Breitbart on suspension of Labour activist for saying 'Women Don't Have Dicks'

I hang about in the Trump threads quite a lot, so have a fair bit of knowledge of Breitbart. When I find they are publishing something that chimes with my beliefs, as in this case, I have to ask myself why that is. Why is an publication that is overtly woman hating raising this issue in this way?

Now I know full well I do not share the politics of Breitbart on any issue and this is no exception. They are not speaking out on this because they believe women should be protected from men, nor do they believe gender is a social construct that should not be used as a defining aspect of what constitutes a woman.

In the US the alt-right have regularly used the language and ideas of the left to discredit them. They are the first to loudly claim that women only spaces are sexist. They are known to publish seemingly left wing news items in order to discredit people who share them. I believe that this is what is happening with trans issues in the UK. Breitbart and it's ilk are violently anti-feminist and the only reason they are pushing news stories on the trans issues is to discredit feminists and claim that we want the same things as them while actually pushing an extreme right agenda of white masculinity.

We are not on the same sid. Or at least I am not. We need to be careful not to become so desperate for any sort of support and validation that we allow our message to be discredited and destroyed by people who want to use it to subjugate women.

Agree with exfem, as I said upthread, a lot of the other articles have had a sneery "left eating itself/uppity women get comeuppance" tone to them.
This one - really surprisingly - manages to be just purely factual.

I agree, Breitbart is the site of the alt-right - I am shocked that the article is so well written. It reports the facts and does not mock transpeople, unlike some of the articles I have seen by The Times and Spectator. I won't be reading Breitbart again but I am impressed with this article. It seems the facts are so absurd that it feeds in to the anti-left agenda of Breitbart perfectly. How utterly depressing.

I think it's indicative of the desperation felt by those of us who see this as the biggest threat to women and girls we have seen in a hundred years.

We've been utterly sold out by the left wing press. It comes as something of a shock to me as a lifelong labour voter/guardian reader/trade union supporter just how little the progressive left care about women.

Right now I'd happily read something by Piers Morgan if it promised to be gender critical.

Thanks to whoever saved me from Breitbart by c and ping though.

I third them. They were always there in the background though, Trump against trans etc. What to do about it I don't know, it's a huge pita that they have sent their dogs in this direction.
In the meantime I have my own reasons and will maintain my convictions.

I second Bigly's worries. You have to be concerned about who you get into bed with. There is something extremely wrong when right-wing anti-abortionists, chain-em-to-the-kitchen-sink brigade get a link from the MN's Fem board of all places! Each click garners them money. Think about that at the very least. Not the first surprise I've seen on here lately, and all in the name of transwars.

Sometimes there are indeed people who make very valid points even if I disagree with other things they say.

Surely there is a point when someone can have such an awful view that this influences your reading of everything else they say. An media publication set up to support genuine far/extreme right activists, which denies the Holocaust, is proudly racist and violently denigrates women certainly crosses that line for me. I could never believe or state that an organisation who held such views could represent a feminist cause I believe in. I find it disturbing that there is really no person or organisation you consider too harmful and hate filled that you would give them a voice if they just say the right words.

... you can press Send too early 😊

We can read widely and make up our own minds on topics. It doesn't mean we like or agree with any particular news outlet, it means we're adults who don't need to be told what we should/shouldn't read in case it influences us or challenges our assumptions. Sometimes there are indeed people who make very valid points even if I disagree with other things they say. Life and people aren't one-dimensional, and in the days of internet bubbles where you can choose to associate with people Just Like Yourself

If you were linking and praising a news source from the far left (and I mean far) I would be equally critical. The guardian is not on that level and whataboutery does not excuse downplaying what Breitbart is.

Reading an article does not make you a neo-nazi but praising them does provide them with a veneer of credibility and allow them to claim the support of feminists. We must have some awareness of the sources we use and not allow the far right to muscle in on a campaign that should be routed in supporting a woman's rights.

I did say I agree with you Bigly.

I know what Breitbart is, and it’s agenda. I hate it too.

I meant the right and left have equally used us.

On another thread bigly we have the Guardian running a sob story piece about a TIM doing a hunger strike in prison, conveniently forgetting to mention any great detail about why they ended up in prison in the first place. Such facts are judiciously edited out to nobly protect sheeple from being turned to the transphobic dark side, natch. So fake news doesn't seem restricted to one end of the political spectrum. It's a bit rock and hard place really and I shall take support for this issue wherever I find it. I'm not going to suddenly turn into a neo Nazi because I read one article on Breitbart.

Breitbart is not the daily mail guys! They make the mail look like a left love fest. This is the voice of the extreme right. Previously run by Steve Bannon and hugely influencial in the election of Trump due to its wide spread use of fake news (and I don't mean that in a hyperbolic way). This is like quoting the Nazis but saying it's OK because you dont agree with everything they say. In fact it is quoting nazis. Actual real life white supremacists. Avoiding tribalism is well and good, but I feel as feminists who presumably feel we have some political responsibility we should be drawing the line somewhere.

I agree with you bigly, but please don’t think the left hasn’t also done this to us. This is cross politics. Women who couldn’t name the cabinet are now wakin up to them, they will be off all political hues, as is the boards here, we should definitely work together as women.

I have a real problem with Jennifer’s politics, and I abhor antisemitism with every fibre of my body, if she was going to be suspended it should have been for racism, not thought crime. So I stand with her on this issue completely, I still disagree vehemently with her politics.

Don’t be tribal. It will fall to Tits.

Not solely aimed at you bigly, you are not alone in your concerns - but where did this idea come from that if you agree with one thing someone says, you therefore condone every single thing they have said since birth (or in the case of a news outlet - every single thing printed by every single journalist)?
It's weird.

Quite. Sigh.

What it says is not the point. I am generally supportive off the feminist views on MN and the conversation about trans rights. However, I just can't see how we can condone something as abhorrent as the wider views of Breitbart even if they have a brief moment of looking like they share our concerns. I assure you they do not. The extreme right has a tactic of coopting feminism for its own gains and condoning them by giving them positive responses simply applies a veneer to credibility to a whole misogynistic media outlets.

Flaps, shame the headline isn't entirely accurate

BeyondWitch

No probs with the link you posted,thanks

Oops - ouroboros

Bigly, did you read it?

I am even more shocked to see it linked in the feminist part of the site considering it is the voice of the alt-right, which is anything but interested in the rights of women.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5319953/Labour-female-activist-suspended-party.html brill piece in Mail too. No mention of Madigan.

Breitbart is not a site anyone should ever call news. I am pretty shocked to see a link to it put on mumsnet in all seriousness.

The terrifying part is that labour are the only hope of getting these evil fuckers out, and they're throwing that chance down the toilet with this. I'm so fed up that we can't even have a discussion about this without being branded bigots. It's so polarising.

Very well written article. Shows how well journalists are reporting this outside of the bubble, doesn't it. Can't argue with anything in there, there isn't even the vague "ouboros" feeling that a lot of RW articles have had.