Talk

Advanced search

A great (long) new article by Suzanne Moore on why she left the Guardian

(10 Posts)
StoryOfANewName Thu 26-Nov-20 01:42:29

I think this is excellent and am sharing it as I didn’t see it on this board (apologies if it has in fact already been posted)
unherd.com/2020/11/why-i-had-to-leave-the-guardian/

OP’s posts: |
dotoallasyouwouldbedoneby Thu 26-Nov-20 02:37:56

Well worth a read thanks.

SD1978 Thu 26-Nov-20 04:52:51

Was juts coming on to see if it had been posted yet. A very well written article which will no doubt suffer the same wrath- because people would rather abuse than accept the validity to the point. That trans rights and women's rights can and should be viewed separately, and to be concerned with one, does not negate the importance of the other.

tackiestones Thu 26-Nov-20 06:47:11

There are loads of details about her career and recent experiences at The Guardian I didn't know. It moved me to cancel my Guardian membership. I don't like bullies.

I found her "origin story" very similar to other people in the public eye who have gone the same way. She made the remark about Brazilians, in a comment about a body type, and got abuse. JKR "liked" the wrong opinion, and got abuse. Glinner wrote a comedy episode with a trans character, and got abuse. There must be others.

These people who abuse others for having the "wrong" opinions or liking the "wrong" things or using the "wrong" words, are not helping trans people one bit. I've noticed that many of them aren't even trans. They're self-described "allies". Allies, my arse. If they were proper allies, they'd shut up, listen and elevate the voices of the people they are allied to. Isn't that what we're told allies should do? They're not doing that because they don't care about trans people at all, they just care about putting others in their place.

My head was turned when an "ally" was tweeting some crap about how conditions like PCOS prove that sex is a spectrum. I asked a lot of questions to get to the bottom of the thinking and it's all bollocks. They were safer when they just twatted on about how the noble savages of their imagination arrange their affairs. They're overplaying their hand.

Compromises are going to be necessary and we can't make decide what they are with this group of gobby fools making a mess of everything.

EmmaGrundyForPM Thu 26-Nov-20 06:57:43

Wow. Such a powerful piece.

The Guardian should be ashamed of itself.

quixote9 Thu 26-Nov-20 07:50:05

A tremendous article. And so sad that what was once a great paper isn't giving her talents the respect they deserve. Story repeated way too often for way too many women.

WorkingItOutAsIGo Thu 26-Nov-20 08:14:28

I have always felt quite unsure of Suzanne Moore and I realise it’s because I don’t agree with lots of her opinions, but bloody hell, she has the right to have them and write them. I have never felt more convinced of the need for debate and free speech than on reading that.

MaMaLa321 Thu 26-Nov-20 11:15:23

I think that it's great that she has made a stand on this, but I find her pieces so rambling and waffly as to be almost unreadable. But I'm obviously in the minority here.

NecessaryScene1 Thu 26-Nov-20 11:31:47

MaMaLa321

I think that it's great that she has made a stand on this, but I find her pieces so rambling and waffly as to be almost unreadable. But I'm obviously in the minority here.

She's never been one of my favourites, and disagree with her about a lot, but I've always noted her as one of the interesting writers, as opposed to the bland ones.

She's clearly a superior writer to most of the hacks out there. Even though that article itself was a bit waffly for my taste, by god it got there and made the point.

A journalism that encourages conformist hacks and not only can't find a place for people like Suzanne Moore, but actively tries to drive them out, is in serious trouble. Particularly if it purports to be "left-wing" journalism.

RoyalCorgi Thu 26-Nov-20 12:51:03

MaMaLa321

I think that it's great that she has made a stand on this, but I find her pieces so rambling and waffly as to be almost unreadable. But I'm obviously in the minority here.

I rarely admit this, because I admire her hugely for the stance she's taken at the Guardian, but I also find her pieces much less clear than they could be. Sometimes I'll read a sentence and have no idea what she's talking about.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in