Good luck Harry The Owl

political spectrum you are on or which tribal camp you fall into, but developing and maintaining critical thinking skills that enables you to assess information and gives you a healthy dose of skepticism whenever any important political decisions are being made

Nonny, I absolutely agree with you about this. Critical thinking and skepticism. Unfortunately, we are in an era where both seem critically endangered. Especially in academia, which seems to be at the epicenter of the totalitarian tendencies

I'm ecstatic at some of the news coverage, it really did seem so hopeless at time but I am in awe of how eloquent and calm Maya has been and how brave Harry is to have pushed this into the spotlight for the world to see. No doubt at a huge emotional and financial cost.

I have personal experience of gonna through the legal system (nothing related to FWR) but I can tell you there is nothing but raw emotion when a judge agrees with your stance and validated that you are right. It strips away everything else and left (at least it did with me) a sobbing heap as years of stress, questioning yourself to your core and utter disbelief that you are even in this situation begin to ebb away.

There is nothing like it and I'm eternally grateful to you all who push and stand up for themselves, because it is a slog with no guaranteed outcome, so a heartfelt thank you from myself. The judge was asking some important questions in these cases and it seems others are waking up to the fact that there needs to be debate, not just to accept everything blindly because you'll be labelled a nasty bigot if you don't.

You're right BovaryX, if you distill the political spectrum down to its fundamentals, it's essentially a balance between freedom and equality.

Society needs both right wing and left wing politics to keep each other in check and from going off the rails. This is something I have come to appreciate as I get older.

The extreme factions of left and right are equally scary. As we are seeing now, when authoritarianism is on the rise in the name of equality, it is the conservative and right wing parts of the political spectrum that we can rely on to pull us back from the brink the name of preserving the freedom of citizens.

What is always important is not which side of the political spectrum you are on or which tribal camp you fall into, but developing and maintaining critical thinking skills that enables you to assess information and gives you a healthy dose of skepticism whenever any important political decisions are being made.

Even though I am naturally very drawn towards left wing policies, I have no problem with supporting more centrist or right wing ideas if they are sensible and pragmatic.

"This feeling that the DT's defence of fighting your corner is disconcerting is, I believe, misplaced. It seems to stem from the fact that economically the DT is right of centre and only read by old farts and whatever the British version of neo-cons is."

Yes spot on. I used to do a paper round and the DT readers' homes were quite different than the Times' readers. Many almost scary and if I was unlucky enough to put the paper through their boxes five minutes late, they'd always either be yanking it through, or open the door at the same time as I pushed it through (so it wouldn't go) and then give me a tut and a withering look. Very intimidating - and none of the other people were like that!
So that has clouded my view of that particular paper!

But as someone who used to "identify"* as a leftie, to have the DM and the DT report things I agree on, whilst tG (which I gave up on long ago) is busy implying I'm a bigot, really is disconcerting. The "side" of the media that used to call me a "bleeding-heart" is now the side I see reporting more accurately on women's rights.

But I see that it could be a reflection of a change in how I view the world rather than a change in the media.

What I'm interested in these days is critical thought, even if I disagree with resulting conclusions. I've even come across that in some DM articles, although that's since the change in editor.

It has pretty much always been a defender of free speech, far more so than the Guardian

I don’t think it’s surprising or incompatible with the Telegrah’s traditionally Conservative values. Au contraire. It’s an example of them. After all, in the ideological conflict between freedom and equality, the Conservative position was to emphasize the former. Douglas Murray is the associate editor of The Spectator, another Conservative publication critiical of this aggressive lobby group. Meanwhile, the Guardian? Its self censorship of ‘difficult’ news is off the charts. Where are its brave journalists questioning the current orthodoxy? On mute

I am still of the mind that a lot of this bollocks started when it become clear that campaigns for equality were actually working. Much easier to simply fudge what it means to be "female" or "black" or "disabled" than actually allow a level playing field.

All of this self-id nonsense pretty much wipes away any ability to realistically identify discrimination - which is the whole point. It's one reason why the major political parties have suddenly become so woke. Fuck all to do with ensuring a fair an equal society and everything to do with a back door attempt to turn back the clock.

Reading the Daily Telegraphs defence of free speech evokes a similar reaction in me ... if The Daily Telegraph is cogently fighting your corner, WTF is going on ?

The old saying about the DT was that the politics was bollocks, but the news reporting was the best in the business.

We've gone way beyond the party political with gender ideology. What is at stake is the right to recognise material reality as we see it.

