Johanna Mellis in the Guardian: Could the Guardian sink any lower

[Signalbox]

I can barely bring myself to link this Guardian article by Johanna Mellis on why "cis female athletes must show solidarity with trans athletes".

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/jul/07/cisgender-female-athletes-solidarity-trans-athletes

Sorry can't bring myself to click on it because of that absurd headline, but thanks for highlighting it!

This has to be one of the worst articles on this subject ever. And there is a lot of competition. I honestly don't know why the Guardian published this. I know, I know they are fully behind the TRA agenda but this is so bad its laughable. If I worked for the Guardian I would honestly be ashamed.

I sometimes can't believe I spent my 20s and 30s reading The Guardian. I couldn't be more contemptuous of them these days. They really do peddle some absolute bollocks.

If "transgender female athletes[sic] pose the gravest threat" it's because THEY'RE THE MEN BEING PERMITTED ENTRY INTO WOMEN'S SPORTS.

If any other group of men were being permitted entry, they'd be an equally grave threat.

There can be no graver threat to a category of sports than eliminating the category. Can there? There could be something bigger like war or something, eliminating all sports, but if you're talking about a specific category, defeating the category is as big as it gets.

Able-bodied athletes would be the gravest threat to Paralympic sport if they were being permitted entry, and so on.

They really do peddle some absolute bollocks.

But on a positive note, they've got a really satisfyingly big "please support us" banner that it's a pleasure to ignore. Or they did - actually, not visited for a while, so maybe they don't do that any more...

Or they just got a large injection from Soros or the Gates foundations. They'll have their begging bowl out soon enough. They are such hypocrites: their funding comes from a trust and they accept money from billionaires while patting themselves on the back for being social justice warriors.

I'm sorry but I cant read that. Anybody who tells me I must look out for others at the detriment of women makes me have a very visceral reaction. And it's not a good one.

They are such hypocrites: their funding comes from a trust and they accept money from billionaires while patting themselves on the back for being social justice warriors.

This.

It is the worst thing I have seen on the Guardian

But yes they will sink lower.

Fuck me, that is the most deranged screed I have ever read in a newspaper. Only made it about a third of the way because it's absolutely batshit crazy.

Didn’t know the Guardian paid in pieces of silver, Johanna?
this miserable creature has a podcast, apparently, for the hardcore masochists out there

Me too!!!

I’m not clicking on it either. I assume at the heart of it is #bekind

there are three reasons why women’s swimming houses a virulent anti-trans movement: the sport’s whiteness and anti-Blackness, its rampant and unaddressed sexual abuse history, and the East German state’s doping program against its female swimmers.

So the history of cheating and sexual abuse makes people more sensitive to cheating and having to share changing rooms with the opposite sex. Makes sense.

Racism accusations are a pretty lazy way of smearing people.

Every time I read the term "cisgender women" it makes my stomach turn a bit. They are so intent on making this term normal / common use aren't they?

I do wonder what the average Guardian reader makes of this. For a long time Guardian readers have been largely oblivious to the harms being carried out by trans activism, because the Guardian simply refused to report on them, but as the various lunacies seep into the public consciousness, I think there might be some hitherto-loyal Guardian readers shaking their heads at this. It is so very offensive as well as being deeply anti-scientific.

It appears the author of the article is based in the USA, from the content. But it is a bit of a rant.

there are three reasons

Does the author know what the word "reason" means?

They can absolutely piss off. I used to love the Guardian. Devoured it during the Partygate scandal, loving all the witty and scathing observations from John Crace and Marina Hyde. I didn’t notice the gender ideology propaganda creeping in until it was off-the-scale batshit crazy, fawning over misogynistic narcissists who play piano with their winkies. Calling men with intact willies WOMEN and demonising any woman who says heeeeey wait a minute, can we talk about this? The Guardian is completely captured, and once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

How about the Guardian asking Sharron Davies about the East German doping?

I couldn't open it due to a paywall but from what I could see the writer seems to suggest that because it is overwhelmingly 'cis white men' who are reported to abuse female athletes, they are the true enemy and hence trans athletes should be left alone.

So there you have it - it doesn't matter if women are no longer able to be competitive in their fields, if all medals won are trans, if all female records are replaced with trans records etc BECAUSE CIS MEN ARE THE PROBLEM!!

Look how wrong the female athletes have had it, all this time!!

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

If this happened to another newspaper the Guardian would be banging on about US hegemony and cultural imperialism.

Completely agree.

So there you have it - it doesn't matter if women are no longer able to be competitive in their fields, if all medals won are trans, if all female records are replaced with trans records etc BECAUSE CIS MEN ARE THE PROBLEM!!

We're kind of used to "women can't have nice things because it makes men sad".

But "women can't have nice things because men are nasty to women, so women should be concentrating on the men being nasty to them, rather than what they want" is quite something.

It's not behind a paywall - you should be able to read it. Just click pay later or whatever the message is you're getting.

This argument that "this isn't the worst thing happening so stop worrying about it" is one they use repeatedly. It is of course idiotic - you can be angry about more than one thing at once. More importantly is that she makes a laughable distinction between "cis men" (evil, abusive) and "trans women" (noble, oppressed) whereas in practice there is no difference at all. One wonders how someone that stupid manages to get through the day.