The Times today

[quote persistentwoman]Just to cheer everybody up a bit - here's Janice T talking about the Fair Play For Women success in the courts and calling out Stonewall's role in it. Share token:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/af930952-88fa-11eb-8b38-e2425c3b9f1b?shareToken=afaf64df495604b8b5c920f09f4000ab[/quote]

Thanks for this. Reading Janice Turner always makes me calm and hopeful.

Thanks @persistentwoman

I found this conclusion heartening

Increasingly the political divide is not between left and right but between those who uphold objectivity, data, evidence and rule of law versus those who will jettison everything, even science and reason, for ideology.

If we cannot trust our gold-standard data body to defend facts against political interests, we are truly lost.

The times is also fairly balanced imo. I’ve moved from the guardian to the times just so I don’t have to read about gender queer all the time. Hope it’s not coming to the times now too

Stuart Hertitage is a guardian writer maybe not on staff but he has been writing for them for years and years. He can be funny, I like his tv reviews for example but can also be a bit mash report too.

Just to cheer everybody up a bit - here's Janice T talking about the Fair Play For Women success in the courts and calling out Stonewall's role in it. Share token:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/af930952-88fa-11eb-8b38-e2425c3b9f1b?shareToken=afaf64df495604b8b5c920f09f4000ab

My parents never attempted to be ‘down with me’ and for that I am eternally grateful. The had the experience. I may have ‘known better’ but I was smart enough to know that they had... the experience.

Stuart Heritage can be very funny but is a lazy writer at heart. Have seen lots of his work that takes the easy route to a cheap laugh but isn't accurate and relies on cliche.

I agree. It's all a bit derivative by the numbers. Very Guardian. Like the Mash Report.

I'm not remotely interested that navel gazing male journalists no longer think they can be down with their kids. Sententious shite.

I don't usually read the supplemental bits of the times much and ignore bits which are clearly idiocies or irrelevant to me (most of the fashion and sleb stuff, silly 'surveys' reminiscent of teen mags.)
The mag starts ok today with Moran challenging men (yes I know about her daft tweets but she avoids that here).

Caitlin Moran

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/caitlin-moran-womens-safety-and-what-men-need-to-do-about-it-0n6g2rbbt?shareToken=b763a7ef3c920e6e8ba63549abf1eca8

Think I will stay in generation awake with eyes wide open

I get that the Woke Handbook piece is satire, and some sentences are very funny, but the overall feeling (see what I did there) I'm left is with is distaste. It didn't quite hit the right mark.

I understand that "The Woke Handbook for Boomers" is supposed to be fun but lazy libel isn't the way to do it: "JK Rowling ... siding against trans people". It's goady shit. I note that this author, Stuart Heritage, "has written for the Guardian since 2009".

Stuart Heritage can be very funny but is a lazy writer at heart. Have seen lots of his work that takes the easy route to a cheap laugh but isn't accurate and relies on cliche. I thought he wrote for the Guardian but as a freelancer of late. Interesting if the Times are paying for this kind of thing now.

It might surprise you to hear that it's possible to be a feminist and think JRK is a mediocre writer and very wrong on trans issues.

Does make you wonder how many more millions she’d have made if she’d been better at writing, doesn’t it?

‘Cho Chang’ is a pretty crass bit of naming, to be honest. Do you think that’s coloured your view of JKR’s stance on unrelated issues, Hibari? It can be hard to disentangle one’s thoughts on these things.

Exactly! I came out with some absolute bollocks in my teenage and early 20s but I don’t remember all the adults getting together to ‘validate’ my utter bollocks

Now we live in a world where adults seem to be taking their lead from people barely old enough to legally drink

I thought there were some interesting trains of thought in the Billen piece that might lead a reader to reach the opposite conclusion to him. It's the last paragraph that is most frustrating. The way women are treated really isn't important is it? He's writing this against the backdrop of an outpouring of anxiety from women about their safety and the threat of male violence and his sympathy is reserved for others. It's casual misogyny- refusing to see what's right in front of you.

Jonathan Ross is exactly who I had in mind.

Have a look at this from the comments under the article:

So, Andrew, when faced with a slightly difficult conversation with a teenager, you didn’t try very hard to explain WHY JK Rowling wants to prevent the removal of any meaning from the word “woman”, did you? This will actually have an impact on your daughter’s future, don’t throw it under the bus so you can congratulate yourself that you “get it”. She’s worth more than that.

He's written a long piece having at its heart his fear of his daugher falling out with him

Didn't Jonathan Ross backtrack on his support for GLinner and gender critical feminists for the same reason? The Twitler Youth i think they call them.

It’s basically “we know our children are talking shite but we love them and we don’t want them to hate us and maybe we are missing something and please god let this be over soon”

"Why it’s time to join Generation Woke" is an interesting read but Andrew Billen misses the point in a number of places: "Can men have periods? What does that mean for biology if they can?", "the response of a “young person” who wrote ... “You would,” he went on, “rather be right than be compassionate.” That got to me. As Mohan did. As my daughter does, regularly."

He's written a long piece having at its heart his fear of his daugher falling out with him.

I understand that "The Woke Handbook for Boomers" is supposed to be fun but lazy libel isn't the way to do it: "JK Rowling ... siding against trans people". It's goady shit. I note that this author, Stuart Heritage, "has written for the Guardian since 2009".

Ah - different team working on it I suppose. Not serious journalists then - feature bods I guess.

Magazine section toffee

I haven’t dared click. Is it in section 2?

Oh how is jkr wrong on trans issues?

But I understand your irritation, McDuffy. Some readers may believe feminists invent “stories of how men have gender realignment surgery to better assault women in toilets”. Trans activists spread enough disinformation already without adding to it.

It’s difficult to mock wokery while trying to avoid the standard frothing-at-the-mouth response from the woke.