Over trans issues, yes, all the fucking time. The Guardian US, it’s own sister site across the pond has called them out on their bullshit anti trans propaganda.
The Guardian went wrong when it gave up on socialism and the working classes.
Says *checks notes* UnHerd.
Anyway, yes they are. Constantly. How Sonia Sodha still has an Observer column is beyond me
I was once a subscriber to the Guardian back in the olden days and it does seem like it has gone through the same radicalisation steps as people that end up as nut jobs. It’s a sort of salami step your way from a fairly moderate albeit slightly contrarian position millimetre by millmetre over to a place where you couldn’t imagine being. The Guardian of the late 80s had pieces say about race when that was far rarer and about the gay community, but as society changed then they moved position a little further along the scale to be ahead again and then did this say another few dozen times and they’ve got into almost race baiting and proselytising whilst of course commercially adopting a clickbait strategy of earning money from outrage and anger. Somewhere along the way they seemed to become a platform for campaigners pursuing their causes rather than reporting on campaigners, and that’s meant adopting liturgies and all the other hallmarks of those types.
Stock even after leaving the country for a right wing grift in America where the money lies still cant put their incessant obsession about trans people in the UK down.
And uh guardian being trans friendly. What? Since when? That’s news to the entire trans population of the UK. It’s even news to the wider Guardian Media Group who have had other countries branches criticise the UK branch for being blatantly transphobic.
Stock lives in a fantasy land where lying about what the gra changes will do legally and [calling random trans women fetishists and implying trans people are the result of a jewish conspiracy](https://www.praile.com/post/kathleen-stock-obe) are all normal fine pieces of speech, but anything short of active full uncompromising participation in the drive to remove trans people from public life is “disinformation”.
(and many would argue the guardian already reaches that goal, given how the us guardian and an internal letter signed by many staff both called the UK guardian editorial team out on their barely concealed bigotry not that long ago, but that’s not enough for stock)
UnHerd accusing others of sowing disinformation?
That kind of projection is so impressive they could get a job replacing the hardware in a cinema!
Nice to see Stock asking for some nuance on such issues as ‘do trans people deserve rights?’, and ‘is the man who said ‘I love Hitler’ really a Nazi?’ Truly inspiring journalism from an academic powerhouse.
Regularly, yes. Trans issues seem to be their biggest mis/disinformation. Then the immigration debate. Then their 3rd biggest is likely the fawning over Corbyn
Slightly ironic that commenters are calling out the Guardian for being anti trans when she’s leaving because they won’t let her express gender critical views (see also, Suzanne Moore)
Her interviews were one of the few reasons I still read the Guardian
Basically every newspaper in the country is, yes, but Unherd and Kathleen Stock can both fuck off too.
The Guardian is a toxic shitrag. Never believe anything you read in that toilet paper. Hypocrites and tosspot Daily.
What are all these nonsense arguments about being pro-trans, anti-trans, pro gender critical or whatever. Just let everyone be whoever they want to be and if they want to be someone who disagrees with you let them be that too. So long as they let you be you.
Making the headline statement, in the form of a question, is a classic case of trying to avoid being sued, when the article is baseless bullshit.
anti trans bias ranting about an online presence which comes across to me as anti trans
piss poor article
>As a highly-educated person with wider expertise and a sounder moral compass than many of your readers, you think it’s part of your job to anticipate the highly emotive and irrational ways in which ignorant people might react to certain bits of information, should they read them, and then adjust the information accordingly.
Patronising wanker.
I’m a feminist. I’ve always taken care to defend women and their access to spaces they have a sense of safety in but now if I say that “we must not undo decades of hard work in protecting and making possible safe spaces for women”, I get called ‘disgusting’. Others get violent threats without ever being heard. Cis men attack cis women who want to have a safe space away from men. I’m also a supporter of the lgbtq community but trying to *talk about the concerns of cis women results in them being dehumanised and subjected to misogyny of a brutal kind*.
17 comments
No?
Over trans issues, yes, all the fucking time. The Guardian US, it’s own sister site across the pond has called them out on their bullshit anti trans propaganda.
