very good at summarising the issues. For me it is not just the very serious implications for womens rights that doodle describes, it is also the utter undermining of truth, reality and the impact that has on our faith in institutions. It has led me to view the BBC with contempt, that isn't a good thing.

doodledog I agree with everything you have posted about gender and sex.
. Men can never become women and I don't think the reporter who called Izzard a man should have had to apologise as he seems to yo-yo between being a man and claiming to be a woman and he said he's not bothered.
I'm much more worried about those who claim that they are women and want to use facilities such as changing rooms for women.
This is a fight than women and girls should never have had to deal with.
I know my 19 year old GD goes to the gym regularly. She would be worried if a trans woman came into the changing rooms while she was dressing. I think most women would be. They shouldn't have to deal with that situation.

Thank you Sallyforth.

I know what you mean, Galaxy, and agree - it's why I always pick up on it when people confuse sex and gender, as it is that sleight of hand that has allowed this to get as far as it has.

We really have to stop the 'kindness', as being kind is very far from the agenda of those pulling the strings, even when they have persuaded the footsoldiers that they are campaigning on behalf of 'the most vulnerable group in society'. Unfortunately this government has a poor track record when it comes to confusing sex and gender, but I have always felt that it is absolutely impossible that they don't understand - they do, but have felt hidebound by the way in which the media and their opponents will pick on anything they can to do them down, and they can only fight on so many fronts at a time. Now they are in power, however, we will see how they behave, which is always the important thing. Meanwhile, I will bore on and point out the truth when confronted with misunderstandings and/or lies.

Gender issues are important to women. I do worry about my daughters and granddaughters but I am also concerned about other dangers Russia being one of them.
I can be concerned about several issues and there are plenty to be concerned about these days.
I don't think Eddie Izzard has claimed that he has changed sex and it is those who make that claim that bother me the most.

Izzard is something of an outlier, as he seems to be deliberately controversial. He claims not to care, yet insists on using women's loos when he is 'Suzy', and was very rude and threatening to teenage girls who happened to be in there on one visit. I think it was he who insisted on the Ladies being cleared for him on another occasion. Attention-seeking? He seems to opt into male and female acting roles to suit himself (and his bank balance), too.

I do take your point about there being several things to worry about in the world, though AGAA4. I'm in no way wanting to divert the thread from the disrespect of Volodymyr Zelensky, and I don't think there has been deliberate diversion onto 'gender' issues, but I do think that this can sometimes happen (less so on here than in the past, though), when campaigners try to normalise the idea that a woman is anyone who says so, and will sneak that messaging into anything they can.