Yeah, this is why I don't pay my license fee. And as for their written reporting on the issue of Tavistock's imminent closure, like the Grauniad, they put it all down to long waiting lists, no exploration of the scandal that led to its decommissioning. Utter bullshit.
I no longer pay the licence fee, and I won't until the BBC changes its policies and direction. Or I might continue not to pay on the basis that I don't trust the corporation. But there's some positive news from another media outlet, Sonia Sodha has written another good article in today's Observer, highlighting all the important issues. I'm sure there'll be a Guardian article along soon to counter her opinion. Entirely predictable, but who the fuck cares? If anything, an article of this kind could add weight to the words of Sodha and others.
Yes, digging deeper and deeper, just like Stonewall. These people, particularly the latter, have allowed themselves to ascend to unsustainable levels of audaciousness and confidence in their malevolent misogynistic fantasy. It was bound to lead to them beginning to lose their grip. Let's hope it continues.
'The BBC'. It's just people really. Wouldn't you love to see more of the actual names and faces behind the enabling of 'gender' cult thinking? Behind the destruction of children's bodies and psyches? Behind the breakup of families, and loss of friendships? Behind the theft of women's rights? It would just take a very few bullying types to overwhelm the weaker, the cowardly, the ones in thrall to their paychecks. (We get it. Mortgages, families to support, but still -- we have a moral obligation to protect children. There is strength in numbers, and more could have at least squeaked out some disapproval.) The cult bullies and cheerleaders need to be named and held accountable.
The BBC’s ‘Specialist Disinformation Correspondents’ (you couldn’t make it up could you) ) would be all over it ... trying to down-play / divert / perform Trans God image damage limitation exercises - as usual. (Channel 4 no better the other day) ✊
Channel 4 actually invited Mermaids' Susie Green on as the only outside voice about the Tavi closure a few days ago. The straight reportage segment wasn't bad, even allowing fair representation in parts, but was followed immediately by Susie Green's delusional, ass-covering, heartlessly patronising spin. This child-sterilising woman anointed by Channel 4 as interpretative authority on the closure of HER pet validation'n'sterilisation outfit!! Fecking hell. Utter indoctrinated fools at C4 and BBC, in turn indoctrinating the nation.
If it weren't for the few journalists of integrity at the Times, Spectator, GBNews, Telegraph and the likes of independent Nolan within the otherwise captured BBC, some of us would be losing the will to live.
People need to read Kemi Badenoch in today's Times, by the way, 'The Tavistock scandal shows the dangers of civil service groupthink.' Very revealing of what goes on and how the tide finally shifted.
I work in the civil service and the groupthink she mentions is real, but not representative of the staff below senior level. Senior level managers are a bunch of yes-men who ass-cover professionally. They virtue signal and fawn over anything that draws attention away from the fact that the top of the tree is still stale, male and pale. Why actually promote women etc. to senior positions when you can cover up your bias and sexism by putting policies in place which actually do not change anything. Hence gender ideology, introduced by Stonewall was welcomed without a second thought and made policy with no thought to the consequences on women because there are so few women at the top. It was enacted by HR becuase the best way to get ahead is to do as you're told. Dissenters are usually side-lined and top out before they make senior management. I'll give you an example: the man that is now our diversity, inclusion and wellbeing lead and is being given a voice and accolades for all that he is doing (repeating the mantra), is the same one that took a member of staff he was responsible for, suffering from trauma, and every time they asked for support or help said "You're a xxx grade - it's on you". I watch what these people do and how they behave and it is not in line with what they say. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Good to know there's at least one bonafide Glinner Terf in the civil service!
I can well imagine those yes-men scenarios (sympathies to you). From what Kemi writes, though, it sounds worse than merely unthinkingly repeating mantras. I encourage anyone to read her account. Bits of it:
'When I became equalities minister in early 2020, the NHS gender identity service (GIDS) for young people was presented to me by government official as a positive medical provision to support children. I was assured that there was "nothing to see here", if anything, the Tavistock was getting an unfair press. This was despite whistleblowers like Dr David Bell already raising concerns about practices at the clinic...
