Guardian reporter says you're a 'fascist' if you disagree with transgender agenda as leftists pile on controversial New York Times op-ed



A reporter with The Guardian called anyone who disagrees with transgenderism a "fascist" in comments complaining about how U.S. and U.K. media covers transgender issues.

Julia Carrie Wong, a technology reporter for Guardian US who is based in San Francisco, on Sunday said it is "deeply disturbing" that "the UK media status quo of transphobia" is entering U.S. news media in what she called a "bigotry creep."

"I think that we’re entering a period when the most meaningful political distinction will be fascist and anti-fascist," Wong tweeted. "It’s really important to understand that transphobia is one of the most potent entry points to fascism today - and act accordingly."

\u201cI think that we\u2019re entering a period when the most meaningful political distinction will be fascist and anti-fascist. It\u2019s really important to understand that transphobia is one of the most potent entry points to fascism today - and act accordingly.\u201d
— Julia Carrie Wong (@Julia Carrie Wong) 1656853290

Wong's comments were made after the New York Times published an opinion article Sunday that stirred controversy on the left.

The article by Pamela Paul, entitled "The Far Right and Far Left Agree on One Thing: Women Don’t Count," argued that the far-left is alienating women by erasing womanhood to be accepting of transgender people. Paul is the editor of the New York Times Book Review.

"Those on the right who are threatened by women’s equality have always fought fiercely to put women back in their place. What has been disheartening is that some on the fringe left have been equally dismissive, resorting to bullying, threats of violence, public shaming and other scare tactics when women try to reassert that right," Paul wrote.

"Tolerance for one group need not mean intolerance for another. We can respect transgender women without castigating females who point out that biological women still constitute a category of their own — with their own specific needs and prerogatives," she argued.

Her opinion was trashed by Wong, who accused her of harboring bigotry towards gender dysphoric males who identify as female.

"One thing about the policy of legacy publications to ban their employees from being honest about their political opinions in public is that a person can rise to an incredibly powerful position in an industry without anyone being the wiser about their biases and bigotries," Wong tweeted.

"[T]ruly wild how full on she is now tho. like every damn week it’s anti-woke on blast," she added in apparent reference to Paul.

"She's a Bari Weiss cover band!" replied standup comic Josh Gondelman, comparing Paul to Bari Weiss, a former New York Times opinion writer who resigned from the paper after alleging her coworkers harassed her not being sufficiently far-left.

Other progressive reporters bashed Paul's column on Sunday.

"That NYT op-ed equating inclusive language to widespread legislative oppression is a reminder that many white, cis women would rather gatekeep and maintain privilege than work in solidarity with other groups. Patriarchy is crushing us, but y'all wanna play both-sides pattycake," Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah said.

She added, "I'm a cis woman who is clearly able to see that we are under a system-wide assault on bodily autonomy and reproductive rights.

"We will need a politics of solidarity and community building to resist this, which is not something that white women have historically had to do."

Jennifer Rubin, the Washington Post's "conservative" columnist who isn't a political conservative under any definition of the term, replied to Attiah's tweet and called Paul's op-ed "appalling."

\u201c@KarenAttiah it's appalling\u201d
— Karen Attiah (@Karen Attiah) 1656866592

Edward Ongweso Jr., a staff writer at Motherboard, called Paul's op-ed "a deeply stupid grafting of UK TERF arguments onto the U.S.," agreeing with Wong.

\u201cpamela paul\u2019s op-ed is a deeply stupid grafting of UK TERF arguments onto the US. the left saying trans women are women is analogous to the right\u2019s war on women? (white) women & their concerns are being erased? fluid gender identities reinforce misogyny? vapid filth\u201d
— Edward Ongweso Jr (@Edward Ongweso Jr) 1656860773

TERF is an acronym for "transgender exclusionary reactionary feminist," a derogatory epithet thrown at any woman who disagrees with the left's transgender dogma.

The slur was used against Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, who is an outspoken critic of transgender political activists' demands to let men into women's restrooms and other spaces if they identify as female. Leftists accused Rowling of bigotry and transphobia because she disagreed with their politics.

But as Wong's comments demonstrate, name-calling to delegitimize political opponents is standard operating procedure for the left. Anyone who disagrees is a "fascist."

CNN's April Ryan suggests media should ignore info that damages Biden, gets summarily torched



Reporter April Ryan, a political analyst for CNN, is being condemned for suggesting on Thursday that journalists should not expose contradictions between what Joe Biden says privately and what he says publicly.

Ryan's comments came after The Intercept obtained and reported on leaked audio of Biden admitting that Republicans "beat the hell out of" Democrats during last month's election for generally embracing the "defund the police" agenda.

The Biden transition team later defended the remarks, despite the comments rebuking the progressive vision for criminal justice reform.

What did Ryan say?

In response to the leaked audio, Ryan suggested the real story behind the remarks is why they were leaked.

"The question is who leaked this and why? Also I am told by a rights leader in that meeting that @JoeBiden was being more so passionate than defensive. Can't wait to hear what the Biden camp has to say!" Ryan tweeted.

The question is who leaked this and why? Also I am told by a rights leader in that meeting that @JoeBiden was being… https://t.co/LpLN6L2mTu
— AprilDRyan (@AprilDRyan)1607625541.0

Ryan later doubled down on that sentiment, again questioning why Biden's comments were leaked.

"I asked an incoming White House source was the meeting contentious with civil rights leader and @JoeBiden and the answer was 'no'. A rights leader at the meeting says @JoeBiden was passionate. The question is who taped this meeting and why? What is the agenda?" Ryan said.

What was the reaction?

Vice journalist Edward Ongweso Jr. highlighted the absurdity of Ryan's response to the leaked audio by mocking her reaction.

Ongweso tweeted:

It is irresponsible and sets a dangerous precedent for journalists covering the incoming administration to be able to use secretly recorded conversations in their stories. To parse out Biden's thoughts and anticipate his policy commitments, you must go through proper channels. The White House Press Secretary, the spokespeople for the President and Vice President, senior officials (without attribution), and the President's public statements are all designated and responsible sources for information about the President's thoughts and intentions. Revealing a contradiction between Biden's private thoughts and public statements is dangerous because it erodes public trust in the President, the Office, and the media itself.

Ryan, however, apparently did not understand that she was being mocked, replying, "You hit the nail on the head! This is not good at all."

folks...I can’t https://t.co/9JaA27rdhV
— Edward Ongweso Jr (@Edward Ongweso Jr)1607717229.0

Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School and self-described "liberal," also tore into Ryan, calling her reaction to the leaked audio something that "would make a Stalinist propagandist blush."

"The fact is that Ryan was just stating what has become the approach of many in the media. As we recently discussed, we are moving dangerously close to a de facto state media with the cooperation of Big Tech companies," Turley wrote. "Ryan believes that it is outrageous to rely on unapproved material if it is critical of Joe Biden (despite her use of such material for the last four years against Trump)."