The Guardian went wrong when it gave up on socialism and the working classes.
Says *checks notes* UnHerd.
Anyway, yes they are. Constantly. How Sonia Sodha still has an Observer column is beyond me
I was once a subscriber to the Guardian back in the olden days and it does seem like it has gone through the same radicalisation steps as people that end up as nut jobs. It’s a sort of salami step your way from a fairly moderate albeit slightly contrarian position millimetre by millmetre over to a place where you couldn’t imagine being. The Guardian of the late 80s had pieces say about race when that was far rarer and about the gay community, but as society changed then they moved position a little further along the scale to be ahead again and then did this say another few dozen times and they’ve got into almost race baiting and proselytising whilst of course commercially adopting a clickbait strategy of earning money from outrage and anger. Somewhere along the way they seemed to become a platform for campaigners pursuing their causes rather than reporting on campaigners, and that’s meant adopting liturgies and all the other hallmarks of those types.
Stock even after leaving the country for a right wing grift in America where the money lies still cant put their incessant obsession about trans people in the UK down.
And uh guardian being trans friendly. What? Since when? That’s news to the entire trans population of the UK. It’s even news to the wider Guardian Media Group who have had other countries branches criticise the UK branch for being blatantly transphobic.
Stock lives in a fantasy land where lying about what the gra changes will do legally and [calling random trans women fetishists and implying trans people are the result of a jewish conspiracy](https://www.praile.com/post/kathleen-stock-obe) are all normal fine pieces of speech, but anything short of active full uncompromising participation in the drive to remove trans people from public life is “disinformation”.
(and many would argue the guardian already reaches that goal, given how the us guardian and an internal letter signed by many staff both called the UK guardian editorial team out on their barely concealed bigotry not that long ago, but that’s not enough for stock)
UnHerd accusing others of sowing disinformation?
That kind of projection is so impressive they could get a job replacing the hardware in a cinema!
Nice to see Stock asking for some nuance on such issues as ‘do trans people deserve rights?’, and ‘is the man who said ‘I love Hitler’ really a Nazi?’ Truly inspiring journalism from an academic powerhouse.
Regularly, yes. Trans issues seem to be their biggest mis/disinformation. Then the immigration debate. Then their 3rd biggest is likely the fawning over Corbyn
Is unherd a reliable news source?
Here’s Private Eye, quoting Hadley Freeman’s resignation letter: [https://www.private-eye.co.uk/issue-1585/street-of-shame](https://www.private-eye.co.uk/issue-1585/street-of-shame)
Slightly ironic that commenters are calling out the Guardian for being anti trans when she’s leaving because they won’t let her express gender critical views (see also, Suzanne Moore)
Her interviews were one of the few reasons I still read the Guardian
Basically every newspaper in the country is, yes, but Unherd and Kathleen Stock can both fuck off too.
The Guardian is a toxic shitrag. Never believe anything you read in that toilet paper. Hypocrites and tosspot Daily.
What are all these nonsense arguments about being pro-trans, anti-trans, pro gender critical or whatever. Just let everyone be whoever they want to be and if they want to be someone who disagrees with you let them be that too. So long as they let you be you.
Making the headline statement, in the form of a question, is a classic case of trying to avoid being sued, when the article is baseless bullshit.
anti trans bias ranting about an online presence which comes across to me as anti trans
piss poor article
>As a highly-educated person with wider expertise and a sounder moral compass than many of your readers, you think it’s part of your job to anticipate the highly emotive and irrational ways in which ignorant people might react to certain bits of information, should they read them, and then adjust the information accordingly.
Patronising wanker.
I’m a feminist. I’ve always taken care to defend women and their access to spaces they have a sense of safety in but now if I say that “we must not undo decades of hard work in protecting and making possible safe spaces for women”, I get called ‘disgusting’. Others get violent threats without ever being heard. Cis men attack cis women who want to have a safe space away from men. I’m also a supporter of the lgbtq community but trying to *talk about the concerns of cis women results in them being dehumanised and subjected to misogyny of a brutal kind*.