Musk tweets Suzanne Moore's comment piece: "The cult of gender ideology is finally disintegrating"

[ResisterRex]

He's not @'d her but he's tweeted her comment piece in the Telegraph from last week:

twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1667297563719122945?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Underneath, he's added an archived link and a comment, saying: "It is worth noting that kids who are same-sex attracted and/or autistic are the most vulnerable".

As he's has a lot of followers (140M or so), this means a lot more chance of the issues reaching a lot more people.

Previously this kind of thing would have risked being taken down on Twitter, so it's maybe a sign that #nodebate is gone/going.

Ok, then I will tell it like it is. She wasted valuable interview time trying to push her own agenda.

It read to me that she listened to Atwood talk at great length about her current obsessions and then asked a few questions about Atwood's publicly stated views on gender. It seems in an effort to unravel the contradictions in Atwood's statements. Time well spent, not wasted, in my view.

So your version of ‘good interviewing’ is something more like simpering sycophancy?
Is that correct?

Generally interviewers will have researched things and may well challenge people in various ways. what’s the point otherwise?

No, not my view but the interviewer was pressing her own agenda not interviewing an interesting author in the round. She bashed on about her favourite issue then squared it by telling us there was an off the record bit.

Ok, then I will tell it like it is. She wasted valuable interview time trying to push her own agenda.

Tell it like it is (snort) who the hell appointed you as the Oracle?

Bringing into the interview questions about statement Margaret Attwood had made and letters she put her name to regarding a current topic being widely discussed and featured?

No, not my view but the interviewer was pressing her own agenda not interviewing an interesting author in the round. She bashed on about her favourite issue then squared it by telling us there was an off the record bit.

It was a very wide ranging interview and the interviewer was not pressing her own agenda merely questioning Margaret Attwood regarding statement and letter she had signed which appear to be somewhat contradictory and also out of line with her other expressed views. Perfectly fair and reasonable.

People who write for, or read, the Telegraph are still human beings - they are not a hostile alien life form.

Journalsim is not meant to be kind, it is meant to challenge and to critique.

Me too.

Yes BBC are desperately trying to smear Elon, but it doesn't fly. He is on the side of free speech, and he understands the danger of trans ideology to both children, and to free speech.

BBC have been pushing the trans agenda for years now. They have been rumbled. They are culpable in trans ideology taking hold in the UK. Elon is a threat to them as people are getting their media (including facts rather than propaganda) from Twitter, and rejecting BBC et al.

Erm, this is an interview with an author. The interviewer went off in the direction of her own interests and kept on with this to the exclusion of what the job in hand was. If you want to see good interview technique, see Simon Hattenstone, Guardian

BBC haven’t got the Memo. I listen to a lot of podcasts and very often hear someone (always been a woman so far) wittering on about being ‘cis’, or attributing a lesbian being beaten to death as a result of her ‘gender identity’.

give me strength…

it's personal for Elon too as he has a trans child. Said child has allegedly disowned him
(but I bet they'll be along after he's gone to request his share of the Will)

Erm, this is an interview with an author. The interviewer went off in the direction of her own interests and kept on with this to the exclusion of what the job in hand was. If you want to see good interview technique, see Simon Hattenstone, Guardian

This is the title of the piece:

Margaret Atwood on feminism, culture wars and speaking her mind:

Therefore the interviewer was right to cover all the the above topics, those are interests of the author.

Simon Hattenstone also has his own agenda. Every journalist brings as much of themselves to an interview, as does the interviewee.

I'd have given Margaret Atwood some curve balls too. I'd always loved her novels, and her poems, especially, and so I'd definitely have wanted to probe her nonsensical views around tra issues.

Erm, yes the interviewer comes back with the article of the interview with her chosen slant on the topic and the byline writer gives it a byline. Doubtless Atwood thought, I don’t mind the result because it does come across well. The postscript style para stuff probably amused her but it wasn’t a professional article of the standard you’d expect

Well all I can say is there is a real difference between the approach Hattenstone takes and the results make better reading. Regardless of anyone’s position on tra being so tiresomely self regarding as an interviewer never makes good reading.

ermagard why are you talking about trans stuff, literally no one else is interested, you’re, like obsessed

seems to be the latest thing

personally I’d say that a global movement which seeks to define women using cultural stereotypes and allow men to push their boundaries with impunity is a very relevant thing to bring up in an interview with a feminist author

Not many of the gold star feminist heroines, organisations and publications have been a friend to women and children on this issue. I totally understand why women like Posie Parker eschew the feminist label.

The Morning Star, really? Goodness me, how Marxism has changed lately.

Her fervour never fails to shock me.

You want to do that to your own son? Fine.

But why the 100mph to do it to as many kids as possible?
What motivates this woman??

What motivates this woman??

it's got to be the right thing to do hasn't it? otherwise what the hell did she do to her son

it's like a horror film, her trying to get other parents to do that to their children

It's validation isn't it, the more parents she can convince to the same to their children the easier it is for her to convince herself that she was right - using other parents and their children as pawns for her own self righteousness, pretty despicable if you ask me and yes she should be in prison.

personally I’d say that a global movement which seeks to define women using cultural stereotypes and allow men to push their boundaries with impunity is a very relevant thing to bring up in an interview with a feminist author

Quite. Particularly when the author in question has made statements, signed letters and involved themselves in the issue.

I think our friend only wanted a puff piece which blew smoke up the arse of Attwood.

When JKR is interviewed it won't only focus on her work as an author, nor should it and the TRAs would scream blue murder if it didn't.

All because Susie Green's husband loathed his little effeminate son, so they castrated him.

This is the most vile social movement since eugenics in the early 20th century