Features

Feminism is over, the battle is won. Time to move on

It should be celebrating its triumphs. Instead it has descended into pointless attention-seeking

24 October 2015

9:00 AM

24 October 2015

9:00 AM

It would be easy to believe from the papers these days that women have never been more oppressed. From the columnist Caitlin Moran to the comedian Bridget Christie, a new creed is preached: that we are the victims, not the victors, of the sex war. Feminists claim we are objectified by the builder’s whistle, that a strange man attempting to flirt with us is tantamount to sexual assault. Suddenly, just as it seemed we women were about to have it all, a new wave of feminists has begun to portray us as feeble-minded — unable to withstand a bad date, let alone negotiate a pay rise.

Worse still, they are ditching what was best about the feminist tradition: solidarity with the sisterhood and the freedom of every woman to do as she pleased. Feminism 4.0 consists of freely attacking other women over, erm, crucial issues such as bikini waxing, wearing stilettos and page three of the Sun. Moran writes that it is childbirth that ‘turns you from a girl into a woman’ (causing every woman in my office to snort involuntarily) and that feminism will only triumph ‘when a woman goes up to collect the Oscar for Best Actress in shoes that aren’t killing her’. The revolution will be televised, with ‘Nicole Kidman in flip-flops’.

Well, if this is feminism, then feminism is dead, and the triviality of the fights feminists pick is the surest proof of its demise. What started as a genuine crusade against genuine prejudice has become a form of pointless attention-seeking.

I was born in 1983, and was fortunate to grow up in a country where it was blindingly obvious that women ruled: with a queen on the throne and a woman in Downing Street. I was a grocer’s daughter, educated at a state school, living in the flat above the shop, and I looked to that real feminist icon Margaret Thatcher as objective proof that I could get wherever the hell I wanted in life, provided I sharpened my wits and gave it my all. I knew, without having to be told, that where you were born was not necessarily where you’d end up, because Maggie, facing far greater odds, bulldozed every obstacle foolish enough to stand in her way with sheer bloodymindedness and an attitude that screamed ‘never say die’. Feminists in the West, if they had any sense, would stop moaning and whingeing, order Germaine Greer a crown of laurels, stick her on a four-horse chariot, and march her in triumph through the streets of Rome so she that could offer a blood sacrifice to Emmeline Pankhurst. The totemic battles were hard fought — and they were won. The next generation should be encouraged to enjoy the spoils, not worry old wounds.

Today, girls outperform boys at school — and have done since the mid-1970s. They are more likely to get five good GCSEs. A third of them go to university, compared with just a quarter of men. Once in university, they do better and are significantly more likely to graduate with a first or 2:1 degree. And equality? In many courses, it has gone a bit beyond that. Last year, women constituted 55 per cent of those enrolling in courses in medicine and dentistry and 62 per cent of those enrolling in law. Business, banking and the professions may be dominated by men today but, judging by the rapidity of our ascent, this won’t last long. As Boris Johnson has observed, when my generation reach the peak of our careers, the entire management structure of Britain will have been transformed — and feminised.

[Alt-Text]


Since the suffragettes won us the vote, women have made greater strides than men have made in millennia. In fact, the demographic doing worst in schools is white boys on free school meals — only a quarter of whom gained five decent GCSE grades. So yes, there are gender equality issues — but they are deeply unfashionable. Who will wave placards, or lie on the carpet of film premieres, for the cause of under-performing boys?

Most self-styled feminists argue that we still struggle in the workplace. On close inspection this isn’t borne out either. Women in their twenties have out-earned men in for the last few years; now the under-40s are doing so as well. The speed of our trajectory is startling. Across Europe and America, and particularly in Scandinavia, women are pushing their way on to executive boards and into the seats of power. The French government has passed a law which will require that two in five executive board members of the largest public companies are women. Feminists argue we need quotas in this country, too, but isn’t there a sweeter triumph in the sisters doing it for themselves?

So the next generation have everything to play for — if only they aren’t encouraged to view themselves as helpless victims at the mercy of an insuperable patriarchy. Only 19 per cent identify as feminist nowadays, which perhaps isn’t surprising since it’s become so dull. In the 1970s, feminists were ball-breaking, ass-kicking, devil-may-care thinkers — the likes of Greer, Gloria Steinem and Susan Sontag. Now the ‘voice of a generation’ is Harry Potter star Emma Watson, who delivered a highly praised speech to the UN, lamenting that her girlfriends had given up competitive sport because they were worried it might make their arms look ‘muscly’.

But while Watson frets about the tyranny of the male gaze, it’s being eyeballed by a feminist which is truly terrifying. These middle–class aesthetes love to boss other — particularly working-class — women around, sneering at how they dress and behave. They disapprove of Beyoncé and Rihanna flaunting their beautiful -bodies in pop videos with a vehemence you might expect from the Taleban. In April, an advert featuring a busty model appeared on the Tube, with the tagline: ‘Are you beach body ready?’ Within hours it had been defaced; within days 44,000 signatures had been appended to a petition demanding it be removed. Making sure women are covered up in public, so their bare flesh doesn’t offend anyone, is something you’d expect in Saudi Arabia, not here, where we should be free to dress as provocatively as we please.

Why shouldn’t we wear make-up, stockings and suspenders if we like? From Elizabeth I to Bette Davis, women have considered lipstick, high heels and killer hairdos to be legitimate weapons in our arsenal, as effective, in their own way, as crossbows and bazookas. But new feminists are determined to drain the fun from life, and illustrate how awful it is to be a woman in the UK.

Another challenge girls apparently quail at is trolling on the internet. So let’s say you have received threats from some maladjusted loser who disagrees with something you’ve said. Should you call the police? Abandon Twitter? Or perhaps relish the insults, in the manner of Maggie, who said: ‘I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding. It means they have not a single political argument left.’

Alternatively, you could remain impervious to insult entirely, like rock goddess Chrissie Hynde, who last month was trolled by feminists after confessing that she had suffered a sex attack aged 21 and took ‘full responsibility’ for it. Twitter lit up with the unedifying spectacle of hundreds of women attacking her for expressing her honest opinion, until even the Guardian’s Julie Bindel felt moved to point out that Hynde herself was ‘not a rapist’. Hynde’s magisterial response? ‘If you don’t want my opinion, don’t ask for it.’

But when it comes to sex, new feminists are excessively squeamish, so much so that one timid male, Samuel Fishwick (24, 6ft 3in, GSOH) has compiled a guide to romance in the age of equality. Approaching the -Vagenda blog for advice, he was roundly informed that a man must never ask a woman to meet him for a drink at a location near his abode: ‘It makes women think you’re going to turn their skin into a lampshade.’

Does it, though? Or are feminists exaggerating ridiculously — spending so much time dwelling on their own vaginas that they fail to use their brains? Surely we should be revelling in the fact we’re the ‘second sex’ no longer, and teaching our girls how to rely on what Emily Bronte called our ‘no coward’ souls.

Emily Hill is a freelance writer. The Evening Standard Londoner’s Diary had her gatecrash a funeral and the Mail on Sunday sent her down a sewer.

More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 6 issues delivered for just £6, with full web and app access. Join us.


Show comments
  • mmac1968

    I find it strange how most feminists are nearly all white middle class university types. The demand for safe spaces and the refusal to listen to debate which counters their own world view belittles real women. And don’t get me started about “rape culture”, it exists in the middle East and parts of Asia but not here. I like most men find this term offensive and like most men we would defend any women against attack. (assuming these screaming banshees would allow us too)

    • cartimandua

      Try listening to the young.

      • Tom Prescott

        You mean the young who overwhelmingly reject this feminist hysteria?

      • Mr B J Mann

        You mean the immature?

      • Mark Chambers

        Why the young? What about older women who fought real sexism. The problem is the war is won. How about listening to the truely disadvantaged, white young males who are failing at every level because they are a cause no one cares about.

      • lloydg

        Lol, men or women..?

        Not sure what young women are saying, but the boys are running as far away from women as they can get, except for physical satisfaction.

        We will have a generation where many women will go childless and/or manless for most of their lives.

        It wil have to happen before this insanity is over.

        There will have to be pain to motivate a change, and this generation will have about 30% of women that will be alone.

        Hopefully the younger girls can learn from these mistakes.

    • Sunshine Sux

      They would never dare ‘criticise’ adherents from the women-abusing religion of peace, because they’d be mass raped, tortured, mutilatedand then probably set on fire.

    • C-4

      They push “safe spaces” to disarm and marginalize critics of their groupthink Cultural Marxism. It’s easier to propagate their lies when nobody can legally challenge you. Just “no platform” all your potential opposition so you can continue proselytizing without interference.

    • Tom Prescott

      Why does eliminating men make a “safe space”? Why do men not deserve to feel safe too and where is the safe space for them?

      • Mr. E

        Good question. Too bad you’ll never get an answer.

  • cartimandua

    We have women in this country who “cover” making themselves and their children ill. There are 10s of thousands of little girls at risk of FGM. There are 10s of thousands of girls and some boys born here at risk of forced marriage.
    There are still inequalities around physical safety for all women. There are 86,000 rapes per year and only 1000 actual convictions.
    There is a culture amongst the young raised on po** nastier than most people can imagine.
    Boys expect that girls like to be hurt.
    So no Emily. Its not all fine now.
    And as far as “normal people ” go. Even when in full time work women still do the majority of work in the house usually excused because “her job” pays less.
    The problem with all that for chaps is that if the marriage breaks down she gets the kids. He has to keep earning and she has practiced parenting more.

    • Tom Prescott

      “There are 10s of thousands of little girls at risk of FGM”

      And vastly more males at risk of male genital mutilation, a.k.a. circumcision. And before you say that is not as bad as with females, I agree, but it is still a mutilation of their genitals and is is not as harmless as many are led to believe.

      “There are still inequalities around physical safety for all women. ”

      They inequality part is actualyl the other way around. Men are VASTLY more likely to be the victim of violence than women.

      “There are 86,000 rapes per year and only 1000 actual convictions.”

      And how many male rapes are there? Since the law doesn’t count it as rape when a woman forces herself on a man, it is impossible to know. On another point, in the USA, there are more men raped than women (due to prison culture). That is the real “Rape Culture” and no-one cares about it. People even openly make jokes about it.

      “There is a culture amongst the young raised on po** nastier than most people can imagine.”

      Agreed this is a massive problem ,I wonder why you assume that it harms girls more than boys though, there is no reason to suggest this, since it is consumed more by boys than by girls so it is boys who are more likely to have their views distorted as to what is normal sex than it is girls.

      “And as far as “normal people ” go. Even when in full time work women still do the majority of work in the house usually excused because “her job” pays less.”

      The reason why women tend to get paid less has been analysed to death and all serious statistical analysis shows that this is the result of different choices women make. If women choose more pleasant but lower paying jobs then good luck to them but then they can’t complain that the pay is less, that is the trade off they have made.

      “The problem with all that for chaps is that if the marriage breaks down she gets the kids. He has to keep earning and she has practiced parenting more.”

      I am glad women have more opportunity for career advancement now but it does seem to have come to some extent at the expense of child welfare.
      Indeed, perhaps it would be better to go back to a system where only one breadwinner is normal, to leave the other parent to look after the kids? Doesn’t matter which way round gender wise, although I suspect in the majority of cases it would be the traditional way, but that can be up to each couple to decide. The problem seems to be the pressure and expectation and now, financial necessity of two breadwinners, which was something feminism started.

      • Mr B J Mann

        An Economist (and for those who haven’t read it: it is a pretty lefty rag) report, produced by a team of women writers, admitted that among a load of other things, women, even single childless ones, would rather work a four day week than fight their way up the greasy pole!

    • Mr B J Mann

      86,000 rapes?!

      The last “verified” figure I saw was 55,000.

      And the got that by surveying the sisterhood and by extrapolation “proving” that tens of thousands were “raped” by their partners because they felt “forced” to have sex because they were “afraid” that if they didn’t “submit” to sex when”they didn’t feel like it” their partners might cheat or leave them?!

      I suppose they have finally officially recognised that wolf whistles are sexual assaults and all sexual assaults are rapes?!?!?!!!!

    • Strazdas

      none of the numbers you posted are even remotely true. and everyone knows it.

  • Michael R.

    Men dying in the trenches in World War I gave the vote to all people in their countries. At least in Great Britain and Germany.
    Suffragettes would have been ok with only white upper middle class women getting the vote.

    • Tom Prescott

      Well recently they protested outside the movie “suffragette” about domestic violence shelter cuts. What they don’t tell you is that the reason they are getting funding cuts is that they fell foul of equality laws (ironically lobbied for by feminists who thought it shouldn’t have to apply to them). There is not a single shelter in the country for male domestic violence victims which is discriminatory. they were told to cater to men too of face cuts. They refused. They would literally prefer to help less women than help men as well, that is how discriminatory and hateful they have become. So people should understand, that scene they created on that red carpet was a hateful protest for their right to continue to discriminate against men.

      • Michael R.

        Which movie? What protests? Are you actually saying there’s a moive a about those women? What next, portraing women handing out white feathers to fifteen year old boys as heroes?
        Voting rights in UK were largly reformed after WW1 and because of WW1. I think it was property based before that.
        I’m also refering to the German soldiers and workers who kicked out the kaiser. Also a very restricted voting system. Drafted soldiers and state employed people didn’t have voting rights.

      • Mark Chambers

        The same dogma by the government allowed the Catholic adoption agency to collapse. The single biggest addoption group was refused help because they would not consider gay parents. The children lost out.

    • Mr B J Mann

      And the Suffragettes, including Pankhurst, spent their spare time dishing out white feathers to men and boys, neither of which usually had the vote themselves, if they conscientiously objected to dying in the trenches for their womenfolk, or came back with she’ll shock!

  • Dryermartinithanyours

    Great piece, completely valid comparison between Islam and leftist feminism which is more than accidental, since they are indeed cousins in righteousness, explaining the empathy the Western left imagines it has with its mortal enemy. Very telling, too, is that this piece necessarily comes from a woman, since men are all so cowed and cowardly, though feminists referred to the likes of Cartimandua would say Emily suffers from false consciousness. I very much like the illustration, too, given that in the first decades of 20th century, many feminists regarded their contemporary equivalents of Feminism 4.0 as the – and I quote – “screeching sisterhood.”

    • Tom Prescott

      “feminists referred to the likes of Cartimandua would say Emily suffers from false consciousness.”

      I thought they called it “Internalised Misogony”?

      • cartimandua

        Uncle Tom was what came to mind. Shes all right Jack the eck with anyone else.
        She hasn’t noticed that work is in opposition to parenting (whichever gender the parent is) or that globalism threatens the gender equality of northern Europe and the West.

  • Richard Eldritch

    I for one am sick and tired of being testicle shamed by femspaining bigots.

    • C-4

      Well if us whites would just lay down and die, they wouldn’t have to shame us, now would they?

      • farkennel

        At least you have the common courtesy to blame the straight white male.I`m thinking of handing my testicles in at the door and apologizing to ALL women and ALL homosexual folk.Maybe then…I cant be the generic bogeyman.

      • ksoileau

        If all of the whites died overnight, the blacks would riot in chaos until the Chinese subdued them and reenacted slavery.

    • jim

      Mostly this is all driven by penis envy and lesbians.

      • David Power

        Feminists generally fall into three categories: The Gullible Patsy, The True Believer and The Cynical Opportunist.

        A) The Gullible Patsy: This group accounts for the vast majority of women who still consider themselves feminists. These women have completely bought into the bogus feminist mantra of “we don’t need men”. These are the women who are destined to become either, married to men they end up despising, mentally unstable spinsters or frustrated single mothers. Single mothers who, ironically, can only survive with state help, such as child care, income support, housing benefits and numerous other state handouts. Handouts that they conveniently fail to grasp, come mostly from men! That’s right, the majority of tax revenue comes from men and the majority of tax spending goes on women. So in truth, these women are still leaching off the productivity of men, the only difference is that they are now doing their leaching by proxy.

        B) The True Believer: This group consists of women who harbour serious psychological resentments towards men. Their ranks include women with daddy issues or women who have been raised by single mothers with daddy issues. They also include lesbians and, ironically, over-masculine women who secretly resent the fact that they were not born a man. The thing that drives all of these male-phobic women, is there deep seated, and in many cases, pathological hatred of men and all things masculine. These are the women who would quite happily see men put into concentration camps or publicly castrated for even daring to question the validity of their victimhood cult. These are the women, who make it their life’s work, to toxify relations between ordinary men and women.

        C) The Cynical Opportunist: This group contains both men and women who use feminism as a means to improve some aspect of their lives. They consist of various self-serving and unscrupulous narcissists, including Celebrities, Journalists and Politicians, who exploit the anti-male rhetoric of feminism in an attempt to further their own careers. Also included in this group, are the lowest form of feminist life; The White Knight – The Manginas – The Supplicating creepy men who believe [erroneously] that selling out their own gender will garner them access to intimacy and sex from women. These men really have no idea of the utter contempt women actually hold them in. These are the men who are eventually despised by the women they marry. These are the men that are destined to be robbed of all they have, including their children, in a future divorce court or humbled, humiliated and ruined via a maliciously falsified rape accusation.

        • jim

          Outstanding.!

        • disqus_QL05BqU79X

          Ah, yes, C) being the most lethally dangerous category of all, containing as it does the people who administer the forced education of our young and the violence of the state.

        • elcalebo

          Have you ever met a real person?

  • Teacher

    My feminist views run to this:- women should have the same opportunities as men and be paid the same for doing the same. They should not be subject to insults or violence because they are physically weaker than men. That’s really about it. Men and women share a lot in common being both human but also have biological and psychological differences. Society needs to cater for these differences as fairly as it can while honouring both genders for their varying contributions to the continuance of the human race. Modern feminism seems to have strayed from early ideals of redressing issues of fairness and equality into some extremist and unpleasant territory. Men and women just need to be nice.

    • cartimandua

      It is a media invention that modern feminism addresses no “real” issues. Media just prefers to notice the apparently silly.

    • Andy M

      Even the “physically weaker” part can be left out – because people come in all shapes and sizes and a large woman would quite easily crush a small man. You are quite right though, they do just need to be nice.

      • Tom Prescott

        The thing is that a physically weaker man takes precautions not to walk in dangerous places and not to start fights with stronger men. Feminists thing that women should not have to do this. Feminists thing a woman has the right to attack a man and for him to not hit back even. If I attacked a stronger man I would expect a beating but if a woman attacks a man and the man calls the police it will be the victim who is arrested often.

    • G ZA

      All this men vs women outrage is manufactured to sell papers and for demagogue politicians.
      Everybody normal just accept women and men are different but respect each other.

      If you look closely the economic realities are harsh to both men and women. Like statistically the wage gap is completely insignificant, but the truth is that working class women and men are getting screwed on daily basis.

      We really should go back to talk about poverty when we talk about inequality and leave this gender identity politics crap for the sexist bigots.

    • Strazdas

      “women should have the same opportunities as men and be paid the same for doing the same.”

      Agreed. This is already true in UK and most civilized world. Done.

      ” They should not be subject to insults or violence because they are physically weaker than men.”

      They are not. Both men and women are sometime subjects to insults and violence for many reasons. this is not one of them.

      “That’s really about it.”

      Then we have reached equality.

  • David

    I imagine the trend will be that women will increasingly take over white collar jobs and make up the intelligentsia while men remain in blue collar work, labour, trade. The trend will def continue with women public sector, men private.
    When the big financial crash happens if it ever does, we’ll see the men sorted from the boys, or who the men and women are.

    • Strazdas

      I work in the public sector and at least in my workplace there is actually an increase in men rather than women for the last couple years. women still dominate (over 80%) but the numbers are actually decreasing.

  • mickey667

    Is this article parody?

    Stay serious Spectator, its better when you;re serious.

  • mickey667

    You could have just written. I’m successful and have a well paid job, what you all moaning about? Maggie maggie maggie.

    What a crock of shit that was

    • Reggie Anderson

      ‘I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding. It means they have not a single political argument left.’ ~ Margaret Thatcher.

      • mickey667

        My comment was not a personal attack though. It was showing that the water extrapolates from her comfortable existence to say everything is fine.

        As boring as it is pointless. Just like your copy and paste wit

        • G ZA

          Way to miss the point of the article though.

          She did mention that among other things boys are failing at a proportionally high rate in school and college, and she didn’t said not to focus on valid feminist issues, like girls being sold to slavery by ISIS.

          All she did was to focus on what feminist are focusing.

          But what are the targets of feminist moaning?. Fitness product campaigns and manspreading.

          I wouldn’t say her success invalidate her opinion when the most prominent feminist voices are exactly the same. (IE, every single feminist journalist working at the Guardian, Huffingtonpost and jezebel).

          • mickey667

            “But what are the targets of feminist moaning?. Fitness product campaigns and man spreading.”

            No, those are the targets she highlights in order to discredit. It just isle true that this is what feminists are all doing.

        • Reggie Anderson

          You insulted their article by calling it a “Crock of shit.”

          Explain how that’s not an attack? I would genuinely like to know what reasoning you’ve made to arrive at the conclusion that your comment was not an attack.

          … Or is this yet one more case of someone choosing to be an insulting tool because formulating a coherent and concise rebuttal would be “beneath” them?

  • cartimandua

    Already in parts of Europe women have been told to “cover up” in case they incite migrant men to violence. Sweden now has a rape rate up there with Lesotho.
    Whatever equality we have is not a steady state. It needs constant attention and it will need constant attention as globalism attacks the successful cultures of northern Europe.

    • Michael R.

      Sweden has such a high rape rate because everything a Swedish women deems as rape is rape. That Julian Assange case wouldn’t be a rape case in Germany or the UK. Maybe be a case of sexual assault, but not rape.

      • dwarfpoo

        tripe. Read the crime figures, the vast majority are muslim perpetrators. Police in Sweden have clarified the recording of rape. Assange was a hit job.

      • C-4

        As long as feminism exists, rape statistics will be inflated. But can that account for every report? False rape accusers now tend to go through academia and “rape tribunals” on campuses. Sure, liars do sometimes file false reports too, but I don’t believe feminist liars are accounting for the huge upswing in rape reportage.

        I think Dwarfpoo is right. Muslim men rape with impunity, and Western governments are actively encouraging them to do so.

        • Strazdas

          statistically, if court decisions are to be believed, majority of rape accusations are false and used as tactic to bite a man they for some reason dislike. so yes, false claims can very well inflate the statistics.

  • Hippograd

    So you’re saying that facts and logic mean nothing to feminists, who are instead guided by egotism, self-righteousness and emotion. But your arguments are based on facts and logic. Feminists will be falling over themselves to agree with you any day now.

  • Graham

    Modern feminists are are completely lost in delusions of there own victim hood. From ‘free the nipple’ to the fantasy of ‘rape culture’ proves the cause of modern feminism has well and truly run out of steam. Western women are most free and liberated in the world a fact modern western feminists have dedicated themselves never to accept.

    • cartimandua

      86,000 rapes and 1000 convictions. That’s not “OK”. 12% of those are raped blokes so not all lying women hey?

      • Knives_and_Faux

        What do you expect when you widen the definition to include next day regret.

        • mcronny1

          It doesn’t.

          It has widened to allow that very drunk/high people cannot be reasonably said to consent. I find that entirely reasonable, because they can’t.

          • Assjacket

            Why is it that you think a drunk/high male is able to consent, but not a drunk/high female? Do you think it’s okay that in cases where both parties are straight up shitfaced-drunk, the male is considered a “rapist”? Are females less capable of making decisions as adults in your eyes, or is there another reason for your reasoning?

          • mcronny1

            Only men can commit rape (unless the woman uses a prosthetic penis) so it’s pointless trying to compare it.

            In a hypothetical scenario if the man was too drunk/high to consent and the woman used a prosthetic penis to penetrate him then yes, she would be committing rape.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            (Apologies for the bowdlerisation of the following, but the Spectator’s filters appear to be having a hissy fit.)

            Technically speaking, ie by the legal definition of rape, you are correct.

            However, feminists have been defining rape in terms of consent for a long time now. By that definition, a woman who has s€x with a man without his consent is, by any reasonable measure, committing rape, even if the law doesn’t call it rape. So the legal definition of rape is wrong.

            (Actually, some US states actually wrote out of their law the word ‘rape’ and replaced it by ‘sexual assault’ of varying degrees, possibly to avoid this problem.)

            The law does recognise sexual assault of men by women. So ‘Jacket’s question stands: why is a woman who sexually assaults a man who is high or drunk not held to the same standard as men who sexually assault/rape women who are high or drunk?

      • Graham

        In most cases it boils down to one persons word against another persons. And you can’t send someone to prison until you have proven to the satisfaction of a jury that the defendant is guilty of what they are accused. I would imagine a great many of these cases are drunk men having drunk sex with drunk women. Regret is not rape.

      • Andy M

        Please cite your sources. A lot of people here will be very suspicious of this claim you’re making repeatedly; and as Mr Mann pointed out on another reply, the kind of cases that are taken into account when reaching this number are often dubious.

