Misogyny, Meet Mendacity: Boris Johnson Takes Aim at Emily Maitlis and Misses - Spectacularly

Boris Johnson’s defence of Trump and takedown of Emily Maitlis reeks of toxic masculinity misplaced loyalty, and a transparent disdain for fearless journalism.

After a week that's included real-world work going, to put it gently, massively tits up, book admin coming out of my ears, and the United States deciding that "yes, we would like to see the guy who tried to overthrow a government as our president - how bad could it be?" - I have never been more grateful to reach a Saturday.

There's been a lot that's happened, a lot to digest, and more than enough to respond to, but today's special mention goes to Boris Johnson - from here-on known as "Bumble", because I refuse to take this man anymore seriously than he deserves. In his column this week (yes, I know I read them, someone has to), he's managed to make himself both absurd and offensive with a few paragraphs dripping with old-school, patronising disdain (while also trying to justify his being booted off the Channel 4 Election coverage¹).

And who's his target this time?

Emily Maitlis, a journalist with more integrity in her left pinky than Bumble has shown across his entire career.

Bumble kicks off his turgid tirade by calling Maitlis "Meltdown Maitlis" and describes her "gradual descent into madness." The misogyny here isn't even subtle; it's practically jumping off the page. To Bumble, Maitlis daring to call out Trump's antics or question the man's character is reason enough to dismiss her as "mad." Classic, isn't it? When a woman raises legitimate concerns, she's "hysterical"; but when men like Bumble bluster on with their selective amnesia and misplaced loyalties, they're somehow wise, reasoned voices.

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

This, of course, isn't new.

Dismissing women's opinions as "hysterical" is an all-too-common tactic used to undermine credibility, and we see it everywhere - from social media to so-called reputable columns. Take Ava Santina, who was dismissed by Laurence Fox as "unshaggable" - a crude, vile attempt to imply her opinions are worthless simply because he doesn't find her attractive. Or Marina Purkiss, who faces relentless flack for voicing her opinions, often dismissed not because of their merit but because she dares to be outspoken. Then there's Carol Vorderman, whose critiques are regularly overshadowed by misogynistic comments about her looks, reducing her to nothing more than a caricature instead of engaging with her ideas. Sangita Myska, too, has faced similar attacks, being repeatedly disrespected and dismissed for her strong and principled journalism. These attempts to belittle women who speak out show just how pervasive this issue remains - a deep, rotten instinct to discredit women by labelling them as emotional, hysterical, or simply not worth listening to.

Let's make one thing clear: Maitlis' career has been one of rigorous, fearless journalism. While Bumble was fumbling around, dabbling in dodgy metaphors, nattering on about bendy bananas and pretending to be a journalist², Maitlis was actually doing the job - asking the tough questions, holding power to account, and never shying away from what's uncomfortable. Bumble's cheap shot at her "kohl-rimmed eyes" is less about critique and more about undermining her credibility through misogynistic belittling. His taunts don't just reflect a lack of respect; they're designed to demean, to paint her as some caricature of a "hysterical woman" rather than a journalist who's simply better at the job than Bumble ever was.

But, the column isn't merely about belittling women - it's also a heartfelt plea to all of his readers to consider Trump through what can only be described as the rosiest of tinted glasses. According to Bumble, we should be applauding Trump for his "sheer guts and resilience." What sheer guts? The guts to incite an insurrection? To try and destroy the very foundations of democracy because he couldn't stomach losing? Bumble deftly glosses over Trump's blatant attempts to sabotage the last election, his utter disdain for democratic norms, and his well-documented misogyny. Instead, Bumble tries to sell us a portrait of Trump as the misunderstood underdog hero. And when it comes to Trump's appalling record with women? Bumble is eerily silent. He skips over Trump's treatment of women - the bragging about sexual assault, the unending disdain for women's autonomy - as if these were mere footnotes rather than the very essence of the man's character.