'I insisted on meeting campaigners on both sides of the debate: not just Stonewall but, to the horror of some officials, the LGB Alliance... I asked to meet young people who had used the Tavistock's services... To my surprise, I was advised strongly and repeatedly by civil servants in the department that it would be "inappropriate" to speak to her [Keira Bell]. I overruled the advice...
'It would be wrong to portray the entirety of the civil service as hostile on these issues. Far from it. A small minority of activist officials are the tail that wags the dog, often to the dismay of their colleagues and the hand-wringing of far more senior officials. This includes some permanent secretaries who are too scared to challenge their own staff and instead see ministers as obstreperous.'
She also credits both Liz Truss for empowering her to 'challenge advice, meet whoever was relevant and do my job as I saw fit', and Matt Hancock (!) 'who in the midst of the pandemic commissioned the review by Dr Hilary Cass that led to the closing of the Tavistock' and 'his successor, Sajid Javid, who provided support when I raised numerous concerns that the Department of Health refused to prioritise.'
Yes there are a few of us, but most are silenced as it would be career limiting. My career is already limited as I had the temerity to be bullied and raised a grievance - it was all swept under the carpet and since then I have gone from being on the ascent to sidelined. The "yes" man and woman syndrome encourages this behaviour - a senior person says this is how this is and then the people underneath will do everthing in their power to maintain that view, even in the light of evidence that challenges it. This is because their own staff reports generally rely on delivering something towards it and it would undo all their accrued work to achieving their objective, getting that pat on the back and being seen to deliver. People who challenge the status quo are not seen as delivering. In the past, I have been warned against challenging an accepted way forward.
You describe perfectly the insidious work culture within such hierarchical structures, how it typically ends up enforcing conformity toward a declared goal no matter how misjudged, even despite where some individuals recognise truth, best policy or 'doing the right thing' to lie.
I remember watching the film 'Spotlight' about when investigative journalism was still practised in the US, Boston Globe inv. journalist team deciding to take the risk of exposing paedophilia within the powerful local Catholic church, and I wanted to write to the former editor who'd since moved to the Washington Post, to point out that he might wish to do the same about kids now captured and harmed by gender identitarians. But WaPo was clearly gender-captured, and I couldn't personally risk it. Funny how they are unable to see another kind of child abuse even though they won awards for exposing the long-established one.
Thank you for hanging in there as a GC presence even if you and some colleagues have felt trapped against challenging things. Perhaps that will shift for the better, now that Tavi/GIDS is being forced to close and figures who will be high up in the new gov't are not only more informed but daring to say so in public?
and Matt Hancock (!) 'who in the midst of the pandemic commissioned the review by Dr Hilary Cass that led to the closing of the Tavistock' and 'his successor, Sajid Javid, who provided support when I raised numerous concerns that the Department of Health refused to prioritise.'
[For some reason that last bit was not appearing in my post?]
The Susie Green interview on Channel 4 made me furious. This was the first time in a long while when it hit me just how spineless mainstream news is. Even when a story like this breaks, they still allow such mindless spin. I can't stand the injustice for much longer!
I too would have been losing the will to live if journalists with integrity hadn't stuck their neck out for what is right. GBNews and countless other independent journalists have just made my heart sing, for doggedly and unapologetically sticking up for women and children.
Kemi Badenoch's article? It sure packed a punch. It was wonderful. I wish she was our leader. She clearly has a backbone.
Stopped paying my licence years ago and just ignore the letters. They can go swivel if they think they're getting a penny out of me to give to the likes of Jeremy "can someone tell me what's happening here " Vine.
I stopped using BBC services over this trans crap. I then had the temerity to be ill and distracted by a death in the family, so didn't respond to one of their threatening fishing letters. Then I returned home weeks later to find they'd sent more, then they got redder in banners and font and I was soon threatened with a visit. So I eventually, when I could, called them. I explained that they could turn up, but I had a hospital appointment that day, so wouldn't be in and didn't want that too to be seen as another supposedly criminal act. I was sneered at and interrupted by a bully boy so asked to speak to his manager to lodge my formal complaint. I got his apology, and admission that they must not treat those of us who don't use their TV or iPlayer and don't need a licence as criminals. I asked him to note down everything I said exactly as I said it. And that their threatening me when I was very fragile made me very angry, caused great stress and made me even less likely to want to use them or support their right to exist. He said of course they didn't expect me to wait at home for them.
Being treated like you have committed some unspecified non-crime and threatened based on nothing is not a good look. I think their complaints team must get a lot of this and he was very polite and said that I could let them know in future if I wanted to get a new licence. Crapita strikes again - that £456 million contract that was miraculously renewed again and runs for another five years.
Just read that Catherine. The difference between the Guardian and the Observer these days is staggering. This article could never have passed the gatekeepers set up
Yes, that Observer article is blistering. Love this especially:
"One day we may look back and wonder at how a regressive and controversial worldview – that being a woman is not a scientific fact but variously an inner feeling or conformity to sexist stereotypes of femininity – came to exert so much influence over so many public institutions and professions. It is a product of corrosive groupthink, charities whose campaigning hinges on bullying their opponents by traducing them as bigots and individuals so keen to prove they are on the “right side of history” they abandon the critical faculties that are core to their profession."
I deplore the BBC. We should not be compelled to pay for it. The license fee is well over-priced. While GB News has been covering this topic well, it is something of a curate's egg with some quite deplorable reporting too. I cannot recommend it to my friends.
I agree - whilst GB News is doing pretty well on this subject, I feel some of their more conspiracy-oriented stuff is a bit much for me. Neil Oliver for example whom I have great respect for as a historian talks great sense on certain issues but seems to dived down the rabbit hole on other areas.
Neil Oliver is both, and I quote: "Neil Oliver is a British television presenter, archeologist, historian and author. He is best known as the presenter of several documentary series on archaeology and history, including A History of Scotland, Vikings and Coast. He is also an author of popular history books and historical fiction". It is possible to be more than one thing at the same time.
GB News are a Godsend to anyone who cares about protecting children, both with the grooming gangs and the trans issue. Those who care are concerned about this silence. Almost all of us actually care about children except the MSM and especially the BBC. It's disgusting that they are allowed to mask the truth.
Sadly, they would be dismissed by many as being "right wing" and therefore not truthful. The American rhetoric of right v left is dividng the UK also depsite all our mainstream politics being far more centric than that of American politics. It's taken on good v evil overtones which are harmful, divisive and shift focus from the actual issues.
Recently, bearded dry voiced twat billy bragg made comparisons of gender critical feminists with nazis. I hope one day he'll realise that calling women such as Allison Bailey a nazi is a serious lapse of judgement. So if that's what left wing has become, call me right wing any day.
Totally agree. It's reached the stage where people look first at who's saying something (which side they supposedly stand on) and judge it only by that, rather than looking for where truth may lie. Partisan prejudging IS prejudice. When we stop even hearing each other and demonise the 'other', all lose.
I completely agree. I hear otherwise intelligent people dismiss things now simply because it's in the Daily Mail or a conservative said it. Critical thinking skills are required now more than ever.
Sadly some people won't accept the truth even when they're hit over the head with it. Look at how the widows and widowers who have lost their spouses because the fake vaccine killed them. They have coroner's reports, death certificates and even government compensation, but Twitter and many other outlets dismiss them as liars and misinformation. It's double abuse of people who did as they were told.
If the BBC did have an open debate there would be a panel of two men, and two trans women, at least three of them would be activists and any deviation from the narrative drowned out by the host and other guests.
Susie Green seems to have been on everything this week, the BBC even stating on one show (I think it was PM) that this was balance after covering a range of views. Only GB News called Helen Joyce, who literally wrote the book on the subject!