      • Mark Chambers

        There was never 86000 rapes reported. If you believe this figure you are a deluded child that has been smoking your own product. And if i am not mistaken you are guilty until proven innocent.

        • mcronny1

          No-one is suggesting that people be convicted without proof, but we would be fools to think that the % of convictions is a reflection of the % of actual rapes occurring.

          Robbery is a crime that has a high reporting rate and a low conviction rate, but no-one kicks up a fuss when we use the number of reported robberies to illustrate a problem, because we recognise that most victims are probably genuine, and that just because there wasn’t a conviction, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. For some reason with sexual offences some people do the opposite, and assume that a low conviction rate therefore means that most victims are lying. This is turn makes more genuine victims scared to come forward.

          • Assjacket

            Your entire argument is based on conjecture, and you seem incapable of believing that we live in a world where people don’t get raped on a regular basis. If you want to talk about “what ifs”, here’s something to consider: what about the fact that half of all rape allegations end up being proven false? Provide some statistics to go along with your BS next time.

            http://www.mediaradar.org/press_release_20070430.php

          • mcronny1

            You missed my point, which was why do we look at a low conviction rate and therefore assume that they MUST therefore be lying.

            A recantation does not mean it didn’t happen; often the recantations will be in domestic situations which are notorious for terrified women recanting their allegations for fear of reprisal. Anyone who works with victims of domestic violence can tell you all about it.

            Rape will always be very difficult to prove, but that does NOT mean that lots of the victims are lying, just as a low conviction rate in robbery doesn’t mean that lots of robbery victims are lying.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            As you will have seen elsewhere in this subthread, I have explained — at length — why acquittal (or failure to bring to trial) does not mean that the complainant was lying.

            However, as I have also said, conviction rates — about 60% — of cases that do get to court aren’t low. In case you did not see it, I’ll requote Baroness Stern’s 2010 report on LEA handling of sexual violence complaints:

            Of every 100 cases reported, about 15 were eventually not recorded as crimes, were retracted or were withdrawn very quickly by the complainant. Of the remaining 85, about 20 were subsequently withdrawn by the victim, 23 were not proceeded with because the evidence was felt to be not strong enough and about 14 were not proceeded with for other reasons. In about 26 cases a suspect was charged with the offence of rape. That figure was reduced to 19 at the time the decision was made to go ahead with a prosecution. A number of the prosecutions were unsuccessful because the complainant decided not to continue or did not attend, the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing. Some cases were withdrawn because of fears of the effect on the complainant’s mental health. Finally of those taken to court around 12 were found guilty of rape or a related offence.

            Yes, 19% prosecution rate is too low, but the CPS can’t do much about that unless there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. Which is why it is so important for women to go report the attack and get a rape kit done before she showers.

            That, so far as I can see, would be the single most effective way of bringing more rapists to justice.

            This is turn makes more genuine victims scared to come forward.

            Baroness Stern also wrote:

            It is clear to us that the way the six per cent conviction rate figure has been able to dominate the public discourse on rape, without explanation, analysis and context, is extremely unhelpful. There is anecdotal evidence that it may well have discouraged some victims from reporting.

            So please, stop adding to the problem by reinforcing the message that rape victims are unlikely to get justice (by way of low conviction rate).

            If the evidence is there, there is a better than even chance that the offender will be convicted.

          • itsthepatriarchy

            “Yes, 19% prosecution rate is too low, but the CPS can’t do much about that unless there is sufficient evidence to prosecute.”

            well sure they can. they can prosecute cases without sufficient evidence, or even when the evidence has proven that no crime occurred…as in the case of Mark Pearson

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Sigh. Can’t argue with that, sadly.

            Still, what I said is true in most cases. Pearson was prosecuted because of a gender-political agenda of DPP Saunders, not because the evidence demanded it.

            There was a case just recently in which a QC (very senior lawyer) got drunk and had a sexy fumble in public (ironically, also near Waterloo) after a liquid working lunch. It was so overt, knickers around her ankles etc, that passers-by complained to the police.

            When she learned that she was about to face professional charges for “bringing the profession into disrepute”, she filed a complaint of sexual assault with the police to trigger the permanent anonymity provisions of the Sexual Offences Act (2003), the consequences to the other guy (also a lawyer) be damned.

            Now she can’t ever be named, regardless of whether the guy is convicted. I wonder if the CPS will be quite so ready to bring this to trial. There may or may not have been CCTV footage but, regardless, there were a lot of witnesses because they were the ones who complained to the police in the first place.

            I don’t see much of a prospect of him getting convicted, but his name’s been splashed all over the papers and she’s got her anonymity so I guess that’s all right then.

            She might get into a spot of trouble with the UK Bar Council, however if they decide that her actions have brought their profession into even more disrepute (which they have), so she may not get away with it, anonymity or no.

          • itsthepatriarchy

            “Still, what I said is true in most cases. Pearson was prosecuted
            because of a gender-political agenda of DPP Saunders, not because the
            evidence demanded it.”

            Absolutely, TRUE.

            and it won’t stop there. It won’t stop until the society is ripped to shreds.

            http://itsthepatriarchy.wordpress.com/

      • C-4

        Well then stop promoting multiculturalism & mass immigration.

        Fewer Muslim men = fewer rapes.

      • Mark Chambers

        There was 17000 rapes reported last year. So 86000 is a figure dreamt up by immature students to include those they think were raped by bum pinching. Yet feminists demand safe spaces for themselves and islamist hate preachers. The same people responsible for Sweden’s status as the worlds rape capital.

        • Solage 1386

          Many rapes go unreported. For example, I was raped thrice aged 16-20 and couldn’t give a flying f–k to be honest. I didn’t bother to contact the police. (One of the f–kers WAS a policeman!) Too much bleedin’ hassle for my liking. I had more important things to do with my time.

        • mcronny1

          Sweden has the most reported rapes because more victims have confidence to come forward and report it.

          Are you honestly suggesting that one of the most gender-equal countries on Earth has some kind of different male that commits rape more than in all the other countries, including the ones where even the discussion of rape is avoided? Don’t be ridiculous.

          • itsthepatriarchy

            u did not really ask that did you?

        • itsthepatriarchy
      • Tamerlane

        If there’s only 1000 convictions then there’s only 1000 rapes.

      • jdgalt

        Which orifice did you pull those numbers out of?

        • Hades2

          You do know that your aggressive post is a form of R.A.P.E!
          Stop being so triggering while I find a safe space to calm down in!

      • Strazdas

        86000 allegations. allegation =/= rape. Stop posting nonsense.

      • Hades2

        I think you’ll find that the numbers are more even than that between the sexes.

        In America due to the Prison Industrial complex men exceed women in reported rapes; http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/04/more-men-than-women-raped-in-u-s.html
        This is from where the term ‘Rape Culture’ was actually derived

        The irony is, of course, lost to most feminists and their fake stats on this.

      • Noah Bama

        WOW! so 85,000 were false accusations of rape!?! That is a staggering number!

      • Earthenware

        “86,000 rapes and 1000 convictions”

        I’ve no idea where you got those figures from, but I assume you realise that you have just said that 98.5% of those rape allegations were false?

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

          It doesn’t work that way. It just means that 98.8% of allegations are unproved.

          That could be for any number of reasons, including lack of evidence or the presence of reasonable doubt, misidentification of the perpetrator, the complainant withdrawing or backing out of the trial or the CPS deciding that there is no realistic prospect of conviction (for whatever reason).

          Baroness Stern’s 2010 report gives a fairly decent breakdown:

          Of every 100 cases reported, about 15 were eventually not recorded as crimes, were retracted or were withdrawn very quickly by the complainant. Of the remaining 85, about 20 were subsequently withdrawn by the victim, 23 were not proceeded with because the evidence was felt to be not strong enough and about 14 were not proceeded with for other reasons. In about 26 cases a suspect was charged with the offence of rape. That figure was reduced to 19 at the time the decision was made to go ahead with a prosecution. A number of the prosecutions were unsuccessful because the complainant decided not to continue or did not attend, the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing. Some cases were withdrawn because of fears of the effect on the complainant’s mental health. Finally of those taken to court around 12 were found guilty of rape or a related offence.

          • Earthenware

            I don’t know where you are getting your figures from either, but of 100 reported cases of rape, twelve resulted in convictions. In my book, if you accuse someone of a crime as serious as rape and you are only getting a conviction rate of 12% (according to your breakdown) there is a serious problem of false accusation. Perhaps not the 98.5% that cartimudua suggested, but still outrageous.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            The quoted figures come from the Stern Report (2010), written by Baroness Vivien Stern. I thought I said that already.

            A false accusation is a knowingly, deliberately false complaint — a lie.

            That’s quite a different matter from ‘unproved allegation’. Failure to bring a case to trial doesn’t automatically mean that the accuser is lying. Acquittal doesn’t mean the accuser is lying, particularly not when the standard of evidence required to convict is “beyond all reasonable doubt”. Some of them doubtless are, but nobody has any clue how common false accusations are.

            There are umpteen other reasons, other than the complainant lying, that a complaint might collapse or otherwise be withdrawn or a ‘not guilty’ verdict be returned. A serious problem is that rape victims frequently shower as soon as they can (for perfectly valid psychological reasons), which means a lot of the forensic evidence is washed away.

            If feminists are so concerned about rape conviction rates, they should be focusing on educating women of the importance of going to the police straight away, however traumatised they undoubtedly would be.

          • Mr B J Mann

            No, failure to bring a case doesn’t mean that the accuser is lying, and acquittal doesn’t mean that the accuser is lying.

            However, as I’ve pointed out above, using YOUR quoted figures:

            If, after over 80% of accusations were whittled down and of the remaining LESS THAN 20% of reported “cases” that proceeded to prosecution STILL INCLUDED cases where:

            the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing.

            Then the claimed “victim” might not have been lying:

            But the CPS certainly must have been to claim that the case had a reasonable prospect of success when there wasn’t a case to begin with!!!!!

          • Mr B J Mann

            “That could be for any number of reasons……Baroness Stern’s 2010 report gives a fairly decent breakdown:”

            Of every 100 cases reported,

            -15 were eventually not recorded as crimes, were retracted or were withdrawn very quickly by the complainant.
            -20 were subsequently withdrawn by the victim,
            -23 were not proceeded with because the evidence was felt to be not strong enough
            -14 were not proceeded with for other reasons.
            ——
            =26 cases a suspect was charged with the offence of rape.

            That figure was reduced to

            19 at the time the decision was made to go ahead with a prosecution. A number of the prosecutions were unsuccessful because the complainant decided not to continue or did not attend, the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing. Some cases were withdrawn because of fears of the effect on the complainant’s mental health.

            Finally of those taken to court around 12 were found guilty of rape or a related offence.

            So even after the reported cases were whittled down by OVER 80%:

            The remaining LESS THAN 20% of reported “cases” STILL INCLUDED cases where:

            the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing.

            eg it WASN’T rape!!!!

            So, just in case anyone is still not following this, the feminists complain that not enough men are charged with rape, and yet, of those that the CPS decide to continue to prosecute, which should be only on the basis that there is a reasonable chance of conviction, there are STILL a proportion of men accused of rape being prosecuted despite the fact that:

            the evidence of the victim did not support the case, ie there was NO case!

            or there was a conflict of evidence ie by definition there HAD to be “reasonable doubt” and so could NOT be a conviction in law!!!

            or an essential legal element missing. ie it WASN’T rape!!!!!

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            (Odd. I guess I triggered some naughty word filter or something, because my reply is in the sin-bin. I’ll try again:)

            the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing.

            eg it WASN’T rape!!!!

            This is a non sequitur. You are right that the accused isn’t guilty of rape without conviction, but that doesn’t mean a rape didn’t happen.

            There are any number of reasons why a woman (arguendo) could really have been raped, but the above still happen.

            Two trivial examples:

            • the wrong man was accused (so the evidence doesn’t support his conviction);

            actus reus, evidence of the guilty act and one of the essential legal elements, was absent because the victim (who really is a victim, in this hypothetical) didn’t get a rape kit done before she washed and therefore there is no evidence that the victim and the accused even copulated in the first place, never mind whether there was consent or not.

            That all said, false allegations do happen — but nobody knows the true incidence of them, any more than they know the true incidence of rape.

          • Mr B J Mann

            What on earth are you wittering on about, wo/man?!?!

            For a crime to occur, there has to be, by definition, actus reus.

            No actus reus, no crime.

            No actus reus in an alleged rape: NO rape.

            No evidence of actus reus in an alleged rape: NO rape, only an allegation of rape.

            Unless you believe that we should have guilty until proven innocent.

            Feel free to prove that any rape where there wasn’t a conviction actually happened and the alleged victim wasn’t making it up!

            Do you even know what non sequitur means?!

            And do you even know the difference between eg and ie?!

            Try re-reading my entire post, were I laboured several point several times for the hard of thinking and feminist apologists.

            As for:

            “the wrong man was accused (so the evidence doesn’t support his conviction);

            The crime is that eg Fred Bloggs raped me.

            If it wasn’t Fred Bloggs, then there was no crime of Fred Bloggs raping the alleged victim.

            Are you going so far as to argue that Fred Bloggs should be locked up because, OK, HE might not have raped her, but someone might have, so we should lock him up anyway.

            You wouldn’t be one of those policemen who used to charge and prosecute people for crimes they hadn’t committed on the basis they were a wrong un and so deserved to be banged up for something, even of they weren’t actually guilty this time?!

            Congratulations on how far you’ve progressed!

            Again, if the victim CLAIMS Fred Bloggs raped her and he didn’t, there is NO EVIDENCE she was raped if her accusation is the only evidence.

            And if her claim was that he raped her, and he didn’t, then that is evidence she was never raped in the first place!

            To maker it even plainer:

            “the evidence of the victim did not support the case”

            ie she was making it up.

            “or there was a conflict of evidence”

            eg she said that he raped her in her home

            But mobile phone records show she was in the disco, or he was in the pub, at the time.

            or eg she said she was raped round the back of the bus station.

            but CCTV shows that they were canoodling at the front of the station, then they took different buses home.

            “or an essential legal element missing.”

            eg there was no actus reus, or mens rea

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Sigh. Let’s try this again, and perhaps without the ad hominem, this time? (To answer your questions: non sequitur means “doesn’t follow”; id est means “that is” and exemplia gratia means “for example”. Arguendo means “for the sake of argument”.). BTW, I’m no feminist, which you’d know if you’d read my profile.

            I tried to explain that it does not follow, neither from acquittal nor from failure to bring a case to court, that a crime did not happen, only that the evidence didn’t persuade the jury or CPS respectively in regard to the particular individual accused. Sometimes guilty defendants go free. (Sometimes innocent defendants go to jail, more’s the horror.) Sometimes the wrong defendant ends up in the dock. And, yes, sometimes the complainant made it up.

            Your basic mistakes are to conflate the actus reus and mens rea components required to convict the person in the dock of the alleged crime with the fact of a crime, and to assume that if “guilty” means “definitely a crime happened” that “not guilty” means “a crime definitely did not happen”.

            1. A is, in fact, raped by B, but C gets put in the dock. A rape really did happen (there is evidence to that effect, but not DNA), but the evidence does not support, beyond all doubt, the allegation that it was C, specifically, who perpetrated the rape, so s/he is acquitted. Doesn’t mean a crime wasn’t committed, only that C is not proved guilty of that crime.

            2. A really is raped by C. Neither party deny that copulation happened (so actus reus is satisfied), but C claims consent was given and A claims it was not. The jury’s job is to determine the fact or otherwise of consent (and whether C could reasonably have known that there was no consent).

            An acquittal doesn’t mean A was lying, only that there was reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s case — but, by your logic, there was no crime (even though there is evidence that somebody committed rape) because there is no conviction. Presumably, by extension of your logic, all convictions must necessarily mean that a crime was committed, but we know that’s not true either because miscarriages of justice do happen.

            3. Same as 2, but A was making it up (or changed their mind afterwards), in which case, of course, there was no crime. I’m sure we both agree on that.

            Only in case 3 was there no crime and a false allegation laid. They sure happen, but nobody knows with any certainty how frequently.

            I am sure that some of the cases that never make it to court are in this class, but, and this was my original point, you can’t assume anything about either the alleged victim or the alleged perpetrator from failure to secure a conviction.

            Have you ever served on a jury? I have, and it happened to be a rape trial, too. Real trials are not like on TV. Frequently, as in that case, it comes down to credibility and his word versus her word because there are few objective facts available. It’s much harder than it looks.

          • Mr B J Mann

            1) Doble sigh.

            2) It was a rhetorical question.

            3) You are conflating the fact that there was an allegation, or even a prosecution, or even a guilty verdict, with the “fact” there was even one rape, never mind 86,000m

            4) I tried to explain that it does not follow, neither from bringing a case to court, nor from conviction (please actually read your own quote from the Stern report), that a crime did happen, only that the claims and allegations did persuade the jury or CPS respectively in regard to the particular individual accused, even if he (it’s practically always a he) wasn’t guilty, or even if no one committed a rape in the first place. Sometimes, in fact practically always, guilty rape “victim” false accuser perjurers go free. (Often innocent defendants go to jail, more’s the horror.) at “best” sometimes the wrong defendant ends up in the dock. And, yes, even you admit that sometimes the complainant made it up.

            Which is what your quote from the report effectively said.

            That when the false accusers themselves, the police and CPS had filtered out over 80% of accusations for one reason or another there were STILL dodgy rape prosecutions, and even false ones.

            5) But, instead of using your quote as further proof that feminists are fantasising over their 55,000 figure, never mind the 86,000 one, you have to repeatedly ride to their rescue, with nit picking pedantic posts about how the paragraph you posted COULD be interpreted to support a feminist interpretation.

            6) But even though you’ve kitted yourself out in knightly armour of a burnished blanc-ness you’re not a feminist.

            Why, even some of your best buddies are blokes.

            I’ll bet!

          • Mr B J Mann

            For Flip’s Sake NANNY!

            As for conflating things (where?!):

            1. If “A” is, in fact, r-ped by “B”, but “C” gets put in the d0ck.

            A r-pe really did happen.

            But THE cr!me of “C” r-ping “A” DIDN’T!

            2. “A” really is r-ped by “C”. Neither party deny that c0pulation happened (so actus reus is NOTsatisfied)!

            Actus reus is a wr0ngful or un1awful act.

            I know that fem!nists (which you claim you are not) define all s-x as r-pe, or rather (allegedly only) the hard c0re do, (so were you saying you are not – just – a fem!nist, but a hard c0re fem!narsty nut job one) but the last time I looked, c0pulation wasn’t, in itself, an !llegal, or even a wr0ngful, act.

            You have to pr0ve not only that s-x took place, but that it took place without c0nsent (the actus reus), AND you would have to pr0ve that “B” or “C” INTENDED to do so (the mens rea).

            3. While you can’t assume anything about either the alleged v!ctim or the a11eged p-rpetrator from failure to secure a c0nviction, you can assume from the report you quoted the various things that I have repeatedly pointed out.

          • Mr B J Mann

            As for whether I have ever served on a jury:

            Are you one of those “non”-feminists who would argue that, as I was born a man, I don’t have a womb, and was never ab0rted, and therefore don’t have a right to an opinion on ab0rtion, never mind to voice it, especially anywhere near a “safe space”, and even then, even amongst c0nsenting adult males, without a “tr!gger warning”?!

            This sub thread, under an article about the problems with feminism, started with someone ridiculing the 86,000 pa (I’m sure you know what that means, and no, I’m not asking for a Latin lesson) claims (when even the 55,000 pa figure is fantasy).

            And you immediately dived in to defend the feminist position with a quote that more logically could be, and should be, (and subsequently was by myself) used to further show how wrong the feminist position is.

            If you aren’t a feminist they probably wish they had a lot more opponents like you if they are to survive to complete their destruction of Western society!

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Enough of the trolling and ad hominem. If you can’t be bothered to do some basic research (like clicking on my Disqus profile and cross-check with the masthead of the publication in question) to find out who I am and what I do (because I’m sure you would not take my word for it) and argue like a civilised adult, then I have better things to do with my time.

            Ditto if you can’t be bothered to try follow the logic of an argument, or depend on semantics to muddy the waters.

            Crimes happen to victims, trials happen to defendants — and verdicts relate to the defendant, not to the crime. They are related, but they are not the same things. Ergo, you can’t rationally parlay “not guilty” into “didn’t happen”.

            BTW, since I was the foreman at that trial, I was quite awake the whole time and the judge did his job impeccably. So did my fellow jurors. (In case you’re curious, we acquitted the guy. The weird thing was that the fact of copulation wasn’t in dispute, nor was the fact that the girl was a few weeks short of 16 at the time! But the charges did not relate to that, and the facts of the case did not support the charges before the court, so we returned “not guilty”.

            Technically, a crime did occur, but it was not the crime of which he was charged. So there’s a more concrete, real-life example of where “not guilty” does not mean “no crime happened”.

          • Mr B J Mann

            “Enough of the trolling AND ad hominem…….. ?!?!?!?!

            And you want me to do some research?!?!?!?

          • Mr B J Mann

            But, just to keep your ego massaged, I did the research you insisted on and found that you are someone who can post:

            David King > anotherday 5 hours ago
            “Name me one legal right that a man has that a woman doesn’t. I don’t mean social prejudices, I mean rights enshrined in law. I bet you can’t name a single one, but I can think of two or three, off the top of my head, rights that women have that men don’t.”

            And then two or three hours later can follow up with:

            David King > gusroar 2 hours ago
            “I’ll happily work with a moderate feminist who actually (and demonstrably) cares about gender equality and will put aside the patriarchy BS etc if they have a realistic plan for fostering gender equality”

            And yet have the brazen cheek to post:

            David King > Mr B J Mann
            “Enough of the trolling and ad hominem…. and argue like a civilised adult….”
            “Ditto if you can’t be bothered to try follow the logic of an argument, or depend on semantics to muddy the waters.”

            Can I suggest that:

            “Transferrance is lame. Don’t project onto me…!!!!”

            By the way, I’m reminded of Jeremy Clarkson having to deal with a PR for one of the AA or the RAC.

            Who turned out to be a prospective Lib Dem camdidate who stood on an anti-car platform?!?!?!

            I repeat, this sub thread was discussing inflated r-pe statistics.

            Yes, some of the men aquitted by a system heavily biased aginst men (why is there even such a cr!me of r-pe in the 21st Century? Whose goods are being despoiled? Why are white, middle class wimmin so afraid of losing their v!rginity, as if, or their honour?! Are “equal” women really so traumatised by someone sticking something into the receptacle that evolved to accept it, how is it any worse than a woman spooning some desert into my mouth when I’ve insisted I’m on a diet?!) might actually have been guilty.

            But from YOUR quote from the report, it would seem that it’s more likely that it proves that even the official stats exaggerate the amount of real rape.

            Women don’t need you to act as devil’s advocate, never mind go charging in to defend them on your charger.

            What they need is every flaw in their arguments exposing.

            But then you seem to struggle with flaw recognition.

          • Mr B J Mann

            “The weird thing was that the fact of copulation wasn’t in dispute, nor was the fact that the girl was a few weeks short of 16 at the time! But the charges did not relate to that, and the facts of the case did not support the charges before the court, so we returned “not guilty”.

            “Technically, a crime did occur, but it was not the crime of which he was charged. So there’s a more concrete, real-life example of where “not guilty” does not mean “no crime happened”.”

            So the “cr!me” was actually statutory “r-pe”, but the CPS c0cked up?!

            So how many women, never mind female teachers, have ever been charged, never mind found gu!lty, of statutory “r-pe” of a 13 year old boy, never mind an almost 16 year old?!

            Again, instead of arguing that, fortunately, the man wasn’t charged with the made up “cr!me” of doing what comes naturally with a s-xually mature young woman (and I’ve heard feminists argue on the BBC that “young women” have a “right” to explore and enjoy their s-xuality, and should be given free c0ndoms at secondary school, and having missed the start of the discussion assumed the feminist was referring, to sixth formers, or at least teenagers, but then discovered she was discussing TWEENagers!!!) only weeks away from the age that “progressive” lefty “liberals” insist small people are mature enough to vote, so should be way more mature than needed to decide for themselves about their s-x lives:

            You insist that:

            “a crime did occur…… So there’s a more concrete, real-life example of where “not guilty” [of r-pe] does not mean “no crime [of r-pe] happened”.”

            With “CIO, Director of Technical Operators and system administrator at A Voice for Men” like you:

            Who needs feminists?!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

            I hope this wasn’t a reference to this “discussion”:

            https://disqus.com/home/discussion/breitbartproduction/feminists_are_panicking_and_lashing_out_at_cassie_jaye8217s_8216the_red_pill8217_movie/#comment-2341022448

            David King > Grahovac Janko 16 hours ago

            It does not do the MHRM any favours to deny that there are extremists who identify as MRAs, and other more extremists who identify as other sorts of manospherians (eg masculists). They are as crazy as the extremist feminists.

