Debates Media Sex and sexuality TV

Shake On It – A Surprising BBC Programme on Trans and Identity.

Screenshot 2019-03-05 at 08.57.53The BBC have produced and broadcast a video which stuns me!  It’s fair, balanced and interesting.      In September last year I went through to Glasgow to record a programme, Shake On It for the new BBC Scotland station.   I wrote about the experience here –

‘Shake On It’ – An Interesting Day Recording for the BBC

Yesterday the BBC broadcast the show.  You will understand my being apprehensive about what would happen when you realise that we recorded for two and a half hours. This was then distilled to 5 minutes.  Talk about being a hostage to fortune or prejudice!  But I think the producers, Firecrest Films,  have done a superb job of editing.  They certainly have given a fair representation of the whole conversation.  See for yourself.

One interesting footnote – in the BBC video that went viral and made Victor famous, she stated she was binary….at the time of the interview there had been a significant change.  Now Victor says he is male.   It’s interesting how someone who states gender is fixed then changes.

Screenshot 2019-03-05 at 09.06.31When you set the story in the midst of a bigger picture – The Big Story what a difference that makes. I very much enjoyed meeting Victor and I hope we will meet again to continue the conversation. Victor is a human being, made in the image of God. I encouraged him to look beyond gender for his happiness and fulfillment. I pray for him…

I have no idea how the programme will turn out…but I do know that this was a worthwhile interaction and will I hope be beneficial to Victor and to all those involved and all who watch. We will see if the Trans Thought Police even let it happen!

Another excellent programme in the series is the one on religion with Stuart Patterson, who superbly answers Gordon the Humanist…watch it here –    Well done Stuart!  That programme deserves to be shown far and wide.

( If you are ok of the UK and can’t see the Iplayer – try this –


  1. Victor is a human being, made in the image of God

    Is he?
    What evidence do you have for this assertion?

      1. Aah … the old Dundee sense of humour, yes?
        Try explaining the second half of of the sentence, Clever Dick.

      2. All human beings are made in the image of God – with knowledge, righteousness and holiness….although given some of your posts sometimes there are those humans who cause me to doubt that!

  2. All human beings are made in the image of God

    Still waiting for you to provide evidence, David.
    Why are you so afraid of tackling this issue?

    1. Not afraid at all…but I can’t provide any evidence for you because you deny the basic premise…that there is a God to be made in the image of….So I won’t waste my breath….I do have a life…

      1. I do not ”deny”, I simply reject the claims of theists such as you and the complete lack of evidence – not to mention the veritable plethora of evidence that demonstrates an alternate history to that postulated by those that have any sort of vested (faith) interest in the bible; from the tale of Adam and Eve to the Flood Narrative Exodus etc. To this we can add the claimed Resurrection of the character Jesus of Nazareth.
        If you believe ( and it seems obvious you do) you have genuine evidence – rather than mere claims and arguments for – then I am more than happy to consider such, and always am, a point I have stressed on numerous occasions.

    2. Still waiting for you to provide evidence, David.
      Why are you so afraid of tackling this issue?

      Aren’t you cute.

      Clearly David’s statement is, at a minimum, a metaphysical assertion, and certainly one uttered with the utmost respect towards an individual who is part of a group that the Church has largely failed (a failure I’m personally well aware of). A Church, by the way, who often needs reminding of everyone’s image-of-God-ness. That David spoke with respect to and about Victor risks his own condemnation for a perceived failure to mention sin, or for his respectful use of ‘he/him’ pronouns, etc. David is in an unenviable position, and not just because you’ve decided to show up.

      In light of the above your tactic is to quibble with the fact that David has risked his own reputation by showing Victor respect, grace, and so forth? How strange, and doubly-so that you refuse to entertain the theological precepts that inform David’s position. Worldviews are tricky like that. Perhaps you ought to call yourself Thrasymachus instead, or is that an insult to Sophists? “David, provide me with evidence except you can’t do it this way or that way; see, no evidence!” That just isn’t just, but is it what you do, right? Rip the Church and those in it no matter what they do? We just couldn’t be sane, logical, or rational without you.

      Perhaps then it’s no surprise that your follow-up is to engage in some confusing display of pseudo-intellectual masturbation, as if listing X, Y, and Z is an argument against the assertion in dispute. Clearly we could reject the Biblical creation account, Flood account, Exodus account, and recounting of Jesus’ life, and still have made no progress on the question: if God exists and created the world, then we are created in God’s image? We might deduce an answer in the affirmative even if the answer weren’t spelled out in a book, although it’s not clear that you’d be up to the task. Metaphysics, Philosophy, and Theology aren’t for everyone, and there’s no shame in that.

      But hey, if you keep at it you might just be the next Loftus. That would be something else; I hope you have hat.

      The more important thing is that I appreciate David’s response. I’m someone who experiences so-called gender dysphoria. I’m someone who loves Jesus and has a hard time loving the Church because there aren’t many people like David, or who would respond like David has — with grace. You should be embarrassed at your attempt to turn that grace into an argument over nothing, and to furthermore posit an argument involving a basic categorical mistake, at least one fallacy, and errors of reasoning.

  3. I’m honestly surprised the BBC didn’t edit it to take your words out of context and make you look bad! Surprising indeed.
    Wish I could watch the full discussion! It’s a shame it’s distilled into such a small clip. Could have had great success on YouTube.

  4. Very good David; calm, measured, balanced and factual responses but with a warmth and kindness towards the young person.
    This is exactly how Christians need to make their voices heard in the public square, with clarity, openness and the honesty to occasionally say ‘no we don’t have all the answers’, as happened here. Well done.

  5. I heard you on Janet Parshall’s show yesterday. Wonderful discussion and I surely wanted to watch what ended up in those 5 minutes. BBC will not let me watch from the link you posted even though you indicated it could be watched from your blog. 🙁

  6. I have returned to the blog each day since Monday and sadly there is no link that can be watched on this side of the pond. I regret not being able to watch it, but trust that the Lord has reached his necessary audience!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: