I believe The Spectator is in danger of folding.

[Battleax]

Perhaps we could show some support for them and their commitment to free and balanced journalism?

They have an excellent 12 issues for £12 offer at the moment.

www.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/transgender-activists-and-the-real-war-on-women/

www.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/transgender-activists-and-the-real-war-on-women/

Hopefully that one’s clicky.

What is the spectator?

Is it a general magazine? So a bit like a less economy version of the economist

Oh god i wish my words worked

Yes a bit like that.

I think they say “Politics, Culture and Current Affairs”.

"What is the spectator?"

The conservative version of The New Statesman

The Spectator is right wing and is not feminist except in the sense that it publishes occasional articles by writers who oppose self-ID. I wish you would all stop promoting right-wing nonsense because you’re so blinded by your focus on trans issues. Right-wing policies are, overwhelmingly, bad for women.

The Spectator is right wing and is not feminist except in the sense that it publishes occasional articles by writers who oppose self-ID. I wish you would all stop promoting right-wing nonsense because you’re so blinded by your focus on trans issues. Right-wing policies are, overwhelmingly, bad for women.

I'd vote for anyone doing something to avoid against this - no matter what the other policies.

The Spectator’s senior staff includes famous feminists such as Toby Young.

Trans is a right wing agenda. Stop pretending its not.

You all?

Who all?

So the new statesman is the left version of the spectator

TERF - I don’t really know what I’m looking at in your post but it seems like creepy men who identify as trans talking about their weird period fetish online. It’s gross but does it directly affect your life? What policy would you propose to prevent people talking about gross fetishistic things you don’t like online?

The “I would vote for anyone who’s anti-trans” position is a supremely privileged one. The conservatives have ruthlessly stripped back funding for women’s refuges and have implemented a punitive system of universal credit which will hit vulnerable women hardest and trap countless women in abusive relationships. These things will affect women more acutely than self-ID ever will. If you would vote for that because creepy men on the internet offend you, you don’t care about women.

For clarity, I am opposed to the suggested changes to the GRA and I disagree with what trans theory has to say about the way gender works. But come on, people. Priorities.

Rufus “you all” refers to the majority of posters on this board who promote anti-feminists who happen to be anti-trans. Alright, so not ALL the posters but certainly most of the active ones. See the post about Jordan Peterson the other day. Some mixed opinions, certainly, but for a supposedly feminist board an astonishing amount of people were claiming this noted anti-feminist - in fact probably one of the most renowned anti-feminists of the current moment - has something to bring to feminist conversations.

The conservatives have ruthlessly stripped back funding for women’s refuges

That is fine though as there won't be any woman's refuges any more, because there will be no such thing as a woman.

These things will affect women more acutely than self-ID ever will.

There will be no such thing. Self ID means that the concept of 'woman' ceases to exist and all parties will just replace them with self-identifying men. Like yesterday's all woman shortlist Labour party roll-call - full of men.

Yeah ive no idea who that jordan chap is

Its sounds like i dont want to know!!

That is fine though as there won't be any woman's refuges any more, because there will be no such thing as a woman.

This is just... so silly, complacent and wilfully blind. Many (most I think, though I would need to check this so willing to accept I might be wrong) women’s refuges in the UK already accept trans women on a case-by-case basis. They seem to be managing this fine. What they are not managing is the massive cutting away of their funding. To glibly say this is “fine” because of your particular trans bugbear honestly illustrates how incredibly far removed you are from the reality of the situation.

I thought their readership was increasing. Could we have some evidence for your statement please?

Article from The New Statesman by Helen Lewis:

www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/04/madness-our-gender-debate-where-feminists-defend-slapping-60-year-old?amp&__twitter_impression=true

(extract)
"The Wolf affair also demonstrates another alarming phenomenon: the left getting high on its own supply of self-righteousness. “Some feminists have a different conception of gender to me” gets smudged into “some feminists talk about me in ways that I find offensive” and on to “some feminists are basically Hitler, trying to eradicate people like me”.

Once you reach the last statement, then of course you can slap a woman and still think of yourself as a good person. She wants to kill you; a mere punch is self-defence. (I’m not exaggerating about the language. The Edinburgh branch of Action for Trans Health tweeted the day after the attack: “Punching TERFs is the same as punching Nazis. Fascism must be smashed with the greatest violence to ensure our collective liberation from it.”)"

I like the guy who writes the anti-trans stuff but in every other way...I'm fucked if I'll give money to The Spectator.

This is just... so silly, complacent and wilfully blind. Many (most I think, though I would need to check this so willing to accept I might be wrong) women’s refuges in the UK already accept trans women on a case-by-case basis. They seem to be managing this fine.

They are not managing it fine. They are petrified of losing funding. But still, we are all just being silly, complacent and wilfully blind eh?

Yes, far better to support The New Statesman.

The Spectator publishes a wide range of views, often ones that contradict each other.

Some writers opinions are truly godawful IMO.

Some are more liberal/centrist/about wider concerns and issue and chime with my views, like the one in the OP published by a left-wing woman.

I read it because of the diversity, I certainly don't agree with all of it.

Judge the articles with critical thinking not just because of where they appear. Otherwise you might turn into Owen Jones or whatever the right wing equivalent is

A rather good article in the Spectator by James Kirkup

New Statesman good too.

They are not managing it fine. They are petrified of losing funding. But still, we are all just being silly, complacent and wilfully blind eh?

People working in places like this are too afraid of losing funding to speak up about vulnerable women's needs. This was discussed in a WPUK meeting. It is happening and it is not OK.

wander

Ds1 did A level politics and was told to read around the issues

Hard to do if you boycott stuff...but in RL i guess people get to pick and choose