Atlantic has an article about "anti-trans feminism" and of course Mumsnet is mentioned

[WeeBisom]

Link here:www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/12/reddit-ovarit-the-donald/617320/

The journalist compares feminist spaces like Lipstick Alley, Ovarit, and Mumsnet to right wing communities like incels and the Donald. The article is disappointing because they get so many basic things wrong. In the very first paragraph they equate 'radical' feminism with extremism, and talk about a woman becoming 'further radicalised'. They say that gender critical feminists believe 'gender is fixed' when that's not what gender critical feminists believe at all. And the article tells the lie that radical feminists dox, harass and bully trans women when we do nothing of the sort. It's just frustrating to have so many lies and misconceptions spread about online feminist communities.

@PurpleHoodie

Has she even been to the site?

Doesn't seem so. The muppet.

I've had a peek.

The Lipstick Ladies have sounded the KLAXON.

They've started a thread readying themselves for a TRA onslaught. They are (ahem) not meek

Solidarity ✊

What, so believing that women are oppressed because of their biology means I have been radicalised? I thought it just meant I'd started reading the newspapers.

I’ve never read the Atlantic. Where is it published?

It's a news magazine published in the US, and has a lot of good articles.

Helen Lewis is also a staff writer and she definitely won't be agreeing with this article, because apart from anything else she knows here feminist history.

I think its significant that the writer of the article usually covers technology.

Quote from the article:

"She became convinced that trans women are men"

Had a quick glimpse at the Lipstick thread. Those ladies are not fucking around! Solidarity sisters!

The nasty British women have found it on twitter. She's getting a robust response.
twitter.com/kait_tiffany/status/1336307072082866178

Ah, Vox. Is it still the home of the dreadful Emily VanDerWerff?

Those Facebook comments are encouraging (and articulate) but there’s one guy who’s taken it upon himself to abuse every single woman criticising the piece. And another furiously blaming t*fs for a transphobic attack before having to clarify it was men who did it, without seeing the disconnect.

I try not to overthink idiots on social media - don’t know them, possibly bots, etc - but it can be so infuriating.

What's Overit? I'd never heard of it till I read this article. Think I might have to seek it out.

As they say on Lipstick Alley. There is nothing actually mainstream about the genderist belief that human sex is imaginary.

This is what annoys me about this article - the tone of the journalist implies that ovarit and mumsnet are like those dark and extreme parts of the internet where young men are radicalised into terrorists as opposed to feminist websites where women just want a space of their own. They discuss women’s growing awareness of the dangers of certain elements of trans ideology like women are being “radicalised” into extremist positions. I think at one point the article mentions that we break away from reality. But do we? We think that humans can’t change sex, but that doesn’t mean trans people aren’t worthy of respect. We think that women’s sport should be for females only. We think that puberty blockers for children are pernicious. Is this really a break away from reality? Every time I read an article that tries to frame gender critical feminism as some kind of cult I just get so mad, because a lot of it is made up!

Mollyollydolly, it's this: ovarit.com/

Solidarity with our sisters over on LSA.

Here’s a comment from over there that we should all take on board

‘There are two places I will not go with these TRAs and that’s back and forth. They can argue with themselves.’

@Maduixa

UK people, can you access this article? I’m elsewhere in the EU - I follow the link and can see it for moments - the misogynistic title, the byline by “Kaitlyn Tiffany”’, and half a sentence which is a lie - and then I get forwarded to an error message:: we’re working on it! We're having trouble displaying the page you're looking for. We apologize, and expect to resolve the problem soon.

If anyone’s inspired to C&P the text here, or save to archive.is and post a ljnk, I’d appreciate it. Thanks!

archive.md/9wZJ9

@merrymouse

Quote from the article:

"She became convinced that trans women are men"

I'm starting to wonder if it is actually a parody

Glad to see this trash is getting the contempt it deserves over on LSA

I wonder who she's related to. This isn't journalism or an op ed, it's just a piss poor rant.

The Atlantic used to hire decent writers. What a shame.

For a bit of balance I'm just going to post a couple of Helen Lewis articles from the Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/11/feminist-aristocrats-who-want-daughters-rights/617067/

www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/07/why-millennial-harry-potter-fans-reject-jk-rowling/613870/

And whilst I'm at it:

www.amazon.co.uk/Difficult-Women-History-Feminism-Fights/dp/1787331288/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&crid=1KDPP4V25VYS5&keywords=helen+lewis+difficult+women&sprefix=Helen+lewis+%2Caps%2C186&tag=mumsnetforu03-21&qid=1607459834&sr=8-1

This is what annoys me about this article - the tone of the journalist implies that ovarit and mumsnet are like those dark and extreme parts of the internet where young men are radicalised into terrorists as opposed to feminist websites where women just want a space of their own.

To understand feminism on Mumsnet all you need to do is visit www.lettoysbetoys.org.uk

www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/12/reddit-ovarit-the-donald/617320/

Eventually, her beliefs radicalized further: She became convinced that trans women are men, that the Pope was Catholic and bears poo in the woods.

The Atlantic also published one of the first mainstream pieces on Desisters & Detransitioners, by Jesse Singal:

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/07/when-a-child-says-shes-trans/561749/

In the very first paragraph they equate 'radical' feminism with extremism, and talk about a woman becoming 'further radicalised'. They say that gender critical feminists believe 'gender is fixed' when that's not what gender critical feminists believe at all. And the article tells the lie that radical feminists dox, harass and bully trans women when we do nothing of the sort. It's just frustrating to have so many lies and misconceptions spread about online feminist communities.

It is frustrating and the lies are pernicious but also people are curious and new people do find MN by hearing about all these vile mothers getting together to plot the downfall of the known universe..

The misunderstanding of ‘radical’ as a descriptor is a bit of an issue. I have heard a guy in a senior position talking seriously about ‘militant’ feminists objecting to things when they actually mean ‘radical’ - those around them then started looking very nervous.. but it’s never been the feminists doing the intimidating around this issue.

There is nothing actually mainstream about the genderist belief that human sex is imaginary.

Excellent quote Prawn

Someone on Lipstick Alley has shared a link to the email exchanges and interviews with the GC women mentioned on that article. Unsurprisingly, the journalist ignored what they actually said and wrote her own version to support the story she wanted to write:

4w.pub/my-whole-conversation-with-kaitlyn-tiffany-for-the-atlantic/

[quote PlantMam]The Atlantic also published one of the first mainstream pieces on Desisters & Detransitioners, by Jesse Singal:

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/07/when-a-child-says-shes-trans/561749/[/quote]

To add clarification, as I think a lot of people don't realize this, Jesse Singal's piece was for the print edition.

The Atlantic is one of America's most venerable magazines. Singal's piece is longer, better written and would have been fact check to death.

Unfortunately a lot of magazines, including The Atlantic but also New York Magazine and even The New Yorker, employ crap internet writers with large social media followings for their websites, where they publish badly-written "hot takes" masquerading as articles that are almost never fact-checked.

The print edition of The Atlantic is also more small-c conservative than its web version for this reason.

But that's how you end up with a piece of crap like this sitting alongside Singal's. Unfortunately most people won't be able to distinguish between the two.

Singal's piece is so compassionate, while raising serious concerns.