Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

'The Guardian has found itself defending a sex-offender's right to expose themselves to children'

84 replies

secular111 · 03/09/2021 19:54

This is a continuation of the thread at;

Shameful incoherent, poorly-referenced, completely biased piece of journalism from the Guardian

The quote in the title is from Dave Hewitt's essay published today;

The Guardian's Ideological dead-end

As you can likely guess, he eviscerates The Guardian, and leaves its rotting carcase out-in-the-sun for the vultures to pick over.

Quite simply, Guardian readers have once again been fed a pack of Alex Jones-style falsehoods, this time over the Wi-Spa scandal. As usual, LOJ contributed to the attempts to hoodwink the readership, and for the most part it seemed to have worked. Until Andy Ngo exposed the entire rotting falsehood in what has proven to be the journalistic scoop-of-the-year to date.

Hewitt details how The Guardian's world-view has seen it simply unable to present itself as a reliable news source, with it now peddling deliberate falsehoods and fake-news, in much the same way the right-wing press in the US is accused of. The Guardian though has gone further in its commitment to falsehood; all the complainants in the Wi-Spa scandal were Black women, so The Guardian had determined to deprive those women of their legitimate voices - a fundamentally racist act.

I'm not sure what the owners of The Guardian - The Scott Trust, have as a business model. Hoping that the readership and subscribers are easily or willingly fooled by whatever lies the hacks write doesn't seem to be a long-term strategy. That though is precisely where The Guardian is today, having abandoned facts are sacred as a creed, replaced with lies are paramount.

OP posts:
justasking111 · 04/09/2021 23:03

Well read a few spa articles it is said Darren had an erection in the women's section. Also a convicted sex offender. I can see the objections to this being quite rational.

nauticant · 04/09/2021 22:44

That should be Too risky.

An unforgiveable mistake. I've let myself down, I've let you all down, but most of all I've let MN down.

nauticant · 04/09/2021 22:39

The Guardian unwittingly walking itself into a woke version of PIE is like something Chris Morris would think up. With the irony being that in the current age no one would dare putting it on the telly.

To risky for a fictional telly programme but OK for actual reality.

aliasundercover · 04/09/2021 22:19

Sorry, just realised how late my previous post was.

aliasundercover · 04/09/2021 22:18

It was Gaby Hinsliff:
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/08/cologne-attacks-hard-questions-new-years-eve
It was this article and the previous lack of coverage that made me realise how bad the Guardian had become. Little did I know this was just the beginning.

JulesJules · 04/09/2021 22:05

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

NewMutiny · 04/09/2021 22:04

@Franca123

How on earth does the Guardian report on the Taliban and women rights? I'm pretty sure that as a woman in Afghanistan I couldn't identify as a man and have all the rights men get. Surely when they're discussing this they have to use one of the terms like, uterus-havers in order to be accurate. Or do they know it's a wink wink thing with the reader - you know what we mean when we say female in this piece. Bonkers.
I think - but it may just be too complex for me as a woman in my 40s - that it is still OK for people of colour from countries with oppressive regimes in place to be women. Because they haven't been civilised yet so they don't know about the rainbow myriad of gender identities which are waiting for them once they have sorted out some of the smaller details like voting and education and basic human rights. So that's transmen sorted out - they, once again, don't really matter to the Glitterati.

AND, as we all know, transwomen are the most oppressed minority in the world ever. So they are all there in Afghanistan right now totally wishing they could be wandering around in a burqa not going to school and getting collectively raped and forcibly married and being only half a person in law etc etc but unable to do so because it would give the game away and they would be getting oppressed all over the place quicker than you could say 'gold lane clutch'. But properly oppressed. Not like the women are oppressed, much much much worse - oppressed like only trans women can be opressed.

AND the level of cultural relativism that identity politics can produce is truly terrifying so you'll probably find another answer is that 'it's cultural'. Which will be said with a withering look and a quote-tweet of Drs Harrop and Jessen circle jerking over who can agree with forced marriage quickest.

Those are my theories on this particular blindspot.

RedDogsBeg · 04/09/2021 21:54

Ah was it, thanks OldCrone.

