Ahem.... FWR headlines in the Mail

[MrsOvertonsWindow]

The Mail have picked up this thread about the wonderful Women Uniting organisation and done an article about us!!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10682139/Mumsnet-readers-rally-campaign-protect-womens-rights.html

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4518855-Maya-Forstater-on-front-page-of-Daily-Mail

For all those moaning that this is all coming through the Daily Mail, what would be your newspaper of choice? Because all the other news outlets have shat on women from a great height, so I don't get who is any better?

Daily Mail is the new Quibbler!

@EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn

I woke up to a text about this from Datun. To non-MNers the names must look bonkers.

You get texts from Datun???? Oh my stars... faints dramatically in envy

@MattDillonsEyebrows

Daily Mail is the new Quibbler!

Yes!!

My re-post...my Mum was upset about a sanpro story which said it was for "people". She said "they mean teenage girls!"

My DH was upset about unfairness in sports. And that unfairness is obvious even in the outlets that apparently are "better" than the Saintly Graun.

People I know are getting upset and annoyed at the obfuscation of language and the unfairness of the way things are developing. People who otherwise would consider this not something that takes up much headspace.

The Guardian is a fucking joke of a paper - hates women, especially British women, and seems to publish reams of 'opinion' and 'analysis' from out-and-out misogynists.

I am at the same time pleased to see the Daily Mail making some effort to hold all the Parties to account on the issue of women's rights being eroded, including the Conservatives who have been in charge for 12 years. To me, this is primarily a Tory shitshow because they have been in government throughout The Rise And Rise Of Stonewall.

It's about time the right turned on the right over this fucking mess.

Labour have not earned my sympathy nor my vote. My contempt, yes. They should have been all over the Tory Government on this, defending women as a sex class. Stupid, stupid fools.

You get texts from Datun???? Oh my stars... faints dramatically in envy

Oh I know. I’m extremely privileged.

Not just do I get texts from Datun but TinselAngel once gave me her autograph.

Favourite comment

"Mumsnet? People-who-had-babies-net"

@DreamTheMoors

To anyone defending the shitty Daily Mail:

Get back to me when you can justify DM’s abhorrent treatment of — and subsequent court loss to — The Duchess of Sussex.

Or does it only matter with people you like?

The Daily Mail is only interested in selling papers, or lately, in online hits. They’re vipers, snakes. The lowest of the low - they slither from one wretched story to the next.

One positive item is not enough for their salvation, no matter how valuable the subject.

Bird cage material. Print that you bastards.

Ahem. I think WE are the Vipers.

The Original and Best.

I detest the Daily Mail so so much. Genuinely. I once used to have the Independent delivered and they one day put the Daily Mail through my letter box. I took it, marched round and told them in no unconditional terms why posting the Daily Mail instead of the Independent is an insult [to humanity] and to never ever do it again.

Yet here we are in upside down world.

Think of this campaign as a traditional bell curve from early adopters to laggards. We know who the laggards are and that they won't ever admit that women have rights.

Many women on these boards were early adopters who were joined by the early majority when they saw what was happening. Credit to journalists like Janice Turner for raising awareness and to JKR who made a few thousand more people pause for thought as well as the clear sighted Mumsnetters.

I believe we are now close at the top of the bell curve, with most of the population believing that it is not possible to change sex, but not necessarily understanding the safeguarding aspects or concerned about the issues for women. It is a critical time to spread awareness to those who are beginning to bend to convert them to the late majority and this is where we need the daily mail and the Sun to help people join the dots.

Even if the Guardian suddenly saw the light, they don't influence enough of the population. So personally I'm thrilled that the Mail are pushing it. Not because I agree with everything that they do, but because of their reach and their influence.

Can anyone explain the mumsnet phenomenon of the Daily Mail? They all call it a filthy rag but seem to post links on an almost hourly basis. So somebody reads it, Don they!!

Georgeskitchen, simples....

It is not behind a paywall. Times share tokens run out after a day whilst the Mail, who often cover similar stories, stay accessible.

I used to read both the Guardian and Mail online, and liked the compare and contrast. I then got irritated by the way the Guardian tries to tell you what you should be thinking. I am intelligent enough to make up my own mind. The Mail often has an angle, but no one is telling me I have to agree with them. And it is interesting to read the comments, which are overwhelmingly positive on GC issues, but can be depressing on others.

@Georgeskitchen

Can anyone explain the mumsnet phenomenon of the Daily Mail? They all call it a filthy rag but seem to post links on an almost hourly basis. So somebody reads it, Don they!!

