Andrew Gilligan Sunday Times Challenor Green Party

[WaddIelikeapenguin]

"A young politician and transgender activist who is running for deputy leadership of the Green Party was fighting for her political life last night after it emerged that she had used her father as her election agent even though he faced charges of raping and torturing a 10-year-old girl."

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rising-greens-star-aimee-challenor-will-not-quit-over-rapist-father-kngjwc8l5

Reading the now over 200 comments on the Breitbart article, it looks like the start of a massive backlash.

not that I've looked but I doubt there would ever be a single positive comment about either the Greens or trans- people on Breitbart! I think not wanting to be arseholes like them is what makes people so open to trans ideology in the first place. Breitbart commentators are not people I'd want onside (bit like Corbyn & the BNP).

Although I did enjoy the comment, "If I had a dollar for every gender, I'd have $2 and a pile of counterfeits"

The "man on the street" was never going to take kindly to the ideas of men saying "I'm a woman" and getting into places where their wives/ daughters are.

They were trying to get laws changed, rules changed in all the orgs quietly before those men noticed.

That's why they've been working so hard to shut women up.

Also, women are much less scary than men.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine yes I laughed at that one too!

Although I did enjoy the comment, "If I had a dollar for every gender, I'd have $2 and a pile of counterfeits

I thought that pretty funny, too.

David 'Lucy' Challenor has now provided the far right with all the ammunition they need - a little girl cross dressing fetish combined with paedophilic rape and torture. Could it get any more toxic that that?

Could it get any more toxic that that?

Be careful when you speculate like that.

I wasn't speculating; that was simply a way of saying surely this is as bad as it can get.

600 comments now. Wow when pp are finally allowed to talk about this subject they sure have a lot to say!

Why would it need to be up to the far right? I am not far right, but I am dead against tolerating the kind of behaviour that the so called liberals have allowed to run rampant through our society. In the quest to be tolerant and liberal we have allowed perversion and depravity run amok. The road to hell is paved with good intention, and we are on the road to hell.

Because we won't get a sensible conversation about this in the current political climate. Indeed its more likely to be dominated by the propaganda of Leave.EU, Breitbart and the Bannon PR machine rather than by moderates.

Why would anyone think linking to Breitbart or other far right propaganda sites on mumsnet was acceptable? And encourage people to go read stuff on their site? Not on.

If its not against mumsnet rules yet it should be. Reported.

I mainly lurk on these pages as I'm not as articulate as everyone else, and comment when I can on consultation docs etc.

But I cannot believe that the BBC is keeping silent on this. Where is its integrity?

I have tried to be objective and understand how it might not be frontline news to those not aware of the gender critical debate / radical trans activism. But I can't see it at all. A candidate in a mainstream political party employing someone charged with gross crimes. How is it not news? I just can't understand how the BBC will justify its silence. Has it learnt nothing from Savile etc?

I will email the complaints department and no doubt get fobbed off, but I feel like somehow barging my way into their broadcasting to ask someone the question directly.

But I cannot believe that the BBC is keeping silent on this.

Me neither and it is starting to look like the BBC has an agenda that is not just misguided.

Breitbart ain't my cup of tea, but it's not a banned publication so there's no reason why it shouldn't be linked to on MN

I''m waiting for the TRAs to campaign for Breitbart to be shut down for its transphobia....or maybe female dominated spaces are easier for them to bully... (In any case, the comments there...that is what transphobia looks like, not "women don't have penises")

if anyone is nervous about reading the Breitbart article, it is ~(bizarrely) - perfectly sensibly worded and cites The Guardian as its source (even more bizarrely).

I'm not going to look at the comments though -

And at long last, story on the bbc website. Tucked away in the local news. Sorry can't do a click link on this elderly tablet.

The BBC story is shameful. It's an exercise in minimising. They've obviously learnt absolutely nothing from the serious criticisms in how they treated the accusations against Saville.

Headline:

Green Party member ends deputy leader bid after father's abuse conviction

Abuse?! They don't even use the word rape. If they want to focus on Aimee, it should be something like:

Green Party politician ends deputy leader bid after father sentenced to 22 years for torture and rape of child

The word "abuse" could mean all sorts of different things.

Although the article mentions the victim was 10, it minimises the heinous nature of the crimes. It does not mention torture, nor rape. Also, as most abuse occurs within families, the way this article is written, it could be taken to mean the abuse was of a family member. This matters, as then the article isn't the red flag it should be for the local community, to know this man has been at large in their community (cub scout leader, involved in gynmastics etc). Families need to know about this, so they can ask - did this man have contact with my child? None of this is mentioned.

Agreed, it's appalling.

This matters, as then the article isn't the red flag it should be for the local community, to know this man has been at large in their community (cub scout leader, involved in gynmastics etc). Families need to know about this, so they can ask - did this man have contact with my child?

It's not even a transgender issue, but seems to be being cloaked by that small aspect of the case.

Breitbart isn't a prohibited publication, AuntiePushpa. I'm fed up with people saying oh, you can't read X or quote Y because X/Y has said something that's considered beyond the pale or is out of line with our position on whatever. This sort of tribalism is unhelpful.

There were lots of dissenting voices when the Hands Across the Aisle initiative started - radfems joining forces with conservatives and Christians. But it made perfect sense. All were stakeholders facing a common enemy: transactivist ideology.

If Breitbart is reporting the Green Party debacle accurately and in detail, then so much the better for the gender critical cause. The comments below the line demonstrate that anyone attacking FWR for transphobia needs to get out more.

I feel more affinity with rightwing women than leftwing men at the moment. Very pissed off with the Guardian, and with the Labour party. And with the SNP.

I agree it is not prohibited Prawnofthepatriarchy but I'm not aware of any site being banned or prohibited (by who? The global internet police?!). That doesn't mean the mumsnet community can't maintain any standard. I don't think its tribalism to object to people linking to far right or Nazi propaganda sites so I'll continue to report whenever I see it. Obviously you disagree, which you're entitled to.

People link to everything from the Pink News (lesbians should accept penis, incest is fine) through the Morning Star (unashamedly communist) to Breitbart on here. We're adults. We can check out the provenance of sites, work out their political leanings and take that into account. I'd rather know what political extremists were thinking than stick my fingers in my ears going "la la la la la, can't hear you."

Putting yourself inside an echo chamber is how the Democrats in the USA sat cheering Hillary on as she made her infamous "basket of deplorables" comment (yes, I know it wasn't intended to encompass all Trump voters, but that nuance was never going to come across in a sound bite), then were surprised when Trump won.

And when the mainstream press (I'm looking at you, BBC) deliberately tries to censor the news (it's taken them till 28th August to cover this at all, and then they've left out the word "rape" and basically re-printed Aimee Challenor's press statement, taking it utterly at face value), it fails in its duty to report the facts and dig out the story underneath interested party's own, partial, slanted accounts. That drives people into the arms of Breitbart.

You want people to return to the political centre ground? Don't try to do it by censoring Breitbart (which will only turn them into "free speech" martyrs). Do it by demanding the BBC and Guardian return to doing proper journalism.