OldCrone · 04/09/2021 21:53

It was Gaby Hinsliff who wrote that article about Cologne in the Guardian.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/08/cologne-attacks-hard-questions-new-years-eve

RedDogsBeg · 04/09/2021 21:50

@dyslek

The Guardian; the paper that was all in for, the war in Iraq and Nick Clegg.

Surely they are never wrong?

There are two things I can think of off the top of my head, does anyone have any more examples of the Grun great judgment?

The Cologne New Year's Eve attacks on women.

When the Grun finally admitted the attacks had occurred and grudgingly reported on them one of their columnists (possibly Polly Toynbee) victim blamed the women who were attacked by declaring that the men who attacked them did so because they were so unused to seeing confident, western dressed women out and about with mobile phones and really the women should have known this and excuse their attackers.

PamDenick · 04/09/2021 21:23

Interesting comments…
The Guardian is certainly making some strange editorial decisions.
It would be sad to see it go, but it does seem like it is encouraging loyal readers to abandon it…

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 04/09/2021 12:46

senior editorial decision to present the newspaper to the world as a pro-sex offender publication?

It's one way of styling it. I would think the preferred styling would be of a publication that is expanding Civil Rights in some areas that will encompass liberating the unliberated generations - if I recall the previous civil rights language and promotions of PIE correctly.

There's a remarkably good chance this attempt would be successful given how difficult it is to have a meaningful discussion in public or within MSM.

secular111 · 04/09/2021 12:37

Glinner is scheduling a 'Mess We're In Special' about the Wi Spa scandal this weekend.

The focus appears to be on The Guardian and Sally Hines, who have both taken on the mantle of being apologists for sex offenders, particularly those who have women and girl victims.

It is though doing my head in. Hines can be excused to a degree, in that she has previous form and her late night tweets have long been suspected to be written whilst she is...well, not entirely fully-functioning.

The Guardian though? Surely it would have to be a senior editorial decision to present the newspaper to the world as a pro-sex offender publication?

What possible commercial advantage is there in doing so? Surely the readership and subscription base would be less than impressed being associated with a newspaper presenting such a stance?

I am thinking though that this is deliberate; that Katharine Viner has decided to hasten The Guardian's demise, rather than see it simply staggering along from one week to the next. Realigning The Guardian to be pro-paedophile/pro-sex offender should in theory see the sales plummet enough for The Scott Trust to bin The Guardian and perhaps save The Observer.

The Observer's editor, Paul Webster, seems to be trying to distance the editorial stance further from The Guardian, though it's been 8 years since one of its writers won an award (Rowan Moore for 'Critic of the Year') and The Observer, like The Guardian, simply refuses to perform top-drawer investigative journalism.

It's been five years since a Guardian journalist last won an award, and four years since even a sports columnist was recognised, so its writers are now really 'B' tier ones at best.

If Viner is deliberately realigning The Guardian to be pro-paedophile/pro sex-offender, in an effort to accelerate it's destruction, beyond the US Guardian contributors, I'd struggle to think who she can depend-on in the UK to back her cause. LOJ immediately spring to mind, and he has already been exposed as being complicit in the attempted cover-up of the Wi Spa scandal, which Andy Ngo exploded across the world. But anyone else? Even Gaby Hinsliff is unlikely to bow to a request to write in favour of sex offenders/paedophiles. And Hadley Freeman? No chance she would buckle.

Viner can perhaps bring in guest columnists to do her bidding, and Sally Hines would be an obvious choice. The new policy though, if indeed it is a deliberate policy and not just temporary daftness on Viner's part, is going to need the willing assistance of more writers than just LOJ.

OP posts:
EmbarrassingAdmissions · 04/09/2021 11:39

Does LOJ have any understanding of the idology he is pushing so violently?
Its nuts that he has no clue of what genderism is about.

For somebody who has been acclaimed as brilliant and a powerful voice, I'm a little disappointed at this (feigned, surely?) show of ignorance about the origins of Women's Liberation. And that although there is a lot to be improved, the UK has a fair amount to be proud of given the rest of the world's lamentable performance in re: maternity leave and pay, parental leave etc.

There is a huge room for improvement. Oddly, Shon Faye's manifesto would not improve that for women given the benefits would solely accrue to one group of people with substantial harms and costs being incurred by another group with a (for now) protected characteristic that would effectively cease to exist.

