Sunday Times today

[mcduffy]

I've been up since 5 (side eye to DD2) so have had a scan of the paper already
Letters to the editor re Tavistock clinic/Keira Bell from Prof Michael Biggs from Oxford University and from Toby Young in his capacity as gen sec of the Free Speech Union
In the magazine, I've not read them all yet!
An article on biological sex and why women's genes are different/superior by Dr Sharon Moalem (an excellent read and lots about biological reality)
An article on why cars are unsafe for women by Caroline Criado-Perez, one on how rape is used as a weapon of war and one on Japan's "comfort women" plus feminists storming 1970 Miss World.
India Knight on equality with a great paragraph in the middle on no-platforming and TRAs pleased that she's spoken up after retweeting Suzanne Moore this week.
Any more that anyone has spotted?

I'm up because I'm a lark, can't even blame the children might as well do sharetokens.

Letters:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/12180938-6089-11ea-8f5d-5d06dfa1e7b9?shareToken=659cccdc4e8548345526a73c1c162333

Sharon Moalam:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/26158480-5e1b-11ea-8f5d-5d06dfa1e7b9?shareToken=c8a30b305230a38d874c8d6babcf819d

India Knight:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6378ad64-5e09-11ea-8f5d-5d06dfa1e7b9?shareToken=9e746bab6d6ea9c9f7c80743c3c389b5

Flora Gill on her mother being no-platformed:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/8fd4f862-605d-11ea-8f5d-5d06dfa1e7b9?shareToken=18340aece26abcf3bff2f6b715552221

Thanks Ig
I'm on my phone so not sure I can do them!

Any other sharetokens, just give me a shout. I keep looking too.

The Daily Mail, despite being sued by A LAWYER, have this article today.

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8086913/How-fashionable-modern-Britain-believe-theres-no-difference-men-women.html

Thanks for the share tokens. Only just read the letters and the Moalam article. I've read something like the genetic article on here before which focuses more on women in endurance sports. It's fascinating.

"Male children are twice as likely to suffer developmental disabilities such as ADHD, autism, learning problems and stammering."

Well that's rather ignoring a massive gap in identification and diagnosis of these conditions in girls, isn't it?

"That being said, Mers, another related coronavirus that we do have more experience with and more epidemiological data, does in fact kill more males"

Can we talk about the restrictions on the movement and social participation of women in the societies in which SARS and MERS were/are prevalent? Was this accounted for?

"There’s a danger here of new forms of anti-male prejudice and discrimination."

Is there?

All the anecdata (sorry, lived experience) about his wife healing better after a car accident, for example. Well great, women are 47% more likely to be killed/injured (I forget the stat in Criado-Perez's book) but it's ok because they'll heal faster. No need to alter crash tests at all then.

And women are more likely to survive injury & disease, so it's ok to go on ignoring their symptoms then.

Maybe I've just got too attached to my sex-based oppression. Maybe I've joined in the oppression-olympics. I'm glad women have some physiological advantages, but I'm wary of them being used to negate the real disadvantages women suffer.

Also Flora Gill tackling about her mum, Amber Rudd's no platforming.

I suspect we'll be seeing a few subtle and not so subtle digs at a certain 'lady' lawyer in the days and weeks to come

Another Mail article today re women's sports:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8086977/Men-transition-women-allowed-compete-female-sporting-events.html

Dr Sharon is a man and is accused in the comments of believing in the power of women’s bodies only to please his wife. Good grief.

Here is the rape as a weapon of war piece.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-devastates-families-and-empties-villages-how-rape-is-used-as-a-weapon-of-war-2kqftx0hw?shareToken=472dec28eff4118db14323bea4ddcaf0

Thanks for flagging up. Thanks Times, sounds great, I'm going to toddle off and buy a copy.

That first Mail article seems to be reinforcing that stereotypical traits are the result of innate biological difference rather than societal influence, and supporting James Damore. Is it really being shared here as a good thing? Personally I have far more stereotypically male traits but I am not a man. That article seems to be encouraging the idea that women are sensitive, empathetic and not good at science as a matter of their biology. I find it regressive and I am surprised it is being shared here.

That being said, Mers, another related coronavirus that we do have more experience with and more epidemiological data, does in fact kill more males

Can we talk about the restrictions on the movement and social participation of women in the societies in which SARS and MERS were/are prevalent? Was this accounted for?

So far the data is overwhelmingly from China and there is another difference pertinent difference for a disease that attacks the lungs: over 50% of Chinese men smoke versus 3% of women.

knittedgoldfish
Lots of pieces get shared on here. We've learnt a lot about censoring uncomfortable or difficult ideas in recent years and I think prefer to debate issues.

Well, where's the debate? This seems to be a thread on articles that are "good news" and it was shared without any comment on its crappy content. If the thread or post had been, "look at this load of anti woman cobblers being posted in the Mail" then I wouldn't have been surprised.

The main section of the Times has a piece which is just news not IWD related - about the NHS smear campaign leaflets which didn't mention women. Public Health England said this was an 'oversight', has amended the online version now and will get them reprinted. Can't get a sharetoken for that.

So to be clear, I'm not saying censor it, I'm wondering why it's being shared on a thread of links to positive articles.

Hence me saying "Is it really being shared here as a good thing?"

About to go to shop. Will buy Observer for the first time in probably over a year, and see if there's anything about Suzanne Moore's article.

Just read the Observer online ‘cover to cover’ no mention of the Suzanne Moore article or the employees letter - interesting this topic is the only one I can remember the Guardian staff - mobilising - WHY? And the fact this letter from professional journalists and others, can’t quote what is transphobic in the article

I shared it because any sunlight onto this ridiculous notion that humans can simply pick and chose their sex is good.
People moan that this issue is being kept as a deliberately confused, out of reach subject....an article laying it out in black and white will surely be better than another 'stunning and brave' one about a man taking up women's spaces?

Did you read the whole article knittedgoldfish? He talks about Germaine Greer being no platformed, the attack on Maria MacLachlan in Hyde Park, male rapists in women's prisons and James Caspian's research about detransitioners.

I think the opposition to The Guardian article seems to have infuriated and emboldened a few more journalists...

Even Gillian Reynolds managed to get in on the act on her longstanding radio review column. She starts her column "Drag, men dressed as women, used to delight me. No longer. It has developed an aggressive side, “women” as competitors not comrades. I try to re-examine such misgivings whenever there seems a good reason."

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/culture/radio-reviews-the-detransitioners-the-essay-heres-the-thing-teatime-2flj00zqk

knittedgoldfish
If you stick around this board you'll see that some threads take off with a variety of views and some brilliant incisive posts. Other threads don't or are merely posted comments / points of view without engaging with each other's views.
Fwiw, I also don't rate the Booker article - it attempts to be a broad brush approach, misses lots of points and given the range of excellent writing at the moment it seems superfluous. BUT, I'm happy to have read it and see it published.
The article that weighs on my soul today is this one:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/668c29e8-5e15-11ea-8f5d-5d06dfa1e7b9?shareToken=56a0495c0cbc55276fb067cf87a5ccfe

Ima buy the Times today too, thanks!