A more elegant way of being awful

The British media's columnists and commentators were bothered by Sunak's trans jibe only because it made them feel awkward.

Previously: Absolute King shit.
The news of King Charles' cancer diagnosis has supercharged the papers' parasocial relationship with a man who hates them.

---

The culture wars have been such delicious red meat for vast sections for those one the right, precisely because it allows people to reduce really complex arguments, really important discussions to for or against, with or without, hate or love. The asylum is another one in question where you, again, have Suella Braverman talking about her dream to get rid of asylum seekers and put them on a plane to Rwanda. 

Even if this is something that many people want to see addressed as a problem in the country — illegal immigration that is. Even if a lot of people are wanting to find a solution, somehow this reductive language… ‘They are something to be hated.’ ‘Trans people are something to be laughed at.’ ‘The National Trust has gone woke.’ 

Have these discussions in a more elegant, more intelligent way, so you bring people with you, so they don’t just become the butt of jokes. Is that really the kind of humour that the Conservative Party find funny? I don’t believe it is. Not for most MPs, not for most of those in the Conservative Party. There’s really decent people on all sides of the house and yet the culture wars make you choose sides in things that actually require more time, more thought, and more compassion. 

— Emily Maitlis, The News Agents ‘Why is our Prime Minister making jokes about trans people?’ (7 Feb 2024)

---

Emily Maitlis’ monologue on yesterday’s episode of The News Agents sounds like a satire of centrist handwringing. It also vibrates with that Westminster insider tendency to argue politics is packed with excellent people, contrary to the persistent evidence of our eyes and ears. The hunt for the ‘good Tory’ is as fruitless as scouring Mauritius in search of a living dodo but it’s a pursuit that the British press will never quit.

Rishi Sunak’s trans jibe during PMQs was made while Esther Ghey, mother of the murdered schoolgirl Brianna Ghey, was in the building. She wasn’t yet in the actual chamber of the House of Commons as Keir Starmer claimed in his performatively angry response but even if she had been her presence shouldn’t have been the reason for the Prime Minister not to make his jibe. Nicola Sturgeon was right when she wrote on Twitter/X:

This was truly terrible from Sunak. But let’s not kid ourselves — had Brianna’s mum not been there today, no-one (including Keir Starmer) would have batted an eyelid. It’s not good enough to stand against transphobia when the mother of a a murdered trans girl might be listening. It needs to be done all of the time. 

Sunak’s line that Starmer had changed his position on “defining a woman, although in fairness that was only 99 per cent of a u-turn” referenced a Sunday Times interview given by the Labour leader in April 2023. He told Caroline Wheeler:

For 99.9 per cent of women, it is completely biological . . . and of course they haven’t got a penis. 

After a barrage of editorials in the press and endless talk radio monologues, Starmer hardened his position in July 2023 while appearing on Nicky Campbell’s show on BBC 5Live, saying, “Firstly, a woman is an adult female, so let’s clear that one up”. The line he used was chosen to echo the gender-critical slogan “adult human female” but did little to convince the intended audience.

Starmer clearly felt he was occupying the moral high ground when he responded to Sunak’s comments:

Of all the weeks to say that, when Brianna’s mother is in this chamber. Shame. Parading as a man of integrity when he’s got absolutely no responsibility. I think the role of the Prime Minister is to ensure that every single citizen in this country feels safe and respected, it’s a shame that the Prime Minister doesn’t share that. 

But Starmer himself has no more integrity than a plywood wall slapped up by a dodgy landlord in an overstuffed HMO. He’s triangulated on policies towards trans people but also wants to present himself as “a man of integrity”. He objected to Sunak’s sneering because Esther Ghey was in the building but shrugs off similar jokes every other week and allows similar rhetoric from his backbenchers and shadow cabinet alike.

As I was writing this edition, Sunak waved away a call for him to apologise from Peter Spooner, Brianna Ghey’s father, defended his comment as “absolutely legitimate” and said Starmer demonstrated “the worst of politics”. These are the “decent people” of Maitlis’ homily, whose positions would be just fine if only they were to express them in “a more elegant way”. It is the curse and comfort of the British liberal to care more about tone than content.

Newspapers that pump out constant streams of negative stories about trans people published leaders, sketches, and opinion columns today pretending that they are very concerned about kindness and civility. You’re meant to mock and demean minorities behind their backs and the backs of their families in a ‘witty’ way from the dispatch box and via columns in the Times and Daily Telegraph.