You mean the phenomemon of a wide range of women of varying demographic characteristics reading a wide range of newspapers and media?

Dunno. Some sort of mystery.

The Mail has found itself on the wrong end of Big Tech in recent times. They had a story on Hunter Biden and his laptop which was removed by Facebook and Twitter in the runup to the last US election for example.

In the UK, we know the press has been muzzled over accurate crime reporting. Crime is a big area for the DM. I expect some of why they might have wanted to cover the campaign is to do with freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

@Needmoresleep

Georgeskitchen, simples....

It is not behind a paywall. Times share tokens run out after a day whilst the Mail, who often cover similar stories, stay accessible.

I used to read both the Guardian and Mail online, and liked the compare and contrast. I then got irritated by the way the Guardian tries to tell you what you should be thinking. I am intelligent enough to make up my own mind. The Mail often has an angle, but no one is telling me I have to agree with them. And it is interesting to read the comments, which are overwhelmingly positive on GC issues, but can be depressing on others.

Exactly this.

It's basically intellectual snobbery @Georgeskitchen.

And obviously lots more links now, as the Mail has gone overboard with GC stories.

Presumably lots of clicks tell them that their readers want more. Or more and more brave people are willing to stand up and be counted, and the Mail is willing to publish.

There is the added advantage that the Mail has relatively deep pockets so can be braver than others. Especially back in the day when Stonewall tentacles appeared everywhere, and sites like this had to perform complete gymnastics in order to stay open. It is astonishing how many left wing writers: Julie Bindel, Prof Stock, Suzanne Moore etc are now able to have their voices heard in the Mail...but not the Guardian. Critics have it the wrong way round. The Guardian needs to examine its approach, rather than people criticising the Mail for jumping in to cover a major issue of our time.

@Slothtoes

I’m a Labour voter all my life. I’m happy the Mail has picked this up story up again to reboot it with some quotes. I was delighted that they did the front page yesterday with the three campaigners on. The Mail are the most popular UK paper. They must have had a hell of lot of clicks on that original piece to bother doing this quick follow up piece. That’s something to celebrate.

Let’s not forget that this is a campaign. All people, however they vote, need to know that an unprecedented threat to women’s rights is going on. This is an all-women’s, cross-political-party issue. It’s also about letting men know the situation. I do agree that if it remains party-politicised, then we’re not going to get anywhere. There’s a Tory majority now but how long that will last, who knows? And what have the Tory government actually done for us anyway? Nothing. Kicked the GRA reform stuff into the future for now.

Right now individual women are desperately crowdfunding for legal cases to try to shore up the law for women and right wrongs to women that have all happened under the Tories. The Conservatives been in power since 2010, effectively.

This whole shit show has been under their watch. A government who gave a shit about women would not have let this happen. Yes Labour, Lib Dem’s, Greens and the other parties have been terrible too. We need to hold them all to account in different ways.

As we have discussed at length on other threads, there is no major political party who are actually solid on this issue. Including the Conservatives who are in government with a big majority.

We have had no solid commitments or guarantees of support for biological reality and anti-sexist action from any party.

We have a mountain to climb.

If the Mail achieves greater awareness among right-leaning women of this campaign then that’s an excellent thing.

It’s incredibly disappointing that the left wing press would rather validate male egos than listen to the completely valid safety, privacy and dignity concerns affecting 51% of the population, (plus the evidenced harms this is inflicting on women around their employment, single-sex medical care and the justice system - we could go on) but we are where we are with all of that, unfortunately.

Right now the urgency of this message is not reaching a huge section of society that don’t read the Daily Mail. That’s a problem that this campaign needs to tackle, not feeling pissed off that the Mail has picked up on it. This weekend’s coverage is excellent to have.

Shall all the left-leaning women who are sick of the Guardian ignoring this issue, write a letter to the Ed to tell them that, for publication? Maybe the three campaigning orgs could draft it and we could all sign it? Ditto the Independent? Newspapers don’t tend to ignore stories of proven huge reader interest for very long, so today could be a really good day to do this..

Fantastic summary Slothtoes

MattDillonsEyebrows Absolutely correct. People tie themselves in knots about the DM, but it basically boils down to snobbery because many of those 'troublesome' working class people who voted Brexit and drive white vans read it.

The Guardian is for the intelligent and cultured people....🙄

Only it's rarely that simple.