AlfonsoTheMango · 04/09/2021 11:38

The Guardian is a rag not even fit for wrapping fish and chips.

dyslek · 04/09/2021 11:33

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

OJ :

the liberation of trans people – and indeed LGBTQ people as a whole – will free everyone. For example, a strengthened welfare state and solved housing crisis would provide a trans person rejected by their family with desperately needed independence; but those benefits would help anyone in need of security. The biggest killer of men under 45 is suicide: freeing them from rigid gender norms, which teach them to believe that opening up about their problems is unmanly or “gay”, will make them more likely to seek support.

How odd. Women's liberation was founded upon those demands and rejected. Is OJ now telling us that those demands are somehow more reasonable and actionable coming from Shon Faye? And overlooking that the cost of this for women will be that they'll never be able to discuss the material reality of a sexed body, that they'll be denied the use of shared language and shared spaces with others who share that material reality? That, there will still be a sex caste in which the material reality of a sexed body determines your position and power/vulnerability?

Does LOJ have any understanding of the idology he is pushing so violently? Its nuts that he has no clue of what genderism is about.
dyslek · 04/09/2021 11:29

The Guardian; the paper that was all in for, the war in Iraq and Nick Clegg.

Surely they are never wrong?

There are two things I can think of off the top of my head, does anyone have any more examples of the Grun great judgment?

SnoopyLights · 04/09/2021 11:15

@Mybalconyiscracking

So there are nude sessions for women, nude sessions for men and mixed nude sessions? Not sure that I understand the problem?
The nude sessions are single sex.

There are clothed sessions for when the two sexes mix.

Cam77 · 04/09/2021 11:07

I'd give the Guardian newspaper of then last decade-ish about a 3/10. Trouble is the rest of the national papers are either a 2/10 or a 1/10.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 04/09/2021 10:52

OJ :

the liberation of trans people – and indeed LGBTQ people as a whole – will free everyone. For example, a strengthened welfare state and solved housing crisis would provide a trans person rejected by their family with desperately needed independence; but those benefits would help anyone in need of security. The biggest killer of men under 45 is suicide: freeing them from rigid gender norms, which teach them to believe that opening up about their problems is unmanly or “gay”, will make them more likely to seek support.

How odd. Women's liberation was founded upon those demands and rejected. Is OJ now telling us that those demands are somehow more reasonable and actionable coming from Shon Faye? And overlooking that the cost of this for women will be that they'll never be able to discuss the material reality of a sexed body, that they'll be denied the use of shared language and shared spaces with others who share that material reality? That, there will still be a sex caste in which the material reality of a sexed body determines your position and power/vulnerability?

viques · 04/09/2021 10:48

self id is not only for genuine, honest people, it is for liars too.

And there we have it. It’s obvious really isn’t it once someone says it.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 04/09/2021 10:47

What we do know that is that recorded homophobic and transphobic hate crimes have jumped every year since 2015, and yet with an estimated four in five still going unreported, the already grisly figures only hint at a far bleaker reality.

Does anyone know whether these hate crimes statistics include the tweets that have turned up in various cases? So, Harry Miller, Kate Scottow etc., would those be included? Marion Millar's tweets that were complained about but not part of the current legal action?

Hoppinggreen · 04/09/2021 10:36

@yourhairiswinterfire

Yawn....Another transphobic thread.

You're the only person that's mentioned trans here...

Mentioning Trans on a thread about sex offenders? Thankfully that transphobic comment has been deleted
Abhannmor · 04/09/2021 10:30

We are all Trump fans and far right religious loons - says the man who has tap danced away from Corbyn very adroitly. I love the YouTube where he tries to persuade Alexi Sayle , an actual Jewish person , that Corbyns Labour was Antisemitic. Sayle basically crushes him like an irritating bug. I can't believe I once saw Jones as a refreshing new voice on the left.

Tibtom · 04/09/2021 10:26

fake comparison to a Trump supporter turning up at an anti-Trump protest.

A gay man visibly supporting gay rights at pride is like a trump supporter turning up at an anti-trump rally? So he is suggesting pride is an anathem to gay rights?

Swipe left for the next trending thread