            Example: I was recently arguing with one guy who insisted that all rape trial acquittals and rape allegations that never made it to court must necessarily be the result of false accusations. When I tried to explain why he was wrong, he resorted to trolling and ad hominem etc. Look back in my Disqus history if you want to see what I mean.

            To anybody with a functional understanding of the law, it is clear that this is BS, but it damages the credibility of the MHRM to take such extremist and obviously BS positions.

            Unless moderate MHRAs publicy reject extremism, the public has no reason to suppose that the extremists typify the MHRM.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I refer Mr King to:

            http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm

            But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he didn’t have the slightest clue why!

            All the Way Down the Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in America
            Professor Joseph E. Olson and Professor David B. Kopel

            Historical Notes No. 43

            ISSN 0267-7105 ISBN 1 85637 571 4

            I. Introduction http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm#I.%20Introduction

            Is it possible for a nation to go from wide-open freedom for a civil liberty, to near-total destruction of that liberty, in just a few decades? “Yes,” warn many American civil libertarians, arguing that allegedly “reasonable” restrictions on civil liberty today will start the nation down “the slippery slope” to severe repression in the future.[3] In response, proponents of today’s reasonable restrictions argue that the jeremiads about slippery slopes are unrealistic or even paranoid.[4]
            This Essay aims to refine the understanding of slippery slopes by examining a particular nation that did slide all the way down the slippery slope.(p.400) When the twentieth century began, the right to arms in Great Britain was robust, and subject to virtually no restrictions. As the century closes, the right has been almost obliterated. In studying the destruction of the British right to arms, this Essay draws conclusions about how slippery slopes operate in real life, and about what kinds of conditions increase or decrease the risk that the first steps down a hill will turn into a slide down a slippery slope.

            For purposes of this Essay, the reader will not be asked to make a judgement about the righteousness of the (former) British right to arms or the wisdom of current British gun prohibitions and controls. Instead, the object is simply to examine how a right that is widely respected and unrestricted can, one “reasonable” step at a time, be extinguished. This Essay pays particular attention to how the public’s “rights consciousness,” which forms such a strong barrier against repressive laws, can weaken and then disappear. The investigation of the British experience offers some insights about the current gun control debate in the United States, and also about ongoing debates over other civil liberties. This Essay does not require that the reader have any affection for the British right to arms; presumably, the reader does have affection for some civil liberties, and the Essay aims to discover principles about how slippery slopes operate. These principles can be applied to any debate where slippery slopes are an issue…….

            2. United We Stand? http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm#2.%20United%20We%20Stand

            Unwilling to support the right to keep and bear arms for defense, as opposed to the privilege to use sporting weapons, British gun owners have also been unwilling to band together for defensive purposes. While Britain has a large number of groups that promote particular shooting disciplines, such as the Clay Pigeon Shooting Association, the National Small-Bore Rifle Association, and the United Kingdom Practical Shooting Association, most of these organizations content themselves simply with running their own competitions. Getting involved in legislative affairs would hardly occur to them and they would never dream of getting involved in legislative affairs on an issue that did not affect their own discipline. The clay pigeon folks paid no attention to how the government was restricting handguns, nor did the handgunners care much about what the government did to the rifle shooters. Indeed, during the debate on the post-Dunblane handgun ban, one might hear a shotgunner claiming that people who enjoy practical pistol shooting are “killers,” while a handgunner on a television program retorted that rifles and shotguns are more dangerous than handguns.[291] This rhetoric is the political equivalent of gun-owners forming a firing squad by standing in a circle.

            [My emphasis]

          • Mr B J Mann
      • David Power

        Sorry ladies, you can’t just shut feminism down when you feel like it. It’s gone way to far for that. By toxifying gender relations, destroying marriage, and decimating birth rates, feminism has made on hell of a s**t sandwich and you! yes you ladies, are going to have to take a bite.

        When the original aims of feminism, votes for women etcetera, were achieved many years ago, feminists had a choice… Abandon the now redundant movement or alter and expand its aims. Of course, they were not about to abandon a movement which (they believed) had been so successful, so they chose to change and expand their aims.

        And this pattern of achieve and change, has continued, and indeed accelerated ever since. This, innately specious strategy, caused feminism to shift from a movement ostensibly pushing for Fairness for Women, Gender Equality and Female Emancipation, into one blatantly pushing for Privilege for Women, Gender Superiority and Male Emasculation.

        To achieve these aims, feminism must continually deride and vilify Men and all things Masculine. It needs to do this in order to justify it’s very existence and to keep it’s ever expanding grievance gravy-train industry in business.

        And so feminism constantly encourages women to forgo Motherhood in favour of Victimhood. It encourages women to kill around 200,000 mostly perfectly healthy unborn western children each year in the UK alone. It encourages women to detonate a marriage for the slightest reason by offering them grossly over inflated financial incentives to do so.

        The cumulative effect of western societies adoption of the feminist narrative of female victimhood and it’s over pandering to female hypergamy, has been to lower the birth rates to chronically low and patently unsustainable levels. And to toxify the institution of marriage so that Western Men are beginning to avoid it like the plague.

        But economics, just like nature, abhors a vacuum, and if western women refuse to provide the next generation of tax payers, then another culture will. A culture far less tolerant, particularly towards women, than anything seen in the west for centuries.

        Don’t believe me? Well, no country on the face of the planet, embraced the ideology of feminism more comprehensively and enthusiastically, than Sweden. And it is no coincidence that Sweden is now predicted to be majority Muslim within the next few decades.

        And that is why it is right to say: Mass Immigration is the symptom of the disease called Feminism. A disease which the whole of Europe has been infected with for several decades. And so, if you are not arguing against feminism, you are arguing for Mass Immigration and the cultural suicide of the west.

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0HTSwUig2-0

      • David Power

        The following list of false rape cases, took a matter of minutes of online research and is just a tip of an extremely large iceberg.

        FIFTY SHADES OF [FALSE] RAPE CULTURE

        CHANEYA KELLY, whose testimony jailed her own Navy Veteran father for 20-40 years for rape, now says she was “coerced by her mother to lie about the charges”. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-accused-father-raping-lied-article-1.1430957

        KATHERINE CLIFTON statements led to rape charges against a professor who subsequently spent nine days in jail as well as being placed on leave from his job, eventually pleaded guilty in court to… “making false statements” to the police. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/woman-pleads-guilty-to-false-rape-report/

        NATASHA FOSTER, now admits that she “lied to police about being raped” has finally pleaded guilty to a charge of perverting the course of justice; http://www.ballymenatimes.com/news/local-news/local-woman-admits-making-false-rape-claims-1-5518294

        KATELYN WEBSTER, now say she lied about being raped, because she “didn’t want to get into trouble with her father for having sucker bites” http://patch.com/pennsylvania/peters/venetia-girl-charged-with-lying-about-rape

        REBECCA HOWARD,now admits to making false rape claims against two innocent men; http://www.courier.co.uk/Woman-admits-making-false-rape-claim/story-13207942-detail/story.html

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE”, had a Man locked up for ten years for rape, but finally came forward and admitted to police that she and her witness had “lied about the rapes”. http://www.japancrush.com/2015/stories/man-serves-6-years-for-rape-before-girl-admits-she-lied.html

        KIMBERLEY WHEELHOUSE now admits to making false rape claims against two men, after attending a house for “arranged sex”. http://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Woman-admits-false-rape-claim-20012014.

        PHILIPA COSTELLO, had claimed she was raped but later admitted “lying to police” about the incident and pleaded guilty to “perverting the course of justice” http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/10448146.Woman_admits_making_a_false_rape_claim/

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE”, now admits to making a false rape allegation against a male student, but will not be charged. “Our focus is towards support and care for her,’’said university police chief Pete Andrers; http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/woman-admits-she-wasn-t-raped-saturday-on-mu-campus/article_29f316be-57a3-11e4-8f3c-001a4bcf6878.html

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED” FEMALE, now admits her “rape claim was false” but will face no prosecution; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-30132260

        JOANIE FAIRCLOTH, now says… the statements she made to police about being raped by Conor Oberstare were “100% false” http://m.spin.com/articles/conor-obersts-name-cleared-rape-accuser-admits-she-lied/

        ANN-MARIE GOUGH, finally admitted to lying over rape claim against two men in car; http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/3598117.Woman_admits_lying_over_rape_claim/

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE”student, reported a sexual assault in the Texas Tech Student Recreation Centre, but has now admitted her “statements were false”. http://redraiders.com/local-news/2014-10-21/tech-student-admits-making-false-statements-connection-rape-allegations#.VPmzo2IgGSM

        BILLIE JO EADS, now admits to making a false rape claim to police against an innocent man; http://www.theindychannel.com/news/police-woman-admits-making-false-rape-claim

        CHARMAINE RIPLEY, claimed she’d been raped in a park, but finally admitted wasting police time; http://www.thanetgazette.co.uk/Margate-woman-admits-making-rape-park-claim/story-19869011-detail/story.html

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE”, finally confessed to putting an innocent man behind bars by “falsely accusing him” of rape because she was afraid of what her boyfriend would do when he found out she had cheated on him; http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/teen-girl-admits-false-rape-1879187

        SUSAN BRADLY, had accused two men of raping her but now admits “the attack never took place”. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1369536/Fury-woman-cried-rape-sparking-major-police-hunt-handed-80-penalty-notice.html

        MICHELLE GRAFTON, now admits making up rape claim because “she liked the attention” http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10642709

        AMANDA ROLAND, had made a detailed rape accusation to police, but latter admitted that she had “made up the story and staged a scene” at her home to make it appear as if a struggle had taken place. http://www.wjhl.com/story/25099879/kingsport-woman-allegedly-admits-to-making-up-story-about-rape

        MELINDA DENHAM, now admits to “falsely accusing her boyfriend of rape” because she was angry at him for not returning her phone calls. http://www.examiner.com/article/angry-woman-admits-to-falsely-accusing-her-boyfriend-of-rape

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE” Student, now admits that she “lied about fighting off Rapist”. http://laist.com/2015/01/23/riverside_community_college_rapist.php

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMLE”, who had claimed she was sexually assaulted by two male students, but now admits “it didn’t happen”. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/woman-claims-she-was-sexually-assaulted-admits-it-didnt-happen/article/2555018

        BIURNY PEGUERO made a rape claim that saw a man sentenced to 20 years in prison, but finally confesses four years later, to a priest and then to the DA’s office that she “made the whole thing up” because she wanted people to feel sorry for her. http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/12/10/203014/15/innocencecases/Man-Freed-After-4-Years-Victim-Admits-False-Rape-Report

        GEMMA SCOONES, now admits to making, what turned out to be her “second false rape allegation” but still avoids prison; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299310/Woman-admits-SECOND-rape-offence-spared-jail-heavily-pregnant.html

        ELIZABETH JONES, finally admitted she “lied about her latest rape allegation” because she did not like the man she accused of attacking her. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9894588/Compulsive-liar-jailed-after-11-false-rape-claims-in-decade.html

        EMILY CHATTERS, plagued” police with dozens of calls to make complaints of rape. Only after police showed her “irrefutable evidence” that her version could not be true, did she finally admit…. “Yes all the allegations were false”. http://www.buryfreepress.co.uk/news/local/latest-news/thetford-woman-plagued-police-with-false-allegations-court-hears-1-6322587

        DANMELL NDONYE, had five men arrested after accusing them of gang rape. Only after prosecutors confronted her with a cellphone video that captured “the whole sordid episode” and showed she had willingly participated, did she finally admit she had in fact “lied about the incident”. http://nypost.com/2009/09/18/twisted-motive-behind-rape-story/

        LEANNE BLACK, had made multiple allegations of rape to police against a series of ex-boyfriends, over an eight year period, but finally made a full admission in open court that the “rapes never happened”. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2358759/Leanne-Black-finally-jailed-FIVE-false-rape-allegations-ex-boyfriends-years.html

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE”, who claimed she had been sexually assaulted by a man, later confessed that she… “made a false report” to the police. http://www.harrogate-news.co.uk/2014/08/29/york-woman-admits-making-false-report-sex-assault-allegation/

        EMMA SAXON, claimed to have been raped in a supermarket car park, but now openly admits “the matter never happened”. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188112/Mother-jailed-making-TWO-false-rape-claims-men-dating-didnt-liaison.html

        MICHELLE ROSSITER, made a series of allegations of rape against one man, but eventually confessed to police that the rape allegations she had made to them previously… “were not genuine”. http://www.cps.gov.uk/northwest/cps_northwest_news/woman_jailed_for_false_rape_allegation/

        JUNE PLUNKETT, accused a man of rape, but finally “pleads guilty” to making a false rape claim which included her “slashing herself” with a blade or razor before making the allegations to police. http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/regional/woman-admits-false-allegation-of-rape-1-6060694

        AMANDA MOYSE, eventually confessed in open court, to perverting the course of justice by making a “false allegation of rape” against an innocent man. http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Woman-admits-false-rape-claim/story-11722416-detail/story.html

        CHARLENE KIELTY claimed to police that she was raped by a bus driver in the back of his coach, but finally admitted in open court, to “making the false allegation”. http://news.stv.tv/highlands-islands/273275-woman-admits-false-rape-claim-against-bus-driver/

        “IDENTITY PROTECTED FEMALE”, now admits that she made a false allegation of sexual assault. http://www.redditchadvertiser.co.uk/news/alcester/10697043.Woman_admits_to_making_false_allegation_of_sexual_assault/

        MEGAN FRANKS, claimed to have been raped by a man who was subsequently arrested, but eventually admitted to police that she had made up the rape allegations and even injured herself to be more credible. http://www.kplctv.com/story/14389364/lake-arthur-woman-arrested-for-false-rape-accusation

        CATHY RICHARDSON, told police officers that she had been sexually assaulted several times but now admits her “allegations were false”. http://www.essex.police.uk/news_features/homepage_latest_news/woman_jailed_for_making_false.aspx

        JACQUELINE McCOMMOND, made an allegation that she was raped, but finally admitted to police… she “made the whole thing up”. http://www.essex.police.uk/news_features/homepage_latest_news/woman_jailed_for_making_false.aspx

        BEVERLY BRANDRETH had “cried rape” against an ex-boyfriend but finally pleaded guilty to lying in court. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/12/03/woman-jailed-after-making-false-rape-claims_n_2233032.html

        MISS SO LEONG-YING, told police in graphic detail how she was gang-raped by four men. But after police confronted her with evidence of the bogus rape and robbery, finally admitted to… “making up the story” in the hope of attracting publicity to her name. http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2003/06/25/false-rape-allegation-hk-woman-gets-18-months

        CHARLENE STEEL made an accusation of sexual assault against a man, but later pleaded guilty to “falsely claiming to have been raped”. http://www.northern-times.co.uk/News/Alness-woman-jailed-for-false-rape-allegation-22102013.htm

        KELLY HARWOOD, claimed that her friend’s son had raped her, but later confessed that she “had made it up”. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-29785120

        NATALIE MORTIMER, had accused her grandfather of raping her, but later admitted she had “made it up” in a bid to claim inheritance money. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-25624620

        JOANNA ROBERTSON now admits to “making up a sex attack allegation” — leading to an innocent man being held in custody. http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/local/dundee/dundee-woman-sobs-as-she-is-jailed-for-false-sex-assault-claims-1.336455

        EMMA BLUNDEN, told police that she had been raped by four men, but was eventually found to have been lying. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11956916

        TEMITOPE ADENUGBA, made a rape allegation to police against a man they later arrested, but subsequently admitted in open court to making “false statements” and perverting the course of justice. http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/headlines/8203165.Woman_admits_making_false_rape_claim/

        It’s worth noting that in most of the cases above, the female accuser only admitted to lying after being shown irrefutable evidence. e.g. video, CCTV, eye-witnesses, phone tracking, DNA. But what about the vast majority of cases where this kind of evidence is unavailable?

        One truly shudders to think… just how many innocent men are currently living lives of hell in prison, just because they were unlucky enough to cross paths with one such vindictive female?

        Of course there will always be the “False-Rape-Denialists” who will attempt to make the groundless assumption, that these women were somehow bullied into recanting and that we should therefore ignore their confessions. But isn’t it funny how they never use this argument when an accused man confesses to anything, even though he is likely to have come under far greater pressure to do so.

        https://falseallegations.wordpress.com

        http://www.inside-man.co.uk/2014/07/28/why-do-women-make-false-rape-allegations/

      • DollarPound

        Feminist use rape to attempt to confer moral superiority on themselves.
        Women are largely excluded from being able to commit rape by the legal definition of the crime. This in itself does not confer moral superiority.

        Men are similarly incapable of committing paternity fraud. And paternity fraud would be far easier to detect with almost 100% certainty. Does that confer a moral superiority on men?

    • Will

      It’s justifying still getting checks and TV time.

  • Alùcard Impàlèr

    I’m not even sure FIRST-wave feminism was all that noble, considering the whole “White Feather Campaign” baloney…

    • C-4

      It was a socialist insurrectionist movement from day one.

      • G ZA

        I’ve read about it before, but it never occurred to me the viciousness of the feminists attacks on men back then. I admit there was a romance around first wavers considering how bad feminism is now.

        But what they were basically saying “men lifes are worthless so please go and die”.

        http://www.angryharry.com/Men-Are-Worthless.htm
        So this is was the world were patriarchy was at its prime and men had it so good apparently?. What bullcrap.

        Of course more men were in positions of power considering they had to make all the sacrifices.
        Who has the nerve to call men cowards for not going to war to die and then ask them for the vote? Feminists.

  • cartimandua

    Go ahead and ask a man brought up in a gender apartheid culture to be “nice”.

  • cartimandua

    The number of victims of Muslim grooming gangs may reach as high as 1 million over 25 years across the country.
    Those children are beneath your notice eh “Emily”?

    • Andy M

      The thing is, you don’t need a feminist to point that out – you need the entire community to, as female victims of these gangs are not alone in their victimhood – homosexuals of all ages are also victims of the same criminal gangs. You can blame Islamic sympathisers on the Left for such a slow response to these issues, making excuses for a clearly problematic and unreformed religion. Either way, anything feminists might be doing against these gangs is purely the right thing being done for their own self-interests. If women were not being victims, only gays, I doubt you’d see any support from them at all on this issue.

      • dwarfpoo

        wrong, they should be speaking out. Enough font space in other rags bleating man hating garbage and not a peep about the systematic abuse of white girls.

        • C-4

          Abused white girls = fewer stable white families.

          With that much damage and shame, they’re much less likely to procreate. They want to destroy “white male privilege capitalist patriarchy” and what better way to do that than turning a blind eye while white women are defiled by nonwhites?

          White men have been emasculated successfully thanks to useful idiot insurrectionist white women, now it’s the system’s turn to make destroy and destabilize white women even further since they’ve now outlived their usefulness.

        • Andy M

          No. They should be speaking out as part of a concerned community, not as part of their feminist agenda. I once again stress the point that the only reason feminists care about these gangs is because females are often the victims. Had this been something purely effecting men you wouldn’t see them bothering. You don’t need feminists speaking out, you need everyone speaking out.

      • Chris Amies

        “homosexuals of all ages are also victims of the same criminal gangs”

        Boys can be victims of sexual abuse without themselves being homosexual.

        • Andy M

          True, but the feminists aren’t speaking out on their behalf.

  • Andy M

    To anyone but people who already identify themselves as one of this lot, they are a joke nowadays. Nobody, be they male or female, takes a modern day feminist seriously, precisely because it is no longer about equality but man-hate and making excuses for the insecurities of the less emotionally stable women out there.

  • Claire Hosking

    I don’t think it’s time to break out the champagne until we’ve actually *achieved* equality. Sure, we’re gaining on the board room, but are we there yet? No. We’re gaining on represetntation in movies & on tv, but are we there yet? No. We still have to get there, so we still need feminism. 80% done isn’t done. Liberation and fully participation and representation are still a way to go.

    I agree, women should be free to wear what they want — whether it’s bikinis or burqas. But to ensure that there’s still work to be done to reduce the pressures on women to wear certain things — there’s still plenty of pressure throughout society to be femme, to be sexy, to be modest (all at once! contradictory, I know). Feminism should push to reduce that social pressure, and celebrate women expressing their selves freely. There’s still so much change left to make.

    • cartimandua

      NOT BURQAS it is self harming behaviour. The science is clear. Even hijabs and long sleeves make you ill.
      You might as well say anorexia aaw go on then.

      • Claire Hosking

        The science also shows that bikinis put you at risk of skin cancer. I think women are smart enough to make up their own minds, provided we make sure society doesn’t pressure them to dress in ways they don’t want to, whether it’s skimpier or more modest than they’d like.

        • cartimandua

          NOPE people don’t wear bikinis every day. Clearly Muslim women are not told the science or stockholmed so comprehensively they choose poor health.
          They are the least healthy group in the UK (source MCB).
          Since Muslim women across the world have extremely high rates of illiteracy I would think most don’t know.
          Over here it seems to be rude to mention it but the NHS knows and also knows supplements are not an adequate substitute for sunlight.

          • Claire Hosking

            I think we agree women should be educated and given the health information they need. But after that they should be free to chose to wear what they want, whether it’s jeans and a t-shirt or a nun’s habit.

          • cartimandua

            No we don’t say “aww” go on starve yourself or smoke or drink yourself into poor health.
            Those are choices too, but we have a communal NHS which requires people to make healthy choices where they can.
            Asians in the UK have 6xs the risk of Diabetes. That’s about lack of sunlight, lack of exercise, and diet.

          • Claire Hosking

            Sure, I think it’s a good idea to encourage people to get enough sunlight and to wear sunscreen so they don’t get cancer. I think it’s bad to put pressure on women to wear specific kinds of clothes to achieve those goals.

          • Angi Hillin

            The only people who have ever judged me for what I wear are women. I’m not saying men don’t appreciate what’s put on display, but anytime I’ve said in front of a man “dang, these shoes suck. Don’t ever wear high heels” they’ve looked at me like I’m nuts and asked why do I do it then? The hoops I used to jump through no longer exist because enough men told me “well, yeah I like it, but if it makes you uncomfortable or puts you in pain, what’s the point?”. I no longer do that sort of thing regularly and it’s not men who are judging me, it’s women.

            Again, men aren’t stupid, if you ARE going to jump through the hoops, they’ll pay attention, but it’s not a requirement. It’s other women who have something to say about my choice of how to dress. “If you don’t get up and get fully dressed you’ve “given up”. I don’t get out of my car in the morning to drop the children off, but my hair isn’t done, I’m wearing yesterday’s t-shirt (yeah, so? I’m going right back home to get a shower, who cares?) and yoga pants so I’ve given up on life and my husband is going to leave me. No man has EVER said that to me. They don’t care what I wear. And my husband doesn’t care either. He just wants me to be happy and leave him alone when baseball is on.

          • Tom Prescott

            Exactly, it is women who edit those fashion magazines which shame women into hating their bodies, not men. And most men don’t go for the catwalk types. that is women promoting that (and some gay men too).

    • Paul Robson

      Gaining in the board room will take time, unfortunately, and probably won’t be achieved 100% anyway because of the family factor. Equality would take probably 20 years to work through the system ; the alternative is to parachute women into top jobs without going through the same experience.

      • Claire Hosking

        I think it’s ok for it to take some time, but I don’t think we should be prematurely declaring victory. There are still things we can do to help it along — addressing stereotypes, addressing problems like the studies that show people rate a resume with a woman’s name on it as less competent than the same resume with a man’s name on etc. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/

        • Mr B J Mann

          But they STILL give more jobs to girls.

          Look at the entry figures for law and medicine.

          And what do we achieve?

          Barristers like Mz Charlotte Proudman, who don’t even understand their own speciality of uman rites and equality, never mind the rules of their own professional body, and wouldn’t recognise a logical argument if it put a stunning photo of itself on its linkedin marketing profile, and “poked” her to “like” and promote it!

          And an NHS in crisis because they train many more women doctors than they theoretically need, but STILL have a shortage because they a go off on maternity leave, and if they come back it’s only part time, and only in the more family friendly GP sector!

          • Captain Dryland

            Women GPs and women teachers working part-time are a problem. When these women have working husbands the household income can become more than adequate, and the women go part-time. Then the authorities end up having to buy expensive locums and agency staff to fill in while female professionals enjoy a three or four day weekend.

        • Thor Alexander Michelsen

          That depends. Women are rated higher then eqaully qualified men in all stem fields a new report showed. So in STEM f.ex the only reason there is more men then women now, is that there are more really good men as candidates.

          Also you cant use the law to force cultural change, or to controll how people think.

          • Claire Hosking

            Oh, I’m interested, could you show me that study?

            It’s pretty normal to use law to force cultural change, actually. Like laws that enforce seatbelt wearing, or require restaurants to meet minimum standards — it’s about changing the culture that was before.

          • Thor Alexander Michelsen

            Here it is: http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract. Theres also a couple of articles about it.

            And yes, i know its normal to play dictator and force cultural change through force and/or violence. Dosent mean its a good idea.

    • Mr B J Mann

      And how do you measure “equality” in the boardroom?,

      40% women? 50%?!

      As even a lefty “liberal” feminist authored report in the Economist pointed out: most women chose to work in organisations without boards of directors (eg teaching, health), most who do, choose to work in areas that don’t tend to lead to the board (eg research), and where they do work in line management they tend to choose not to put in the hours, make the sacrifices, or fight as hard as is necessary to get to the top of the greasy pole!!!

      The talent pool is nowhere near 50:50, or even 60:40.

      So why should the board be anything near 60:40, never mind 50:50?!?!?!!!!!!

      • Claire Hosking

        Yes, issues like the gendering of labour is something we would have to address to reach parity, I agree. And yeah, 50% is equality.

        • Mr B J Mann

          So you’re saying that women should be forced to do jobs they don’t want to?

          Or does “gendering” mean forcing some of the men on boards to have sex changes?!?!?!!!!

          • Claire Hosking

            Nope, it means changing society’s stereotypes and reducing the pressure on people to pick jobs that are “right for their gender”.

          • Tom Prescott

            And what if they ARE right for their gender, on average? There are innate gender differences in psychology, that is a psychological and neurological fact, no matter what you have been told, gender is biology and has been there throughout most of evolution, it is not a 2social construct” as feminists laughably claim. if it was merely a social construct, and men have all the perks as they claim, they should just reconstruct themselves as men. Or perhaps just during the working day? It is laughable logic.

          • Claire Hosking

            I think the great changes in men and women’s roles over the last century show that yes, a lot of the ways the two genders behave are totally socially conditioned. I think we’re all a lot closer than we’ve been taught to think. Which is a wonderful thing really — that we all share a common humanity and can bond over our shared hopes, dreams and experiences.

          • Tom Prescott

            the changes in gender roles over the last century have been forced, artificial, and counter-productive in many cases.

            I am not in favour of enforcing gender roles. If there are exceptions, let them succeed on merit. but lets not pretend there are not natural gender roles, that goes against nature and is absurd.

            I wonder what a primitive amazonian tribe would say if you told them that gender was a social construct? they would think you are insane, because it is so obviously a part of nature to them.

          • Claire Hosking

            Why would I expect a pre-science tribe to know more about anything (except itself) than an advanced society like ours?

          • Tom Prescott

            Don’t claim to be citing science please, you are ignoring all evolutionary science in its entirety pretty much.

          • Claire Hosking

            What? You know there’s evolutionary science besides evolutionary psychology, right? You don’t have to believe in gender roles to read The Selfish Gene.

          • Tom Prescott

            And the evolutionary science beyond evolutionary psychology also reinforces what I am saying.

            “You don’t have to believe in gender roles to read The Selfish Gene.”

            You do if you understand it fully. I would refer you to “The Red Queen” on this topic.

          • Tom Prescott

            the reason you would expect a primitive tribe to know it is it is utterly common sense, something the modern world seems to have lost.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Yes, but people aren’t the best at something because they are a happy average normal: they are are best because they are at the extreme.

            And the genders differ on those extremes.

            It’s no use arguing that it doesn’t matter how you pair Pandas if you want to produce a pregnancy because 99% of a Panda is the same whether it’s a male or a female:

            It’s the 1% difference that makes the difference, and that will get the job done for you!

            Well there’s certainly one thing women are better at than men:

            Illogical thinking.

            Oh, and refusing to accept when they are wrong!

    • C-4

      You’re not entitled to “gain” in the boardroom. If you had the talent, you’d be there already.

      Until women make significant gains in construction, stone masonry, the military, fire fighting, plumbing, garbage collection, etc – then you can forget the board room. Why should we be selectively outraged about “inequality” in board rooms and films, but think gross overrepresentation of men in the above fields is perfectly ok? No, see, you just want to be artificially elevated so you can usurp the few cushy, comfortable jobs men still have – you don’t want to be burdened with the downsides of being a man. It’s about throwing us back out into manual labor, since you ice queens aren’t clamoring for THOSE positions.

      If men are the most qualified for the job, it shouldn’t matter if they make up 70-90% in any given field or industry. Similarly, nurses and teachers are overwhelmingly women, are we supposed to impose a quota there and “make things more equal”? No, women are better at those jobs so it makes sense that they’re there.

      What you want is emasculation and usurpation of men from the highest rung of society, based on your latent penis envy. Stop pretending otherwise. Quit the damn charade already.

      • Claire Hosking

        I work in architecture, so yeah, I’m pretty pro-women in construction and trades, as it happens. And it’s been feminists who’ve long pushed for women to be able to have combat roles in the army, too.

        The idea that women don’t get into the boardroom because they lack talent is just saying that men are more talented than women. That’s ridiculous and sexist. Women are equally talented to men, they just face this kind of sexism that stops them from getting the same dues: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/

        • Tom Prescott

          “And it’s been feminists who’ve long pushed for women to be able to have combat roles in the army, too.”

          Yes, but with lower fitness standards. So equal pay for cushier conditions as usual, that is what equality means now.

          I also don’t ever see any feminists clamouring for the military draft to apply to women too. If there was a real war tomorrow men could be forcibly sent to their deaths, women couldn’t.

          “The idea that women don’t get into the boardroom because they lack talent is just saying that men are more talented than women. That’s ridiculous ”

          It is not ridiculous at all, you just don’t like it. On average, gender has little bearing on intellect, but if you select the top 1% in something as simple as IQ, most will be men. And it is not sexist because it is the same for the bottom 1% too, mostly men. This is a fact, just as it is not racist to say that black people tend to win olympic records more. it is a selection effect which only tends to manifest at the extremes.

        • C-4

          http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/opinions/williams-ceci-women-in-science/index.html

          You’re pushing mythology.

          No they’re not. Men have specific abilities that women do not. You’re pro women in construction and combat, that’s fine and dandy, but recent articles have shown that even though many women WANT to to become firefighters/soldiers, they can’t make the grade. Their bodies are just not designed to carry 100 lbs of gear on their back all day, and they certainly can’t lift/rescue an obese person from a house-fire when seconds count.

          This is my point. Just because women WANT to be firefighters or soldiers doesn’t mean they have what it takes to do the job. Putting under-qualified women in occupations/positions of power in the name of ideological “equality” would be an absolute nightmare when they clearly cannot handle it. This is not about infantile temper tantrums about life not being fair and patriarchy, it’s about practical real world talent and know-how. Women overwhelmingly don’t have it. Exceptions to the rule must never be used as a justification to rewrite said rule. Enough of this androgynous agitprop.

          • Claire Hosking

            I didn’t know you needed to lift a morbidly obese person from a housefire in order to sit on a board.

          • C-4

            Exactly my point. Fighting for 50/50 equality in occupations like firefighting, construction, military is conveniently a low priority for you because you know damn well women don’t want those jobs/can’t do those jobs nearly as well as a man.

            My point is if some fields naturally have higher male representation, that’s not evidence of some form of systemic oppression and that’s certainly not an “imbalance” that needs to be “addressed” or “corrected.” If blacks are over-represented in basketball, that’s the way it is and that’s the way it should stay. Undermining the game for the sake of other people’s feelings, or for the sake of somebody’s ideology, takes away from the game.

            You don’t sit on a board by whining and crying oppression, you get there by doing the work/putting in the effort, and with an overwhelming majority of women listening to their nurturing/mothering instincts instead of your propaganda (and thus becoming teachers and nurses instead), that means most women aren’t even going to TRY to enter board rooms, let alone succeed at doing so. It makes sense that fewer women sit on the board, just as it makes sense that more men are firefighters and more blacks are basketball players – we have an innate predisposition to it and a proficiency that makes us better at it.

          • Claire Hosking

            So you’re saying, because women can’t do some jobs we well as men, they shouldn’t expect to be equal even in the jobs they can do as well as men. That’s illogical. I don’t think women are less talented at being on boards.

          • C-4

            No, I’m saying they shouldn’t expect to see EQUAL REPRESENTATION of both sexes in those professions. They shouldn’t expect more women in board rooms if there aren’t a lot of women clamoring for that position to begin with.

            What you essentially want is social engineering. Reeducation. You NEED 50/50 representation in board rooms to assuage your anxiety about patriarchy and oppression being real, and if you have to bypass a woman’s instinct/better sense and then condition her for the “greater good” of quotas and women’s lib, then so be it.

          • Claire Hosking

            I think we should expect to see equal representation where the sexes are equally good, and I can’t see any reason women wouldn’t be equally good at being on boards.

            I don’t want re-education, I just want women to grow up with the same encouragement and expectations given to men. To have as many role models, to see themselves represented in those roles just as often as men do. Only then will we know that little girls are choosing freely.

          • C-4

            Where’s your proof that women are “equally good” at running companies? You feel that’s the case. It’s all about the bottom line at the end of the day, if greedy corporations think women will maximize their profits, they will hire/appoint more women to the upper echelons.

            There will always be eccentrics/exceptions to the rule, like say Carly Fiorina (although ironically people say she was a terrible CEO), but if women were equally good at being on boards, they would be there in larger numbers. Competent business women are the exception, not the rule. Period.

            More women in nursing is not evidence of sexism against men. More men in construction is not evidence of sexism against women. It’s evidence that both sexes are innately disinterested in those respective fields, and generally have limited capacity in some respect to excel at those careers.

            “As many role models” – the only way this will be practical is if you socially engineer more women to BECOME role models when they would rather just live their lives and not be a symbol for YOUR struggle.

            We KNOW what women are choosing freely. You just don’t like the choices they’re making.

          • Claire Hosking

            Why would being a woman make you bad a running a company? That’s ridiculous.

          • C-4

            Less assertive, more emotional, more impulsive, less intelligent.

            Although the average women tends to be slightly smarter than the average man, it’s the exceptional men that rise to the occasion in the corporate world, not the rabble. The people with the very highest IQs in the world tend to be overwhelmingly male, and they’re the inventors, the risk takers, the visionaries, the economists, the bankers, etc.

            You look at the “male dominated” world and act as though men have a white privilege card that automatically elevates them to CEO by virtue of how they were born. You see the similarly in outward appearance, but the difference between a CEO and the average man is less visible – the BRAIN. The average man doesn’t have what it takes to run a company, nor does the average woman. It’s just by happenstance that more men are geniuses than women. It’s not oppression. What do you suggest? Inflict head trauma on the world’s smartest men to make things more equal? Force them into hospitals for brain transplants so average women can be equal via organ donation?

            More exceptional men = more men in exceptional roles. It’s fate.

          • Tom Prescott

            “Why would being a woman make you bad a running a company? That’s ridiculous.”

            Why would being white make you bad at running? That is ridiculous. And yet olympic medal winners tend to be black disproportionately. It is because selection effects like this only come into play at the extremes. The average black man is no better at running than the average white man, but if you select the very best, they tend to be black. same with gender, if you select the top 1% in business abiltiy, they will tend to be male (this is true for the bottom 1% too).

          • Mr B J Mann

            You are Mz Charlotte Proudman and I claim my £5!

            Are you TRYING to PROVE women are INCAPABLE of logic?!

            If no, or even very few, women try to achieve a particular position, regardless of their ability, no, or very few, will achieve it.

            But if you are a typical example you demonstrate why you shout so loudly for legally enforced quotas!

            Even if women were potentially the best mountaineers in the world, eve if they were the best mountaineers in the world, if no, or very few of them, tried to reach the top of everest, then no, or very few of them, would reach the top of Everest, and men wouldn’t be 60%, or 99%, of the people who reached +the top”, they would b 99%n or 100%!

            Which bit of that does feminine “logic” struggle with?!

            It’s obvious why you are an architect and not an engineer!!!

          • Claire Hosking

            I’m also a programmer, if it helps.

          • Mr B J Mann

            BBC?!

          • Mr B J Mann

            No, it clearly didn’t help you to counter the logic of my argument.

            In fact it’s a typical feminine quarelling tactic.

          • Dan Theman

            Let me mansplain to you why your logic is deeply flawed.

            Far more women than men pursue a career in nursing right? So what if male quotas were then introduced? What would be the outcome? Men would get hired just because they have a penis, & women who would otherwise earn the job on merit would now be out of work.

            For an example, say of all the people who pursue a career in nursing, 90% are women & 10% are men. Male gender quotas are then enforced…

            Soon enough 50% of those hired in nursing are men. If the jobs were decided on merit, you’d expect the % of women in the job to be relative to the % of women pursuing the career, which is 90% in this example. But because you’ve now enforced gender quotas, women are now only being hired at 50%, denying roughly 40% of the women who pursue a career in nursing a job.

            It’s the same with high end management & politics, far more men than women pursue a career in these fields hence there ‘should be’ far more men than women with a job in these fields, anything else is discrimination.

            & you can apply the same logic to any female or male dominated career.

            The thing about women like you is that you think there’s all a big conspiracy, that men get the job just because ‘they are men.’ No! That’s not how it works, the male world works on competition & merit.

            Men who are successful work bloody hard to get where they’re at, & you want equal representation of women for none other reason than they have a vagina & you have one too.

            If you can’t understand what I clearly demonstrated to you just now than there’s no helping you. Your emotion is clouding your judgement.

          • Claire Hosking

            Ok.

          • Mr B J Mann

            S/he never said that.

            You’re an MCP trying to undermine women by posting hysterical nonsense, aren’t you?!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Classic example of feminine “logic”!

        • Angi Hillin

          No one says they aren’t talented. Women don’t get the same dues because they get pregnant and have kids and take care of them. A wonderful quality, but there are plenty of women who DO get in these careers because either their husband stays home with the kids or they CHOOSE to sacrifice their families for their career. THAT’s what feminism used to be about. And we have it. No one ever said the choice is fun, but now you have the right to make that choice. The fact that more women don’t choose it is not “unfairness”, but because we are the child bearers and we get attached more thoroughly.

    • Dan Theman

      Ok, so you advocate for 50% of all nurses to be men even though far more women pursue a career in nursing? Effectively denying many women who would otherwise earn the job on merit, & giving them to men just because they have a penis.

      Use your head, far more men pursue a career in high end management & politics so there should be far more men in high end management & politics… It’s that simple really.

      All you’re advocating is female superiority & sexism against men.

      • Claire Hosking

        The question is why they do tho — is it an inherent tendency, or is it culturally conditioned? I think the fact that women and men’s roles have changed so much over the last century suggests that these roles are culturally conditioned, and that the gender ratio would be much more equal in those professions if we didn’t place such gendered expectations on the career choices of young people.

        • Tom Prescott

          “The question is why they do tho — is it an inherent tendency, or is it culturally conditioned?”

          it is clearly an inherent tendancy since gender roles have been distinct throughout most cultures througout most of history and prehistory. We understand from rigorous science the effect that different hormones and gentics have on behaviour, we have MRI scans showing that men and women think differently, we have experimental evidence about decision making which can correct for cultural difference……

          you are arguing against nature, against evolution. It is silly. And even if you were right, and gender was a social construct, the goal should be equality of opportunity for all, not an artificial “equality” of outcome which means promoting people unmeritocratically. I have no problem with women being given the same opportunities to succed on merit. Where I have a problem is men getting passed over by far less competent and qualified women just because they are women. Call it what you like, “positive discrimination” or whatever, it is still straightforward sexism if the determining factor for success is gender and not ability or qualifications/experience.

          • Claire Hosking

            Having MRIs that show men and women think differently doesn’t disprove cultural conditioning. It probably shows cultural conditioning affects the way we think. There’s evidence people from one culture think differently to people from other ones, which again, shows cultural conditioning affects the way we think. Brains grow in flexible ways, not predetermined patterns.

            It’s true, I think there should be equal opportunity. But given I think women are equally capable to men, I think equal outcomes is evidence of equal opportunity, and unequal outcomes are evidence of a lack of equal opportunity. So we’re both working towards the same goal.

          • Tom Prescott

            “Having MRIs that show men and women think differently doesn’t disprove cultural conditioning. It probably shows cultural conditioning affects the way we think.”

            Actually it shows a lot more than that. You can pretty much tell what gender someone is from an mri scan. Those whose brains look like the other gender tend to be transgender. This is well understood in terms of basic hormonal physiology. It has been shown numerous times that female ways of thinking can be brought about through oestrogen supplements, male ways of thinking can be brought about through testosterone supplements, of course this is an oversimplification but it is quite well understood biology on a genetic and hormonal level., Not only that, but it is absolutely rudimentary evolutionary biology that nature has evolved the genders for different things. Our psychology is a product of our evolution and our evolution is a product of natural selection, which I am sure you will agree is different for men and women. throughout all of history and throughout almost all cultures they have had clearly defined gender roles. these have not always been rigid and inflexible but they have always been there. Our bodies are just vehicles for propagating genes when we get down to it, and males and females CLEARLY have different strategies for doing this and always have. without being rude, to suggest gender is a social construct shows about the same level of understanding of evolution as a creationist.

            “It’s true, I think there should be equal opportunity. But given I think women are equally capable to men, I think equal outcomes is evidence of equal opportunity, and unequal outcomes are evidence of a lack of equal opportunity. So we’re both working towards the same goal.”

            Well not really, because you won’t believe any evidence of equality of opportunity unless you see equality of outcome, two different things whatever you believe. You are basically admitting to circular logic here.

            And if you REALLY believed in all this you would care just as much for all the men in crap low paid manual labour jobs subject to unpleasant conditions, with back-breaking work and the much higher likleyhood of workplace injury or death. you would also be concerned about the academic achievements of young boys falling behind, about men comprising the majority of suicides, about a lack of refuges for male victims of domestic violence, and a million other things.

          • Claire Hosking

            “And if you REALLY believed in all this you would care just as much for all the men in crap low paid manual labour jobs subject to unpleasant conditions, with back-breaking work and the much higher likleyhood of workplace injury or death.” But I am? I’m a constant advocate for better working conditions, especially for low paid jobs. Most recently I’ve been very concerned about the push to get rid of penalty rates in australia, which would be a big problem for low paid service jobs.

          • Tom Prescott

            You dodge the point, do you want quotas to force women to do unpleasant physical labour that men traditionally do, or only quotas for the nice jobs like boardrooms? If you want one you must want the other too, or else that is hypocrisy.

          • Tom Prescott

            Why suddenly delete all your comments?

          • Mr B J Mann

            It’s finally clicked, she’s seen the light, and realised how incredibly stupid she’s been.

            Some of them do grow up and reach maturity eventually!

          • Tom Prescott

            I doubt it. I bet you she is thinking “no point arguing with those evil patriarchal misogynists” right now. shame, as it was a civilised conversation from both sides, that she had to revert to feminist type and run away.

          • Project Zeta

            I saw this as a tail between the legs act…
            +1 for the Good Guys!

          • Mr B J Mann

            She probably only wants to ban men holding more than 50% of nasty jobs (and being subject to fill more than 50% of any military draft).

            And “only” force companies (and governments) to fill the other 50% with women?!

          • Claire Hosking

            I’m curious — do you really believe if you’d been born a woman, you’d be so different in your hopes and dreams?

          • Tom Prescott

            “I’m curious — do you really believe if you’d been born a woman, you’d be so different in your hopes and dreams?”

            Absolutely I do. Many women don’t get just how differently men think from them. If I had been born female my psychology would be completely different. As we get older we appreciate these differences more and can have more understanding, but as children we don’t understand such differences well and only see the world through the prism of what seems intuitive.

          • Claire Hosking

            Sad for you, believing we’re so destined to be disimilar.

          • Mr B J Mann

            There are half a dozen surviving matriarchal cultures (and if there were more: why did they die out?!) where the women run the household, inherit, own, pass on to their daughters, all property, choose who to marry, and when and if to divorce, choose the tribal leaders, and their replacements……

            But, guess what, they always choose a man to lead the tribe!!!!

    • Angi Hillin

      So the goal isn’t really equality, it’s for every 1 man put in a position we must put 1 woman? And that doesn’t sound at all silly to you? It doesn’t matter if enough women aren’t applying, or have the skill/ability, just 1 man = 1 woman?

  • Cyril Sneer

    So what’s going to happen about these under performing white boys?

    F ck all. That’s what.

    Even the author of this article makes one mention of this and then continues waffling on about the advancement of women.

    “a law which will require that two in five executive board members of the largest public companies are women”

    Great so we have quotas in place of talent – so in effect a more talented man could lose out to a less talented woman.

    How is this good? How is this fair?

    This is inverted sexism, or just plain old sexism – if you’re a man then even though you’re more skilled at this job you will lose out because you weren’t born with a fricking vagina.

    Angry today – I just want take an AK47 to every virtue signalling leftist s.o.b.

    • cartimandua

      Meanwhile there are supposed to be more black men at the top of the police force when the % of black people in the population is 2% or 3 %. They may be over represented in the crime stats but not in the general population.
      Women are 51% of the population and don’t go on about living longer. That’s no longer true.

      • Paul Robson

        Isn’t it ? Sure it’s not still averaging 2-3 years ?

        I know you don’t do sums or logic but ‘catching up’ is not the same as ‘not living longer’ ; the recent study showed it had shrunk from about 6 years 30 years ago to 3 now, and estimated 2 in 2030.

      • Zxya Ayx

        Are you sure the percentage isn’t 12-13? Because I doubt that’s true, considering I looked it up and also common sense would stand to reason. I don’t know about you, but black people aren’t exactly rare.

    • dwarfpoo

      correct. That statistic of white working class boys in education is decades old, nothing is or has been done about it. Utter disgrace. Sexist adverts, sexist courts etc. positive discrimination my toot..sexism.

      • Nick D

        Yes and nothing will ever be done about it. I have a theory that white men have dominated the world because we have always realized that the world is not a fair place for anyone, and if you wait for someone to give you what you feel you deserve you will die waiting. That is why we have always taken the most initiative to achieve at a high level through hard work not by grievance mongering and whining. We just all have to continue to outwork everyone else, and we will continue to dominate, no matter what the identity politics crowd does. Workers always win out over complainers.

        • Nick D

          And I would further say that poor under educated white boys will unfortunately continue to underachieve as they always have. The difference in the white community is there is a great shame placed upon these people as classified clearly and without any outrage as “white trash” I don’t know of any other race that refers to their underachievers as “trash”

        • dwarfpoo

          it is well documented boys learn differently than girls and instead of celebrating the differences between the sexes we are emasculating boys. I do find it wrong that money is available for e.g., science/ computer initiatives for girls and minorities , the same funding is not available for boys. Classroom assistants are funded for children who speak English as a second language but not for a child who is struggling where one to one help could make all the difference in confidence.Whilst the TV is not a priority in our home, the portrayal of men as imbeciles reinforces the feedback boys are receiving in school. University applications for boys this year is very low, we no longer have proper apprenticeships.

    • C-4

      The newly elected Canadian prime minster is doing the same thing in his cabinet appointments – making sure there’s an equal number of men and women. Talent is irrelevant.

    • Dan Theman

      They always fail to grasp the concept that there are far more men who aim for & work towards these positions.

      Use nursing, a predominantly female field, as a comparison. Are the majority of nurses women because the hiring process is sexist against men? No, it’s because far more women than men pursue a job in nursing.

      & that’s exactly why the majority of high end management & political jobs are occupied by men. It’s not exactly rocket science.

      As soon as you enforce quotas for women your being sexist against men, & hurting their families (which obviously include women) who are reliant on the man’s earnings. A woman in one of these high end jobs is far less likely to be supporting a family.

      In fact, I can almost guarantee you that even as we speak, women are being hired at a comfortably higher percentage than they are applying for these jobs, in comparison to men.

      I guarantee you that the hiring process is already damaging & sexist against men.

    • Nick D

      You were good until you referenced the AK47 and the mass murdering. That only furthers the stereotype that anyone who speaks against feminism is a violent misogynist. I actually upvoted you until I read that last sentence. You can’t win an argument by stepping down into the mud to sling it with the low lifes.

  • cartimandua

    And in the workplace Em more women are in zero hours contracts and part time insecure work and only a tiny % of women are in top jobs.

    Its the kids you see . Men still want to be Dads but then the workplace isn’t “for it” really whichever parent actually wants to parent.

    http://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/factfile/

    I was once asked when applying for an NHS job whether I was planning to get pregnant.

    • Michael R.

      “I just asked my wife to work the same hours as I do and share the child care evenly.” the newly divorced father said.

    • Paul Robson

      Difficult to take seriously an organisation devoted to a non existent equality gap.

      I’m sure “Em” knows that more women are on part time low paid work. And it is “the kids” ; ask any teacher about teaching assistants ; they are virtually *all* female because the job fits school time pretty much perfectly.

    • Andy M

      “I was once asked when applying for an NHS job whether I was planning to get pregnant.”

      Good. They are fully within their rights to want to know if, after they put the time and money into training you, you will be off on maternity for the best part of a year, then possibly another year and another year if you’re going to have more. They have a service to provide to the public and need to try to maximize their efficiency to provide the best possible service.

    • Strazdas

      less than 10% of manual labour jobs are done by women. we must fix this inequality by making more woment sewage cleaners, builders, oil rig workers (actually one of the best paid professions out there), deep sea fishers, etc.

  • misogynist

    Poor child. The daughter of a greengrocer, that explains it. Apparently she graduated from university but could not read. What a string of stupidity, misinformed opinion… Of course, her head is a sewer… Misogynistic brat – the Mail should send her to the sewer again and keep her there. Sickening stupidity. That is it – I am cancelling my subscription to the New Spectator.

    “Emily Hill is a freelance writer. The Evening Standard Londoner’s Diary had her gatecrash a funeral and the Mail on Sunday sent her down a sewer.”

    • Reggie Anderson

      ‘I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding. It means they have not a single political argument left.’ ~ Margaret Thatcher.

      Thank you for proving the validity of this entire article.

    • http://quiettowers.wordpress.com/ InRussetShadows

      Apparently the writer has the ability to reduce you to sputtering, incoherent rage. She also has the power to cause you to reveal all your toxic attitudes, which I find interesting. You have incriminated yourself without even realizing it!

    • Nick D

      Are you a troll, trying to represent the worst of what a feminist harpie can be? I find it really unbelievable that a so called feminist supporter could use such repugnant terms to describe her fellow sister. I mean what is wrong with you? Why are you so nihilistic?

    • Zxya Ayx

      I’m calling bullshit that you exist
      This is not something
      You
      Could you even give an argument bro, because you didn’t

  • cartimandua

    And by the way Hynde was gang raped by professional rapists. She is guilty of being right on so she didn’t spot the risk. She is also guilty of not spotting her own masochism.
    Rape victims often do minimize it all to mentally survive or assume guilt since that means they still have some power.
    Truth is an overpowered rape victim doesn’t have the physical strength and may be frozen with horror.
    Only the fault of the rapists. Rapists plan to rape and rape at least 6 xs before they are caught.

    • Tom Prescott

      How condescending that you tell someone how to feel about a trauma that happened in their life, not yours. All she has said was that she was reckless to hang around with “professional rapists” as you call them. Which is clearly common sense. she is not “minimising” anything, she is not a masochist for suggesting she should not have hung around with types like that and to suggest so is patronising and absurd.

    • http://quiettowers.wordpress.com/ InRussetShadows

      You have over-esteemed your clairvoyance and clairaudience powers.

    • jdgalt

      I find the notion of “professional rapists” intriguing.  Who pays them?  ;-b

  • Maureen Fisher

    Men should go on strike for a week. Caitlin Moran would not have her bins emptied, the pavement outside her house fixed, the boiler repaired, the buses, trains or tubes driven and the streets swept. On the other hand, nobody would miss her and her sisters at the Guardian’s p**s poor scribblings.

  • cartimandua

    http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/SouthAsianhealth/Pages/Overview.aspx

    “If you’re from a south Asian background, you’re more likely than people from other communities in the UK to have certain health conditions.

    This is also the case for some mixed-race people of south Asian descent. The term ‘south Asian’ in these articles refers to anyone of Indian, Bangladeshi, Pakistani or Sri Lankan origin. While each of these communities has its own unique culture and background, they all share some common health issues.

    Diabetes and heart disease

    People from south Asian communities can be up to six times more likely to have diabetes than the general population. Pakistani women are especially at risk. The risk of dying early from coronary heart disease is twice as high among South Asian groups compared with the general population. Experts aren’t sure why this is the case, but it may be linked to diet, lifestyle and different ways of storing fat in the body.”
    And that’s because weedy people demonize anyone who mentions negative effects of women culturally being covered and indoors.

  • Revd Robert West

    The case of the feminites has always, it seems to me, been a bad one. They have behighted themselves equality, and all they have begot is extinction. Is that progress, I ask? Imagine a farm where all the ewes, cows and sows thought of themselves as too good to beget lambs, calves and piglets. Within a couple of generations that farm would be barren and the beasties all extinct, maybe replaced by others: wild and ferocious ones at that. Is that not what is happening as the Mohammedans outbreed us? Is feminitism not self-genocide? I think it is: the feminites are exterminators worse than the gas ovens and the NKVD of Joseph Stalin. A woman’s duty is not to be a feminite but to bring forth in holy wedlock. It is time to reverse feminitisim, not rejoice in its alleged success, and to bring the women of Britain back under control.

    • cartimandua

      Er men like to be Fathers too and the problem is the middles are too taxed supporting the feckless to have children themselves.

      • Revd Robert West

        Tend to agree with you: there should be tax breaks for the wedded and the wedded who have children.

        • cartimandua

          Much more help for 1 child per adult so that the middles can afford to have children.

  • C-4

    Feminism is Marxist conspiracy to destroy the nuclear family as Marx commanded. It never consisted of anything more than that. Feminist women suffer from self-imposed sexual amnesia, where they forget their biological makeup and purpose in life. In the midst of this fugue state, they imagine themselves as perfectly equal in every respect: entitled revolutionaries and careerists that can “have it all” but somehow the existence of successful men anywhere is a hindrance to this fantasy being realized.

    Feminism relentlessly exploits the power of the state in order to evict white males from the annals of power incrementally. The hope is to prevent future white generations from being born by emasculating white men and then simultaneously encouraging white women to either succumb to lesbiansism or procreate with nonwhites. “Equality” was just a ruse to ingratiate themselves into respectable society so they could spread their noxious poison in academia and elsewhere. For example – isn’t it convenient that they only care about unsubstantiated rape allegations on campuses (“rape culture”) when white jocks are the accused, meanwhile they don’t seem to care or make a fuss about Rotherham, Peterborough, Telford, Oxford rape gangs? Why do you suppose that is? Strange, inexplicable double standard, right? The also support mass immigration policies that will guarantee more interracial rape!

    I have a theory. White girls getting raped by Pakistani men are traumatized damaged goods and less likely to procreate and form families, so feminists/left wingers are ok with THAT form of rape continuing unabated because it means fewer white people. Whatever destroys the white legacy faster.

    The New Left’s neo-Marxists are attacking our economic system vicariously through the culture. Demographic displacement followed closely by economic usurpation. Nonwhites tend to vote far left and tend to be on social assistance. In a few generations, all remaining vestiges of white culture and capitalism will cease to exist and we brought it on ourselves when we embraced the Trojan Horse of feminism. We gleefully signed our own death warrant by entertaining the counterintuitive BS delusion about “equality.” Way to go, comrades.

    • cartimandua

      You assume feminists are all Lefties. I can tell you that is just not so.

      • C-4

        “Most” feminism derives from Women’s Studies courses on college campuses, does it not?

        Women’s Studies, Gender Studies, Queerstudies, are all based on Marxist critical theory and its derivative “critical race theory.” “White privilege theory” was developed by Marxist intellectual Theodor W Allen, and is now a mainstay in feminist thought. “Standpoint theory” was also developed by a Marxist. Every single idea feminists cling to has a convenient Marxist origin.

        Name me feminists that aren’t left-wing.

        • Tom Prescott

          Well I am left-wing but I am anti-feminist, so please don’t think all lefties are like this. I know many other very left-wing people who I know quietly disagree with feminists but don’t feel able to say it openly, such is their hold on the left discourse unfortunately. Many men in particular on the left have felt increasingly uncomfortable about this for a while now but it is almost impossible to address till there is a critical mass who will support any reasonable criticism of their dogma. This is changing rapidly though. I long for the day when we grow up and stop indulging these narcissists on the left of politics.

          • E.B. Wolf

            “Please don’t think all lefties are like this.”
            No one said all lefties are feminists.
            “Many men in particular on the left have felt increasingly uncomfortable about this for a while now but it is almost impossible to address till there is a critical mass who will support any reasonable criticism of their dogma.”
            So you’re saying leftist men tend to be cowards. No breaking news there.

          • Tom Prescott

            People on all sides of the political spectrum do not challenge prevailing views, especially when there are other battles to be fought. Don’t make out the right-wing has any moral high-ground on this. They lap up the feminist propaganda almost as much, David Cameron even had something equivalent to a women’s only shortlist, where electoral candidates could only be picked from a list stuffed full of ineffective women to make up numbers. Feminism may have it’s home on the left but it is established dogma amongst the mainstream right too.

            This is a battle whose time has come and I for one will be glad to see left-wing politics purged of these facist loonies.

          • C-4

            I agree to an extent. Cameron is a fraud, I will certainly concede that he’s right wing and take the blame for him, but what is a right winger to do in a politically correct society where women and nonwhites are calling the shots? Tell the truth? Offend sensibilities? That won’t translate to votes, constituents want to be placated, kowtowed to, etc. When feminism becomes mainstream, then all “credible/electable” politicians have to kiss the ring and pander to them.

            Feminism became mainstream because the culture swung radically to the left in the sixties and its flower children grew up and now dominate the institutions. Right wingers, desperate to survive in an increasingly indoctrinated, easily offended culture, have had to temper their message and make it appealing to the useful idiots, which includes an unwilling incorporation of left wing dogma into the message.

            Don’t get me wrong, David Cameron is a snake and a con artist who is a willing participant in all this, that guy is phony opposition and is an enthusiastic proponent of multiculturalism, feminism, the EU, etc. But right wingers HAVE also been backed into a corner where they have to espouse this unconscionable BS or else.

          • Tom Prescott

            ” what is a right winger to do in a politically correct society where women and nonwhites are calling the shots? Tell the truth? Offend sensibilities? That won’t translate to votes, constituents want to be placated, kowtowed to, etc. When feminism becomes mainstream, then all “credible/electable” politicians have to kiss the ring and pander to them.”

            If you think right-wingers have been backed into a corner inagine what it is like to be surrounded by these idiots! Imagine how anti-feminists on the left feel! If you are engaged in left-wing politics, you have to pay lip service to the feminists or they will destroy you! Jeremy Corbyn kissed their arse and they repayed him by attacking and insulting him, they are never happy! Most anti-feminist lefties I know think other battles are more important to fight because there are even more serious issues, like disabled people dying due to IDS’s cuts, etc. If the people who support fighting those causes happen to be feminists, it doesn’t pay to alienate them. Unfortunately this attitude has led to some degree of complacency and they have got totally out of control, they are a cancer eating all of society from within, and their base is indeed on the left sadly. I have been warning about this for many years, it seems finally people are starting to see that the problem moust be confronted. feminists have the power to end your career on the spot in most political parties, even the right-wing ones, so anyone who wants to achieve anything has to pander to them. I am glad this seems to be changing right now.

            As for David Cameron, the man doesn’t even stick to traditional tory values, which I respect (although disagree with). He was exactly the type Thatcher had to fight to get into power, he is old-guard, hates the poor, doesn’t believe in social mobility, and says “I am not a conviction politician”. If only the tories had chosen David Davies for leader, that man has more intergrity on his little finger than scum like Cameron, Osbourne, IDS, thoroughly nasty people, who don’t have any values, tory or otherwise. Thatcher would be ashamed of this current shower.

          • C-4

            I sympathize with people on the left being attacked, I really do. But especially with Corbyn, I also liken it to Frankenstein being attacked by his monster, or a loyal Soviet toady being purged by Stalin after outliving his usefulness. I am willing to bet the most vocal left-wing opponents of feminism were one time supporters that become slowly disillusioned overtime once they realized how malicious and insidious it truly was.

            Feminists will never be happy because their activist trajectory is at odds with their ticking biological clock, and without an attentive husband to henpeck, they will increasingly join forces to nag complete strangers. The patriarch (husband, boyfriend) is replaced by “the patriarchy” (government) and women collectively demand resources from it the way they would do a husband if they were even remotely attractive or feminine.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Institutionalised henpeckery of the unattractive!

            Love it!

          • C-4

            Not all lefties are feminist, but all feminists are lefties. Or they’re “go along to get along” well-intentioned useful idiots that have been duped.

            Look up Shulamith Firestone and her book “The Dialectic of Sex” – tell me that’s not the model that these modern feminists adhere to. It’s perfectly ok for individual leftists to distance themselves from feminism, but it’s absolutely unacceptable to distance feminism from the left. This is, unfortunately, your baby. Not yours in particular, just your side of the aisle.

            It’s not just a fringe laughing stock like Westboro Baptist Church is on the right. Feminism is the dominant paradigm of the system we pay taxes to, the industries that entertain us/sell us products, etc.

          • http://quiettowers.wordpress.com/ InRussetShadows

            Interesting. I appreciate your honesty.

          • Tom Prescott

            I have never liked the idea of pigeon-holing peoples views into one camp or another. Each topic should be considered independently.

          • Bram

            Absolutely agree. As a good old fashioned lefty I find the descent of these “progressives” into terminal narcissism abhorrent.

      • Tamerlane

        The other three are Tories eh? Well thanks for that.

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

        Like Christina Hoff Sommers. She self-identifies as a feminist and is most certainly not leftist.

        @c4seafour:disqus

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

      Feminism has existed in one form or another since at least 1848 (the famous conference of Seneca Falls, NY), the same year Marx published his communist manifesto and some 2-3 decades before Das Kapital — and I’m pretty sure long before that. Don’t you think it would have taken some time before feminists could organise in response to Marx’s writings?

      Feminists have heavily borrowed from Marxism, to be sure, but each movement has its own quite distinct history.

  • peterdavis

    In the past, feminism campaigned over ‘things’: the vote, equal pay, contraception, childcare facilities, abortion – material things that were above and beyond personalities. And through legislation and money being spent, these were achieved, to a lesser or greater extent.

    Today, feminism campaigns over ‘attitudes’. Their targets are ‘everyday sexism’, ‘toxic masculinity’, ‘rape culture’ – these are not material things. That is why the modern feminist weapon is the consent class, the safe space, quotas, shaming men on twitter, and banning speakers and speech deemed inappropriate.

    It is particularly dangerous because it is so authoritarian. How can you change the attitude that men have, without literally creating speech and thought crime, and without attempting to reprogram the minds of men in a manner redolent of Maoism?

    It is intensified because those who wield this unforgiving authority, paint themselves as victims. So any man that dares object to being vilified simply for being male, is attacked with a volley of self-righteous zeal. See for example here, a young man that stood up to consent class culture at Warwick University:
    http://thetab.com/uk/warwick/2015/10/14/dont-need-consent-lessons-9925

    All of this could be written off as student union nonsense, since in reality it is promoted by a minority of people. Unfortunately, it now has the full and unequivocal backing of the entire western establishment. Barrack Obama, Angela Merkel, David Cameron – all openly and repeatedly state the legitimacy of this brand of feminism. They all parrot the skewed statistics that are used to support this mentality (the 1 in 4 rape stats, the gender pay gap stats, etc).

    So the new wave of feminism, with its desire to reinvent men in its own image, has scant support in daily life – but over-amplified support in the corridors of power and in the media. Hence it is a deeply dangerous and pernicious phenomenon. With its claims that all intimate relations are potentially abusive, and all expressions of masculinity a threat, it represents an attack on everyone that seeks a happy and normal life.

    • Earthenware

      All true but largely irrelevant as the weakened western culture will be replaced by Islam and not the Marxism that the feminists expected.

      We will go through a period of oppression by feminists when today’s tumberlinas are older and in positions of power, but it will only be temporary as Muslim birth rates change the demographic.

      I hope I’m still around when the first feminist tries to tell the local Imam that he needs to stop his patriarchal teachings :)

  • cartimandua

    C 4 As archaeology shows us gender equality has been part of northern European culture since the ice age. Before that people lived in groups anyway.
    Gender equality has made us more successful than all the places where women are treated like livestock.

    • C-4

      What do you define as gender equality? Are you saying women went to work and men were barefoot and pregnant at home? Cuz I’m pretty sure that wasn’t case.

      Western society is in a state of perpetual decay, debt and decline. If that’s “success” I’d can’t wait till we fail again.

    • lloydg

      links or you’re full of it.

      need to be peer-reviewed to count.

      I’ll bet you don’t have sh it

    • lloydg

      links or you’re full of it.

      need to be peer-reviewed to count.

      I’ll bet you don’t have sh it

    • Strazdas

      since there are no societies where women are treated like livestock, i dont think you have anything to compare success to.

  • Temporary ID

    The state of feminism today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj9dA6E3fJw

  • Guest 1

    ‘Since the suffragettes won us the vote’. No, that tiny number of violent, terroristic women did not win anyone the vote. It was the Suffragists who won the vote for women, by democratically lobbying and winning the argument.

    • Michael Steane

      No, it was men who gave women the vote. Without the concomitant duty of military service. What the feminists have achieved is the raising of the female pension age to parity with that of men.

      • Guest 1

        But the ‘giving’ was a result of the activities of the Suffragists. The men who had the vote prior to 1916 weren’t obliged to due military service in the UK.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Very few men (but some women!) had the vote before 1918!

          • Guest 1

            Around 60 per cent of men had the right to vote prior to 1918, and, as you say, some women in local elections.

  • AliceS

    It’s good of the Spectator to publish undergraduate essays.

    • Fulgentian

      What’s your point?

      • Mr B J Mann

        She thinks it’s good that Miranda Dobson could post her piece here for critical deconstruction!

  • Paul Stevenson

    feminists will never stop finding reasons to exist because it’s their job, they make money from it and they are qualified to do nothing else – they’ve got their degrees in gender and essentially the only way they can make money is by getting more people to take degrees in gender studies – it’s like an “academic” pyramid scheme – the higher ups know it’s all crap and the minions are pretty much in a cult and believe/enforce anything

  • MirandaDobson

    Utterly generalizing and narrow minded. It’s articles like this that show why we still need feminism, so thanks for proving yourself wrong Emily. Although it would be nice for feminists (of all kinds, with varying views on any one of the topics mentioned above) to not have to constantly defend themselves against mindless barrages like this, and focus on subjects like ending street harassment, reducing the pay gap, increasing paternity leave, increasing the number of women in government……..The idea that women should just “do it for themselves”, as if the reason women are under represented in certain professions and government is that no one is trying hard enough, is simply blinkered. I thought the Spectator would be above sensationalism and laziness like this article.

    • Mr B J Mann

      You could have just admitted you can’t defend feminism and saved us all the time we’ve wasted on your “contribution”!

    • peterdavis

      It’s hilarious how you claim that an article full of stats, examples, fact and figures is ‘utterly generalizing’. Just because it’s not the evidence you want, doesn’t make it wrong.
      Now, if she’d quoted those bogus stats like 1 in 4, or 81 cents to every male dollar – presumably you’d have been purring in agreement?

    • Tom Prescott

      “Although it would be nice for feminists (of all kinds, with varying views on any one of the topics mentioned above) to not have to constantly defend themselves against mindless barrages like this”

      Actually this article is a breath of fresh air and there are DAILY “mindless barrages” from feminists which go unchallenged, feminists are defending themselves from anything, they are the aggressors and recieve DAILY coverage in aminstream media for their hate, unlike counter arguments like this which (until recently at least) are 100 times rarer.

      “……focus on subjects like ending street harassment”

      Almost all actual street violence is against men. if you want to have a conversation which excludes all these victims simply for being male, and expect to have the entire discussion be about women feeling harassed, don’t expect men to give a crap, because appropriating victimhood for one gender only, the gender who are a tiny minority of victims, show that you don’t care about the issue outside of your chosen victim profile, so you will get the same attitude in reciprocity.

      “reducing the pay gap”

      There is no like-for-like pay gap, and promoting fake statistics that were debunked decades ago really does not help your cause. After decades of debunking, to still repeat it begins to feel like deliberate dishonesty. The only pay gap there is is due to women making different choices than men, which is their right.

      “…..increasing the number of women in government”

      We have a thing called democracy where people can vote for who they like. If people are not voting for women it is because those women do not have enough merit to attract votes. Germany has a female leader. America may be about to. The UK had a female leader throughout the 80’s and has had a female head of state for most of the last two centuries. There is hardly a glass ceiling her, more like women don’t tend to go into politics as much as men. Which is perfectly fine, their choice, their ability, the public’s votes. it is called democracy.

    • Jona

      You didn’t read it, did you.

    • John Lea

      I’ll tell you of one profession where women are criminally under-represented: the building trade. Miranda – let us put our minds to solving this disgusting inequality and start a campaign to get more women into low-paid jobs that involve standing in muddy building sites for 10 hours a day. We could even drag Sandi Toksvig away from her comfy house in Fulham/Notting Hill/Islington to spend a month on site (perhaps somewhere like Sunderland) to raise publicity. I’m sure she would jump at the chance to defeat this disgusting example of inequality in the workplace once and for all.

      • Blubbedey

        Also sewage works, rubbish collecting, deep sea fishing, … We should force women into those jobs until they are all 50% female.

        • Celest1ne

          Was wondering how long it would take before I found someone who said this. Exactly my point. You get equal OPPORTUNITY, not outcome.

        • cromagnum

          No not fishing!! I like fishing to much.

    • Blubbedey

      Ah, my favourite argument – People saying “we don’t need feminism” proves we need feminism. Which, conveniently for feminists, means there will never not be a need for feminism.

    • Nick D

      “The Idea that women should just do it for themselves” yes isn’t that what capitalism is about. Or do you think the world should just handout jobs and careers because women can’t do it on their own? Are you insinuating that women need special assistance to achieve at the levels men achieve at? That sounds sexist to me

    • Des Demona

      Pay gap? What pay gap? Are you insinuating that a woman gets paid less for doing the same job as a man? That’s illegal you know.

    • Zxya Ayx

      We need feminism because people say we don’t need feminism?

      Exqueeze me, but I’m an american teenage girl and I don’t need you bitches telling me I can’t do things for myself, thank you, I can handle my own shit.

  • grutchyngfysch

    Who will wave placards, or lie on the carpet of film premieres, for the cause of under-performing boys?

    No, you see you haven’t grasped how Feminism works at all. If we were to apply the principle to white boys, they wouldn’t be “under-performing”; they would be marginalised, they would be shut out of privilege, they would be discriminated against.

    At no stage would personal ability be invoked to explain a deficit in position, social regard, or attainment. It would be systematic – the product of an All Capitals Concept which could never be objectively determined, but also never be permissible to be ignored. An entire class of mystics dedicated to its mysteries would discover the great extent to which every facet of life and society excluded and hindered white boys’ latent ability – which surely if unconstrained by the Big Nasty System would naturally soar.

    Positive discrimination would make its own case, and damned be any who disagree: society would have failed white boys, and it would be society which must pay to promote and sustain their interests, no matter what some tainted test score suggested.

  • Haru Kawa

    A shockingly limited understanding of the concept of feminism, especially feminism in the modern world. There also seems to be no perception whatsoever of related issues, such as the prevailing patriarchy, privileges, internalised sexism, or the intersectionality of feminism. I genuinely wish you would go and do some proper research Emily Hill. It is absurd to declare that feminism is over, or that there’s no need for it, while all over the world, victims of rapes and domestic violence are overwhelmingly women (while the perpetrators overwhelmingly men); in many countries millions of girls are denied education, or married off to older men as teenagers. In the U.K. women are painfully underrepresented in top leadership positions, such as CEOs of FTSE companies, or as MPs; and in STEM fields – despite outdoing men at school and university. Agonising ignorance like this is one great reason why feminism must press on

    • whale biologist

      “You should educate yourself on these fictional concepts we’ve conceived to make ourselves seem oppressed.”

      Feminism seems to shrink and expand on cue – criticise it, and it is about the disgusting abuses in the third world. Leave it alone, and it becomes about the amount of clothing fictional characters wear.

      • C-4

        Disgusting abuses they otherwise ignore, or enable through their promotion of mass immigration and multiculturalism. Pakistani rape gangs never seem to be the focus of their outrage or activism. Ain’t that nice.

        • Haru Kawa

          With all due respect, you are wrong. Women and indeed men in Pakistan and India have taken to the street in mass demonstration to pressure their governments to take action on gang rapes, for example. That’s also feminism – protecting the rights and safety of women.
          Please look up intersectional feminism – which addresses situations where women may be oppressed not just because of their gender, but also because of race, religion, sexuality, etc…

          • C-4

            You didn’t address my point. Perhaps you misunderstood. I’m not talking about regional problems with rape that exist in those nations. I’m talking about the prevailing attitude the government has towards rape gangs like Rotherham, Derby, Oxford, Bristol, Rochdale, Banbury, etc. The pro feminist government went out of its way to enable/encourage/cover up these offenses so as to not offend the nonwhite communities that were carrying them out. Feminists are creatures of the left that support mass immigration and multiculturalism, and therefore are creating the preconditions necessary for white girls to be routinely tortured and raped by nonwhite assailants. A true opponent of rape would deport & close the borders. Look at Sweden, the most feminist nation on Earth and yet the highest number of rapes, which is directly caused by the influx of Muslim migrants. Feminists are ok with rape as long as Muslims are carrying them out.

      • Haru Kawa

        Both of the issues you mention could be related to the issue of sexism, which feminism actively seeks to dispel so there’s no contradictory there. It is sexism when young girls are abused in different parts of the world (including so called first world countries like the uk or the us). It is sexism when fictional female characters are scantily clad for no reason other than to appease to the male gaze. They are symptoms manifest from the same problem of sexism – something feminism addresses and fights to eliminate

        • whale biologist

          Even accepting that these two things are of a kind (which I do not), your argument is: “a paper-cut and a broken neck are both physical injuries, so it makes sense to treat them both equally.”

