To think allisons pearsons rant about Angela Rayner is full of nasty stereotypes about girls who are 16 and pregnant?

[Helhigh]

Well I’m not a fan of Angela Rayner and have never voted labour but Pearsons rant in the telegraph yesterday was half assumptions that Rayner must have been a bully who thumped classmates for doing their homework and distracted the class by talking about how many boys she shagged.
And of course reading books and having a child at 16 is mutually exclusive.
I don’t think Rayner has ever said she was like this Pearson has just made a load of assumptions because she was 16 and pregnant.

Anyway it’s behind a pay wall so I had to copy and paste the nasty part:

“I have noticed a tendency among politicians and commentators, particularly the posh ones, to praise Rayner’s flame-haired “authenticity”. That’s because they didn’t go to school with an Angela. Those of us who did know the harm that the Angelas do to kids from poorer homes who want to work hard and do well but whose lessons are permanently disrupted by those who don’t. The Angelas sit in the back row of the class putting on make-up, doing their nails and chatting loudly, throughout readings from the set book, about who they’ve sh---ed. They disdain the teachers who are rather scared of them.
Angelas have sex by the age of 13 (they mock those of us who are saving our virginity for later). Pregnant at 16, they leave school without any qualifications and work behind the till in Mac Fisheries before embarking on a romantic life which features at least two injunctions and a restraining order. By the age of 37, they are grandmothers (as Rayner was).
Believe me, all the kids who want to get on in life breathe an almighty sigh of relief that the Angelas have left school because now they can hand in their homework and try to pass their exams without being ridiculed or thumped by an Angela.
So you’ll have to forgive me if I don’t join in the applause for Angela Rayner’s vibrant “back story” and her ascent to the top of government through militant trade unionism. The working-class kids I admire often came from difficult council-house homes, as Rayner did, but they clung on to education like a life raft. Or they saw a job opportunity and grasped it with both hands. They did that old-fashioned thing called bettering themselves”

Excellent comparison. Although with what seems acceptable to say these days many would probably agree. Especially in the Telegraph.

Archive link to avoid giving them money https://archive.ph/cB3FC

But does that mean you should have your teenage pregnancy thrown back in your face and made up fantasies spread about you? That doesn’t seem fair. It’s not even something that happened to her as an adult (still nasty to bring up).

Criticising her for things she says and does is fine, @LiviaDrusillaAugusta - but making up stories about her and then criticising her for your own imaginings, is not acceptable, imo.

Right, so you are morphing one incident of mildly bad language into 'shouty vileness' and 'abusive foul language'. Got it.

Personally I think David Cameron's sneery 'Calm Down dear' to Angela Eagle was far worse - misogynist, contemptuous, arrogant. But we all consider different things important.

And of course none of this changes the fact that AP's article was a disgusting smear.

Well apart from that one incident she doesn't seem prone to "name calling shouty vileness" and in no way deserves Pearson's bile-ridden rant.

Thanks for the link. It is also offensive because it is so badly written by Allison. I mean, what can she mean: those of us who are saving our virginity for later

It is like she was looking forward to being served up on a platter for pudding 🍰It is like she is using teenage girls for titillation and contempt. Unpleasant.

Rayner really does bring out the worst in some women, doesn’t she? To the point of them inventing stuff to hold against her.

Some people are just obnoxious and elicit that reaction.

Why should I like her or not criticise her just because she's a woman?

She's a massive hypocrite, massive grifter, doesn't pay her tax. Her response about "her growler" was embarrassing. And she's thick.

What response about her "growler"? What did she say?

Do you think it’s ok to make up lies about her childhood and then vilify her for that? Simple question.

She’s very far from thick. She’s bright enough to be far more successful than her critics.

But she deserved it, she was wearing a short skirt, M'lud.

It’s fine to criticise her for all of that. But Pearsons lies about her as a school girl claiming she was a bully and say discussing how many boys she shagged distracting her classmates who all breathed a sigh of relief when she dropped out. There’s no evidence for any of that she’s just assumed it because Rayner was pregnant at 16.
I don’t think anyone has said she shouldn’t be criticised for things she’s actually done.

Tell me about the hypocrisy and the grifting? She has tax issues which are currently under investigstion. She is by no means alone in that! And why do you think she’s thick?

Do you routinely know many people whose tax affairs are under investigation?

Did you miss the freebie Me + Em clothes? And the stays at Lord Ali's NY flat declared at vastly below what it would cost if she'd booked and paid for similar property.

Thick - if she genuinely got the tax wrong as opposed to just not paying.

Does a speech impediment affect reading ability? I must tell my friend who has a stammer and a doctorate, I’m sure she’ll be surprised.

She doesn't even have a speech impediment - she just doesn't talk in a posh voice.

And the 'growler' comments are unfounded - even Boris Johnson said they did not happen so why people are still trotting those out is a mystery to me. Seems it isn't Rayner who's thick here.

Fuck me, that really is lower than a snake's belly (apologies to snakes). I dare you to tell Lucy Worsley her speech impediment means she must not be a reader.

Ah yes-she declared some work clothes as office equipment rather than clothes. And stayed in a friend’s apartment in New York. I thought you must have something more drastic than that!

Pearson used to be a serious journalist. She used to on The Late Show (think it was called that) with Mark Lawson and Tom Paulin. She was insightful and sharp. For a good while now she's simply been nasty. Hate clearly pays well. But, you know, the Telegraph isn't a serious newspaper anymore. And she'll know that. Sort of sad really thinking about someone bashing out this shite for money. Where's the sense of purpose or achievement? Where's the sense that what you did today made something better for someone? Being Allison Pearson must be a horrible place to be.

Does she? Where?

"We cannot get any worse than a bunch of scum, homophobic, racist, misogynistic, absolute vile... banana republic, vile, nasty, Etonian... piece of scum.".
Quite a nasty one incident she failed to apologise for just guffed about strong feelings. Politics need to rise out of the gutter to win back back engaged voters. Tax avoider and those slinging slurs around should not be entertained from any side. The fact this quote is conveniently reduced to she called them scum means you wish to minimise and hide her true behaviour. She wasn't great over Grenfield either and quite frankly has had her 3 strikes with the last tax avoidance scam.

Utterly depressing that so many women are apparently totally fine with blatant misogyny so long as it’s directed towards someone they don’t like (by which I mean someone who doesn’t agree with them on trans issues). You might “know what a woman is” but you clearly don’t give a flying fuck about defending them against this sort of vile backwards bigotry.