AIBU to be shocked at this level of vitriol in an article targeted at one woman by another, even though it's in the Daily Mail?

[Chocolateseashells]

DM article. Linking this reluctantly as it brings more traffic to the site but you need to read it to see how low it sinks.

Disclaimer:
Yes I know AIBU for reading the DM in the first place and I certainly won't be doing so EVER again.

Just idly scanned this yesterday and was shocked that Amanda Platell refers to Fern Britton as having had a "girth the size of an elephant" along with all sorts of other sexist vitriol about being a "comely middle-aged mum" (wasn't aware being either was something about which one should feel shame ).

I know the DM is no friend of women but am I alone in being shocked that a female "writer" would engage in such worthless "journalism" against another female?

I don't know much about Fern Britton except that she's a TV presenter, but AIBU to be shocked that this article was deemed acceptable to be published in 2020?

Tbh, this really isn't about FB. It's more about the fact that it seems you can publish something like this about any woman in these seemingly "enlightened" times and no one bats an eyelid?

WorraLiberty I've already said that I regret reading it, that I won't be reading it again and that I can't explain or justify why I was reading it in the first place.

And Brefugee has highlighted how we can post a link that doesn't link which is helpful I think.

Newmetoday I previously worked in an all women office in London in the late 80s- 1990s and it was one of the most supportive, professional, and friendly group of people I have ever worked with and I am still friends with many of them nearly thirty years later.

WorraLiberty I've already said that I regret reading it, that I won't be reading it again and that I can't explain or justify why I was reading it in the first place.

Yes I know.

But why is Brefugee's post helpful to you if you won't be reading it again?

As an aside, no-one has to explain or justify why they choose to read certain newspapers but it's the fakery that gets annoying.

I don't understand why Daily Mail readers don't just own their choice.

The Daily Mail is the only newspaper with a majority female readership (source : The Independent).

However difficult it may be for feminists to understand, many women do apparently want to read this misogynistic stuff, so the Mail gives its readers what they want.

Go figure 🤷🏻‍♀️

I knew this would be Platell. It's her thing. Being a cunt.

@Crockof
I agree about press freedom. What is alarming is the numbers of people who still pay money for shitrags of this kind

Even the DM’s commenterati are horrified!

Worral Visiting the UK this weekend I read the DM having not read it for a while. I agree I don't have to justify myself but fyi (as you are the one questioning my honesty) my DH and I were looking at it to see the Leavers reactions to Brexit. (We are Remainers.) I don't know why I went on to read that particular article but I did. You can believe this or not , or accuse me of "fakery" or not. Whatever or whichever floats your boat.

And I meant the no-link-link was helpful generally not specifically in relation to the DM fhs!

@MintyMabel

I wouldn't normally comment on a woman's appearance but I make an exception for Platell and her ilk, who make their living by denigrating women.

and she does look like an anteater

I don't read the DM as a rule but clicked on the link. It is an very unpleasant, patronising article about Ferne. I also read the one about Jesy and honestly I have to agree with how ironic it is that she bangs on about how nobody judges on her looks anymore.- if Jesy still actually resembled Jesy that's all fine, but she's stood there saying that, looking completely plastic with a completely different face to the one she started out with. I saw her documentary and I was very sad that she was trolled so badly but her response to that was to literally remodel her looks but then tell young girls to ' Celebrate yourself, be happy in your own skin' etc. It makes no sense.

The Daily Mail is the only newspaper with a majority female readership (source : The Independent)

Shit. . I didn't know that.

However difficult it may be for feminists to understand, many women do apparently want to read this misogynistic stuff, so the Mail gives its readers what they want.

Is the reason so many women read it really about intentional misogyny though? Evidently, some of it really is. But how many women would make a positive decision to buy it (ie walk to a newsagent and hand over cash) if fashion and health stories didnt pop up on their on-line news feed ? (I am NOT suggesting that fashion and health are the ONLY subjects women are interested in btw, nor am I suggesting that those topics are exclusively interesting to women, before I am leapt on for that.)

Have a look at this thread. How many people have commented negatively on Amanda Platell’s appearance rather than/as well as criticising the shit she wrote?

I am intrigued by the fact that you felt it necessary to grovel about your sinful reading of the DM before you even got started, as if you’d sullied yourself and needed to be forgiven in the mumsnet confessional. You’re allowed to read different things you know, and you don’t have to explain yourself.

As for the article, oh who cares? Vaguely upsetting maybe if you’re Fern - though I imagine she’s got a reasonably thick skin - but It’s a 2 second read on the train in the morning, forgotten by the time you get to work. And I don’t expect all women to support each other just because they’re women - we’re individuals, some of us are kind and thoughtful and others are mean and opportunistic.

An awful lot of ordinary people in this country aren’t obsessed by “internalised misogyny” and are indeed capable of separating things they read in the paper from their everyday lives. Fascinating though that the very people here who despise the DM for it’s supposed anti-female stance find it perfectly appropriate to comment in a demeaning way about Amanda Platell’s appearance.

I don’t read the DM , nor those kind of gutter journalists , and professional hate Stirrers such as KH and PM.
It amazes me that people know what they are like but follow them on Twitter & act out rage then they say their predictable venom . The only way to deal with them is to ignore them and take away their power to dispense poison and bile, I never re tweet or use their names I don’t see them as worth the effort.

here's the Non-Link Link if anyone wants to read it (luckily i could copy the link from the OP and didn't have to click it)

donotlink.it/1J9W2

And yes, agree with Floribundance that it's unedifying (if satisfactory on a spiteful level that I do stoop to in my head) that some PP are using Platell's methods back on her.

gosh i hope that really is the don't link link

I am intrigued by the fact that you felt it necessary to grovel about your sinful reading of the DM before you even got started, as if you’d sullied yourself and needed to be forgiven in the mumsnet confessional.

I've tried to explain twice (obviously not very well). I am intrigued by why you feel it necessary to craft your faux supportive post with such sarcasm?

As for the article, oh who cares?

I care about it a lot. That's why I started this thread. I am genuinely surprised it got through editorial checks.

And although, as Pumpkinpie suggests, not reading the DM and its ilk is by far the best strategy, I am a bit uneasy about the fact that, having read it (although I wish I hadn't) that sort of narrative is left unchallenged. Not that posting on Mumsnet is exactly hard edge activism but still... .

Since I stopped reading the Daily Fail, years ago when I first noticed what they supply, I pinned a £20 to my home cork board. It's available to the first person who can point to an article in the DM which is unequivocally warm and supportive of a woman, without denigrating someone else at their expense.

No call for it so far.

It's not even just women. They scream about NHS waiting queues and then run a regular 'health concerns' multi page spread each week, which drive loads of calls to already overstretched GO surgeries.

DNiece who is a GP agreed that she would never willingly buy a copy but it was essential for the surgery to have a copy each week, so they know what kind of calls to expect.

The personal finance was good, but I have lived without it.

My late DM, who really was kind almost to a fault to everyone , used to read it avidly as a guilty secret. Of course, she knew it was horrible but did get such guilty pleasure from reading it, and basked in the validation of ' of course, we are not like that, it's just those horrible women who are slated.

Bless her, she genuinely did not spot that everyone well any celebrity would eventually be gone for.

Didn't they do the Waity Katy stories about the Duchess of Cambridge who now is praised by contrast to the Duchess of Sussex. Sigh.

I love the cork board idea FinallyHere

Amanda Platell is a vicious and vitriolic hag, always has been. I've never understood why her views on any subject are expected to be taken seriously.