Suzanne Moore - naming and shaming

I think she's doing a great job and I can't see how she'd struggle to find writing work.

According to Suzanne's own comment on her Facebook status, about half of them are journalists.

I know some people worry she has burnt her bridges. But I think she knows what she's doing. She probably can't stomach the thought of writing for the Guardian any longer. Wouldn't surprise me if one of the paper's competitors had offered her a job - don't forget she wrote for the Mail on Sunday for years.

If I was editor of the Guardian, I'd rather keep Suzanne on staff and lose the nasty little shits who signed the letter. This was Viner's chance to show what she's made of, and she's blown it.

Just saw the letter, what a load of nonentities, what on earth do they have to do with editorial content? Fucking tossers.

I'm really troubled at the disappearance of older women's voices in the media. Where are the female equivalents of octogenarians whose views are deemed important and who hold prime slots in broadcasting and print journalism? It gives me the shivers when I see those silly young handmaidens siding with LOJ in ganging up on older women, do they not realise they'll be in the bin in their 50s too?

And yet they still manage to justify Suzanne's treatment by making it about sexual harassment. What the fuck is wrong with these fools?

It's compelling. She's burning her bridges with the Guardian, sure and I won't pretend I don't feel anxious for her. But there are other newspapers and, in any case, she's 61 and, although I have no insight into her finances, she may be old enough not to care.

In the olden days, if people at work ganged up on one person and made life difficult and frightening for that person, it was called bullying and could be a dismissible offence. How things change!

I miss the olden days (say, 2017)

I think it's a huge bridge burning strategy and I don't think she should have done it. She may be forcing Kath Viner's hand, or does she want to be sacked? Also I haven't seen the actual petition - the wording may not be personal.

But I'm not enough of a morally strong person not to read the names... and I'm not at all surprised about Eva Wiseman. I think she can write but she has really boxed herself into Polly Filla 'this thing really made me think that thing' columns and it appears to have limited her critical faculties generally.

Katharine Viner's response has been disappointing too. I completely agree with Murray that she should have told all those nasty little cowards to fuck off and find jobs elsewhere. I wonder how many editors would want to employ journalists who had betrayed a colleague like that?

I have to admit I've been more than disappointed in the Guardian since Viner became editor.

While a part of me applauds this, it also makes me nervous as I'm sure that some TRAs will use it as a justification for doing the same thing to GC people who have written and signed things after having been assured of anonymity.

Of course it isn't the same, but they'll say it is

India Knight is supporting her on twitter. I’m so happy.

I've not seen Nick Cohen's name and she was bantering with him last night before I went to bed and it all kicked off. At least I thought it was banter....

Is Nick Cohen on the list? I thought he was supporting Suzanne.

Did anyone else see this tweet from Simon Edge to Suzanne:

'Suzanne, one of your bullies (guess which) came to the LGB Alliance with his 'journalist' hat on but backed off when he was only offered one of the two females founders to talk to, rather than a celebrity man. If you follow me back I can DM you the full story.'

Disgusting Misogynist Turns Out To Be Misogynist Shock

I'm surprised by Nick Cohen......not so much any of the others.

Katharine Viner's response has been disappointing too. I completely agree with Murray that she should have told all those nasty little cowards to fuck off and find jobs elsewhere. I wonder how many editors would want to employ journalists who had betrayed a colleague like that?

I've often defended the Guardian on here when others have attacked it. I still think much of the work it does is really valuable. But I find it increasingly difficult to justify buying it. I gave up reading Owen Jones long ago, but I no longer want to read people like Simon Hattenstone and Luke Harding. Why should a paper that employs such nasty, weaselly little shits get my money?

💪💪💪💪Suzanne. The cowards can go to the far side where cowards gathere secretly. Now we can se3 the cowards

I saw this - good for her. I hope the weasels enjoy their infamy.

Good for her.

Fabulous. These people will end up with lots of rotten egg on their face, once the tide has turned.

Good on Suzanne for this. Am especially interested in those coming out in support. Good for them.

Douglas Murray says this about the transmission of this craven petition. Good for Suzanne Moore for exposing the shenanigans of these alleged journalists to the cold light of day.

In typical neo Stasi fashion, the petition was 'leaked' to a left-wing clickbait site whose otherwise unemployable LGBT editor did his bit to whip the storm along

The Guardian recently gave Moore space in its online pages to publish a column which failed to fit precisely into today's leftist orthodoxies on trans. You might have thought that when it came to the question of whether or not our society should drug some children and give them a mastectomy for 18th birthday, there might still be room for discussion. Well, not at the Guardian

Another epic nail on head quote from Douglas Murray.

Why isn't the "transwoman" who resigned named?

Is it a secret?