Can someone explain Matthew Wright's issue with MN?

[AdrenalineFudge]

Apparently this is home to some of the "most illiterate.... harridans" online. That's the comment he's just made on this morning's show. Is it intended to be tongue in cheek and I've just not got the joke? or does he genuinely think this site is a pile of shit despite the fact that threads topics on here are often fished for topical discussion on his show.

I know jeez Matt, read the room- who do you think watches tv at 10am weekdays...

It's because he's a giant bellend.

Why was mumsnet brought up this time anyway?

Unfortunately some men are sexist and cannot cope with the fact that women have a place where they can safely speak about their issues without men jumping in to talk over them and tell them what do. They find it very threatening.

I'm mixed race and have been on BAME boards where white men register just to say something nasty, disrupt the conversation or engage in whataboutarry. Some people cannot handle not being top dog in every sphere.

I had to look up who Matthew Wright is. What I found leaves me with the strong impression that we should not take any notice of what he says. If his researchers are using material they find on MN I think it's time we sent in a bill.

I think Matthew wright is a very funny, prevocative journalist and I can see where he gets that impression due to some of the 'hysteria' on MN, but bear in mind it will be reasearchers reading the boards! Not MW himself .....

Paul They were discussing the thread about the OP who'd taken issue with her 6yo Ds pretending to put his hand up the girl's skirt on a movie poster. Fair enough, I'm not bothered that they fished the thread, it was more his remarks about MN i.e. illiterate harridans. I do enjoy his show but that comment seemed to come out of nowhere and I'm half thinking I took it too literally as it was intended to be tongue in cheek but then again I doubt it. It doesn't really matter in the big scheme of things I know.

'illiterate'?

That would indicate that he doesn't frequent MN himself.

If MN didn't exist his show researchers would actually need to do some work!

Lauslaw Fair enough, like I said, once you've posted something online it really is fair game. But the comment was said by Matthew himself, doubt it was scripted tbh. I don't think posters should feel aggrieved if something they've posted on MN gets shared elsewhere e.g. the Daily mail etc but why the disparaging comments. Don't bite the hand that feeds you MW!

It's fairly tongue in cheek. They also get a lot of ideas here so obviiudly use the site. I don't get the hate here for him - i think a lot of sheep just jump on the bandwagon that if you are on mn then you have to hate him.

Illiterate harridans def: woman who have a different opinion to mine and who won't back down insist on defending it.

Women thinking, discussing and arguing about stuff without "guidance" is deeply disquieting to some men. Who knows where it might end.

There's a loooong history of them fishing on here on a slow news day and then slagging the site off. Iirc (I do rc btw I'm just dead modest)

We’ll be wanting the vote next, BarbarianMum.

And i don't think he is sexist, the oppisite really (apart from ribbing mn.) Despite the love/hate relationship with mumsnet - i'd say he would fit right in here.

Matthew Wright doesn't like parents, that's it. I don't know what his beef with procreation is, but any jibe he can get in at parents, especially women, and particularly those with prams, is taken up with glee. He's an odious twat with a bad hair weave and overplucked eyebrows.

It's the Daily Express of broadcasting; no one really takes it seriously. Strange that, as they're both owned by the same person.

Capricorn76 Me too. I am on other forums that are focused on a certain disability and another one about mixed heritage and there are often times that someone will sign up just to put the boot in. But I can't imagine MW making a similar comment about either of those boards i.e. mixed parentage or disability. There'd be uproar, so why is MN fair game? I frequent a discussion board about narcolepsy most days and our joke is that someone hasn't posted back a reply because they've passed out on their laptop but if a broadcaster were to make that sort of joke I doubt they'd have a job to go back to the next morning.

Itsmine I didn't know that about him and his wife having IVF, though it might explain, though not excuse, some of the caustic shit that spews from his mouth about parents, particularly mothers. Though, I can't do many things, but it doesn't make me say nasty things about those who can do those things.

Is it jealousy, or does he think MN is the modern day equivalent of fishwives gossiping in the street?

Considering how much his show gets slated on here I wouldn't expect him to be full of praise TBH.

I think he does it to get a reaction. He often plays devils advocate when discussing the day's news with the panel on the programme - regularly completely contradicting himself. He does make remarks about "breeders" when talking about parents, but as other posters have said, is also quite open about he and his wife's ivf.
I quite like him, but I don't take him seriously!

I am, I would say, a well-educated eloquent woman with a decent career.
I know what Mumsnet is and I like being here.
I have absolutely no idea who Matthew Wright is.

I would rather be on MN than watch Mathew Wright.

MIL watches the Wright Stuff when she is visiting. I just can't watch.

he is the oddest man he really is, I dont know why people still phone in on his phone ins, he is so rude to people.

I wonder if he is on here though....wouldnt surprise me.

for a bunch of illiterate harridans he certainly gleans much discussion fodder for his show from us