        • Aporia

          “It is sexism when fictional characters are scantily clad for no reason other than to appease the male gaze”

          Somewhere in hell, Mary Whitehouse and the rest of the blue-rinsed gang are cackling at all the young, ‘trendy’ ‘progressives’ effectively rehabilitating their old moralistic crusade and dressing it up in modern, PC language.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Whitehouse#Television_and_war

        • Mr B J Mann

          So it’s sexism when slutwalkers slutwalk!

        • Bram

          The male gaze.

          Not only dealing with a retard but with a fascist one to book. Males have “a gaze, a male gaze”. Not even the Nazis had an issue with the way the “Untermensch” regarded the outside world. This lot does. Be gone, Brownskirt.

      • Project Zeta

        “Feminism seems to shrink and expand on cue – criticise it, and it is
        about the disgusting abuses in the third world. Leave it alone, and it
        becomes about the amount of clothing fictional characters wear.”

        Bravo! Could not have articulated this any better!

    • CharleyFarleyFive

      This is a parody yes?

    • Aporia

      Internalised misogyny must be the most misogynistic concept around nowadays. Effectively says:

      “Women are stupid and they’ve been brainwashed by the Patriarchy. We clever feminists, however, have somehow immunised ourselves from its insidious effects, and it’s our job to set women straight and tell them how to behave.”

      You wouldn’t hear such patronising and sexist drivel from men. Feminism has become a war against women.

    • cartimandua

      I rather suspect her anti woman schtick gets her paid. It isn’t funny and it certainly isn’t clever.

      • Des Demona

        ”I rather suspect her anti woman schtick gets her paid”

        I think you’ll find there is a world of difference between anti-woman and anti- radical feminist dogma. Or do you conflate the two? That would explain a lot.

      • Zxya Ayx

        ” Anti-woman”

        Now finding it hard to tell whether you’re a troll or not. Nobody could be this stupid, doll~ <3

      • Strazdas

        Feminism is anti-woman.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Women are out numbering male graduates, getting more and better jobs and better pay for the same qualifications, experience and workload.

      Women in their 30s and 40s are doing better despite bein undr represented at university,

      Women in their 50s and 60s earn more than men if they are gay, single or didn’t have children.

      Women are over represented on boards considering how few go into FOOTSIE100 companies, never mind into line management, never mind how few aim to do it as a full time, lifetime, over riding priority career.

      Also, listing the modules on your women’s studies course isn’t an argument!

      • cartimandua

        But those who have children crash out workwise and husband has to carry the load.
        Not only is that hell for him he gets little time with the children and we all know what happens when the 42% of marriages which split split.
        She ends up in poverty and he ends up with not much at all at least to start with.

        • Ask

          She will have brought nothing to the marriage with regard to finances, yet will expect half of everything, and if she has kids will get the house and more. Further expecting the father to support the ex-wife even if she was the one that instigated the divorce or caused it by sleeping around…..

          ……and we call this a fair system….

          Never get married if you have any money in the bank as she will take half automatically. Only marry someone that is of equal to you in finance standing and status, if you as a man do not wont to be put in the poor house if she ever decides to devoice you.

        • Strazdas

          She will not end up in poverty though. the court will make sure sooner the man will end up in poverty before she does because he will be legally obliged to pay her money for 18 years.

    • Ask

      Utter crap Haru.

      You look at only one side of the coin. Why are feminist wonting more women in the board, why not more women working as sewage Engineers, or Working on building sites?

      Feminists like to pick all the good jobs and look after themselves.

      Why are we only talking about women and girls? Why not equality for all. Boys and Girls? If Girls were failing in schools, I bet feminists would be shouting this, but since its boys they say nothing and in-fact try to depress the facts.

      Like I said feminist like you, have double standards and that means you are only interested in making you and your group of women the superior sex.

      If you truly car about girls and women all over the world why are we not seeing protests against what Saudi Arabia is doing to there women. Women like you only look after your own interests and lie and cheat to get what you wish.

      I’ve wasted to much time on you, and see your true colours.

    • Eggard Snark

      thank you for womansplaining feminism to Ms. Hill

      Is everyone listening and believing? Read this post and you too can learn how to woman

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

      The problem that inevitably arises when trying to have a civilised conversation with a feminist is that concepts like patriarchy etc are not universally accepted, and anybody who dares question axiomatic principles gets labelled a misogynist (or worse).

      It is far from evident that patriarchy (as feminists use the term) does, or has ever existed. You believe it to be so, but feminists can’t seem to construct a persuasive argument in support of the hypothesis — yet they demand that the rest of the world see the world the same way they do, even when others might have good reasons not to.

      That means that whether you accept the patriarchy hypothesis or not is a subjective matter, and any argument predicated on axiomata not shared by all disputants is doomed from the outset.

    • Zxya Ayx

      Don’t be stupid, okay~? Girls in the westernized world don’t need westernized feminists to speak for them. Go speak about the Muslim women! You all seem to use them as an excuse to shame penises in America and the UK, but what the fuck are you doing about it? :3)

      • Project Zeta

        It is so predictable now it has become a bore.

        “We need feminism because girls are – Blah, Blah, Blah – far away lands…”

        Well Haru, how about you, and your ilk, venture to these ‘far away lands’ and actually do something about it?

        Bloody Armchair Feminist!

        I posit that you (feminists) have a vested interest in keeping these ‘third world problems’ going because you ran out of genuine complaints in the Western World about 45 years ago. If Feminism descended upon the third world and ‘fixed’ all the problems you would have NOTHING left to whinge about and feminism would collapse/implode. So nothing will ever be done except all the whinging…

        The article above clearly states it is in reference to Western World Feminism. And the moment someone mentions the redundancy of such a political ideology in our Western Nations Feminists instantly drag out the old “Girls mistreated in foreign lands”.

        And it is getting really old, really quick…

    • Project Zeta

      It is so predictable now it has become a bore.

      “We need feminism because girls are – Blah, Blah, Blah – far away lands…”

      Well Haru, how about you, and your ilk, venture to these ‘far away lands’ and actually do something about it?

      Bloody Armchair Feminist!

      I posit that you (feminists) have a vested interest in keeping these ‘third world problems’ going because you ran out of genuine complaints in the Western World about 45 years ago. If Feminism suddenly descended upon the third world and ‘fixed’ all the problems you would have NOTHING left to whinge about and feminism would collapse/implode the very next day. So predictably nothing will ever be done except all the whinging…

      The article above clearly states it is in reference to ‘Western World Feminism’. And yet the moment someone mentions the redundancy of such a political ideology in our Western Nations, Feminists go into apoplectic fits and drag out the old “Girls mistreated in foreign lands” schtick.

      And it is getting really old, really quick…

    • Bram

      Intersectionality…

      You can stop reading here. We’re dealing with a retard that can only regurgitate what’s been poured into its head. I did bother to read the rest of the paragraph for confirmation…and promptly got it. The problem is of course that this non-thought now dominates all levels of education, mainstream media and politics.

      The lunatics have indeed taken over the asylum.

    • Strazdas

      ” There also seems to be no perception whatsoever of related issues, such
      as the prevailing patriarchy, privileges, internalised sexism, or the
      intersectionality of feminism.”

      Thats because there are no such issues.

  • DeliaMaguire

    Surely the whole point is equality. If male and female are welcomed into the world equally, given equal rights to health and education, then surely after that it is up to the individual to decide what is best for them. Feminism has alienated a lot of women because the people who have appointed themselves as the mouthpieces of it, have focused on some subjects which many women find unappealing. It would seem to me that the biggest drive of feminism should be that baby girls are as welcomed as baby boys everywhere in the world for no other reason than they are human. Once that has been addressed all other issues can be looked at.

    • Michael Steane

      ” that baby girls are as welcomed as baby boys everywhere in the world for no other reason than they are human”

      so you are in favour of female genital mutilation then.

      • DeliaMaguire

        I find your comment bizarre. I think it is quite clear that I was talking about the welcome that should be given to each new life regardless of the sex of the child. If baby girls were respected and loved the world over, FGM would not exist.

        • lloydg

          Delia, leave the problems of the world to the world.

          The anglo-american societies are so screwed up presently because of a lack of men, or men who want a woman of today, that our very continuance is threatened.

          Hopefully the younger girls will learn from their spinster older sisters, and learn to keep quiet once in a while…

          • cartimandua

            We here in the UK have twice the population of Canada. We have 3xs the population this land mass can support.
            We have far too many feckless breeders paid for by middle class people who cannot afford children themselves.

          • lloydg

            Then why do you rely on immigration to maintain and increase your population.

            Please, please do some research…

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

          He means that since male genital mutilation (viz. circumcision) is legal, so should FGM.

          It’s a rather crass way of making the point, but far too many simply refuse to recognise that boys and men lack equality in some areas, and so it sometimes seems that overblown rhetoric is necessary. I doubt he actually thinks that FGM should be legal.

        • Project Zeta

          “If baby girls were respected and loved the world over, FGM would not exist”

          Lets reverse genders.

          “If baby boys were respected and loved the WORLD OVER, Circumcision would not exist”

      • cromagnum

        Yep

      • Mr B J Mann

        Wh did you ignore:

        “given equal rights to health”?!?!?!!!!!

  • CharleyFarleyFive

    I do hope that the author’s words resonate with the vast majority of women and that the insufferable new age feminists remain a tedious minority.

    • cartimandua

      I think she is selfish and stupid since a million children were abused by Muslim gangs etc etc.
      86,000 rapes a year and only 1000 convictions really? Things are only “just fine” if you are employed and childless (and white).

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

        The true number of rapes is not known with any precision.

        The figure of 86,000 must be the number of allegations per year (not all of which meet the legal definition of rape), so (setting aside miscarriages of justice which, arguendo, are rare) the actual number of rapes must be more than 1,000 (because some guilty defendants are acquitted, and many cases are not reported to begin with) and less than 86,000.

        The allegation rate is made more unreliable when, in an age where the notion of ‘rape’ has been so broadly expanded as to be well outside the legal definition, many complainants may believe they have been raped when, under law, they have not (even if they have been treated badly, or have been assaulted but not raped).

        By the way, the conviction rate of cases that come to court is about 60% (Stern report, 2010), which is pretty respectable. The best way to see to it that more cases make it to court is to see to it that rape victims report the crime while there is still forensic evidence to collect. That’ll be hard, though, for a multitude of perfectly good psychological reasons that no doubt you already recognise.

        • Des Demona

          ”The figure of 86,000 must be the number of allegations per year ”
          It’s not even that. It is an estimate.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            I assumed it to be taken from police crime report statistics (or else the British Crime Survey).

            In any case, the result is the same: the figure of 86,000 is unreliable at best and, just as the rate of (deliberately or maliciously) false accusations is unknown, so is the true rate of rape.

            The only thing known with any certainty is the number of convictions secured. Even though some of them are miscarriages of justice, it is likely that many more truly guilty defendants are acquitted than truly innocent defendants convicted, so it’s probably safe to say that the rape rate is at least 1000 per year (assuming @cartimandua:disqus is correct about that).

            Even if it were out by a factor of 2 (which is plausible) that still makes rape a fairly rare offence. (So much for “rape culture”.) Still, rape is an horrific crime and 1000 is 1000 too many.

          • Des Demona

            The BCS explicitly states it is an estimate. Based on what is more difficult to determine. But I’m entirely with you, 1000 convictions a year is 1000 too many.
            Some people are scumbags. There always have been and unfortunately probably always will be. We live in hope. But we carry a big stick just in case.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Exactly right.

            And the conviction data would be much greater (probably about double, based on the CDC NIPSVS survey) if rape was defined to include rape of men by women (NIPSVS calls it “made to envelop”) in the same way as of women by men.

            (ETA: The criterion being consent, who has which body parts.)

          • Des Demona

            Not really interested in statistics. More interested in the real world and what I see hear and learn.
            Don’t be a cnut is the most important but least appreciated lesson

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Point taken, but without accurate statistics, it’s hard to effect changes in law (or in social attitudes).

          • Des Demona

            Not sure there is any such thing as an accurate statistic. They tend to be selectively used to give credence to a point of view.
            I’m entirely with humanist thinking that rape is despicable.

            Feminist is not necessarily humanist. Not in the modern UK, Which I think was the point of the article for me.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Well, you know the old line, “there are lies, d*mnable lies and statistics”. However, we can but try to eliminate as many errors as possible.

          • Mr B J Mann

            It can’t have been that l ago they were only claiming 55,000 rapes pa but that included things likthan o

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

        Another misrepresented statistic is that only 6% of rapes result in conviction.

        According to the Stern report, 6% of all complaints filed result in conviction of rape, but additional 6% result in lesser (but still serious) charges, such as sexual assault.

        Still, the attrition rate is high, mainly for lack of evidence or a reasonable prospect of conviction. Which is why collection of forensic evidence immediately after an attack is so important.

        @des_demona:disqus

        • cartimandua

          It was only in the 1990s that judges could stop warning juries that women and children lie about rape.
          From an article by J Bindle in the Gardian.

          ‘I coped with being raped,” says Jane Lewis, who was attacked by a man two years ago at the party where they met, “but I went mad when he was acquitted. That is when I started fantasising about killing him.” She later discovered that he had been accused of rape four times previously: twice not charged, and twice acquitted by a jury.

          Today, rape might as well be legal. With women frequently accused of making false allegations, and victims who had consumed alcohol blamed for “getting themselves raped”, it is a wonder that the conviction rate for reported rapes is as high as the current figure of 5%.

          Rape is an everyday occurrence. Research published yesterday by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Home Office Inspectorates estimates that of the 50,000 rapes thought to occur each year, between 75% and 95% are never reported. And almost a third of reported cases recorded by police as “no crime” should have been properly investigated as rape.

          If a man commits a rape, then he has, on average, a less than 1% chance of being convicted. Those most likely to result in a conviction are classic stranger rapes, involving a man with a knife who breaks into the victim’s home or drags her into the bushes.”
          Rapists are estimated to rape 6 xs before they are caught. That’s from interviews with rapists in prison.
          Its just not true that normal men rape .

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            The fact is, sometimes women do lie about rape (and why should anybody assume that they don’t? Women are human beings, and human beings sometimes lie for any multitude of reasons.)

            That said, it is completely inappropriate for a judge to colour the evidence in that manner (or in any way, but especially not by some generalisation or stereotype) after it has been presented.

            I don’t know where Bindel gets the 5% figure from, but it’s wrong. Baroness Vivien Stern wrote a comprehensive report published in 2010 on how sexual assault is handled in Britain. She reports that the figure is closer to 12% by the time you include convictions for lesser (but still serious) sex crime charges. Stern wrote:

            It is clear to us that the way the six per cent conviction rate figure has been able to dominate the public discourse on rape, without explanation, analysis and context, is extremely unhelpful. There is anecdotal evidence that it may well have discouraged some victims from reporting.

            and, apropos, “probably about 11 per cent of those who have been raped tell the police about it”. That’s pretty bad, but I can see Stern’s point if victims feel like there’s little chance of getting justice.

            It should not be forgotten that about 8% of reported cases were male victims (she reports), but that male victims were much less likely to report than female victims. She wrote:

            Men find it very difficult to talk about what has happened to them because of the common view that a man should be able to fight off an attacker. Male victims ‘find it less easy to identify as victims and ask for help’

            She gave a detailed breakdown of the prognosis of rape complaints:

            Of every 100 cases reported, about 15 were eventually not recorded as crimes, were retracted or were withdrawn very quickly by the complainant. Of the remaining 85, about 20 were subsequently withdrawn by the victim, 23 were not proceeded with because the evidence was felt to be not strong enough and about 14 were not proceeded with for other reasons. In about 26 cases a suspect was charged with the offence of rape. That figure was reduced to 19 at the time the decision was made to go ahead with a prosecution. A number of the prosecutions were unsuccessful because the complainant decided not to continue or did not attend, the evidence of the victim did not support the case, or there was a conflict of evidence or an essential legal element missing. Some cases were withdrawn because of fears of the effect on the complainant’s mental health. Finally of those taken to court around 12 were found guilty of rape or a related offence.

            So there’s your 12% figure. She went on to write (emphasis mine):

            The information on jury conviction rates, […], finds that rape does not have one of the lowest jury conviction rates. […] With an overall jury conviction rate of 55 per cent, the research finds that juries actually convict more often than they acquit in rape cases, and that other serious offences such as attempted murder have lower jury conviction rates than rape.

            So it sounds to me that rape prosecutions, while they could be much improved (per the recommendations of the report) are not, in any significant sense, to be found wanting relative to other criminal procedure — and that, in a solid case (much strengthened by the collection of forensic evidence while it is still available), a complaint is more likely than not to result in conviction.

            This is why you should be sceptical of the likes of Bindel (who is one of the more egregious of man-hating, misandrist, trans-phobic radical feminists in public life) and who have an ax to grind and who have an established reputation for overt hatred against several sectors of society. Barnoness Stern’s figures are much more likely to be accurate.

            Its just not true that normal men rape

            On that much, at least, we agree. The vast, overwhelming majority don’t, and therefore men should not be presumed to be rapists as so often seems to be the case.

          • cartimandua

            No more women lie about rape than people lie about any other crime.
            The vast majority of rapes are never reported. Rapists are serial offenders raping about 6 times before they are caught.
            They plan acts of violence towards men women and children. So why people
            should accuse victims heaven knows.
            “retractions” are often out of fear by children or by domestic abuse victims.
            I have seen children retract because they might be sent back to their abuser.
            They were raped but they didn’t want to risk it.
            We have all seen the hounding of victims.
            Whatever one thinks of the claims of the victim hounding or threatening them should attract a severe prison sentence.
            At the moment victims have been hounded to literally death while those who abuse and threaten them have got off scot free.
            1000 convictions a year on a background of 86,000 rapes. You cannot dress that up. You really cannot.

        • jdgalt

          Even “forensic evidence” only shows that sex, not rape, took place, unless it involves looking closely enough to find bruises or scrapes from a fight. Which should mean looking at both people (because one person by herself can easily fake that).

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            You’re quite right, of course, but proving mens rea is a bit pointless if you can’t prove actus reus.

            So get the damned forensic evidence. It ain’t, ipso facto proof of rape, but it’s a good start. Especially if there is bruising etc.

        • Strazdas

          Complaint =/= rape. There are surprisingly large amount of false accuasation when it comes to rape.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Complaint =/= rape.

            Which is the point I made elsewhere in this thread.

            There are surprisingly large amount of false accuasation when it comes to rape.

            There are no reliable data to that effect, any more than there are that quantify incidence of rape. (No, don’t quote Kanin. That study is too limited to be significant.)

          • Strazdas

            Cour records show that there is no evidence to support majority of cases that get through official record. While probably not all, i would bet most of them are false accusations.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What terribly sloppy thinking it is to ‘bet’ that most of them are false accusations (ie, deliberately and maliciously filed).

            Also, you can’t be right about court records (at least, not in the UK), because the Stern report (2010) says that conviction rates run at around 60% of cases that come to court, ie, what court records will show.

            BTW, you might look up Philip Rumney’s 2006 paper on the subject, if you can find a copy. It’s a metastudy on rates of false complaints, and most papers report somewhere in the vicinity of 2%–25%. But the numbers are all over the place and the quality of the papers is wildly variable, so there’s no consensus.

            I’ll punt for 10% (the average of the UK CPS and the US DoJ figures). 1 in 10 is still far too high and is more than enough ground for police to scrutinise every case carefully before they hand the file to the CPS.

            Here’s the citation:

            Rumney, Philip N. S. (March 2006), “False Allegations of Rape”, Cambridge Law Journal 65 (1)

      • Zxya Ayx

        You’re an idiot. We live in the western world. This is western feminism. They’re doing shit-all to help any Muslim women. They need help, not the gals in america.

  • Tamerlane

    All these people want is to control sex. Feminists, fundamentalists, it’s always about sex. Endlessly obsessing about sex and control over it. Drop ’em all on a desert island and let the chips fall where they may. The rest of us, the overwhelming majority of both men and women, can then get on with enjoying life.

    • http://quiettowers.wordpress.com/ InRussetShadows

      LOL. As if (Christian) fundamentalists are a big threat facing society. Don’t you have a massive immigration and Islamic (oops “Asian”) problem to worry about over there? I think you’ve already dealt with the Christian threat – LOL – and now you have much worse demons to handle. Good luck on that.

      • Tamerlane

        Bless. An opinion. Well done sweets.

        • Todd Unctious

          Sneering git.

  • Celest1ne

    I will fight for your ability to have equal opportunity. When you start demanding equal outcome like modern feminists I have nothing for you.

  • Des Demona

    A very refreshing article, thanks. The ‘sisters” will no doubt be out in force attacking you over this, but as you are obviously immune to the victimhood of feminism I’m sure you quite frankly couldn’t give a toss. Good on you.

  • Andrew Smith

    Breath of fresh air this.

  • lloydg

    Thank you.

    This has been some time in coming.

    Finally, society is catching up.

    They estimate that 30% of young women will go manless and childless for their lifetimes.

    Hopefully the younger girls will not want the same, and then maybe we could start having families and children again one day.

    • mickey667

      Er fertility rate is up across all sections, ethnic groups and ages of society.

      What you on about?

      • cartimandua

        Middle class people cannot afford children. Only those paid for by others can. Whining woman on QT had 4 children. Shaker Aamer has 5.

        • mickey667

          “Middle class people cannot afford children.”

          HAHAHA.

          That has really made my day. I’ve copy and pasted your comment for my collection.

          Absolute classic. Thanks

          • cartimandua

            Do you live here? If you do do you live in an area with cheap housing?
            The reality is that the prudent middles who want a home BEFORE having children now have to wait so long they run out of fertility.
            Average 1st time buyer now is 36 and up . Its only 30s if parents help.

          • Jean-Christophe Perrault

            I guess the abundance of home ownership in the middle age is what caused the high fertility rate back then.

            PS: If you need a roof over your head to have children, you can rent.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Of all possible threats to the long term economic stability of the UK, nothing worries me more than the ratio of house prices to average income. Terrorism, immigration and feminism are each significant concerns, but we’re storing up a huge problem for generations to come.

            Why? The more of one’s income spent on rent, the less disposable income is available for general economic activity, and those who retire without a mortgage free house and who don’t have a decent private pension (which will be most of them, because those rich enough to have one probably own their own house anyway) will have to depend on the government to subsidize their rent for the rest of their lives (now routinely 3 decades) which, in turn, places an ever-greater burden on the tax-payer which, if it leads to increased taxation (as inevitably it must), further threatens economic prosperity.

            And it’ll be a very difficult problem to solve, because house price deflation is an economic saboteur because those stuck in negative equity can’t sell up should they need to move for a new job (so there’s another threat to economic prosperity) — therefore, house prices are largely stuck where they are.

            It’s a real catch-22 situation: ignore the problem long term or destroy lives now by taking measures to keep house prices sensible.

            The least-worst solution I can think of is for the government to rebuild social housing stock and charge affordable rents so that private landlords are forced to compete at a sane level. Such competition would put quite a damper on buy-to-let mortgages, depressing demand, moderating house price inflation and allowing more people to buy houses to live in rather than to profit from.

            Of course, the government can’t afford to embark on such massive public works without either borrowing heavily or increasing taxation, and we’re back to square one again.

          • Project Zeta

            “It’s a real catch-22 situation: ignore the problem long term or destroy
            lives now by taking measures to keep house prices sensible”

            —Either we financially destroy the lives of people today who have played a part (complicit) in this wicked system (fair). Or we destroy/cripple the future lives of our children who played absolutely no part in this system (unfair).

            I’d rather be fondly remembered by the next generation as taking responsibility for, and correcting, our short sightedness than bitterly recorded in history as the most selfish and myopic generation that God ever gave breath…

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            That’s a very interesting way of looking at it, and one with some merit.

            Of course, the destruction wrought by such a correction would also be inherited by our children, and they will not thank us for overdoing it.

          • Project Zeta

            The longer this charade continues the harder we will fall. We can’t keep kicking the can down the road. The crash is inevitable. It’s what we can do to mitigate it…

            This system is unsustainable and the sooner we collectively awaken to this reality the less the resultant impact will be upon future generations. God help us all.

          • Project Zeta

            Hell, all they have to do is stop artificially propping up markets and let the markets function as they are supposed to. They tried to stave off the Day of Reckoning in 2008 in a grandiose belief that they can control the market with strategic intervening and monumental levels of cheap debt.

            Instead of letting it organically correct they fueled the beast by papering over it. The problems have only been magnified ten fold. The madness will end eventually, but how much closer to the edge do we need to go until we blink? Will we blink?

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Agreed. Something will give. It is inevitable, and only a question of ‘when?’

          • Strazdas

            oh, they will just do what they always do. extend retirement age so that average person does not stay retired for long (before death) so they dont have to pay the pensions. At one point the average life expectancy of men were only half a year longer than retirement age. on average they stayed in retirement for only 6 months!