Green received the softest of soft treatment, not one question about the Webberleys.
Graham, there's a typo that needs fixing in the line that says, "Now that the Tavistock’s child-experiment wing, GIRES, has been shut down..." I'm correcting it here for the benefit of other readers who might not be as familiar with all the details as some/many are.
The NHS specialist service for minors at the Tavistock that's going to be be shut down is GIDS, the Gender Identity Development Service. GIRES is Gender Identity Research & Education Society, a charity in the UK that promotes transgenderism and gender ideology.
Also, just for the record: GIDS hasn't been shut down yet. The closure has been announced; it's supposed to happen "by spring 2023."
I think careful watch needs to be kept to make sure that GIDS really does get shuttered. And to see where the people running the place end up once they've scurried off the sinking ship. I suspect there will be plenty of behind-the-scenes machinations and backroom deals struck. I have no doubt that some of the GIDS crew who carried out their grotesque child abuse for years will end up "rebranding" and in new positions where they can continue to do harm to vulnerable people.
Start taking screenshots now if you haven't already. It's funny what some subtle tweaking can do to the 'record'. GIDS? Wot GIDS? Nah, not me guv, never 'eard a the place. Wosat then?
Gah, corrected that mistake. It is of course, GIDS, not GIRES.
Sorry, Graham. Can you please correct to GIDS in your blog post? I regret to say that GIRES.org.uk is alive and well... grrrr.
Yeah, this is why I don't pay my license fee. And as for their written reporting on the issue of Tavistock's imminent closure, like the Grauniad, they put it all down to long waiting lists, no exploration of the scandal that led to its decommissioning. Utter bullshit.
I no longer pay the licence fee, and I won't until the BBC changes its policies and direction. Or I might continue not to pay on the basis that I don't trust the corporation. But there's some positive news from another media outlet, Sonia Sodha has written another good article in today's Observer, highlighting all the important issues. I'm sure there'll be a Guardian article along soon to counter her opinion. Entirely predictable, but who the fuck cares? If anything, an article of this kind could add weight to the words of Sodha and others.
Yes, digging deeper and deeper, just like Stonewall. These people, particularly the latter, have allowed themselves to ascend to unsustainable levels of audaciousness and confidence in their malevolent misogynistic fantasy. It was bound to lead to them beginning to lose their grip. Let's hope it continues.
'The BBC'. It's just people really. Wouldn't you love to see more of the actual names and faces behind the enabling of 'gender' cult thinking? Behind the destruction of children's bodies and psyches? Behind the breakup of families, and loss of friendships? Behind the theft of women's rights? It would just take a very few bullying types to overwhelm the weaker, the cowardly, the ones in thrall to their paychecks. (We get it. Mortgages, families to support, but still -- we have a moral obligation to protect children. There is strength in numbers, and more could have at least squeaked out some disapproval.) The cult bullies and cheerleaders need to be named and held accountable.
The BBC’s ‘Specialist Disinformation Correspondents’ (you couldn’t make it up could you) ) would be all over it ... trying to down-play / divert / perform Trans God image damage limitation exercises - as usual. (Channel 4 no better the other day) ✊
Channel 4 actually invited Mermaids' Susie Green on as the only outside voice about the Tavi closure a few days ago. The straight reportage segment wasn't bad, even allowing fair representation in parts, but was followed immediately by Susie Green's delusional, ass-covering, heartlessly patronising spin. This child-sterilising woman anointed by Channel 4 as interpretative authority on the closure of HER pet validation'n'sterilisation outfit!! Fecking hell. Utter indoctrinated fools at C4 and BBC, in turn indoctrinating the nation.
If it weren't for the few journalists of integrity at the Times, Spectator, GBNews, Telegraph and the likes of independent Nolan within the otherwise captured BBC, some of us would be losing the will to live.
People need to read Kemi Badenoch in today's Times, by the way, 'The Tavistock scandal shows the dangers of civil service groupthink.' Very revealing of what goes on and how the tide finally shifted.
