I believe The Spectator is in danger of folding.

Hopefully more libraries will soon offer online access to newspapers etc in the way North Lincolnshire does.

www.northlincs.gov.uk/your-council/about-your-council/news/latest-news/read-top-newspapers-and-magazines-online-anywhere/

I loath being told what to do, as a grown woman I think I'm capable of making up my mind what or whom I support/subscribe too. I am now seriously considering buying a subscription to The Spectator which I wasn't before.

LangCleg this is what I mean about establishing priorities though. I agree that at its root trans ideology is incredibly right-wing and it’s insane this fact seems invisible to so many. But it’s not as simple as that because as you note, supposedly left-wing organisations like Labour or The Guardian support it, while extremely right-wing organisations like Breitbart tend to oppose it (though for very different reasons to feminists). The point I’m trying to make is that X political party/publication being sceptical about self-ID should not be considered a reason for support in itself, when the overall picture is often that X political party/organisation supports policies or ideas that are far more tangibly damaging to women. Take the Republican Party, for example. They hate trans but they also hate women. Some posters here would probably vote for them, given the chance.

Yes, far better to support The New Statesman.

Why would that be an either/or choice? (Assuming disposable income to pay for journalism.)

Exactly, read around the subject, and use critical thinking skills, which seem lacking in so many people atm. I'll happily pay £12 to keep them going.
I'm a newpaper tart. I utterly despise Owen Jones, but I still read his stuff, and buy the Guardian now and again. I also buy the Times, Telegraph, Private Eye, etc, read Socialist worker online..

I'm with Nye Bevan on this;

"I read the newspapers avidly. It is my one form of continuous fiction."

But since queer/gender identity theory is a right wing, individualistic, neoliberal ideology, the same surely could be said of giving money to the Grauniad, which supports it for all its worth, despite purporting to be a left wing publication?

Everything is always a choice. Why not support Breitbart too? Why not the Morning Star? Why not support absolutely everything across the spectrum, if your own political affiliations are neither here nor there? The New Statesman publishes an array of feminist voices on different subjects. The Spectator is not feminist but publishes one or two journalists who are opposed to self-ID. But who you give your money to is up to you.

The OP is suggesting people actively pay to support The Spectator. This is a bit different from reading a variety of sources, left and right, which I imagine most people interested in self-ID do anyway since left-leaning publications (The New Statesman excepted) tend to be a bit lax about covering this.

As I said before, I don’t agree with self-ID. There is so, so much wrong with it, in theory and in practice. But trans people simply are not the biggest threat to the women’s services that make a real difference. The Conservatives are. It’s just crazy that posters such as TERF are implying they would vote conservative out of some kind of feminist principle.

wander

Ds1 did A level politics and was told to read around the issues

Hard to do if you boycott stuff...but in RL i guess people get to pick and choose

They are not managing it fine. They are petrified of losing funding. But still, we are all just being silly, complacent and wilfully blind eh?

People working in places like this are too afraid of losing funding to speak up about vulnerable women's needs. This was discussed in a WPUK meeting. It is happening and it is not OK.

New Statesman good too.

A rather good article in the Spectator by James Kirkup

The Spectator publishes a wide range of views, often ones that contradict each other.

Some writers opinions are truly godawful IMO.

Some are more liberal/centrist/about wider concerns and issue and chime with my views, like the one in the OP published by a left-wing woman.

I read it because of the diversity, I certainly don't agree with all of it.

Judge the articles with critical thinking not just because of where they appear. Otherwise you might turn into Owen Jones or whatever the right wing equivalent is

Yes, far better to support The New Statesman.

This is just... so silly, complacent and wilfully blind. Many (most I think, though I would need to check this so willing to accept I might be wrong) women’s refuges in the UK already accept trans women on a case-by-case basis. They seem to be managing this fine.

They are not managing it fine. They are petrified of losing funding. But still, we are all just being silly, complacent and wilfully blind eh?

I like the guy who writes the anti-trans stuff but in every other way...I'm fucked if I'll give money to The Spectator.

Article from The New Statesman by Helen Lewis:

www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/04/madness-our-gender-debate-where-feminists-defend-slapping-60-year-old?amp&__twitter_impression=true

(extract)
"The Wolf affair also demonstrates another alarming phenomenon: the left getting high on its own supply of self-righteousness. “Some feminists have a different conception of gender to me” gets smudged into “some feminists talk about me in ways that I find offensive” and on to “some feminists are basically Hitler, trying to eradicate people like me”.

Once you reach the last statement, then of course you can slap a woman and still think of yourself as a good person. She wants to kill you; a mere punch is self-defence. (I’m not exaggerating about the language. The Edinburgh branch of Action for Trans Health tweeted the day after the attack: “Punching TERFs is the same as punching Nazis. Fascism must be smashed with the greatest violence to ensure our collective liberation from it.”)"

I thought their readership was increasing. Could we have some evidence for your statement please?

That is fine though as there won't be any woman's refuges any more, because there will be no such thing as a woman.

This is just... so silly, complacent and wilfully blind. Many (most I think, though I would need to check this so willing to accept I might be wrong) women’s refuges in the UK already accept trans women on a case-by-case basis. They seem to be managing this fine. What they are not managing is the massive cutting away of their funding. To glibly say this is “fine” because of your particular trans bugbear honestly illustrates how incredibly far removed you are from the reality of the situation.

Yeah ive no idea who that jordan chap is

Its sounds like i dont want to know!!

The conservatives have ruthlessly stripped back funding for women’s refuges

That is fine though as there won't be any woman's refuges any more, because there will be no such thing as a woman.

These things will affect women more acutely than self-ID ever will.

There will be no such thing. Self ID means that the concept of 'woman' ceases to exist and all parties will just replace them with self-identifying men. Like yesterday's all woman shortlist Labour party roll-call - full of men.

Rufus “you all” refers to the majority of posters on this board who promote anti-feminists who happen to be anti-trans. Alright, so not ALL the posters but certainly most of the active ones. See the post about Jordan Peterson the other day. Some mixed opinions, certainly, but for a supposedly feminist board an astonishing amount of people were claiming this noted anti-feminist - in fact probably one of the most renowned anti-feminists of the current moment - has something to bring to feminist conversations.