            Funny thing, women got it better there too. they live longer on average and retire earlier.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            From the point of view of the exchequer, there is little difference between the person on unemployment benefit and a state pension. (From the person’s point of view, the former is a great deal more miserable, but that’s another matter.)

            Consequently, it makes little difference what the state retirement age is, if there aren’t the jobs to keep them employed.

          • Strazdas

            Not true. at least here. Pensioneers get much lower payment and arguably lower benefits than unemployed people.

            There is no evidence to suggest that there are less job offers now than there ever were.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            I’ve never taken either in the UK, but even if the basic state pension is less than job seekers’ allowance (which i’m not sure it is), you’ve got to account for the Pension Credit or Pension Guarantee or whatever it’s called. (But ironically, if you have too much private pension, you lose out on some of those top-up benefits. So much for the incentive to save.)

            I know of a guy who was out of work and then he hit retirement age, and suddenly his income increased.

            You might be thinking of all the aggregate benefits that working-age unemployed get, particularly when children are involved.

            Consequently, it makes little difference what the state retirement age is, if there aren’t the jobs to keep them employed.

            Excepting the extended blip after the recession I agree, there probably aren’t significantly fewer jobs available. So if job supply is fixed, and as labour supply grows (both through immigration and through increasing retirement age), wages fall while, at the same time, the demand (and consequently the cost) for housing increases.

            More people => lower wages + higher housing costs. Not a good combination, and will make the ratio of average house prices over average salaries worse, not better.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Why do you think social housing will only moderate, and not reverse house price inflation?

            And negative equity is usually only really a problem for people who have really overextended themselves.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            Why do you think social housing will only moderate, and not reverse house price inflation?

            Because annual private real-estate transactions amount to something of the order of £1bn pa, and it seems unlikely that the central budget could allocate anything like as much to building programmes, therefore there simply would not be the volume of social housing investment to so drastically affect house prices to cause house price deflation.

            And negative equity is usually only really a problem for people who have really overextended themselves.

            Anybody with any sense will want to escape the rental trap, which means that the majority of first-time buyers are going to be extending themselves as far as they can. Therefore, it seems that overextension is likely to be commonplace.

          • lloydg

            Mickey, you copied and pasted a post for your collection, as some sort of deterrent that they should not offer their opinion here..?

            You have problems..!

            Sorry for taking the time to respond to a loon.

            Goodbye.

          • mickey667

            No no, not at all. I hope whoever it is keeps posting. They’re hilarious

          • lloydg

            Yeah you do, seek help, or maybe just go for a walk once in a while, and try to get a friend to talk to…

            Good luck, best…

          • PaulMurrayCbr

            “middle class” means different hings in Britain and in America.

            In Britain, it means “having sufficient assets that you can live off them without working”.
            In America, it means “white and has a job”.

      • Jean-Christophe Perrault

        NO! This is inaccurate.

        TFR (Total fertility rate) is down across the world. The majority of countries don’t even have enough children to maintain their population (replacement rate) and are looking at was is called a “demographic time bomb” where the working population becomes smaller the the older generation receiving retirement.

        It is unfair to the next generation to burden them with a higher tax rate because their elders didn’t have children to support them. I think people who don’t have children should save for their own retirement, no children, no taxes, no retirement.

        • mickey667

          In england fertility rate going up. Has been for a few years now.

          • Jean-Christophe Perrault

            Yes, England is almost back at replacement level (2) but after a long hard fight by the government and they still haven’t made it. It shows how hard it is to stop the declining fertility rate. It might be a losing battle.

          • mickey667

            Long hard fight by the government?

            That sounds a bit creepy :) whether been doing?

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

          That’s a bit rough on people who either can’t have children, or who know themselves to be unfit to be parents — or who simply can’t afford to have children and are responsible enough not to bring new life into a world of poverty.

          • Jean-Christophe Perrault

            For people who live in Iraq or Afghanistan, I totally understand about the whole world of poverty but that really doesn’t apply to most western nation. Not being able to afford the latest iPhone is NOT poverty.
            Children can be brought just as healthy with a moderate income.

            As for unfit parents… I see the new generation of spoiled children raised by very competent parents and I wonder if anybody could really do worse.

        • lloydg

          Thank you Jean-Christophe, c’est vrai, completement vrai…

          Je suis Canadian, nous parlons les deux langues ici,

          Salut/Cheers,

          • Jean-Christophe Perrault

            Salut cousin de l’autre cotes de l’Atlantique!!!
            Je suis passe par Montreal et Quebec, superbes villes et super gens.
            J’ai hesite a aller vivre la bas… mais le froid m’a refroidis… AHAH
            :-)

        • Strazdas

          looking at your chart, the ones omniuosly called “more developed regions” are increasing.

          • Jean-Christophe Perrault

            Yes, the “more developed regions” have invested a lot of money into getting back to replacement rate and most have seen an improvement but as of now, none have actually achieved it (without counting immigration). With increased wealth and health, fertility seems to drop below replacement rate. This might be a problem for future generations. We know the economic effects will be negative but I think that the lack of growth of the general population will have other more debilitating effects for the human race.

          • Strazdas

            i for one am in joy over this. there is way too many humans on earth as it is and while i would never advocate genocide, lower birth rates may be a perfect solution to that until we learn to colonize space which is when population boom will be needed again. Currently, the earth is overcrowded.

            You do have a point with out economy being heared to endless population increase and there are need of strucutral changes to avoid massive problems this may cause.

          • Jean-Christophe Perrault

            Colonize space… How I wish we would do it.
            I fear however that without the growing population, the dream of colonizing space will never happen. We humans have a tendency to be great in situation of needs however if we learn to be totally sustainable on earth with a low birth rate, I believe we will never colonize space. We will stay on earth, the population will stay flat and the next great super Nova will end our run.
            This would explain the fermi paradox, everyone stays on their own planet until it dies.

          • Strazdas

            on the contrary, growing population now makes colonizing space impossible because we make too much problems locally and waste too much resources that we cannot replace.

            Humans are explorers by nature, so we will colonize space if we can find a way.

        • PaulMurrayCbr

          Fertility rates are down because you no longer lose 8 of your 10 kids to childhood diseases.

      • lloydg

        Fertility rate compared to what years. If it is increasing over recent years that could easily be explained with the increase in the demographic that are child-bearing.

        Stop manipulating statistics to fit an agenda.
        Things are not as simple as the simple like to think they are.

        Have you noticed Germany and the syrians..?

        A german woman has a 1.38 children to women replacement rate. In syria it is over 3% and was 6% in the 80’s, hence the youth.

        Please stop the BSing

      • Bertie

        Eh no fertility is not up across the board.
        It’s falling/flat lining amongst the indigenous white population.Which is why, apparently, we are importing all the migrants we are, to offset then demographic crisis!
        (I guess you havent about that one)

      • Bertie

        Eh no fertility is not up across the board.
        It’s falling/flat lining amongst the indigenous white population.Which is why, apparently, we are importing all the migrants we are, to offset then demographic crisis!
        (I guess you havent about that one)

  • cartimandua

    lloydg
    The tax system makes it impossible for the middle classes (who pay all the taxes) to have children as they are too busy paying for the feckless breeders.
    It has NOTHING to do with feminism. Have you looked at the prices of homes lately?

    • lloydg

      You’re wrong..!

      I have two sons 24 & 28, they have both told me they will not get married under the current laws.
      As they put it, they would need their heads examined to get married today.

      We can afford housing. One has an advanced degree and the other is working towards it, income is not a challenge.

      You can think it is only housing, and I am sure that some would be more ready to settle if it was affordable.

      But the problem is the women, they simply are uninterested in having relationships with what they call “divorce threats”

      I think it will take a generation of women that will end up childless, in order for the younger girls to learn, in my opinion.

      This will not be settled quickly, and there will be some life choices made by women that they may regret in time.

      • Des Demona

        Seems to me you are both out of step. Most people don’t have these extremist views.

        • lloydg

          No actually, the few with extremist views are the 3rd wave feminists.

          Watch Dear. In this world of a man-shortage for marrying your lot, as most do not want to, feminists are or have become absolute man-repellent.

          So, have at it and don’t reproduce. I don’t think many men will mind, quite frankly.

          • Des Demona

            ‘So, have at it and don’t reproduce. I don’t think many men will mind, quite frankly.’

            We’ll have to agree to disagree here. Never confuse being a woman with being a feminist. Equally never confuse a man with being a male.

          • PaulMurrayCbr

            And never confuse a bloke from Scotland with a true scott.

        • Amaryllis

          It is absolutely true that most people don’t have extreme views either way, and this is where both feminists, and sections of the manosphere often get confused (I don’t like making equivalencies here, because I don’t think there are usually very many, but in this they are the same), because the people involved in those places have a very uneven view of how most of the rest of humanity prioritizes the things they see as basically central to their lives. The recent slew of articles about Mad Max and Jurassic World being respectively feminist/sexist movies for instance…nobody else cared, they just went to see movies that looked interesting.

          However, the things that happen in the extremities do have a way of eventually making their way to the body at large. It’s as true with the human body as it is with society. Look at what has happened to marriage; it’s basically a pointless institution, nothing grand or sacred about it left, and people are totally cool making game shows out of it. It no longer has even the illusion of permanence, and people who stay married for their whole lives are like finding unicorns. ‘Being bored’ is now considered a valid reason for getting out of it. This is something that started in the far reaches and eventually made its way into our culture at large. And feminism is FAR more dangerous in this regard than anything else, because feminism has the overwhelming majority of the media behind it, who will take its side on everything, cover up all of its misdeeds while playing up every little bad thing anyone says about it, and consistently treating even the most deviant behavior as normal, until people just start accepting it as such (see: the recent crush of pro-pedophilia articles on certain sites). We don’t have pedophiles in sitcoms or being sympathetically spoken about on the news yet, but it’s entirely possible given the way these things have played out in the past.

          TL;DR while most people don’t hold extremist views themselves, that in no way means they aren’t affected by them, or that they will not react to them as the extreme edges closer to normal. And unfortunately, that really might be happening.

        • PaulMurrayCbr

          So being aware of divorce statistics is “extremist”. What about refraining from base jumping? Is that exremist too?

  • Gweedo
    • cartimandua

      Which “Em” happily tramples on saying no need for feminism.

      • Gweedo

        True, there’s no need for feminism in the developed world.

        • Ric

          Feminists in the developed world are sending a clear message to the undeveloped world that FEMINISM IS DEATH and they need to keep it out.

      • Jack Rocks

        A pandora’s box you’ve opened there. Radfems don’t address feminism in other countries because the people in those other countries are poor and have brown skin. Any attempt is labelled “racist”. Instead they witter on about complete bs like someone hitting them up on LinkedIn. If they actually went to some of these countries and risked their lives for their beliefs, it would be possible to admire them.

        There are “classical” feminists who do that, by the way. Most of them have absolutely no time for the radfems.

    • oldoddjobs

      Oh good, now the other 50% of the population can steal everyone’s property. Feminism is bad but democracy is holy. The creed of the worms.

  • Anon

    This is probably the best and most accurate description of modern feminism I have ever read.
    We live in a society that is so blatantly gynocentric, you would have to be a total muppet to think women are oppressed. But that doesn’t stop the wailing harpies from searching manically for anything they can be offended by, and portray out of context and present it as “infallible proof” we live in a misogynistic patriarchal society. Which of course is a strict contradiction to divorce-court statistics.
    And anyone who speak against them get labeled “misogynists” to silence their opinions. Or my favorite: Mansplaining. A nice way of dismissing an opinion based on gender. The very definition of sexism.
    These people are troll-magnets, wether they like it or not.

  • Eggard Snark

    “feminism” is ISIS minus Islam

    • oldoddjobs

      feminismisisisminusislam

  • Eggard Snark

    Expect Progressive Empathy Crusaders to swoop in on their brooms in the middle of the night to cancel Emily Hill’s Woman Card.

    How long until Ms. Hill is forced to make a humiliating public apology where she prostrates herself before the Vagina Cult for hurting their precious fee fees? Two days? A week?

  • MistyWeaveFishLosh

    Nice article!

  • ReginaldHarper

    Fantastic article.

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com TheBibo Sez

    The quickest way to make feminists evaporate is to ask them to address inequalities faced by men. Suddenly, all feminist bluster about equality turns into crickets.

    • Emilio Lizardo

      No, they just tell you that they will now define what a man is. Or announce a plan to cull them to 30% of the population.

      • silversurf

        10%

      • Strazdas

        30%? Thats not the impression i got with #killallmen

    • Mr. E

      Well said.

  • Lina R

    Feminism has just been reduced to privileged women whining and playing the victim. They focus on indulgent problems and never address the actual mistreatment many girls/women face, particularly in Islamic/developing countries.

  • Zoe Julia Hawthorne

    I really liked this article. I agree with a lot of your points, but I did find it slightly ironic that you point out that a lot of today’s feminists spend their time “bashing” other women and you kind of did the same to them….

    Either way, I still like your article and agree that sometimes feminism today has gotten out of hand. Ultimately feminism is about equality, freedom to do what you want, and be judged on your merit, not what’s between your legs (and this is whether you are a man or a woman I should add) and I think this is sometimes forgotten.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

      Perhaps, but Hill is not claiming to represent other women’s best interests.

      What feminism says on the tin and what it does are two quite different things. It’s not hard to see that based on the actions of feminists. They aren’t interested at all in equality: they are interested either in power or obtaining privileges for women without regard to the condition of men — but mainly, they’re interested in imposing their world view on everybody else without respect to others’ capacity to make up their own minds about things.

  • Tim Patten

    Even the false wage gap lie has been plugged by a law in California.

  • Emilio Lizardo

    Feminism (gender Marxism) is not dead yet, it is now heavily into the funding phase creating new industries to suck money out of the government and litigants. Gender still exists and must be abolished.

  • Lucia Lolita

    I’m taking this as satire. It gave me a good laugh.

    • Jack Rocks

      You didn’t read it.

      • oldoddjobs

        I can’t even

    • http://www.bing.com CrosbyTee

      Poor little eternal victim.

      :o(

    • Fulgentian

      Are you being sarcastic? My worthless man brain can’t tell you see.

    • Alvaro Arrillaga

      This is not satire.

    • Stevie Mac

      I’m taking your comment as satire.

    • http://www.bing.com CrosbyTee

      Po po widdle wictim.

  • RobynD

    Give it a few years. Have children – and then see how your career is affected, How you become judged for being a mum who works. Or stays at home to live off your partner. Your partner might work part time. Probably won’t. So someone will have to stay with the kids.

    It will affect your career. Having a family and a career is much harder for a woman.

    You might not want children. Society will then judge you then. Or they might not employ you because they think you’ll go off on maternity leave.

    Enjoy being young.

    • Des Demona

      Oh do grow up, for the sake of your children.

      • Chris Amies

        Or you could take a third option. Even without having children you could contribute to your community in other ways than just making money.

    • http://www.bing.com CrosbyTee

      Exhibit A: This is the whining mindset that The Sisterhood of Eternal Victimhood brainwashed young women with.

      • RobynD

        You got kids? Who takes care of them? Has your career been affected by having children?

        • lloydg

          Shut it..!

        • Fulgentian

          Which is more important – career or children? Surely that’s a non-question!

        • Captain Dryland

          Have your children been affected by your having a career?

        • Stevie Mac

          Is a career really the most important thing in life and the key to happiness? Its probably more fulfilling and worthwhile to have had some children and not got quite as far. But life involves compromises so its your choice if you want them.

        • silversurf

          Yes I’ve got kids
          Yes I was a single Dad with a career and PhD to juggle
          Yes I had to work hard to make it work
          Yes kids were was worth it
          No I didn’t whinge and whine about it, I was proud to care for my child
          Yes I found some bosses were intolerant of the needs of a male caregiver (the women bosses were diabolical).
          Yes I found bosses who were very considerate of a male caregiver (always the male bosses)
          Yes I am appalled by this self-entitled generation of women … the most entitled generation in the history of humanity still claiming victim-hood in the name of empowerment.

        • Funcuz

          Maybe you shouldn’t have had children if it’s such a burden on your career.

        • Strazdas

          I find it funny how people somehow think careers should be put before their families. no wonder so many divorces happen nowadays.

        • PaulMurrayCbr

          Let’s say I bought a horse.
          Let’s say I worked four-day weeks, six-hour days so I could take time off to care of my horse that I bought.
          Let’s say I proceeded to whine that this had hurt my career.

          Would anyone give a toss?

      • Snibbo

        Brainwashed? Sounds to me like she’s talking from her own experience…

    • Franz Maier

      What? Having a family and a career is much harder for a woman? In which century are you living? Do you really think this only affects women? I know two men who stayed at home to look after their kids. I guess they’re struggling with their careers too but they just chose to stay at home for their children. And concerning your argument that you’re judged for being a mum who works…maybe you should consider to change your social circle in which you are in and if you can’t then you’re unfortunately surrounded by critical people who are idiots and do not represent the opinions of everyone else. So I guess you might be kind of frustrated about the direction your life took which is perfectly fine but don’t blame society (and probably men) for your decisions.

      • RobynD

        You know 2 men! Well, that’s fantastic. How many women do you know who’ve done that? You’ve used the What about the men argument!!

        If more men took time off, then society would change and taking time out would not affect careers, But it is largely women who take time out and are expected to take time out. The fact you can name 2 men shows how engrained the reality is.

        • Ric

          It would be great if men stayed home more! Men are better at raising children anyway. Then again, men are also better at working jobs that matter.

          So.. I suppose the final feminist conclusion is that men need to form families with other men, and keep women as incubation chambers for men to procreate with so the children can be raised with a working dad and a stay-at-home dad.

          I didn’t think that was what women wanted, but HEY! Ladies get what ladies want.

          • Strazdas

            “So.. I suppose the final feminist conclusion is that men need to form
            families with other men, and keep women as incubation chambers for men
            to procreate with so the children can be raised with a working dad and a
            stay-at-home dad.”

            gay adoption?

        • Captain Dryland

          I know 100% of women who started out with wombs.

        • Stevie Mac

          Women ideally breastfeed for the first year at least so women need to be the the primary baby carers. That’s how it is with mammals. That’s how its been for millions of years.

        • Matthew

          I know more men who have done that than women, just saying. I’m not going to pretend that’s true across the board, but I don’t think the equation is as simply cut and dry as it is often presented.

    • Hungry Lion

      Robyn, If you want to try doing something that’s really hard, why not try out coal mining. Or roofing. Or working on a loading dock. Or laying bricks. Nothing in life is harder on women than it is for men. Period.

    • Zxya Ayx

      I guess there are no single dads on earth.

      • silversurf

        Having been a single Dad, I find that we do it better

    • Jonas Downer

      Have kids or give a career your all. It’s not society that constrains you to tough choices it’s mortality. Jesus Christ you people are bat shit. You literally think someone owes you the opportunity to both have children and excel to your fullest potential in a career.

    • Amaryllis

      For a representative of a group of people up in arms demanding society not judge them for any choices they make, you seem to be agonizing exclusively over how society will judge you for living your life. Maybe if you didn’t run your every thought through that framework, you’d be a little happier.

      Yes, raising children AND having a career is very difficult. This is what happens when you have two different things going on that BOTH call for being able to monopolize all of your time. There is no ‘harder for women.’ It’s just usually women than do the brunt of the child rearing, and it’s usually women that WANT to do the brunt of the child rearing (at least more than men). Nobody, including feminists, appears to be very happy with permanent stay-at-home dads. Sorry it’s this way, but if your S/O won’t compromise with you AT ALL, then maybe there are discussions less broad than ‘FEMINISM YEAH’ that need to be had. On the other hand, if his working full time is the only thing keeping the family fed, and could not be offset by dropping to part time + whatever it is you do, that’s probably a call for you to be less narcissistic, because allegedly you are all in it together, and should be doing whatever you can to keep that ship sailing. Unfortunately, family requires investment that single people (or even people just completely opposed to kids) do not have to make, but then again, you also have fewer people thinking you’re weird and hopeless. Everything has benefits and consequences. What feminism’s end goal appears to be is removing all consequences from everything related to women’s lives, while giving even more benefits, while not requiring a single iota more effort from them, which is stupidly unreasonable, in addition to being ACTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE, and this is where you get the growing backlash, as more people realize it.

      And I’m sorry to say, but everybody will be judged for not having children. Your awareness (or maybe just concern) just does not extend beyond your own group. Whether or not you let that judgement define you is a personal choice.

      Enjoy being ignorant.

    • Andrew Cole

      There are a lot more ‘househusbands’ these days ya know!!! I fully believe that children should be raised by their parents and not just dropped off and picked up from daycare each day. How much time do these parents get with their kids? Or do they wake them up early at 5 in the morning or put matchsticks under their eyeliods just so they can have some quality time?

      When I lost my full time job my wife went full time and I was house husband for 3 years. What is the problem? We weren’t moaning about daycare costs either. We focus on our children rather than our assets, bank balances and other material things.

    • silversurf

      The only people judging you are the feminists and yourself

    • Stevie Mac

      Also, my sister has a baby. Her boyfriend works all day then comes home and has the baby all evening, while she sleeps ready for the night shift. He also does the nights some days. I think he actually has it just as hard as her, maybe even harder. Men work hard for their families while staying off and being supported could be seen as a priveleged situation. Especially in the days when men when down the mines.

    • jdgalt

      Far better that those who breed have this problem than that we all become forced to pay for it.

    • Snibbo

      Too right. Feminists have never come to terms with motherhood.

    • Strazdas

      Well, thats what grandparents are for.

    • PaulMurrayCbr

      So happy I don’t get to feeling all oppressed because other people sometimes have opinions!

  • Leics Fox

    a very good article

  • Lisette Muntslag

    Communism, Socialism and Feminism are one and the same and the goal of feminism is socialist, communist government in the Western world….anyone who thinks that it was about the position of women, or is about equality has been duped. Radical gender feminist are still pushing their agenda of destroying Western civilization and overthrowing the patriarchy….they are waiting for Hillary Clinton to openly declare the take over…..

    • Fulgentian

      Sorry Lisette, I posted above without reading yours! You are so spot on, I wish more people would see this. ‘Cultural Marxism is a right-wing conspiracy theory’ the Guardianistas say. Their propaganda is even more ridiculous when we see the effects of Cultural Marxism all around us, relentlessly, every single day.

      • Lisette Muntslag

        When something hit you and you don’t know what hit you, it is your civic duty to question to get to the truth…..I lived and learned in Amsterdam, the Netherlands and New York, USA that Cultural Marxism is a reality affecting people’s lives….it is not a right-wing conspiracy, the psychological warfare and indoctrination has been going on for a longtime…only in the past decade things became more blatant….because the collectivist think they won the ideological war.

        • jdgalt

          In a way, they did. They now control the schools (from kindergarten to university) and the media, and you won’t keep a job in most places if you speak up against them.

          • Lisette Muntslag

            A lot of people don’t know it but the gender radical have a lot of power and influence social policy all over the place….”Who Stole Feminism: how women betrayed women” is the first book that confirmed my suspicion on the matter. Feminism today is a hate cult sanctioned by government.

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            Hear hear.

  • Ric

    Here’s what Feminism 4.0 is teaching a growing number of young men: Western Women no longer worth saving. When invaders come knocking, men will see no need whatsoever to rise to the defense of women in any meaningful way. Look at the ACTUAL rape crisis in Sweden to see it starting. Hateful, female-supremacist (i.e.: modern) feminism will ultimately be the tiller that clears the soil of enlightened patriarchal civilization to make way for the violent seeds of Islam.

    I, for one, look forward to watching today’s women find out bloodily and painfully just how oppressive Muslim patriarchy can get and wishing in agony that they hadn’t dismembered the Western Patriarchy that asked them to do hardly more that care for children, dress decently, and calm their tits when they got emotional.

    • Fulgentian

      Some good points here. Feminism has served to be yet another nail in the coffin of Western civilisation; it is one among a plethora of initiatives by ‘progressivists’ to dismember the Old Authority of the West. The targets of this progressivism are:
      The Family – attacked by the state and by a relentless media campaign to normalise disfunctional family life
      The Church – attacked by the new prophets of atheism and by other ‘outraged’ groups (see recent pro-abortion stuff in Ireland)
      The Father figure – attacked by feminists.
      They’re doing their bit to emasculate Western culture to make it easier to destroy by Islam. Thanks girls!

  • Hilary

    “if only they aren’t encouraged to view themselves as helpless victims at the mercy of an insuperable patriarchy”

    Whilst I don’t agree entirely with the article or several of the comments, the quote above is what most puts me off feminism.

  • CortexUK the quitter

    How DARE you give air time to that hideous and nasty Proudman woman.

    • Des Demona

      Don”t be a cnut, there’s a good chap.

      • CortexUK the quitter

        Are you on of those “male feminists” who thinks being such a thing will get you laid? Good luck with that.

