Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

The friend cull article is insane.

If you actually don't value people, don't make an effort to see them. If you do, then maybe do.

That's about it.

pinefox write for the guardian

He can't. Suzanne Moore is still writing for them.

Is that confirmed? I thought her incoherent posts meant they had parted ways.

yeah I thought she had quit and then spotted her 'not sorry' piece. they really are out to bait.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/10/i-wish-everyone-strength-however-they-identify-suzanne-moore?CMP=share_btn_tw

yep, it still says Suzanne Moore is a Guardian columnist under today's piece.

UGH

Read the first sentences and fuck’s sake. Why can these fuckers never stop reducing women to their body parts?! I was raised to think that kind of thing was reductive and at best misogynistic. Like, being female is more than your ability to bleed and breed ffs.

Like she has literally never got past the self-mythologising and the symbolism and I bet she’s 100% one of those people who used to scoff at people painting with period blood, but now sees that with a fresh respect. I’m sorry, I hate it.

i would love to live in a world made only of discourse.

i would love to live in a world made only of discourse.

Yeah that is a joke. Promise me to haul me off if I ever start spouting nonsense like this, as I'll probably have lost my mind.

Apart from the very true points you already mae Gyac, what also annoys me about her pieces is that they're lathered with this sense of 'last woman standing' faux courage. She's posturing as some self proclaimed Jeanne d'Arc ffs.

A Tanya Gold comment piece on the same day, truly our cup runneth over.

Are you talking about the Woody Allen piece, because “he wasn’t convicted” is an argument you’d expect to see on Reddit and not being made in earnest by people being paid for their opinions.

No, something about the Royals that’s probably completely inoffensive other than that it points to the Guardian commissioning Tanya Gold again.

Is Tanya Gold worse than she used to be?

What the fuck is with sour terfs and their rush to defend Woody Allen? I thought the whole reason they were terfs was because they were always trying to justify their bigotry by saying they were worried about men raping women and children?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESvkYt-XQAEZ7uw?format=png&name=large

I think a lot of it is linked with controversies regarding the no-platforming of certain views.

“Should small children in poverty be fed?” asks the Guardian. https://t.co/yg3NpmXWmM

— Dawn Foster (@DawnHFoster) March 10, 2020

asking the big questions here so the Taxpayers Alliance don't have to.

People are dying you self-centred fool

Just want all colleagues I know personally who signed a letter without naming me but linking me to trans people leaving The Guardian (I never go there ) None of you have the guts to talk to me or defend free expression. You are entitled to disagree with me as I am to name you.

— suzanne moore (@suzanne_moore) March 18, 2020

finger on the pulse as always

Apparently she’s saved ‘abusive’ DMs from a colleague she’s allowing her followers to think is OJ.

A good friend of mine is friends with her on FB and he says all her social media acolytes respond to self-pitying status updates with the most sick-making level of arse-kissing he’s ever seen.

Gosh, can’t believe terfs are ok with the bit of casual homophobia. Totally out of character.

As far as I can see, that tweet is illiterate.

This person is a long-standing professional writer.

(Leaving aside, as Gyac says, the utter irrelevance of the complaint at this time of seemingly unprecedented global disaster. Astounding.)

Blame the psychedics

Psychedelics are supposed to obliterate the ego

Some people need bigger doses than others I guess

Some people are bigger doses...

Bingo

New development! I am reliably informed that SM has a little list... and uploaded it so all her FB friends could see it and kiss her arse harder,

There's a grim fascination in how their actions undercut their arguments

"I'm not hateful, I'm speaking my mind" *continues to do hateful shit*

having a normal one pic.twitter.com/v5KaU1eRW5

— Cynical Bathtub (@cynical_bathtub) March 19, 2020

It's amazing that she keeps hammering the fact that she never goes to the Guardian offices, as if that's going to make trans employees any less uncomfortable about working there.

Even more amazing that she thinks this looks like anything other than a monumental self-indulgence at this particular time.

Once again, this professional writer cannot write.

Otherwise: reminiscent of Father Ted collecting his Golden Cleric award.

Oh the irony.

xp 😅

Sarah D*tum all snippy about being a better writer than the signatories in the letter and OH WELL THEY WON’T COMMISSION ME NOW.

Babe, I’ve seen more literate FB hunnis and Twitter reply guys in just a random hour of social media use.

Suzy's right!

I looked at the document as a useful guide to cool commissioning editors.

I looked at the document as a useful guide to cool commissioning editors.

Sarah D*t*m couldn’t write a post-it, idk where she gets these notions. Some of the worst game writing I’ve ever read (maybe I was spoiled by growing up reading Digitiser but I sincerely doubt it).

She’s been in a terfy white-feminist circle-jerk for a decade, where do you think she gets ideas above her station?

Otherwise: reminiscent of Father Ted collecting his Golden Cleric award.

LOL, this is so perfect.

Anyone else look at this today and wonder if John Harris was now producing all of their video content under a number of different guises?

https://i.imgur.com/GvG8ORa.jpg

Crace has always been unfunny, a buffoon at best. Running this tripe is just an abject failure at an editorial level. https://t.co/aqKRj5Wsry

— James Mackenzie (@mrjamesmack) April 2, 2020

god bless the grownups

fellow grauner Chakraborty pointed out earlier that rather than being admirable, his action more exposes the pernicious lie that "NHS debt" always was.

looks like Suzanne Moore has gone off the internet because of psychedics you

Crace still isn’t as bad as Michael White was but that’s an almost impossibly low bar to crawl under. The Hancock piece is garbage.

I see Katy Balls of the Spectator is being given an increasingly prominent role as a political commentator.

I don't think the Hancock piece is the worst ever, but at the heart of it is this:

To fend off ongoing criticism of the government’s testing programme by committing to 100,000 tests per day by the end of the month.

Given that the government has consistently missed even its own piss-poor targets – we’re struggling to manage 10,000 tests a day at the moment – it was understandable that most of the questions were on whether 100,000 was hopelessly optimistic. But Matt was adamant. He couldn’t exactly promise how many of the tests would be antibody and and how many antigen, but 100,000 was the hill he was prepared to die on. No more bullshit. No more obfuscation. A real target with his job on the line if he failed to deliver.

The article praises MH for promising so many tests, even as it notes that it is unlikely that they will happen.

It notes that he has promised these tests and put his job on the line (?). But assuming that this number of tests doesn't happen, which is likely, will the same commentator point this out and demand that MH resign in, say, a week?

No.

The government has repeatedly promised things and not done them, has mismanaged this crisis very dangerously and damagingly, and here they are being praised for more of the same BS.

That doesn't make sense.