Is this an about-face from The Guardian?

[NopeNi]

Well fuck me I wouldn't have expected to read this in the Guardian.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it still focuses on rights for transwomen and calls both sides of the debate "toxic" (of course) but it also says:

..."But misogyny too must be challenged. Gender identity does not cancel out sex. Women’s oppression by men has a physical basis, and to deny the relevance of biology when considering sexual inequality is a mistake. The struggle for women’s empowerment is ongoing. Reproductive freedoms are under threat and the #MeToo campaign faces a backlash. Women’s concerns about sharing dormitories or changing rooms with “male-bodied” people must be taken seriously. These are not just questions of safety but of dignity and fairness."

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/17/the-guardian-view-on-the-gender-recognition-act-where-rights-collide

I think this might mean I can start reading the Guardian again. Wouldn't be surprised if they are in favour single gender rather than single sex spaces in the long run though.

I wonder what prompted this. The academics' letter and Maria Caufield perhaps.

Its a sign of something,an outbreak of balance ?

Blimey, pass me the smelling salts!

Was surprised to read that. Is the current editor tied up in a cupboard? Seriously - credit where credit is due. It is good to see this.

Looks like standard public relations damage control to me.

To hold the Guardian to account for this statement would mean a sharp increase in the amount of articles published by gender critical feminists. Until that increase in the Guardian's gender critical content, statements like these are meaningless.

I know, I keep eyeing it up, waiting for it to be deleted, or wondering if I've misread the date somehow.

Are there any comments on it? I can't see from my phone if there are.

WTF is the point of a 'single gender space' though?

Most activities and spaces are open to everyone. A 'gendered' activity might be theoretically open to all but in practice only attract people with one 'gender' with respect to that activity. That's fine. Single sex spaces and services exist for reasons related to sex not gender.

I guess the Guardian have finally read the room!

Do you think the 98% “not buying it” poll in the Times might have given them pause?

I cannot believe this! Where is the "wrong side of history" bigoted T*RF rhetoric?
Well done on this article.
The Overton window has shifted.

Do you think the 98% “not buying it” poll in the Times might have given them pause?

Well this diehard leftie has certainly spent more £ on the Times than the Guardian over the last year.

Just far too little and far too late.

Mystified. I bet an awful lot of internal argument went into producing this. After all, in the Guardian's comment pages you won't even catch a glimpse of gender critical feminism - it's all Shon Faye and Owl and Little OJ and all the rest. Something, I reckon, must have peak transed them in the last week. Could it be Karen White? Or the MPs being frightened to be named?

I reckon one of their middle aged female staffers must have written it - someone like Anne Perkins.

Or more cynically, perhaps they spotted all the women on Twitter and on here saying things like, "I'll never buy the Guardian again"?

Well this diehard leftie has certainly spent more £ on the Times than the Guardian over the last year.

Me too! Solidly left-wing, had read the Guardian for 2 decades, and feel so let down by them. I'm now a Times subscriber.

Its a sign of something, an outbreak of balance?

Surely not!

Wow.

Or possibly that letter signed by all the academics? Who knows? Maybe they just finally woke up to what is actually going on?

You realise of course, this means war.

This a transphobic statement and the AWAs won't stand for it. Even with all the 'both sides' shibboleths, any acknowledgement that GC women might have a point is unacceptable.

I expect lots of backtracking and 'clarification' to be forthcoming. And obviously it's too bloody late in the day anyway.

Too late for me. Once I'm scunnered, that's it.

Woah. Wow. THE GUARDIAN acknowledges that there is an actual rights conflict going on? It makes me feel almost like I can breathe again

Perhaps sales and clicks had started to be affected and they were looking increasingly isolated.

But perhaps too little too late. If they are effectively talking about single gender spaces it sounds like they are trying to avoid criticism for avoiding debate, without actually changing their approach.

I have a feeling they've had a look at the Times' revenue increasing, then their own donations dipping, then their hits going down as fewer feminist vagina people are around to be put in the stocks of their comments section and get missiles hurled at them by MRAs, causing the MRAs to dwindle for lack of 'sport'....

For once the phrase "too little, too late" is apposite. It's too late because it doesn't recognise the full horror of what's gone on and the abuse women have received, and too late because the deadline is Friday and they have done absolutely nothing in the preceding months to inform their readers.