I work in the civil service and the groupthink she mentions is real, but not representative of the staff below senior level. Senior level managers are a bunch of yes-men who ass-cover professionally. They virtue signal and fawn over anything that draws attention away from the fact that the top of the tree is still stale, male and pale. Why actually promote women etc. to senior positions when you can cover up your bias and sexism by putting policies in place which actually do not change anything. Hence gender ideology, introduced by Stonewall was welcomed without a second thought and made policy with no thought to the consequences on women because there are so few women at the top. It was enacted by HR becuase the best way to get ahead is to do as you're told. Dissenters are usually side-lined and top out before they make senior management. I'll give you an example: the man that is now our diversity, inclusion and wellbeing lead and is being given a voice and accolades for all that he is doing (repeating the mantra), is the same one that took a member of staff he was responsible for, suffering from trauma, and every time they asked for support or help said "You're a xxx grade - it's on you". I watch what these people do and how they behave and it is not in line with what they say. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Good to know there's at least one bonafide Glinner Terf in the civil service!
I can well imagine those yes-men scenarios (sympathies to you). From what Kemi writes, though, it sounds worse than merely unthinkingly repeating mantras. I encourage anyone to read her account. Bits of it:
'When I became equalities minister in early 2020, the NHS gender identity service (GIDS) for young people was presented to me by government official as a positive medical provision to support children. I was assured that there was "nothing to see here", if anything, the Tavistock was getting an unfair press. This was despite whistleblowers like Dr David Bell already raising concerns about practices at the clinic...
'I insisted on meeting campaigners on both sides of the debate: not just Stonewall but, to the horror of some officials, the LGB Alliance... I asked to meet young people who had used the Tavistock's services... To my surprise, I was advised strongly and repeatedly by civil servants in the department that it would be "inappropriate" to speak to her [Keira Bell]. I overruled the advice...
'It would be wrong to portray the entirety of the civil service as hostile on these issues. Far from it. A small minority of activist officials are the tail that wags the dog, often to the dismay of their colleagues and the hand-wringing of far more senior officials. This includes some permanent secretaries who are too scared to challenge their own staff and instead see ministers as obstreperous.'
She also credits both Liz Truss for empowering her to 'challenge advice, meet whoever was relevant and do my job as I saw fit', and Matt Hancock (!) 'who in the midst of the pandemic commissioned the review by Dr Hilary Cass that led to the closing of the Tavistock' and 'his successor, Sajid Javid, who provided support when I raised numerous concerns that the Department of Health refused to prioritise.'
Yes there are a few of us, but most are silenced as it would be career limiting. My career is already limited as I had the temerity to be bullied and raised a grievance - it was all swept under the carpet and since then I have gone from being on the ascent to sidelined. The "yes" man and woman syndrome encourages this behaviour - a senior person says this is how this is and then the people underneath will do everthing in their power to maintain that view, even in the light of evidence that challenges it. This is because their own staff reports generally rely on delivering something towards it and it would undo all their accrued work to achieving their objective, getting that pat on the back and being seen to deliver. People who challenge the status quo are not seen as delivering. In the past, I have been warned against challenging an accepted way forward.
I only just saw this, sorry.
You describe perfectly the insidious work culture within such hierarchical structures, how it typically ends up enforcing conformity toward a declared goal no matter how misjudged, even despite where some individuals recognise truth, best policy or 'doing the right thing' to lie.
I remember watching the film 'Spotlight' about when investigative journalism was still practised in the US, Boston Globe inv. journalist team deciding to take the risk of exposing paedophilia within the powerful local Catholic church, and I wanted to write to the former editor who'd since moved to the Washington Post, to point out that he might wish to do the same about kids now captured and harmed by gender identitarians. But WaPo was clearly gender-captured, and I couldn't personally risk it. Funny how they are unable to see another kind of child abuse even though they won awards for exposing the long-established one.