I long ago stopped giving a flying fuck about the guilt by association culture. The Mail is supporting a MASSIVE push for protecting Womens rights. The Guardian and others have not only consistently ignored women for many years but have actively bullied female journalists who speak out and have even LIED in published articles (the WiSpa incident being just one).
I'm disgusted with the so-called 'left wing' platforms. They've totally, utterly and massively not only dropped the ball, they've stolen the ball, popped it and thrown it away.

So the mean DM might be using this stories to sell papers and tell a story to their readers??
Well fuck me sideways.

@DreamTheMoors

To anyone defending the shitty Daily Mail:

Get back to me when you can justify DM’s abhorrent treatment of — and subsequent court loss to — The Duchess of Sussex.

Or does it only matter with people you like?

The Daily Mail is only interested in selling papers, or lately, in online hits. They’re vipers, snakes. The lowest of the low - they slither from one wretched story to the next.

One positive item is not enough for their salvation, no matter how valuable the subject.

Bird cage material. Print that you bastards.

The idea that the DM is uniquely bad is a tedious rent-an-opinion from people too lazy or dim to apply critical thought.

The DM prints a lot of poisonous shit. So does every other paper in this country. Remember the Sun and Hillsborough? Remember the NOTW and hacking Millie Dowler's phone? Remember the Mirror hacking phones and faking stories? The Times is currently gender critical, but does anyone seriously believe that Murdoch won't turn on women in a heartbeat, if it boosted sales? The Guardian has run a sustained campaign to undermine women's rights, and has allowed women journalists to be bullied out of their jobs. The Telegraph is more hateful towards immigrants than the DM, yet somehow gets a pass because it's posher. I've never seen anyone on MN clutch their pearls at a Telegraph article, yet I recently saw someone claim that clicking on a DM article (a bit of good news trivia) had 'ruined her whole day'. Half-wit.

I used to have a Guardian subscription but ditched it during the first lockdown. I now have a digital telegraph subscription and since Suzanne Moore joined it is a rare day now when there isn't one or more articles on these issues by a range of authors.

Sometimes being more Establishment can allow a paper to push things further than their rivals. The DM did that with the Stephen Lawrence case and it was the Telegraph that broke the MP’s expenses.

Suggesting a paper is pro-Tory is also a bit simplistic. The Telegraph appears to be more pro-Boris than the Mail. (Boris used to write for them.) Both though will criticise the government if they feel they are getting something wrong. At the moment Rishi seems to be coming in for criticism from the Mail over the cost of living crisis. And it is not unknown for "balance" to be achieved by publishing articles outlining opposing points of view.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

Sometimes being more Establishment can allow a paper to push things further than their rivals. The DM did that with the Stephen Lawrence case and it was the Telegraph that broke the MP’s expenses.

Good point. And a right-leaning paper is more likely to sway Tories, which in turn puts greater pressure on Labour, if they want to win back marginal seats. There are some mildly encouraging signs - albeit too little, too late - that Labour HQ might finally have noticed that the Tories are trying to use the TRA movement as a wedge issue, to split naturally left-leaning female voters from Labour and the LibDems.

The only ways to handle a wedge issue are either to double-down on it (e.g. Labour and hunting in the 90s - they were happy to lose some rural voters, in the knowledge they would gain metropolitan ones), or to eradicate the policy difference between you and your rivals, so voters can no longer differentiate you on the issue. Labour seems to be making some feeble attempt to do that latter. More power to the DM, if it keeps up the pressure on them.

Newspaper's gonna news.

@witnessfortheprosecution

I used to have a Guardian subscription but ditched it during the first lockdown. I now have a digital telegraph subscription and since Suzanne Moore joined it is a rare day now when there isn't one or more articles on these issues by a range of authors.

I took out a Telegraph subscription when Suzanne Moore joined, alongside my Times subscription and daily reading of the Mail and the Indy. I cancelled my monthly donation to The Guardian and told them it was because of their stance on women's rights. Tbh the Telegraph forums are mostly very horrible places, but I delight in posting my "awful left wing views" (according to one DT pearl clutcher) on them and I have sensed a change even there. I find it's better to refer to facts on the DT - I quote femicide numbers, trans crimes figures and even posted about the existence of the terf is a slur website. I find DT readers are picking up on these links and clicking on them to see what they are all about. The Times is mostly a gentler place but you do need to really push back own the TRAs who are there...they then report you and your comments disappear, then you comment on the fact that they disappear and those posts remain! It's a crazy world. Everyone has their moment of realisation and I think the Lia Thomas/Emily Bridges stories are critical in making (mostly) men suddenly see the light.