Bumble's willingness to whitewash Trump isn't just ignorant; it's dangerous. His pathetic attempt to elevate Trump as some benevolent "protector" while dismissing Maitlis as emotional is more than misguided - it is reckless, and it feeds into the same narrative Trump has peddled for years. This narrative where anyone who dares challenge him is "unhinged" or "weak," and where women who stand up to him are simply too irrational to grasp his so-called brilliance. It's a narrative that emboldens authoritarianism, sows distrust in truth, and marginalises voices that we desperately need right now.

Bumble's column does exactly what he criticises Maitlis for: it trades on sentimentality and empty platitudes while completely sidestepping reality. But the difference is, Maitlis calls attention to dangerous truths, while Bumble distracts us from them. His praise of Trump's supposed courage and strength isn't just misguided; it's an endorsement of the worst impulses in politics - authoritarianism, misogyny, and shameless disregard for democratic values. It is a disgraceful attempt to manipulate public perception, to feed the public lies wrapped up in faux bravado and nostalgia for a time when men like Bumble and Trump could go unchallenged.

So let's call this what it is. Bumble's takedown of Maitlis is more than just sour grapes; it is an abject display of the deep-seated misogyny that men like him have clung to for far too long. It's a sad, sexist, and cowardly attempt to dismiss a formidable woman simply because her voice threatens the fragile ego of men who cannot bear to have their lies challenged or their hypocrisy exposed. Bumble’s rhetoric reeks of the kind of toxic masculinity that dismisses any woman who dares to speak with authority as "hysterical" - an old, tired trope designed to silence women through condescension and degradation.

This isn't just about Maitlis either. It’s about every woman who has had her intelligence questioned, her credibility undermined, and her voice dismissed simply because it speaks truth to power. Bumble’s attack isn’t merely a personal vendetta; it's part of a systemic effort to maintain a patriarchal status quo that keeps women "in their place." He isn't just belittling Maitlis - he's perpetuating the kind of dangerous rhetoric that emboldens other men to see strong, intelligent women as threats to be crushed.

By propping up this narrative, Bumble is aligning himself with the worst aspects of political and social discourse: the parts that encourage dismissing valid criticism with misogynistic slurs, the parts that feed off belittling women as a way to uphold male fragility. He is doing his part to reinforce a world where strong women are "mad," legitimate concerns are trivialised, and dangerous, unaccountable men are held up as misunderstood "protectors." He stands not just as an antagonist to Maitlis, but as a symbol of the very attitudes that drag society backwards, away from progress and equality.

Emily Maitlis has earned her place by doing the work that matters, the kind that pushes back against men like Trump - and, let's be honest, men like Bumble, too. She doesn't need validation from someone who has spent his career bumbling from one scandal to another, wrapped in his own warped delusions of grandeur. Her journalism stands as a reminder of what we need right now: truth, resilience, and accountability. Bumble, meanwhile, can keep his taunts to himself. We have a world to make sense of, and we'd do well to leave men like him behind in the dust, where they belong.

---

Footnotes:

¹ Bumble’s predictable exit from the Channel 4 coverage wasn’t, as he’d have us believe, about some all-important flight back to Washington. No, it was about flogging his book. In the midst of a historic election, Bumble’s primary concern was making sure his latest masterpiece got as much screen time as possible. Now, I know I’ve been relentlessly plugging Bear Necessities, but at least I’m not defending would-be despots or tearing down fellow journalists in the process.

²Let’s not forget that Bumble’s own record as a journalist is hardly above reproach. From fabricating quotes as a reporter to peddling misinformation, his career has been peppered with journalistic scandals that show just how little regard he has for the integrity Maitlis embodies. While she has built a reputation for holding power to account, Bumble’s record reflects a pattern of self-serving spin, dubious accuracy, and a flagrant disregard for journalistic standards. It’s no wonder he resorts to petty jabs - he simply can’t compete with the professionalism and ethical standards that Maitlis upholds.

---