LA Times Name Calls MN, and lumps mums in w/ Breitbart

[Delphinium20]

Ok witches, guess we're notorious again! LA Times calls us 'anti-trans' and lists MN in paragraph, "The footage was quickly amplified by an international network of right-wing activists, pundits and media outlets, including Breitbart, the Gateway Pundit, RealClearPolitics and TheBlaze, a publication founded by Glenn Beck. Message boards where anti-trans activists gather, including Mumsnet, saw thousands of comments."

Glenn Beck is currently not on my Christmas list, so I'm quite confused which one of y'all sends him holiday cards?

www.yahoo.com/news/indecent-exposure-charges-filed-against-215044834.html

When I was just a fresh-faced and lovely teenager, we were taught to read widely. I read everything from Malcolm McGuiness to Mao Zedong. The Bible to Das Kapital. Having read 1984, I know when people are being accused of wrongthink. All that reading paid off. Thanks professors.

No you're only allowed to read a few things and any exposure to anything else is a thoughtcrime.

Interesting because I have a very clear memory of the Cologne sex attacks and searching for any mention of them in the Guardian or BBC, finding nothing and then having to read Breitbart to find something. Breitbart might be right-wing but they reported that.

I remember the Cologne sex attacks, too, having heard about from a German friend. I waited for English speaking news media to pick it up...and waited...Good callout.

Just adding my bit of amplification. I notice that they are calling the person-with-a-penis 'she'. Interesting use of language.
I wonder if they will ever find the man who called the good lady a 'dick' in the video, and get him to apologise now? Just a thought?

man who called the good lady a 'dick' in the video, and get him to apologise now

Mustachioed wokebrodude is probably a staunch organiser for the campaign to change the law so that indecent exposure is removed as a crime.

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

man who called the good lady a 'dick' in the video, and get him to apologise now

Mustachioed wokebrodude is probably a staunch organiser for the campaign to change the law so that indecent exposure is removed as a crime.

But then you might as well do away with any pretence of single-sex spaces. Everything mixed sex by default.

But then you might as well do away with any pretence of single-sex spaces. Everything mixed sex by default.

The more I read, the more I believe this is the end game they are striving for. When you read Naomi Cunningham’s review on that book written as a ‘guide’ to the application of the law for transgender people, it becomes very plain to see.

Even RMW doesn’t deny they believe it is perfectly ok to deceive a rape victim who asked for a female counselor if the male ‘passes’. And it seems their thinking aligns that of the cyclist who stated that if transwomen are accepted as women then why would anyone reject that they are female too.

These males truly believe there should be no single sex spaces they cannot access. It is that simple.

The more I read, the more I believe this is the end game they are striving for.

Sort of. They wouldn't want other males in there, just MTFs. They don't want unequivocally mixed sex spaces to be all there is.

There's no validation if there are no ostensibly "single gender" spaces.

twitter.com/Self_Made_Dan/status/1433543700097994753

'As it turns out, #BelieveWomen only applies when the women in question are registered sex offenders with multiple convictions for flashing their penis at women and kids. #Wispa'

The nice cuddly liberal fascists are now on the horns of a dilemma : if the flasher is convicted do they revert to the ' not really trans' defence ? That would be tempting of course . But it would be openly admitting that Self ID is a disaster. Or do they just dig their heels in and say it isn't a big deal because he is in fact really trans. Which also means Self ID is a nightmare. Decisions, decisions....

Whenever I've tried to have the debate with any leftish friends about males in women's spaces, they very quickly resort to the argument of "only right-wingers don't support the rights of trans people to self-ID".

Why? Because they don't have any other arguments. They know that their entire case is built on a falsity. They haven't got a leg to stand on. Calling people "right wing" (along with other names - Terfs, bitches, witches, white feminists etc) is all they've got. They imagine that we will be so filled with horror at the thought of being right-wing that we will go: "Oh no! In that case please let the male sex offenders into our changing rooms, refuges and prisons."

They really are a pathetic group of individuals.

@Abhannmor

The nice cuddly liberal fascists are now on the horns of a dilemma : if the flasher is convicted do they revert to the ' not really trans' defence ? That would be tempting of course . But it would be openly admitting that Self ID is a disaster. Or do they just dig their heels in and say it isn't a big deal because he is in fact really trans. Which also means Self ID is a nightmare. Decisions, decisions....

I’m guessing something along the lines of having a semi erect “female penis” exposed to you, looks very, very, very different to having a semi erect “male penis” exposed to you.

Well then, I'm lumping the LA Times in with everyone who thinks women are uptight bigots for not wanting to be raped. Perhaps they should always be referred to as 'the notorious rape-apologists, the LA Times.

It's really, really, really awful isn't it that women have a place to actually discuss their own rights?

Fuck this shit.
Women only spaces must be off limits.
I'm turning into a radical feminist in my old age.
To think that after all we went through back in the 70s we now have to put up with this misogynistic crap...

From what I can see, people across the political spectrum see through the TRA agenda - it’s not as binary (zero pun intended) as right/centre/left. This is what baffles those who are unable apply critical thinking.