In the Telegraph, Madeline Grant who amplified the farcical ‘children identifying as cats’ story last summer squeezed out a few crocodile tears:

Still, this was a tin-eared blunder from Mr Sunak. So soon after the invoking of a grieving mother, his remarks looked witless, insensitive – showing that same lack of judgment under fire as the taking of [Piers] Morgan’s bet [on refugee numbers].

With ghoulish gusto, Sir Keir implied that the Prime Minister was being malicious, rather than simply tactless – even though the jibe came at Labour’s expense. None of this exchange was pretty, much of it was crass…

… Between the outrage and opportunism, this was not a day of much dignity for the House of Commons. 

What would Grant do all day if parliament was suddenly gripped by a spirit of dignity and compassion? The newspapers frequently call for a ‘better’ politics but they would be mortified if it came to pass. It would force them all to try a lot harder.

Meanwhile at The Times, which has made anti-trans content a mainstay of both its news section and columns, recently installed sketch-writer Tom Peck writes:

Sunak declined the many opportunities to apologise, but by the very end he had decided it would be wise to at least acknowledge Esther Ghey’s presence. He praised her, specifically, for “her compassion and her empathy”, two noble qualities which he had just accidentally demonstrated a complete lack of himself. As it happens, this didn’t really matter either. She wasn’t even listening to the prime minister, but was instead turned to her left and was in conversation with her local MP, Charlotte Nichols.

However many days Sunak has left in No 10, he has made two terrible mistakes this week that will haunt him for all of them.

I suspect that Sunak’s jibe will be forgotten by next week and that the moist-eyed calls for greater compassion will have evaporated along with it. Certainly a strong contingent in the Times comment section is outraged that Peck could even suggest that the Prime Minister was out of order.

The most unbelievable of today’s calls from decency comes from the Daily Mail’s leader column. It’s like Harold Shipman fronting a campaign for Age Concern or Josef Fritzl publishing a childcare guide. Under the headline Conduct the gender debate with dignity, the paper writes:

The dignity shown by the 16-year-old's devastated mother Esther has been extraordinary and moving. Why then did Sir Keir Starmer deliberately and cynically drag her into a political storm?

For Labour's leader to weaponise this tragedy in order to shut down discussion of gender ideology was truly reprehensible… 

… When Rishi Sunak sought to highlight his opponent's endless policy flip-flopping, he mocked Sir Keir's difficulty in 'defining a woman'… 

… It is disingenuous to accuse the PM of being disrespectful. 

Perhaps he was slightly tactless. But it is perfectly reasonable to condemn Brianna's murder while arguing that biological reality should be respected.

Sir Keir accuses Mr Sunak of insensitivity, but he is the one exploiting a family's bereavement for base political motives. For someone who claims to lead a compassionate party, it is the worst kind of opportunism.

To attack Starmer for “exploiting a family’s bereavement for base political motives”, the Mail … exploits a family’s bereavement for base political motives . It’s one of those irregular verbs again: “I criticise, he highlights, you weaponise…”

In a media culture where Ofcom just ruled that there were no issues with GB News’ scarf-obsessed scaremongerer Neil Oliver broadcasting baseless theories about non-existent ‘turbo-cancers’ in children, the faux-naivety of Matilis’ conclusion that “the culture wars make you choose sides in things that actually require more time, more thought, and more compassion” is maddening. The culture war industry is a machine for dehumanisation and soft-spoken liberal podcast hosts are as much part of it as hard-nosed Daily Mail leader writers and opportunistic politicians.

The difference between the Mail and The News Agents, Sunak and Starmer, isn’t so much about substance but delivery. Labour promises to be as cruel and dismissive as the Conservative Party but with more efficiency and a regretful look on its face while it does it. Rishi Sunak being railroaded into a bet about sending refugees to Rwanda is almost worse for most of these commentators than the policy itself.

The change that Britain’s commentariat is truly craving is from a Prime Minister and government who are clumsy in their cruelty to an administration that offers “a more elegant” way of being awful, a state whose brutality is kept well out of their eye lines and off their doorsteps. Sunak’s jibe bothered them yesterday because it created a sense of awkwardness. If Esther Ghey had been sat at home, the screaming horror of Westminster’s callous knockabout would have passed by with barely any comment, one line in a typical edition of Prime Minister’s Questions, professional wrestling for the professionally dull.

---

Please consider sharing this edition if you enjoyed it:

You can also follow me on Threads, BlueSky and/or TikTok.

If you haven’t yet, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription. You’ll get bonus editions and other exciting developments in 2024.

It helps and allows me to spend more money on research and reporting. Buy a t-shirt if you’d like to make a one-off contribution and get a t-shirt.