mumsnet in the guardian

[Trexical]

Focusses more on the infamous mumsnet language and unsurprisingly the comments that mentions gender critical views have been removed ...however the fact that the Guardian has raised mumsnet's profile is interesting to say the least!
www.theguardian.com/media/shortcuts/2019/nov/12/mumsnet-new-language-book-parenting-website-vocabulary-female-perspective

The Guardian only allowed 4 hours of comments (80 of them) about the article
It's such a repressive misogynistic rag - a real travesty after their long honourable history of investigative journalism to end up as this seedy woke excuse of a manipulative news organisation. Can you tell I cancelled my subscription? -

www.theguardian.com/media/shortcuts/2019/nov/12/mumsnet-new-language-book-parenting-website-vocabulary-female-perspective

As long as penis beaker is there it's a win I reckon.

Barely scratched the surface there really though, eh!

Uncompromising, I've just gone back to have another look at the comments. Earlier I saw one perfectly reasonable post highlighting Mumsnet threads on women's rights. It has of course been zapped. Their moderators are craven sumphs.

It was actually quite surreal ..there was a series of comments that mentioned that certain brands had pulled their advertising from mumsnet and thereafter a number of posters highlighted why gender critical views were essential and how having men in women's spaces poses a threat to women and girls ..then zap! The entire discussion was removed...I feel like the conspiracy to silence us is more sinister than ever

I think we wer3 in the daily mail on how words that we use have changed current usage. Like MIL

Yes and totally understandable!

There's a very good comment by a LtRipley ...with a reply which is unfortunately not quite true...

(Not sure if it's ok to quote newspaper comments or not, even though they're about MN)

Most MNisms are general forum abbreviations, and VBAC is a standard meical term. What an odd article.

Man makes money out of women's abbreviations.
And most of the (uncensored) comments are pointing out the same bloody obvious thing about D&V and VBAC.

Though there is an ODFOD still standing. And a criticism of the use of 'perforating' with discussion as to whether the author meant percolating or whether it was a typo.
I dare the Guardian to write a piece about Pedants' Corner...