The Guardian's US Staff are Revolting

[FreshlyBakedRolls]

Seems like the Guardian staff over-the-pond are leading a revolt against the Guardian UK's editorial stance, as it is "Transphobic".

They state "our journalism should be grounded in the principle that trans women are women"

It seems harsh to say that but I feel they've completely betrayed women.

And yet, they'll look at the reaction on twitter, breath a big sigh on relief, and say to themselves, "ahh, we are on the right side of history and it feels fine":

twitter.com/SamTLevin/status/1058469158931722240

The US is turning into a shithole. On one side, half the population supports Trump, the other half is flying towards the opposite end, hard.

I'm sure. Twitter is both a cesspit and an idiocy convention.

I've been increasingly uneasy over the past year seeing the Guardian demonstrate an outright antagonism toward trans people.

LOL. Is that a different Guardian to the one I know?

All Guardian staff need basic lessons in human sexuality and reproduction - I would not wipe my arse on their "newspaper"

FFS. Again, it's that mixing up and mashing up between sex and gender.

It's not at all difficult, really, is it? That difference between sex and gender?

Gender - social construct, varying across different times and locations and societies. If gender is important to you, then have at it. Have whatever genders you fancy. Fill yer boots.

Sex, on the other hand: sex is your physical body, your biology. In the vast, vast majority of people, sex is observed at birth, because it's absolutely bleedin' obvious. Humans are dimorphic. In order to reproduce, a female gamete and a male gamete must meet and join. Female gametes are produced by women, and male gametes are produced by men.

Gender: social construct, details vary between various societies in various locations and at various times. Mutable.

Sex: fact of biology. Immutable, regardless of society, location or era.

And I'm an arts graduate...

Now you know why we need mumsnet and you UK women! I don't know why anyone would want to immigrate to the US right now. It gets worse every single day. TRAs are clogging up the legal, health care, education, political systems that is divisive and fucking scary. I want to leave

Weird how these "gender critical" women don't use gender neutral pronouns, isn't it? Almost like this is some sort of excuse.

Does that mean we don't use neutral pronouns to discuss trans people? That's not what they want though generally is it? I otherwise could think it means we should use "gender neutral" pronouns for ourselves and our family and friends. Why not? Because it is BATSHIT.

To all the US posters on this thread. I love your country and absolutely support you in fighting against this bullshit.

Me too Vegilante so disappointing

When I first read the thread heading, "The Guardian's US Staff Are Revolting," I took the last word to mean "rebelling" rather than "causing intense disgust; disgusting," which is how the Oxford (American) dictionary on my macbook defines "revolting."

The “statistics” link linked to an Instagram post....FFS how is this journalism.

Ffs. I know that adds nothing to the discussion - sorry. I just felt I needed to say it.

They really aren't trying very hard to change the stereotype of America telling the world what to do, are they?

I know most Americans don't do this but it is a popular image. And now a nice article to sit besides it.

The “statistics” link linked to an Instagram post....FFS how is this journalism.

I know, ridiculous. One of the authors, Mona Chalabi, is a “data editor”. She does the data for elections and so forth. Surely she appreciates the need to be able to accurately define a demographic? How can you determine how many women are voting for Trump if your definition of women includes trans women?

For example, here are two articles she’s written about facial hair and pay gap:

www.theguardian.com/fashion/2017/nov/30/female-facial-hair-if-so-many-women-have-it-why-are-we-so-deeply-ashamed

www.theguardian.com/us-news/datablog/2017/apr/04/equal-pay-day-us-wage-gap-gender-race-ethnicity

Just how can she square the ideals she pursues in those articles with the idea that trans women are women? Just HOW?

Trump is awful, but the alternative does not always come across as much better. Who is speaking for the ordinary working person. Not this lot it seems. It sounds as if the PC rabbit hole the Guardian has disappeared into in the UK has become a complete warren in the US. Not least but equality is surely recruiting on merit, not demanding the recruitment of a trans person.

A question. The Mail on line has a relatively large US readership, far larger than the Guardian. (I have read that it has the worlds largest English online readership.) I assume stereotypical rednecks dont read foreign press, and indeed it may come across as a bit left wing for some of Trumps supporters. So who reads it, and why dont they (or do they) have a problem with the GC stance. Or do people just read the sidebar of shame.

The need for quality, fact-based journalism has never been greater. Alas you won't find it in the Guardian. It was my newspaper for 30 years. It makes me sad and angry that it has become a mouthpiece for bullshit woke propaganda.

Wow these fuckwits are dishonest motherfuckers.

Lies in the first fucking paragraph

'The Trump administration is trying to define transgender people out of existence. Last month, the New York Times reported that the US government is seeking to deny trans people the most basic recognition by claiming that gender is “determined by the genitals that a person is born with”.'

Why is that in quotation marks when it's not a quote from the source?

The actual source:

www.nytimes.com/2018/10/21/us/politics/transgender-trump-administration-sex-definition.html

"Sex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth"
"“The sex listed on a person’s birth certificate, as originally issued, shall constitute definitive proof of a person’s sex unless rebutted by reliable genetic evidence.”"

Nowhere does it say 'genitals', and neither is that synonymous with 'genitals'.

"Biologists have increasingly recognized that there is a wider spectrum than two sexes, a view that more than 1,600 scientists supported"

ORLY?

"Postdoctoral Fellow in Glaciology,"

"Education and Outreach Specialist in Agriculture ,"

"Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice"

"Professor of Management of Complex Systems ,"

"Asst. Professor of Cultural Geography ,"

"Student in Digital Media"

"Assistant Professor of Linguistics,"

WTF kind of shitty appeal to authority is that?

Fuck off.

" The Mail on line has a relatively large US readership, far larger than the Guardian. (I have read that it has the worlds largest English online readership.) I assume stereotypical rednecks dont read foreign press, and indeed it may come across as a bit left wing for some of Trumps supporters. "

Um what. Seriously?

Ironic that under this thread, Mumsnet have placed an advert for Plan International:

'This is Evie. Unfortunately, she was born a girl.'

By which they clearly mean biological female.

The US woke Guardianistas would have a fit!

I'm so glad I never signed up to pay for Guardian membership.

If The Guardian is so transphobic, why don't these, ahem, journalists, resign?

They’ve written this so they don’t have to resign. They can retweet it to placate the woke folk and still keep taking the dirty money.

I don't suppose anybody explains what they think the word 'woman' means or why trans women are women?

"Biologists have increasingly recognized that there is a wider spectrum than two sexes, a view that more than 1,600 scientists supported"

Please could these 1,600 scientists explain how they think these other sexes are reproducing?

Good grief
I am a biologist and was taught about intersex years ago. Nothing news. But conflating it with trans is ridiculous.
People are really proud of their ignorance of science these days.