Suzanne Moore - naming and shaming

I would have been staggered if Nick Cohen was a signatory.

Nick Cohen is very much on Suzanne's side on this - I was looking at Suzanne's FB, which seems to be public, and he has made a sympathetic comment on a post she has about it.

Irvine Welsh is also supporting Suzanne.

twitter.com/IrvineWelsh/status/1240874631730511872

A good article from NZ mentioned in response to S Moore’s tweet.

The writer, Rachel Stewart, had this piece pulled by the mainstream newspaper the NZ Herald. And the event she refers to in the article was actually cancelled by the university concerned before her article couple be published:

speakupforwomen.nz/the-rachel-stewart-column/

The letter being anonymous was unfair to everyone, especially those who didn’t sign - who are high profile and know Suzanne personally. I’d be angry that folk might be wondering, might assume i had signed it

Is Hinsliff still working there? Would have thought she would have signed.

I think that's unfair. Just because somebody isn't 100% gender critical it doesn't automatically mean they don't believe in free speech or understand what the journalism is. Ditto Zoe Williams not signing. I'm pleased to see the absence of Guardian 'top' journalists on there, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're on 'our side'. They just aren't bullies and weasels.

Hmmm. To be fair tho’ Viner told the staff that they had no business trying to suppress opinion amongst staff with differing views

So what? The Guardian routinely fails to report news which conflicts with its blinkered, insular, ideological viewpoint. Its editor presides over a paper whose news reports are dire or non existent. Now 322 or whatever of its alleged journalists are engaged in a witch hunt denunciation campaign against Suzanne Moore for daring to question the wisdom of giving 18 year old masectomies as a birthday present. As Douglas Murray scathingly quipped. What's Viner's response to this letter? Does anyone at the Guardian understand diversity of opinion or freedom of speech? Or news reporting?

Hmmm. To be fair tho’ Viner told the staff that they had no business trying to suppress opinion amongst staff with differing views. It looks as if the letter is a reaction to her response to the original backlash against Moore.
Moore writes article
Backlash on Twitter etc
Editorial Mtg: during which Viner has her say (doubtless among much TRA outrage)
Letter.

Just posting quickly, apologies if it's already been posted, but I've just seen this article on the topic.

I would have been staggered if Nick Cohen was a signatory. Is Hinsliff still working there? Would have thought she would have signed.

Eva Wiseman - meh! Never rated her.

Simon Hattenstone always seems very self involved. I remember he wrote a piece about interviewing Simon Wiesenthal and seeming annoyed to be kept waiting!! Hattenstone by Wiesenthal.)

JustHadAThought, it was referenced earlier in the thread. 7.05. Apologies, I'm crap at adding pictures.

Lordfrontpaw that's what happens when someone goes private - only followers can see, and no retweets.

I’m not able to retweet Suzanne's tweets - is that normal?

Suzanne has flicked the privacy switch on her account now. I do note that Nicky Clark is vocal in her support.

I have cancelled my Guardian donation support paying for news
but I support Women more

Welcome to the club. there are now other, and various, news sources that are, in fact, like a breath of fresh air......the Guardian has become so predictable and stifling...and frickin' annoying.

‘There are more of us than you think.’ Inside as well as outside, I imagine

Only just read the thread, and I rarely post, but have to say I am over the fucking moon about a) the lack of Marina Hyde's name and b) the supportive (of Suzanne, if not explicitly the cause) Ian Rankin tweet

It would be really good, for those of us not on twitter, to understand the content of any references that are made. Ian Rankin tweet?

Go Suzanne. God they’re such cowards.

Go Suzanne! 💪🏽💪🏿💪🏻💪

Only just read the thread, and I rarely post, but have to say I am over the fucking moon about a) the lack of Marina Hyde's name and b) the supportive (of Suzanne, if not explicitly the cause) Ian Rankin tweet.

I couldn't get nasty little bullying campaigns to work without all the other woman haters in my workplace, so thank you to all the people who agreed to anonymously join in.

Just want to say this, because it's not said enough. Newspapers are collective efforts: from the news reporters to the sub editors to the columnists to the cleaners to the producers to the admin staff. I couldn't do my own job without an amazing hard working team. So thank you

mobile.twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1240741832042196993

Has this been posted yet?
Article by Julie Bindel:

unherd.com/thepost/the-appalling-treatment-of-suzanne-moore/

I didn't realise this, bolded bit:
"When Moore wrote a perfectly reasonable opinion piece on how feminists are being abused, de-platformed and otherwise silenced by trans-extremists and their allies, 338 cowardly snakes signed a letter to the editor, on the condition that their names would not be made public, denouncing ‘trans-phobic’ coverage in the paper."

Snakes is the right word.

have cancelled my Guardian donation
I support paying for news
but I support Women more

not only did they want to stay anonymous, they didn't have the guts to name Suzanne, nor did they produce any evidence, they did not list any demands. They simply wanted Kath Viner to make the nasty woman go away.

good advice. Never seen a bridge I wont set alight...

Love that tweet.