And we are not just talking about factory production here. We are talking about the basic structures that organise our understanding of existence. If the terms "woman" and "man" can mean either sex, and are only subject to a nebulous understanding of gender expression that cannot be formally measured, then we essentially eradicate the social, civic and political recognition of biological sex class.

That has huge implications for all communities and the political sphere. It fundamentally means that the state has to recognise "hyper" individualist access to services and facilities. It means that policies pertaining to a class or community of people can no longer be valid.

This is the logical conclusion to "pregnant people" language. It is a way of fracturing class-based analysis in favour of the hyper-individualistic, which is an approach that is fundamentally unaffordable. It is a way of crashing institutions through overloading them with policies that require hyper-individualistic access.

With gender ideology, you can't get much more fundamental difference in humans than biological sex differences. So it affects pretty much everybody everywhere.

It's almost like, despite differing editorial opinions on many things, most free media can agree that things which damage the vulnerable need to be examined and the powerful held accountable...

I am of an age to recall the Sunday Times fighting to release the truth about Thalidomide

So did the news of the world.

^The prejudice against the DT is misplaced I feel (OK shoot me now).
It has pretty much always been a defender of free speech, far more so than the Guardian.^

I am of an age to recall the Sunday Times fighting to release the truth about Thalidomide

@BiologyIsReal that's a good analysis. Might start buying the telegraph every so often. Have started allowing myself to read the mail online recently; there's a lot on there I don't like but they've clearly got their finger on the pulse of what a vast percentage of the population think, and they seem pretty firmly GC.

How this niche lobby group have managed to achieve such extensive regulatory capture if they are as marginalized and oppressed as they claim is an enigma

Stonewall's gay rights reputation and Ruth Hunt's misguided leadership.

This feeling that the DT's defence of fighting your corner is disconcerting is, I believe, misplaced. It seems to stem from the fact that economically the DT is right of centre and only read by old farts and whatever the British version of neo-cons is.

As someone pretty much in the centre of the political spectrum and with a journalism background I have read the DT, the Times and the Guardian daily for many years - to try and ensure my prejudices were even handed ).

The prejudice against the DT is misplaced I feel (OK shoot me now).
It has pretty much always been a defender of free speech, far more so than the Guardian.

For a long time it has been a huge supporter of women in business, including campaigning, and its coverage of women's sports is unparalleled e.g. today it has a complete supplement on women's health in sport and how it has been neglected with men's being treated as the default, covering issues such as concussion, problems caused by periods and endometriosis, and by bike design in cycling.

While the Guardian has stepped back from supporting women in favour of niche minorities e.g. the trans issues the DT has quietly filled the space, thus it is firmly gender critical.

Great post clitherow and absolutely on the money.

Sorry, I don't know what you all mean. I was not at the american Embassy, I was at my place of work 200 miles away.

Me too, it seems I'm not safe even in a backwater!

Solidarity from a fellow backwater dweller! Queer theory has not arrived here yet but it's only a matter of time.

ProfSlocombe
". if The Daily Telegraph is cogently fighting your corner, WTF is going on ?"

Feeling this way myself. It's very disconcerting.

yes, I expect people who used to throw around the acronym derived from 'westernised oriental gentleman' thought that was factual and inoffensive too

disingenuous twerps

In the area of trans we are currently (as with other “phobias”) being bullied away from having such a discussion. By claiming they are “offended”, a small number of activists are trying to force everyone else into agreeing with extraordinarily radical demands

Douglas Murray is eloquent on this. How this niche lobby group have managed to achieve such extensive regulatory capture if they are as marginalized and oppressed as they claim is an enigma. This is a battle between freedom and those who wish to dominate the narrative and criminalize any dissent. The Guardian et al? They are on the wrong side.

I think all slurs start off factual don't they? I'm thinking about an n-word and a p-word, both racial slurs. Both began life as factual descriptions of facets of people's 'difference'. Then they were used in more and more derogatory ways and here we are finding those words repellent and abhoring their use.

Just like the t-word.

I just assumed that was the nicknames of some of Twitter's more vocal denizens!

Can't see any MN thread where that would be out of place, personally

I can hear the gnashing of teeth from Fatman and Bobbin.
Sorry, wrong thread

Can't see any MN thread where that would be out of place, personally

Sorry, wrong thread

yes Clitherow , there seem to be people telling us that some truly terrifying stuff is just progress, and is in fact A GOOD THING

I'm just not going to pretend to believe things that aren't true, and I don't see why Maya should get fired for that, or Harry should get a knock on the door from the police for that, or indeed (on a more mundane level) why women should lose their posting rights here for that