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.

A disappointing lack of discussion about Keira Bell on that LSA site.

Last time I checked there was disappointingly little discussion on the saidit gender critical site as well. The case didn't get much coverage in the US and Americans probably don't see it affecting them. I think the Keira Bell case will have a bearing over there. Obviously the US isn't bound by UK precedent but our legal system has a good reputation worldwide and common law countries do use relevant rulings from other similar jurisdictions to support their cases and judgments.

However, if you don't know that, Keira Bell might seem irrelevant and unimportant, especially given the lack of coverage.

But anyway. Thanks to Kaitlyn, some people are going to discover that the African American community is not a monolith and that, in fact, some black women are feminists/womanists. If awareness of that spreads, it's going to be inconvenient.

Agreed. The TRAs use the argument 'if you exclude transwomen from using spaces it's like excluding black women from those spaces'. They are trying to portray gender critical feminists as racist.

To me, that argument is the racist one. Women's spaces are for women and girls, i.e human females. All human females. The fact that TRAs seem to be conflating black women and girls with human male-bodied people is shockingly offensive, surely. Skin colour has no bearing on whether one is a human female. Being biologically male does.

Anyway, good to see LSA standing up to this nonsense.

Waiving back to you!

It reads like a far less sophisticated Titania Mcgrath parody article, combined with the plans to write a One Direction book proudly in the Twitter bio.

Hello! You from LSA?

Crush the trolls!

@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

Love it!

Looking forward to Helen's response :)

Hi Marcy!

I wonder if the writer contacted anyone at mumsnet HQ?

The hook for the article seems to be extremists flee Reddit and set up alternative websites, but from a journalistic point of view it looks as though they failed to interview anyone with extremist views who had set up a website, so just tried to work with what they had.

When you look at the email exchange it reads a bit like a Trump supporter trying to explain how Biden is a socialist who will make the US like Venezuela by interviewing Keir Starmer.

It’s unfortunate as the writer is a tech specialist and there’s a good ^tech^ story in there, they just totally miss it and turn it into a personal rant. I skim read it and it made the Ovarit developer sound vile - the emails show that is not the case at all. And as Janice Turner pointed out on Twitter, they haven’t bothered to describe the issues at hand in any meaningful way at all. The reference to t*s throughout (and in the headline!) is appalling, but it’s written to play to a particular gallery and it’s good it has been falling apart under scrutiny. The Atlantic should be ashamed.

Ha, just thought the same Merry!

Well, we did get a few new male perspective posters yesterday. Sadly, one of the most chatty males had absolutely nothing new in their view poin, but at least they were civil and not out to just ‘shame the nasty women’ and maybe they will stick around.

Wasn’t one of the people the writer interviewed Lavery? Maybe the intention at the start changed after that interview.

O M G the response on LSA is absolutely brilliant. Crying with laughter at some of the comments.

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/lsa-gets-a-shout-from-the-atlantic-for-being-a-terf-hideaway-prepare-for-an-onslaught-of-others.4176928/

I personally think the poster Medusaa on that thread has called it right.

Karen Davis has something to say.

[quote DancelikeEmmaGoldman]Karen Davis has something to say.

[/quote] She's very entertaining. I like her style.

She's awesome.

Does anyone know how you can tell whether an article is in the print magazine or just on-line?

I don't think the article meets the editorial standards of the Atlantic because it only makes sense if you are already immersed in the subject and can skate over the fact that the writer doesn't seem to understand very basic feminist philosophy, and so is not in a position to write about 'extremist' feminists.

However, I suppose as clickbait, it works.

Here you go Merry

support.theatlantic.com/hc/en-us/articles/360050757233-Identify-print-and-web-articles-from-The-Atlantic

Karen Davis is marvellous.

Horrible article that hypocritically doxes Mary Kate Fain from Houston by painting her as some dangerous extremist who is a mastermind behind “secret” extremist hate platforms. All because she rightly understands that sex is determined by your DNA and is immutable, and that it is the female sex that is the victim of oppression.

I'm intrigued by Kaitlyn Tiffany's mention, in her article, of "radfem" Tumblr.

I thought Tumblr had a reputation for being man-centring-choice-feminism/woke central.

Tumblr is like Reddit, in that it creates pockets of special interest.

The majority of Tumblr users (unlike Redditors) are young women. Tumblr will reflect whatever adolescent and young women are interested in.
Gender has reached it’s own peak and is falling away. It’s become the establishment, and young people are generally pretty anti establishment.

Here comes the new wave of second wave. Thankfully!

@merrymouse

Does anyone know how you can tell whether an article is in the print magazine or just on-line?

I don't think the article meets the editorial standards of the Atlantic because it only makes sense if you are already immersed in the subject and can skate over the fact that the writer doesn't seem to understand very basic feminist philosophy, and so is not in a position to write about 'extremist' feminists.

However, I suppose as clickbait, it works.

Unfortunately you only know by knowing the magazine/writers who write for it. I work in media which is how I can usually tell.

That's the case with most websites - print articles are always a million times better than the web only but it's usually impossible to tell unless you buy the magazine or work in media- although the Daily Mail is one of the only outlets that make it clear in their bylines whether it's print or digital only:

XXX for The Daily Mail or xxx for The Mail on Sunday = a print article that's gone on online

XXX for MailOnline/Dailymail.com/Daily Mail Australia = online only

Unfortunately you only know by knowing the magazine/writers who write for it.

This link actually gives directions on how to tell print from online only.

support.theatlantic.com/hc/en-us/articles/360050757233-Identify-print-and-web-articles-from-The-Atlantic

[quote PlantMam]Unfortunately you only know by knowing the magazine/writers who write for it.

This link actually gives directions on how to tell print from online only.

support.theatlantic.com/hc/en-us/articles/360050757233-Identify-print-and-web-articles-from-The-Atlantic[/quote]

Ah that's good - didn't know they did that. Very sensible. I wish more magazines made it clear.