Hilarious article

[FoldyRoll]

If you can spare the time between changing 'diapers' and giving each other advice about kittens and knitting changing facilities, get a load of this article about why British feminists are mean and horrid. I am so embarrassed for the girl who wrote this. She's spoiling for a scrap with t**fs on Twitter, but I fear she'll only get snorts of derision.
https://theoutline.com/post/6536/british-feminists-media-transphobic?zd=2&zi=5keu4ifu

Seriously, I can't read that.
Best to ignore it and deny her the attention she desperately craves.

She has a horribly patronising attitude towards Mumsnet. Reeks of sexism.

She's thirsty for that TRA validation.

I followed a link on here the other day to datalounge. Why is MN always cited as transphobic and datalounge left in peace. They say things on there that you'd be banned for here. It couldn't be because we're women could it 

I thought it was pretty much impossible to have an IQ smaller than your shoe size. She's proved me wrong,

Bless her, she's going to be really embarrassed by this when she grows up.

Painfully obtuse stuff. And so fucking contemptuous towards women.

There is an article written in The i, from earlier this year, that gives a little more detail on the author. If you are reading Edie, good luck with the baby and enjoy the huge learning curve of the next few years.

My highlight was saying ‘trans rapists pose a threat in womens’ prisons’ is scaremongering. Or was it that Lilly Madigan is a talented organiser. scratches head Not so very long ago I wouldn’t have believed it was possible to cram that much stupid into a few paragraphs of writing, or I would have assumed it was a piss take. I’ve had to re-educate myself.

I was amused by the man who said in tones of outrage that his wife was on Netmums and that was hardly any better. I've never been on Netmums - does anybody know if it's a haven for GC women?

Her internalised misogyny is so huge and so deeply ingrained, I actually feel sorry for her. She really hates women. She has no understanding of any of the topics she writes about; sex, gender, feminism, gender critical thinking, politics, UK or US culture, nada.

It's about self promotion, surely. Headline grabbing and knee jerk support from those who can't think past 144 characters. It's all about furthering her online profile and getting friends in the right places.

The author's internalised misogyny is bad enough. Her writing style puts the rotten cherry firmly on top of the shit sundae.

Sad to say that I read the whole thing...

I guess I'm a little confused, but maybe it's just because I'm a dim-witted, diaper-changing mum who is easily influenced by anything I read, but it sure seems as though she's suggesting there IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH BELIEVING IN BIOLOGY AND SCIENCE. I guess that means my entire career is a sham. Maybe I should scrap pediatrics and, I don't know, sell essential oils. (Scrap that, too, because there may be some evidence that they can be effective for certain conditions.)

For the record, (in reference to the Tweet posted by Kat), as an American, how do you prefer we term your country? I usually use UK. I'd hate to be guilty of mis-geographizing. It could be devastating to your mental health.

Oh god my best friend has shared the article. I really want to reply and yet I don't.

It's a dreadful article. Just poorly written and unaware.

Omg wopbamboo
Awkward

I got about half way through until she started about Skeptics and thought whaaaaat?

Wish I cba to name change to homeopathyhater

But I can't.

Carry on, I'll just lurk here.

Well happily I had some time in the pick up line to read this. I now understand that I have moved unacceptably from only discussing nappy rash to worry about things my poor little brain can't possibly understand.
I see she tells me I am obsessed with a narrow view of science and then she can't tell the difference between sex and gender.
I don't hate homeopathy, I do think it is a load of bollocks right enough. I think we need more science in schools.

George UK is probably the safest but you could probably also use "nest of evil witch terfs"
Everyone woke will know exactly to what country you refer.

Tis a terrible place where some people actually dare to whisper terrible things like women don't have willies and stuff like that. Evil. Don't visit.

Whatever you do don't call it England unless you are actually referring to England. Now that's a guaranteed drama

She must be terrified of childbirth.

It seems she thinks that once you push a sprog out you only want to talk about diapers and child-friendly cafes.

I mean if you were politician, a lawyer, a doctor, a scientist, a journalist that's it. Baby out, brain gone, you can only think about purees from now on. You are immediately totally gullible and will accept any extremist shite thrown at you.

Talk amongst women who have procreated can only be about prams and nipple cream.

I hope she has some men or childless women lined up to tell her how to vote, how to think, to keep her away from attempts at political thought etc after she gives birth.

Is this something to do with NaNoWriMo or whatever it is? A flurry of poorly written 'blogs' that showcase a stunning dearth of thought or talent?

I really can't be arsed with this or the one that spannablue plopped elsewhere in FWR. Fucksake, is this the new tactic, wear us down with incessant mediocrity?

I'm getting very tired of the straight mistakes published about the spousal consent element of the GRA. The spouse has no role in consenting to transition, but has the ability to say whether or not their own marriage to the transitioning person should end or not. THEIR MARRIAGE. I actually don't know much about US federal/state divorce law; presumably it is/they are different in some way from UK law; is this author perhaps not aware that a legal divorce can only be granted on specific grounds in the UK, and that in order for a person to be able to end a marriage to a person who has changed legal sex (which in 2004 could render it unlike any other legal marriage around them), they needed an actual legal ground to do this? That the alternative was to divorce the transitioned person on unreasonable behaviour grounds? Would she actually prefer all transitioned divorced people to have been divorced on the grounds that their behaviour in transitioning would have been unreasonable? How is that less transphobic than the spousal consent element?

It makes me cross that someone who is so pro-humanities (which apparently are very different from 'science' and the scientific method - who told her that?) doesn't have any regard for the following BASIC components of work in the humanities:

1. Read the original sources and work from them.
2. Read in the original language if you can.
3. If they don't seem to make sense, consider whether there are language and culture barriers that might explain that. This might require quite a lot of other reading, and talking to people from different cultures and who speak different languages.
4. When you read secondary sources, which are also important, consider where they came from and who wrote them. It may be possible to agree with parts of them, and not others.

Oh, and I'm going to pay a cause I don't agree with the compliment of borrowing one of their slogans.

If your feminism requires you to sneer at Mumsnet specifically because it's dominated by women, many of whom have children and who talk about what having children requires of them, it's a pretty fucking weird kind of feminism.

Yeah but annandale she saw something on Twitter and it got likes and everything. Goodness she's practically an expert.

I'm sure that's how research works now.

To sum up the article. If you know how babies are made, and/or you're the sort of person who is generally a bit sceptical towards highly implausible pseduo-science such as homeopathy. The chances are you're probably not be the sort of person who falls for genderist BS hook line and sinker.