Thank you for hanging in there as a GC presence even if you and some colleagues have felt trapped against challenging things. Perhaps that will shift for the better, now that Tavi/GIDS is being forced to close and figures who will be high up in the new gov't are not only more informed but daring to say so in public?
and Matt Hancock (!) 'who in the midst of the pandemic commissioned the review by Dr Hilary Cass that led to the closing of the Tavistock' and 'his successor, Sajid Javid, who provided support when I raised numerous concerns that the Department of Health refused to prioritise.'
[For some reason that last bit was not appearing in my post?]
Edited to correct my inevitable typos.
The Susie Green interview on Channel 4 made me furious. This was the first time in a long while when it hit me just how spineless mainstream news is. Even when a story like this breaks, they still allow such mindless spin. I can't stand the injustice for much longer!
I too would have been losing the will to live if journalists with integrity hadn't stuck their neck out for what is right. GBNews and countless other independent journalists have just made my heart sing, for doggedly and unapologetically sticking up for women and children.
Kemi Badenoch's article? It sure packed a punch. It was wonderful. I wish she was our leader. She clearly has a backbone.
Stopped paying my licence years ago and just ignore the letters. They can go swivel if they think they're getting a penny out of me to give to the likes of Jeremy "can someone tell me what's happening here " Vine.
He’s ( hope I didn’t misgender… NOT) still wandering around asking …
I stopped using BBC services over this trans crap. I then had the temerity to be ill and distracted by a death in the family, so didn't respond to one of their threatening fishing letters. Then I returned home weeks later to find they'd sent more, then they got redder in banners and font and I was soon threatened with a visit. So I eventually, when I could, called them. I explained that they could turn up, but I had a hospital appointment that day, so wouldn't be in and didn't want that too to be seen as another supposedly criminal act. I was sneered at and interrupted by a bully boy so asked to speak to his manager to lodge my formal complaint. I got his apology, and admission that they must not treat those of us who don't use their TV or iPlayer and don't need a licence as criminals. I asked him to note down everything I said exactly as I said it. And that their threatening me when I was very fragile made me very angry, caused great stress and made me even less likely to want to use them or support their right to exist. He said of course they didn't expect me to wait at home for them.
Being treated like you have committed some unspecified non-crime and threatened based on nothing is not a good look. I think their complaints team must get a lot of this and he was very polite and said that I could let them know in future if I wanted to get a new licence. Crapita strikes again - that £456 million contract that was miraculously renewed again and runs for another five years.
GB News have really been great. Nana Akua is another voice on our side on the channel.
Great article in today's Observer. Sonia Sodha, of course.
Just read that Catherine. The difference between the Guardian and the Observer these days is staggering. This article could never have passed the gatekeepers set up
By Kath Viner.
Yes, that Observer article is blistering. Love this especially:
"One day we may look back and wonder at how a regressive and controversial worldview – that being a woman is not a scientific fact but variously an inner feeling or conformity to sexist stereotypes of femininity – came to exert so much influence over so many public institutions and professions. It is a product of corrosive groupthink, charities whose campaigning hinges on bullying their opponents by traducing them as bigots and individuals so keen to prove they are on the “right side of history” they abandon the critical faculties that are core to their profession."
Thanks for tip, just read Sonia's excellent article. Owen Jones must be frothing at the mouth!
I deplore the BBC. We should not be compelled to pay for it. The license fee is well over-priced. While GB News has been covering this topic well, it is something of a curate's egg with some quite deplorable reporting too. I cannot recommend it to my friends.
I agree - whilst GB News is doing pretty well on this subject, I feel some of their more conspiracy-oriented stuff is a bit much for me. Neil Oliver for example whom I have great respect for as a historian talks great sense on certain issues but seems to dived down the rabbit hole on other areas.
Niel Oliver is not an historian. He's an archeologist.
Neil Oliver is both, and I quote: "Neil Oliver is a British television presenter, archeologist, historian and author. He is best known as the presenter of several documentary series on archaeology and history, including A History of Scotland, Vikings and Coast. He is also an author of popular history books and historical fiction". It is possible to be more than one thing at the same time.
Oliver is not an historian. Ye can list all ye want..it disnae alter the fact that he in not an historian. And his work is third rate
Have you got anything relevant to add to the actual discussion?
GB News are a Godsend to anyone who cares about protecting children, both with the grooming gangs and the trans issue. Those who care are concerned about this silence. Almost all of us actually care about children except the MSM and especially the BBC. It's disgusting that they are allowed to mask the truth.
Sadly, they would be dismissed by many as being "right wing" and therefore not truthful. The American rhetoric of right v left is dividng the UK also depsite all our mainstream politics being far more centric than that of American politics. It's taken on good v evil overtones which are harmful, divisive and shift focus from the actual issues.
Recently, bearded dry voiced twat billy bragg made comparisons of gender critical feminists with nazis. I hope one day he'll realise that calling women such as Allison Bailey a nazi is a serious lapse of judgement. So if that's what left wing has become, call me right wing any day.
Likewise. I've alwaysd voted on the issues and will continue to do so and right now that makes me right wing.
Totally agree. It's reached the stage where people look first at who's saying something (which side they supposedly stand on) and judge it only by that, rather than looking for where truth may lie. Partisan prejudging IS prejudice. When we stop even hearing each other and demonise the 'other', all lose.
I completely agree. I hear otherwise intelligent people dismiss things now simply because it's in the Daily Mail or a conservative said it. Critical thinking skills are required now more than ever.
Sadly some people won't accept the truth even when they're hit over the head with it. Look at how the widows and widowers who have lost their spouses because the fake vaccine killed them. They have coroner's reports, death certificates and even government compensation, but Twitter and many other outlets dismiss them as liars and misinformation. It's double abuse of people who did as they were told.
If the BBC did have an open debate there would be a panel of two men, and two trans women, at least three of them would be activists and any deviation from the narrative drowned out by the host and other guests.
"Grooming culture," as in cult grooming, natch
https://archive.ph/Os2um
Thanks for sharing and enabling us to see this very interesting Telegraph article from yesterday.
I think Brits need to just, all at once, stop paying their license fees.
What are they gonna do? Throw the whole damn country in jail?
* I think you meant to say GIDS not GIRES.
Susie Green seems to have been on everything this week, the BBC even stating on one show (I think it was PM) that this was balance after covering a range of views. Only GB News called Helen Joyce, who literally wrote the book on the subject!
Green received the softest of soft treatment, not one question about the Webberleys.
One of the few who did report on this for the BBC was Deborah Cohen, the health reporter on Newsnight (now departed). Her tweet on this was shared by Maitlis - https://twitter.com/deb_cohen/status/1552628745705496577
I have a hunch Maitlis may say more about this subject when her LBC show begins now that she's free of BBC editorial shackles.
Graham, there's a typo that needs fixing in the line that says, "Now that the Tavistock’s child-experiment wing, GIRES, has been shut down..." I'm correcting it here for the benefit of other readers who might not be as familiar with all the details as some/many are.
The NHS specialist service for minors at the Tavistock that's going to be be shut down is GIDS, the Gender Identity Development Service. GIRES is Gender Identity Research & Education Society, a charity in the UK that promotes transgenderism and gender ideology.
Also, just for the record: GIDS hasn't been shut down yet. The closure has been announced; it's supposed to happen "by spring 2023."
I think careful watch needs to be kept to make sure that GIDS really does get shuttered. And to see where the people running the place end up once they've scurried off the sinking ship. I suspect there will be plenty of behind-the-scenes machinations and backroom deals struck. I have no doubt that some of the GIDS crew who carried out their grotesque child abuse for years will end up "rebranding" and in new positions where they can continue to do harm to vulnerable people.
Start taking screenshots now if you haven't already. It's funny what some subtle tweaking can do to the 'record'. GIDS? Wot GIDS? Nah, not me guv, never 'eard a the place. Wosat then?