The BBC is facing backlash over claims that it is “disappearing women” by allowing its 50/50 male and female quota to be filled by transgender guests. The MailOnline has more.
BBC news presenter Ros Atkins is at the centre of a trans row following the corporation’s 50:50 project, an initiative he founded in 2017 that aims to increase the number of women on air and on screen.
The project has seen the BBC increase the salaries of some of its most high-profile women such as Zoe Ball and increase the number of female stars in its shows such as Line of Duty.
Mr. Atkins is accused of “going along with change” after the corporation stated in their latest Equality Project report that “they do not monitor whether a contributor’s gender differs from their sex registered at birth”.
The BBC guidance states: “Content-makers monitor the gender identity of their contributors with the aim of featuring at least 50% women. They do not monitor whether a contributor’s gender differs from their sex registered at birth.
“Where possible, teams also monitor the proportion of contributors who identify as non-binary or genderqueer in order to improve their representation of all genders. This data is not currently reported to 50:50 The Equality Project, but is used by these teams to improve their representation of all genders.“
BBC employees have blasted the corporation for “following Stonewall law” despite ditching the controversial LGBT charity’s Diversity Champion’s programme last year.
It means transgender women who are born male will be counted as females in the corporations 50:50 project that aims to “represent women”.
A senior BBC insider told the Telegraph: “The BBC has now ‘disappeared’ women as a sex class and instead monitors ‘gender identity’. It’s redefined a word which we all understand, without any public debate, and Ros Atkins has gone along with the change.
“In this 50:50 monitoring, the BBC is still following ‘Stonewall law’ in failing to respect sex as as a protected characteristic.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It is hard to understand the MSM culture of silence and avoidance of anything that seems like a critique of either the mRNA ‘vaccines’ or of the government health agencies, who refuse to review the collateral health damage even though informed consent and patient safety are at stake. The bodies that are meant to defend the patient and stand up for medical ethics remain quiet. The journalists, media outlets, celebrities, influencers and activists who speak out on ‘climate emergency’ or the UK getting there first on the vaccine remain deadly quiet when it comes to the greatest medical experiment inflicted on humankind” (TCW, my bold)
Not really hard to understand. I repeat my call for the Times muppets to give full disclosure on all direct and indirect links to the pharmaceutical industry. Whilst their welcome if belated story about harms from the experimental AZ coronavirus medication suggests at least some acknowledgment of the issue, they remain silent about Pfizer and Moderna, despite having a policy editor in Oliver Wright (Oliver Wright | The Times & The Sunday Times) who has written articles like these for the Independent in 2014 about unethical practices in the pharmaceutical industry, including AZ and Pfizer:
Big Pharma lobbyists exploit patients and doctors | The Independent | The Independent
Revealed: Big Pharma’s hidden links to NHS policy, with senior MPs saying medical industry uses ‘wealth to influence government’ | The Independent | The Independent
(Refresh page to show full story?)
Note particularly this section:
‘JMC Partners’ clients include blue-chip drugs firms such as Novatis, Astro Zenica, Sanofi and Pfizer. It also represents a number of medical device manufacturers and biotech companies who sell their products to the NHS, including Roche Diagnostics, Cyberonics and Bausch & Lomb.
The company’s website makes bold claims about how it has been able to influence policy. In one case study it says it represented a medical device manufacturer who was worried about a planned cut in the amount the NHS paid for a treatment with which it was involved. JMC boasted that it organised a lobbying campaign targeting MPs and ministers as well as mobilising doctors to support its cause. It concludes: “The market for the technology was saved.” ‘ (my bold)
I rather suspect that groups such as the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service (OMNS) and the Health Advisory & Recovery Team (HART) with the patient interest at heart do not have such lobbying powers. Having slandered btl commenters on this site for raising legitimate questions about the “covid ‘vaccines’ “, theTimes muppets owe us an explanation. Until they do so, and until they start behaving like proper responsible journalists, I will continue to regard them as anti-truthers. Muppets.
Not entirely unrelated to my above post, this interview with RFK Jr on the Mark Steyn show is well worth a watch:
RFK Jr runs for President :: SteynOnline
Highlights include disturbing information about the “sickest generation in American history”, how he is “anti pharmaceutical industry’s control of government”, how profit was more important than public health, and some interesting stuff on the Ukraine war.
RFK Jr and De Santis going for the “American presidency”? Now there’s a contest I could live with!
Hang it, I wish I was going on that Mark Steyn cruise…
This is just evil and sick. I sincerely hope this family get either a good lawyer to overturn the hospital’s policy or Tanner can go to another hospital where they are actually interested in saving lives.
”Tanner Donaldson, a 9-year-old from Cleveland was born with a rare birth defect that caused irreversible kidney damage in utero and has resulted in stage 4 chronic kidney disease as well as bladder and urinary dysfunctions as he grew older.
A kidney transplant from the proper donor could reverse his disease and put Tanner back on track to have a normal life for at least 20 more years. Before the pandemic began to unfold in 2018, Tanner had found that donor — his dad, Dane Donaldson.
Because a kidney from a live donor only lasts about 20 years, the family decided to wait a couple of years before carrying out the transplant to extend Tanner’s life as long as possible. Then covid happened.
Prior to the Emergency Use Authorization of the covid vaccine, Dane and Tanner could’ve undergone the surgery and be in recovery right now. But covid changed all that and the hospital is now refusing to conduct the surgery because Dane is not vaccinated against covid-19. Seriously.”
https://magspress.com/9-year-old-boy-refused-life-saving-kidney-transplant-because-his-father-is-unvaccinated/
Absolutely disgraceful isn’t it?
“Individuals who are actively infected with COVID-19 have a much higher rate of complications during and after surgery, even if the infection is asymptomatic,” the hospital stated.
Surely that should exclude all the jabbed from being donors, then?
It seems the hospital would accept an organ from a soon-to-die / brain dead individual – jab status unknown – but won’t accept from a healthy unjabbed donor.
Not only crazy, it’s bordering on evil, denying someone a chance of life.
Don’t know where the links from the word ‘surgery’ came from.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12077475/Starbucks-manager-sacked-transphobia-rant-activist-terrifies-neighbours.html
Why is it that people who demand tolerance and understanding have no concept of tolerance or understanding?
What ‘rights’ don’t the transpeople have that others have?
What do they realistically want?