I used to read the Guarniad but recently prefer other broadsheets who eschew the knee-jerk woke agenda. The Times report on the demo outside the Scottish parliament yesterday was good; I haven’t even bothered checking to see if the G has reported on it.

@RoyalCorgi

Whenever I've tried to have the debate with any leftish friends about males in women's spaces, they very quickly resort to the argument of "only right-wingers don't support the rights of trans people to self-ID".

Why? Because they don't have any other arguments. They know that their entire case is built on a falsity. They haven't got a leg to stand on. Calling people "right wing" (along with other names - Terfs, bitches, witches, white feminists etc) is all they've got. They imagine that we will be so filled with horror at the thought of being right-wing that we will go: "Oh no! In that case please let the male sex offenders into our changing rooms, refuges and prisons."

They really are a pathetic group of individuals.

Yes - sorry, my post was written in reply to this. Totally agree.

@EsmaCannonball

Well then, I'm lumping the LA Times in with everyone who thinks women are uptight bigots for not wanting to be raped. Perhaps they should always be referred to as 'the notorious rape-apologists, the LA Times.

The LA Times did a column at the time of the Wi Spa incident that was pretty grim reading, "no one has an absolute right to feel comfortable all the time. People have a right to use the spa, but that doesn’t include with it a guarantee that they all will feel at ease with everything they see" and said those women who were "offended" and making a "hullabaloo" should seek out a space in keeping with their religion (the only legit reason for 'offence' and 'hullabaloo', apparently), so I'm not that surprised they've doubled down.

Editorial, not just a column!

This all leaps out to me now as patently ridiculous and untrue - only an idiot would lump MN in with Brietbart as a homogenous group of bad guys - but it's taken a long, long time to see things like this for really are in the face of such hostility. (Are we the baddies, etc)

It's bad enough when Twitter narcs pull this stuff but to see an international media outlet repeating the lie, it all feels grim. Do they ever get pulled up on this shit?

Maybe if the LA Times or Graun ever dared to open their stories on this subject up for comments they'd get "thousands" too. To frame people (women) discussing the news on a UK parenting forum as an "anti-trans gathering" is beyond misleading and an out-and-out smear.

Not read the full thread yet but I think the issue is when you take such a hardline stance and refuse to see other views you have to double down and stand your ground even harder even when its clear you're in the wrong because then you'd have to concede the other party has made a good point and lose face.

I just went to have a look at the front page of Breitbart, something I’ve not done before.

Top Stories: “most voters think congress should investigate [withdrawal from] Afghanistan”
“Kamala Harris thinks texas abortion laws will harm women of colour”
“CDC: unvaccinated should not travel over Labor Day weekend” .

Which of these am I supposed to denounce, too, I wonder? Because I’m quite keen on the culpable people being held to account for the mess in Afghanistan, on Texan women not being forced to carry unwanted pregnancies, and on people getting vaccinated so the world can get control of covid. Not everything needs to be, or can be split into left and right, wrong and right, good and bad. Some things concern lots of groups of people, maybe even all of us.

Incidentally, if you believe that women who have concern over women’s rights can only be doing it because we’re “anti trans”, you do know that by doing that, you’re acknowledging that there is a clash of rights, don’t you? If there’s no clash, then we wouldn’t have anything to say…

The LA Times did... said those women who were "offended" and making a "hullabaloo" should seek out a space in keeping with their religion (the only legit reason for 'offence' and 'hullabaloo', apparently), so I'm not that surprised they've doubled down.

Thats so disingenuous of them given;
a) the women were using the women only sauna, and the spa provides a third, mixed sex facility, and
b) Biden/Bostock has made women only spaces illegal.

Its almost as if they don't understand what they support.

Maybe if the LA Times or Graun ever dared to open their stories on this subject up for comments they'd get "thousands" too.

The Guardian used to allow comments on these stories, as all "Comment is Free" pieces did. They are more selective now as it was clear that many readers disagreed with their general position and the people they chose to platform.

As with the categories “women”, “men”, “male” and “female”, the categories “left” and “right” nolonger mean what they used to mean.

Those who support exposing the most vulnerable women in society to the danger of males in female spaces self-id as left wing.

Their beliefs are the luxury beliefs of those who can afford to barely be affected by giving away women’s rights. Obviously men won’t be affected and as the hierarchically dominant group they give away the rights of those in the lower sex class. Not very left wing, is it?

Reasonably well off women won’t be affected too much either. At most, they will have to share public toilets, usually in busy areas, with men. That’s why they think it’s all about toilets. They are oblivious to the problems faced by the lowest class of women, those in prison, those using homeless night shelters, those who have to use refuges when escaping an abusive partner. Well off women won’t be affected, so it costs them nothing to give away the rights of those who will.

Likewise, wealthier women are less likely to end up in secure psychiatric units; they can afford help long before it gets that bad. If they have to spend time in hospital, and there is a “woman” constantly playing with “her” penis in the same ward, they can afford to go to a private hospital and get a single room. -and younger women have the luxury of being oblivious to the fact that they really may go to hospital at some point.

Giving women’s rights away affects the lowest class of women far more than it affects wealthier women, so I am less than impressed with people who self-id as “left wing”, but have zero understanding of class analysis. These are luxury beliefs, and have nothing at all to do with “left wing” politics.