Advanced search

Guardian has debate on all-women shortlists

(41 Posts)
hackmum Thu 08-Feb-18 11:04:18

It's crap, as you might suspect. The usual suspects, e.g. Shon Faye.

But do go and comment. Women's voices need to be heard.

UpABitLate Thu 08-Feb-18 11:09:33

4 comments so far, 3 of them say that all women shortlists shouldn't exist anyway.

So, um.

cista Thu 08-Feb-18 11:12:22

Comments are being pre-moderated.... hmm

hackmum Thu 08-Feb-18 11:15:14

Yup. As far as I can see they're allowing in comments that say there shouldn't be women-only shortlists, but not allowing comments that say transwomen are men, and men shouldn't be on women-only shortlists.

I am so angry with the Guardian. I've read it since the days when Jill Tweedie wrote on the women's pages. It's <my> paper. Now it's just full of misogynistic shit like this.

OvaHere Thu 08-Feb-18 11:16:29

Democracy in action hmm

Sittinonthefloor Thu 08-Feb-18 11:32:03

I can't seem to post my comment! I was trying to suggest trans only short lists.

CaptainWarbeck Thu 08-Feb-18 11:35:52

And all the opinions in the piece were very supportive of trans ideology. You'd think if you were having a debate you would include an opposite (in this case gender critical) view.

Comments are a load of bollocks.

UpstartCrow Thu 08-Feb-18 11:39:23

My comment isnt being posted. It was pretty moderate, but supported The Equality Act and AWS.

FlyTipper Thu 08-Feb-18 11:42:49

Not a debate really. Among other things, I object strongly to Susanna Rustin's declaration that single sex-spaces will need justifying case-by-case! Why do they need justifying? Plus, getting rather bored with Labour's 'have compassion' as the SINGLE overriding justification for TIMs on AW shortlists.

hackmum Thu 08-Feb-18 12:01:02

"Plus, getting rather bored with Labour's 'have compassion' as the SINGLE overriding justification for TIMs on AW shortlists."

It's such lazy thinking. If you're going to have all-women shortlists, then the sole criterion for being on the shortlist is that you're a woman - not that you're oppressed, or traumatised, or suicidal. If you don't believe in all-women shortlists, say so. But extending the idea of all-women shortlists to anyone who's had a miserable life is simply sloppy reasoning.

hackmum Thu 08-Feb-18 12:03:04

And why couldn't they have invited Linda Bellos on? Or Julie Bindel? Or Kiri Tunks? Are they all blacklisted now from the Guardian because they might express a coherent, logically-argued view? (Or as Shon Faye would no doubt put it, a "hateful, transphobic" one?)

jellyfrizz Thu 08-Feb-18 12:30:25

Our difference is highlighted and what we share with fellow women is erased

What Shon Faye? What do you share with women that other men don’t?

Waddlelikeapenguin Thu 08-Feb-18 12:37:36

It's like 'cis' confetti on that page angry

coffeecork Thu 08-Feb-18 13:25:39

The comments are going better than I expected. A few properly gender critical posts are getting through now.

rowdywoman1 Thu 08-Feb-18 13:31:40

I agree - this is the first time I have ever seen the Guardian allow gender critical posts - what a shameful history.

UpABitLate Thu 08-Feb-18 13:34:03

Most of the comments are saying there shouldn't be all women shortlists, candidates should be picked on merit, and if there aren't very many women ones then that must be for sensible reasons like most of them aren't interested and prefer to stay at home with their kids, and not due to discrimination obviously because it doesn't exist.

UpABitLate Thu 08-Feb-18 13:36:22

So I don't see this as positive at all.

There is a comment on there from one of the contributors saying that Shn Faye has said about prisons they don't "expect" that self id will change anything and so that's all fine.

Erm.... Well one person with no specialist knowledge thinks something will probably be fine, so we can all down tools and go home confused

Actually what that means is, don't worry your pretty heads about that ladies, the men in charge will make sure everything is AOK.

coffeecork Thu 08-Feb-18 13:45:25

Yeah, there are definitely a lot of misogynist dudebros pontificating on the comments. And a smattering of women supporting them.

But it's significant that the Guardian is allowing gender critical comments at all. Given their utterly shameful history of censorship and misrepresentation on this topic. I'm hopeful that public opinion is beginning to turn and that the editors couldn't ignore this any longer.

There's even one comment alluding to the fact that alternative opinions have not been permitted so far. No doubt some poor rogue Guardian moderator will shortly be given the boot.

Thisusernamethingistricky Thu 08-Feb-18 13:48:01

What do you share with women that other men don’t?

Yes, exactly. What is it?

hackmum Thu 08-Feb-18 15:25:45

The thread has now been closed to comments, but I'm astonished that some of the comments in the last few pages are quite sensible. There's even a reference to the Guardian's report on the male sex offender who wanted to be transferred to a women's prison. The mods must have all gone to lunch or something.

derxa Thu 08-Feb-18 15:30:31

Yes I noticed this.
The people making the comments are tying themselves in knots trying not to be transphobic.

OvaHere Thu 08-Feb-18 15:39:26

I really think the eventual outcome of this is that AWS will get dropped.

TerfyMcTerface Thu 08-Feb-18 15:41:30

The Guardian makes me sick. I have to seriously question what their agenda is when they are supporting the "plight" of a prolific, violent sex offender who broke into teenaged girls bedrooms to wank in their underwear. I mean, what are they trying to achieve here? Are they fully on board with the promotion of men's sexual rights and the removal of consent?

WiseUpJanetWeiss Thu 08-Feb-18 15:43:57

I posted some basic biology (aka literal violence and bigotry) and haven’t been deleted. I even got some recommends.

Small victories.

hackmum Thu 08-Feb-18 15:44:57

"I really think the eventual outcome of this is that AWS will get dropped."

And I'm sure that was the intention. If MRAs in the party argued against all women-shortlists, there's a good chance they'd lose. But now they have a nice, easy way of sabotaging them by allowing them to include men who identify as women. At some point it will become so ridiculous they'll abandon them altogether. Simple.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: