The Guardian - femicide in Mexico. Am I being cynical?

[YouSetTheTone]

Is it just me or does it seem a bit odd that The Guardian recognises what a woman is when it publishes a long article about violence and murder towards women, in fairly explicit detail, but not when it comes to recognising a woman’s biology or her sex based rights?

It’s ok for women to be click bait but not to be supported. I hope I’m being overly sensitive as this feels like a pretty dark train of thought.

www.theguardian.com/news/2021/feb/25/mexico-femicide-frida-guerrera?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR3VIxQSHi5VEx_Gez-aV8n2feBlNdwNn0eS4A_SwLRhfJERNhfO3w04SRo

The Guardian is notoriously inconsistent - I'm confidently expecting Talcum X or the US staff to insist that the piece is edited to reflect the statistics for The Most Oppressed Of All Demographics.

Yep. They haven’t gone for peopleocide or murdered uterus havers.

Well it's the about non-white women so it helps highlight the savageness of non-white men doesn't it? Similarly they are ok with women doing most domestic work in Africa because it highlights how badly African men treat women. What they don't understand is that the efforts to erase women in the West and in specific domains will affect development programmes all over and will set back efforts to protect women globally. Idiots!

Very inconsistent. I got banned from commenting on Guardian because I linked an article about men and women not having different brains in the comment section of a pro-trans article. The brain article was also from The Guardian.

The BBC is inconsistent as well.

In fact everyone is.

When it comes to some things it's women. And they expect people to take that as. Uterus havers. Only in the women's section and LGBT+ areas do they change the language.

It's a sack of shit.

If they mean women as in female then they need to be consistent. Uterus havers kidnapped in Nigeria. People with vaginas at risk in war zone.

You want this language? Go for it on the front page.

Fuckers.

Biscuit

*There really needs to be a face palm emoji on here

Biscuit that’s insane!

The article was the first Guardian one I’ve clicked on in a while, as I’ve been so angry at their attitude to women, and I was disappointed at how it essentially felt to me like a long gratuitous description of violence towards women.
Certainly TG do not feel moved to talk about the three women murdered a week here in the UK or about the need for those women to have refuges.

Yep they need to promote that women are vulnerable and attacked and harmless while simultaneously promoting that women are uterus havers that are inter changeable with males and are cool with self Id. Women wear dresses and like certain activities BUT could also at any time become men by wearing trousers and liking other activities. Poking fun at the religious right in America making up science while simultaneously, making up science.

It’s a bizarre tightrope to walk.

The Guardian is Woke Central and not even fit for chip-wrapping paper.

God that was a depressing read 😔

TG do not feel moved to talk about the three women murdered a week here in the UK or about the need for those women to have refuges.

Nor the 3 or more women a week whose suicide is associated with DV. I think it might become quite difficult to discuss coercive control soon even tho' it's been recognised belatedly. It's hard to discuss coercive control if refuges are going to coerce women into sharing spaces with those who might trigger PTSD or other stress responses.

I live in Mexico. The level of feminicides in Mexico is shocking and partly the inheritance we have from so many years of corrupt governments and the so-called War on Drugs. We finally have a decent federal government but this problem will not be cured overnight.

The 'war on drugs' has been a disaster for so many people and communities and it's a massive failure.

I live in Mexico.

The constant background level of fear must weather people's health way in advance of their age. The public health ramifications of this in addition to the menace of WAWG feel overwhelming. It's a testimony to the strength of women in Mexico that pro-social structures survive.

@NiceGerbil. Yes, the Mexican president from 2006-2012 has now been proven to have been steeped in drug trafficking himself and the head of security of that government is currently on trial in New York for organised crime. The next president was not necessarily involved in drug trafficking but was just busy selling favours, left, right and centre and the deaths mounted up. A government cannot necessarily stop murders, but in those days murders and kidnapping weren't even investigated.

The USA originated 'war on drugs' is unwinnable and has caused so much harm.

It started when the last of slavery ended. If you're in prison you work for free. Black men in the USA are put in prison for years for minor drug offences for massive terms. The stats are horrifying.

A large percentage of USA GDP is from prisoners work.

Slavery went and they found a way to keep it going.

And fucked up massive amounts of the world in the process.

It’s very obvious that some contributors and staff at the Guardian understand that sex matters. They seem to be allowed to write about some sex specific issues e.g. they have had long articles about women’s health and vaginal mesh.

The thing that isn’t allowed space is suggestion of a conflict of rights.

Given that they have a US audience and specific US content, they seem to have given the US Equality Act very little general coverage, which is odd.

Only in the women's section and LGBT+ areas do they change the language

There is the bit of the BBC where you do diversity and the bit of the BBC where you pay women less. It’s a very big organisation.

A large percentage of USA GDP is from prisoners work.

I've read various discussions of the topic before but I've never seen that - I must look.

Interesting, I've just had a quick read of this, about the burden on mothers in the pandemic. No 'cis', no one identifying into anything when it comes to home schooling, bum wiping and refugees, wonder why that is 🤔

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/feb/28/mums-women-coronavirus-covid-home-schooling-inequality?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

Written by by Natasha Walter is the founder of Women for Refugee Women and author of Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism, haven't read her before but will look at up.

It is interesting, and reaffirms what a lot of women are saying at the moment - that to maintain (let alone build on) existing provisions or legislation that assist women, we need to be able to define ‘women’. There won’t be any recognition of the burden of care that falls to women if we can’t define ourselves and fight for the extra funding and understanding laid out in this article.

(Is it really nitpicking of me to wonder why the illustration accompanying the article is of a cartoon-style woman?!)