attack on mumsnet, anyone seen this? thoughts?

[cleoteacher]

www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9977902/Poor-Amanda-is-right-about-Mumsnets-angry-brigade.html

[footflapper]

I'm still trying to find the original thread from AH. Can someone link please?

[blondieminx]

Meh... Not clicking in that article to give them more traffic.

Perhaps the lazy journo would find more heartwarming/positive stories here

[ClaraOswald]

Why are journalists feeling so threatened by this site?

Maybe if they did some actual research and stayed well away from aibu, they would actually see what the site is about?

[tribpot]

The article's a week old, so presumably was one of the ones written at the time of AH's initial comments. blondie's link is more relevant, I think.

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

"600,000 registered users are more judgemental than a Fifties suburban housewife, more negative than a BBC commentator discussing Tory cuts"

She's quite right :) Stumble into the wrong section with an opinion that goes against the received wisdom and it's a pretty hair-parting experience. Not saying it's a bad thing but it's certainly not for the faint-hearted.

[AnnieLobeseder]

There has been a thread going on this for a week.

[boxershorts]

Its just a diiferent set of manners

[slug]

Because, fundamentally, newspapers are very uncomfortable with the concept of women having ideas and opinions and being prepared to defend them. Especially when those ideas challenge the stereotype of the "Mummy".

We are all supposed to lose our ambition and brains the minute sperm hits the egg.

[DeepRedBetty]

Very soon DT links will have to join DM links as To Be Avoided. Which will leave me with very few options... is there such a thing as an intelligent paper that isn't left wing left for me to read?