One long pity party
Another woman-hating creep who works for Pink News.
But what is this “relentless targeting”? The opening of Moore’s article:
It is March 2020. For several months now I have been trying to write something — anything — about the so-called “trans debate” in my Guardian column. But if I ever slip a line in about female experience belonging to people with female bodies, and the significance of this, it is always subbed out. It is disappeared. Somehow, this very idea is being blocked, not explicitly, but it certainly isn’t being published. My editors say things like: “It didn’t really add to the argument”, or it is a “distraction” from the argument.
Shock-horror she tried to talk about female experience belonging to people with female bodies, and the significance of this, but the Guardian wouldn’t let her.
(I have to say, I was shocked by the subbing out and the patronizing explanations. It’s her damn column, she gets to make her argument the way she wants to.)
So Ryan John Butcher is in a towering rage at Suzanne Moore because she wanted to talk about the significance of female experience. So much for solidarity eh? Intersection of Me and Me, and don’t you forget it, laydeez.
She didn’t lie, she didn’t bully anyone. The 338 colleagues who signed that open letter trashing her on the other hand…
I want to immediately donate to Tanya Gold’s patreon, and simultaneously call in a bird-poop strike on Ryan.
I have read Suzanne Moore’s whole piece, which is alarming. The sheer craven-ness of the Guardian in this case is appalling. And there it is pretending to the voice of enlightenment. I admit to being a subscriber, since I agree with some of its positions at least, and the positions of some of its ‘opinion’ writers, among whom was Suzanne Moore, whose honesty and intelligence I admire.
The thing that leaps off the page for me is his constant dishonesty.
John’s representation of Suzanne’s position: “I’VE BEEN SILENCED!!!!” and “i’m being bullied and silenced and cancelled!!!!”
The words he quotes in support of this: “I was bullied for saying women should not be silenced.” and “We are living in a world in which it is increasingly difficult to say certain things.”
.
John’s representation: “i never went into the office and my boss kept wanting to take me out for lunch”
Suzanne’s quoted words: “I naively thought I would be defended, because that’s what’s always happened at other newspapers. I thought a public statement would be issued making clear this letter-writing business was not on. What happened was, the editor offered to take me out to lunch.”
Dude is just a liar.
Even in this piece by Peter Wilby, strongly supportive of Moore, that error creeps in. ‘Moore received death and rape threats on social media, but was not censored or “cancelled”.’ She didn’t claim she was cancelled. She did note some excessive editing and pressure to cover different issues, actions I think meet the bar for “censorship”, but that wasn’t her claim, either, I don’t think.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/11/first-thoughts-how-suzanne-moore-split-guardian