        • oldoddjobs

          White knights, learn the lingo

  • kingkevin3

    No it isn’t time to move on in this country. Men have to grow some balls and put women like yourself in your place. Won’t happen in my lifetime I guess

    • fromaway05

      Not my problem for my balls. Men are leaving the plantation in droves. Enjoy the decline.

  • im lost

    Men don’t care, mavy are going there own way

    • jdgalt

      This is what will change things. Women who drive all men away won’t get to raise the next generation.

      • RdP

        Don’t worry about that they are taking over the schools so that their voice is herd !!!

  • skeptik

    The ladies have conquered all the air-conditioned jobs in government and everywhere else.

  • Thomas

    So how near is near to my abode? Is a couple of roads down okay, or will Londoners have to start by going outside of the M25 for pre-sex dating?

  • silversurf

    This is a great read .. the only thing I would disagree with is the
    narrative (Marxist feminist propaganda) that the suffragettes won voting
    rights for women.

    • skeptik

      That’s because they (suffragettes) didn’t win the right to vote, some women have always had the right to vote just like only some men did. Most suffragettes campaigned for universal suffrage aka the right for ALL people to vote including the girls.

      Universal suffrage was won, by men on the backs of 100s of thousands of dead mostly young men and boys.

      • driversuz

        The suffragettes weren’t too crazy about votes for poor people and people with dark skin, just middle and upper class white women. The suffragISTS, OTOH, were actually seeking the vote for everybody.

  • King Zog
  • Janet Wilkinson

    Proudman clearly has drunk the crazy feminist coolaid and has practiced in the mirror for many hours before coming on to try and talk over everyone else but then claim victimhood again when anyone else tries to speak….

    Proudman’s career is practically ruined because no one will want to employ someone with her attitude and obvious bias. Courts are supposed to be places where no bias exists which is why she is effectively finished.

    As for the points raised by Proudman at the end, they are very easy to debunk.

    Domestic violence : The home office stats show that domestic violence happens on roughly a 60/40 and in many years 50/50 split between the genders so for the most part men are equally the victim of domestic violence as women are. The big difference is that women have shelters and support services setup in this country to help them, men have not. On the last count there are 4500 shelters for women and 15 for men. Guess who manages the funding for domestic violence shelters that comes from the government ??? Feminist organisations. Oh and as for the “2 women are killed per week by men” line, you can always fire back with the “and what you are leaving out that 2 men are killed by women every 2 weeks”

    The pay gap argument she used is also easily debunked, because all she is quoting is when you take all the wages of women and all the wages of men total them up over their life times and then compare them. That is an incredibly flawed way of comparing wages / earnings. When you factor in that men on average work more hours, do not take time off to have children, do not work part time anywhere as near as women do and you start to see why this statistics are nonsense. When you factor all these things in the pay gap drops to something like 2-3% and even then women now out earn men at certain stages of their life. You don’t see feminists challenging anyone over that though do you…

    With feminism and feminists, they depend on you not knowing the statistics, and the other side of the argument. Listen to proudman at the end, she is listing a series of stats but only giving the female side of the stats. The reason for this, if she mentioned the figures for men who are sexually abused or who suffer domestic violence you would see that they are not that far apart from female figures and it would weaken her argument.

    Therefore going in to a debate like this armed with ALL the facts allows you to instantly blow her weak and biased arguments out of the water.

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      I think the Proudman LinkedIn “scandal” was wholly a planned sham to further her career in journalism, which is a far softer career than Law. The Guardian were probably partly behind it.

      As a person, she comes across as someone either sociopathic or who has committed a serious crime some time ago and is projecting.

  • Leibfarce

    Note: These strides were only made because of modern advancements that men gave their blood, sweat and tears for.

  • jdgalt

    Now that they HAVE won, equality and then some, it would be nice if feminists would declare victory and go home.  Only they won’t.  Feminism has become female supremacism, and will continue as long as they can continue to make “progress” at ruining the world for anyone with a penis.

    • Cuki

      They ruin the world for everyone who’s not them, regardless if they have a penis or not.

  • Mc

    “It should be celebrating its triumphs. Instead it has descended into pointless attention-seeking”

    That’s because, as with all Leftist causes, feminism is a grievance bandwagon that has nothing to do with social justice and everything to do with exerting power over others.

  • rtj1211

    ‘Moran writes that it is childbirth that ‘turns you from a girl into a woman’ ‘

    I would have thought that concluding a successful relationship, from freely choosing to date a guy/girl, from deciding whether or not to dump him/her, from deciding whether or not to snog him/her, from deciding whether or not to sleep with him/her and from deciding whether or not to marry him/her, represented that transformation.

    If a young female makes all those decisions, for better or worse, rightly or wrongly, such that they became fulfilled or learned from the experience, but most crucially, did so in a manner which showed they were taking responsibility for their own decisions, their own life outcomes, their own emotions and their own legal status moving forward, then she has become a woman.

    Of course she should be doing likewise to do with determining her educational path, her career path, her employment status and her holiday plans.

    She should do likewise in choosing a circle of friends and how she relates to her siblings, parents and other close family.

    She should do likewise in determining her overall view of life in terms of religion, philosophy, prejudices and engagement styles.

    And she should do so without blaming blameless men for her choices, especially if she went to NLCS, had career advice from the President of the Royal College of Surgeons, was granted preferential access to medicine through being good at swimming and netball and having freely chosen to abuse her body, become a semi-alcoholic and blame men for refusing to dump her first boyfriend if he didn’t satisfy her sexually.

    But that would be expecting too much, wouldn’t it??

    Because being a woman is all about joining MI6, being a queen bee dominatrice psychopath and killing all over the world to try and emulate Eliza Bullying Manner, isn’t it????

  • grimm

    I’m a bit worried by the overall aggressive tone of this article. As far as I can see Emily Hill is saying that feminists should wake up to the fact that they have soundly beaten men, men are not much good anyway and she can’t see why women feel should feel oppressed by them.

    It reads like a pep talk by a domineering and bullying school teacher accusing all around of being weak and lilly-livered. Surprised it didn’t end with the words “man up, girls”.

    • Matthew

      I don’t feel like we read the same article the same way.

  • farkennel

    Perhaps when our femifascist sisters decide that when a man is at the point of suicide,they stop “bathing in male tears” we will see them in a more positive light.

    • Vicky Frankland

      Maybe when the mens rights activists and their ilk stop threatening us with violence, rape and death because we campaign for a women on a postage stamp, when they don’t call for rape on private property to be legal; when judges aren’t telling Defendants that they could not resist or that 15 old virgins “groomed” their teachers; I could go on and on, but no, you go on about how awful “male tears” is.

      • farkennel

        No one is threatening you in any way shape or form.Men are ripped to pieces in the courts while women are being made excuses for while the judges don`t even pretend to not be corrupt.The fact that you cant see that and you make excuses is utterly repugnant.You Vicky…have no honour.

        • Vicky Frankland

          No one is threatening women? Are you serious? You think that thousands and thousands of rape and death threats against women are excuses? Roosh V wanting to legalise rape on private property is satire I suppose? Leading criminal prosecuting barristers posting blogs called “She was asking for it”, is that a really clever attempt at women’s rights rather than the culture of victim blaming? Get your head out of the sand.

          • farkennel

            “rape and death threats”…the stand by from every professional victim with no sense of reality.Vicky,I want to take you seriously but….MY FUCKING PATIENCE IS RUNNING OUT!Forget Roosh…he has no relevance beyond your nonsensical chance to attack.Vicky….enough is enough…..

          • Strazdas

            “You think that thousands and thousands of rape and death threats against women are excuses?”

            No, i think you are lieing. And i will continue to think that until you prove otherwise. Which you wont, becuase you are lieing.

          • farkennel

            you go girl! you are so empowered!Hand your testicles in at the door.Dont kid yourself princess…they wont let you touch their “special” place.There is no honesty in you .

          • Strazdas

            not sure how your post has anything to do with my reply.

          • farkennel

            Thats OK mate…you`ll work it out….I have faith in you.

          • Vicky Frankland

            I refer you to Twitter. Caroline Criado Perez for one who was threatened with rape, murder and bombing her home. Because she wanted a woman on a banknote.

          • Strazdas

            so since you completely failed to back up that statement with any proof, you know, something that would mean you are not a liar, i went and searched for that myself. all i found is Caroline Criado Perez doxxing people on twitter. somehow i am not surprised.

            As already explained to you, there already is a woman on a bankote. As far as people on bankotes go, noone should be there. bank notes should not glorify individual people but achievements of the nation as a whole.

          • PaulMurrayCbr

            Of course it was bloody satire. Duh. Can you say the same about #KillAllMen ?

          • Vicky Frankland

            Except it isn’t satire. He sells book on this crap. He runs seminars. He frequently writes on his posts that this isn’t satire. As for the #killallmen thing, the majority of people I see using are men. Then there are the fake twitter accounts set up purporting to be feminists using it. Like the #endfathersday that was set up by 4chan. #killallwomen is a frequently used hashtag too, but we don’t bother with it, because we get enough specific and direct threats.

          • PaulMurrayCbr

            I would be very surprised to find that Roosh V ever wrote that his “legalise rape on private property” was not satire. I would be very surprised to discover that he wrote books advocating the legalisation of rape on private property. Of course, he has written a lot of other stuff that you also don’t like that isn’t satire. But even if you yourself put everything you happen to not like in the same bucket, covered with the same blanket – other people don’t, and are able to make distinctions.

      • Hades2

        I’m sorry but has the Queen been a transgender all of these years and no one has said anything?

        • Vicky Frankland

          What are you on about?

          • Hades2

            The Queen is a woman, is she not?
            You know that’s on stamps, money etc
            good grief!

          • Vicky Frankland

            I’m aware of that. What has the Queen got to do with this thread? Nothing…..

          • Mr B J Mann

            Typical brain dead feminasty:

            Vicky Frankland farkennel
            a day ago
            Maybe when the mens rights activists and their ilk stop threatening us with violence, rape and death because we campaign for a women on a postage stamp,

            Vicky Frankland Hades2
            a day ago
            I’m aware of that. What has the Queen got to do with this thread? Nothing…..

          • Vicky Frankland

            My comment should have read bank note, not postage stamp. At the time of replying I had just read earlier in the thread someone saying that feminism was dead because the Queen is a woman.

          • Mr B J Mann

            And we have a woman on banknotes too. The Queen isn’t dead yet!

          • Vicky Frankland

            But campaign to have another one featured and you get threats of rape and murder.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Oh, Purleeeeze, give us break.

            Anybody to the right of any left whinger who dares to disagree with them gets abuse, threats, death threats.

            “We know where you live” came from a left wing website that would track down and publish the addresses of anyone they disagreed with so that activists could physically attack them.

            It’s highly uncommon and unlikely that somebody would suffer harm from a right wing nutter, much more common from left wing ones.

            And before you mention one or two, literally solitary lone wolf right wing nutters consider the animal rights liberationists doing everything from releasing diseased lab rats to nail and petrol bombing, and even downing a microlite, through to the Baader-Meinhof and Red Brigades nutters. Plus, if you don’t know, the splits in the IRA and away from it were on divisions between different factions of socialism and full blown Marxism!

            And just because a few (one single?!) sad, lonely (female?!?!!) Internet troll posts something like “I’ll swing for you”, or “hangings too good for you”, or even just “you’ll burn in hell” to, or about them, left whingers dial 999 and demand an air ambulance, a SWAT team and the Murder Squad sending round!!!!

            *MAN* *U*_*P*! ! ! ! !

      • Hades2

        And no, we go on about how awful that the legal system has been subverted, that 90% of homeless are men, that men’s suicide rate is through the roof, that men are failing in school and a million other things that feminists don’t give a monkey’s about because they (now pay attention) do not care about EQUALITY.
        ‘Male tears’ is something we laugh about as it is like you ridiculous

        • Vicky Frankland

          What exactly are male rights activists doing about anything you have mentioned. They moan about women. Nothing else. Apart from threaten them, create Twitter profiles to pretend to be feminists and moan about how white men are under privileged. Please……….

          • Hades2

            Then you know nothing.
            All you’ve done here is display your ignorance about this and further your credentials as a bullied victim ™
            No surprises there then.
            Twitter profiles!
            I can’t believe how petty and entitled feminists are.
            I know, Why don’t you do a part 2 of Sarkeesian’s shenanigans and moan to the women of the UN about people not being nice to on twitter and how it should be censored to suit you.
            Screw girls education in Afghanistan and Acid victims in Pakistan and all the rest because, well, being upset on the net is REALLY what feminism should be about!

          • Hades2

            And, for the record, what they are DOING about this is creating an awareness & opposing dialogue, as I like most men (and most men still) knew nothing about this while being fed lies by the establishment propaganda (often men i hasten to add) and the rubbish spouted by fawning Political class obsequious to feminist myths (despite often knowing better) that are distorting society to benefit one gender over men and children.
            This awareness will continue to grow until 3rd wave feminism inevitably COLLAPSES under the weight of it’s own stupidity and loss of support.

      • PaulMurrayCbr

        That old canard? Links, pls. Where have MRAs threatened you with violence and all the rest of it?

      • Matthew

        Women spend 70% of disposable income in family households, they receive 75% of the punishment for crimes than men will face, they represent the majority of university students and graduates. I have honestly yet to meet an MRA in real life who was as radical as some of the feminists I’ve been forced to deal with.

        However, the fact of the matter is there are extremists on both sides of this equation and so long as we use one set of extremists to justify inaction and dismissal, nothing will get done.

      • Justthepip

        ‘…mens rights activists and their ilk…’ Slaying straw men’s rights activists doesn’t justify feminism. And ‘their ilk’ is the entire universe that is skeptical or counter to feminism. It is large, complex and diverse. Feminism was the primary aggressor in dividing ‘men’ and ‘women’ into distinct political classes.

  • Harryagain

    Feminism always was drivel. Women have always been bitchy.
    At last we are going back to reality as the light dawns.
    Women are different to men and do different things.
    Just a few brain dead female journalists bang on about it in Lala Land.
    For most women,absolutely nothing has (been) changed by feminism since the 1950s.
    For a few, they have just had a lot more work.

    Funny the femibitches only want the good jobs for wimmin.
    I never seen one emptying bins.

    • Hades2

      or slaughtering animals, working 500 feet up, digging ditches, fishing for crabs in trawlers through the winter etc and forever

      • Harryagain

        For 95% of women, there has been absolutely no change.
        Feminism is just tripe that a certain class of breast beating (ha ha) wimmin babble on about.
        Nor can there be change, biology has seen to that.
        Attempts made however have been very damaging to family life with children being deprived of love and care just so some silly bitch can go out and do “mens work”. They always regret this later. Too late.
        The one change was the pill. Which in practice has meant more STD, so no great benefit there then.
        You often get some bleeding intellectual comes up with a stupid idea that flys in the face of thousand of years of “best practice”.
        Always ends in disaster, these people live in cloud cuckoo land.
        Feminism is one of them.
        Attention seekers and idiots.

        • Hades2

          I’m less concerned about women going out and working, esp (of course) single women.
          Actually I support that as it has a definite link to overall prosperity for this and any other country.
          As long as the overall well-being of the family is being taken into account.
          Everyone needs to be able to potentially stand on their own two feet.
          My main issue with families & feminists (and there is more than a couple) is the subversion of the rule of law to the point where it is not just a threat to Men but to children also, FOR the benefit of women.
          Which is just about the present situation we find ourselves in now.
          Women are treated with kid gloves in the family courts, let’s face it you have to be a convicted killer before they won’t hand over the kids to you after a divorce.
          And who do women mostly kill when they have the chance?

          • Harryagain

            A single person can’t properly look after children.
            I agree with everything else.

            The only reason both parents go out to work is for the purchase of unnecessary luxury items.

          • Hades2

            Not necessarily.
            For working class families esp now in tax credit (or soon to be not) land.
            Totally agree with you about single parent families.
            The correlation between crime and single mothers, in particular, is shocking in the West.
            Here’s the thing, kids eventually go to school, so there is a time and place for work for women without a doubt.
            As I said, as long as the overall well-being is taken into account

          • Hades2

            Funnily enough, single Fathers have better outcomes than single mothers with children a lot less likely to live in poverty
            Particularly for male children.

            But that must be ‘The Patriarchy’s’ fault..
            :)

  • davejon

    I always laugh at the Woman’s Hour programme on Radio 4 – the BBC bosses must be laughing patronisingly at women as they seem to need their own programme – men don’t have or don’t need Men’s Hour because we rule naturally. Realising women’s thought processes, I’m not at all surprised they have failed to notice!

  • octagon<3

    I’ve always agreed with those who contested that equality is a loftier goal than whatever feminism offers. Page 3 babes should not be offensive to women who respect the choices of other women to wield their sexuality freely. Denying that women have agency in their sexuality is ironically sexist. Instead of trying to define femininity we should be celebrating what makes us all human.

    • peterdavis

      Of course I agree. But the outlook of feminism is one of the raging, insatiable self. It is the triumph of the politics of self over the politics of society. In feminism’s view, Page 3 babes are brainwashed by ‘the patriarchy’, blindly obeying the whims of men as women have always done. There is, to them, a direct line from page 3, to women being held as chattel centuries ago, to rape, to FGM, to casual comments on Lindked In……in their eyes it is all one.

      They do not respect the right of others to live as they choose. It must be what THEY want or it must be stamped out. ‘ME…..ME…….ME !!!!!!’

  • Sue Smith

    Feminism is another one of those ubiquitous “isms” which you have when a society is search for its core beliefs or negotiating new ones, having thrown almost every other time-honoured one out: narcissism, racism, sexism, feminism, Marxism, post-modernism, Islamism, skepticism, multiculturalism, atheism, pacifism, careerism, leftism, conformism, professionalism, individualism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, ageism…etc. Each one carries its own tailor-made belief system which comes to define who people are and what they stand for.

    What’s mostly missing from this list of ‘isms’ is social cohesion, respect and self-respect, a sense of communiity and shared humanity, self-sacrifice, delayed gratification and love of the culture and its heritage. If you can find me some “isms” to cover those things I’ll start to believe there is no schism with an “ism”!!

    • oldoddjobs

      You’re right, socialcohesionism is the way out of this mess,

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      But also, there’s no jism with out an “ism.” And we need that to make babies.

      LOLz.

    • Taca

      I think it’s gone too far to recover the social cohesion. All we have left is tourism.

  • James David Lockhart Nelson

    “Women and wounded to the rear” ” Fix bayonets”

  • Sean L

    Call to mind this little gem from Santayana: ‘Fanaticism consists in redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim.’

  • cartimandua

    Its underperforming white boys who don’t succeed in school and no one knows what to do about them.
    There are no longer unions feeding in boys to manly jobs. Apprenticeships have mixed reviews.

  • cartimandua

    Perhaps Emily thinks honour murders etc are “not a problem” because they are not a problem for her.

    • kitten

      Or FGM and domestic violence.

      The fact that two women are murdered in this country every week at the hands of an ex partner has totally passed over her empty head too.

      • disqus_QL05BqU79X

        FGM is very rare and illegal almost everywhere (it’s also performed by women), whereas MGM is legal and kills hundreds of males a year. Domestic violence is perpetrated mostly by women (all studies show this); men are over half of victims and have no legal rights or support. “Two women a week” lie needs to die. It was about 1.1 for two years and two feminists lied and won’t stop repeating it. Domestic violence and relationship breakdowns actually kill three times as many men as women.

        Honour-based killings are suffered by men, too. In some countries, reports are showing it’s more male victims. That we don’t know about it in the West is because of liars like you ensuring that the media keep refusing to report on it, or any of the above issues.

        • kitten

          Pathetic, trying to play the victim card.

          Fuck off you rude, snivelling misogynist.

          • Taca

            You really have no arguments do you? If you have any evidence that, in terms of fatalities and serious maimings, FGM is anything near the huge global problem that is MGM I’d like to see it. Ditto honour killings.

          • Hades2

            Some of the complications from MGM are so shocking yet NO ONE SAYS ANYTHING.
            Most American men are still mutilated like this
            It’s very sad.
            It will of course have occurred to kitten’ (groan!) that this is a problem at all.

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            LOLz. I think I’ve pulled.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            Hahahahahaha! Looks like SOMEONE struck a raw nerve!

          • eternumviti

            I was happily sitting outside this debate until I saw this. Kitten, this is precisely the bullying, belittling language used by women who practice abuse, domestic or otherwise. It is all too horribly familiar.

          • Hades2

            Why didn’t you use it to brush your teeth?
            You talk so much trite shit I would think it was necessary!

          • PaulMurrayCbr

            Hmm – smells like … hate.

          • Mr B J Mann

            “You’re utterly pathetic, trying to play the victim card.”

            AWwwwwwww, diddums:

            I4 that your job then?!?!?!

        • Strazdas

          “”whereas MGM is legal and kills hundreds of males a year.”

          While MGM is in no way a good thing, id like to see where you got that claim from because that sounds like FUD to me.

          • PaulMurrayCbr

            So I just googled “circumcision deaths”. Plenty of info for those that care to take three seconds out of their busy, busy day to look for it.

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            It’s not a claim. It’s a commonly-known fact you can learn easily; MGM is not outlawed anywhere. A baby boy was killed in the UK some months ago by a botched circumcision. Happens all the time, especially in less developed countries.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            More baby boys (just slightly more) die from circumcision every year than from SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome).

            The research may be found at a newly-launched site (not sure what Spectator policy on links is, so remove the spaces and replace the DOT):

            neonatal cutting DOT org

          • Strazdas

            I see you failed to provide any statistics or supporting evidence outside of a single anecdotal case.

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            I see you’re just typing with one hand out, demanding free links that you can find on the internet 😉

          • Strazdas

            if its so easy to find, how come you failed to find any?

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            I didn’t fail. I collect research and have been for 15 years. Takes under two ounces of blood loss for a cut baby to die. It happens. They die from infections and diseases, too. There’s two die a day, on average, in the USA alone.

            I don’t bow to strangers on the internet, sorry and all that.

          • Strazdas

            then why it is so hard to produce any when asked to back up your statements?

      • Tehy

        Find me a recent article by a prominent feminist trying to stop FGM, I fucking dare you.

        Domestic violence is suffered by both sexes, but one sex has all the shelters, legal support, public sympathy, et cetera. Hell, men are victim-blamed via ‘he asked for it’

      • Strazdas

        Funny thing Domestic violence – women dominate that statistic too.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Yup, who is the oppressor in a lesbian DV incident?!

          • Strazdas

            obviuosly a man that tries to seperate them!

      • PaulMurrayCbr

        We are talking about a country of 300 million, right? Perhaps you might profitably look into stats for women who murder children, the aged, the ill. Usually by abusing a position of trust.

      • Mr B J Mann

        And isn”t it amazing how many men die of “accidental” poisoning?!

    • Tehy

      Can you link me to any recent article where a prominent feminist complains about honor killings, creates some kind of call to action against them, provides any kind of a solution to them, etc?

      Probably not, since modern feminism is scared to death of opposing Islam and thus losing their progressive allies + beating on an ‘oppressed group’

    • Aj Retro

      The article makes it clear this is about feminism in the West.

      Speaking of, I don’t hear a lot of Western feminists talking about the parts of the world where Feminism is sorely needed. They mainly just complain about “oppressive” problems like “manspreading” and “mansplaining.”

      • Hades2

        Quite.
        The sound of silence is almost deafening when it comes to criticising actual patriarchies in the world, such as Islam
        So Feminists literally have no use whatsoever and their only role is to be harmful and hateful.

  • kitten

    What a nonsense article.
    Basing the fact we have a queen on the throne to state it’s “blindingly obvious that women ruled” would mean women ruled in the 17th century when queen Elizabeth 1st was on the throne.

    The suffragettes didn’t win us the vote either.

    The crass last paragraph has presumably been put in for shock value.
    Can we have grown ups producing articles please?

    • utera

      The queen ruled in spite of the fact that most of the dying to defend the empire was done by men. This makes the disparity between her right to rule and the sacrifices made by the other gender even more significant, which undermines your narrative of historical oppression.

      The sexism feminists like to ignore is the benevolent kind, which has existed throughout history, and continues to exist today. Due to the gynocentric biases of the human animal, women are constantly held to lower standards, and pandered to, which has become mal-adaptive in modern society. Much like how human appetite for high calorie food which was an advantage in the distant past is now a major health issue in a modern calorie rich environment. As male utility has become less directly important and governments are able to extract value from men by proxy for women, the social contracts have broken down. Feminists are allowed to imagine an equality of contribution to society which they simply have not earned. Almost all the jobs which actually build and maintain the modern infrastructure which gives these yuppy hipster feminists their comfortable lives are done by men, and yet what do we see? Nothing but and endless demand for only the best jobs, because feminists can only look up the social ladder, men who do the blue collar jobs, the dangerous and dirty jobs which keep society functional, they simply don’t exist. Feminism has taken all the worst aspects of female nature and have amplified them without limit, the entitlement and narcissism, is once again amplified by modern technology, where women can post selfies and bathe in the thirst of thousands of males. Its a toxic brew which has toxified society, its no surprise that male legislatures are passing things like the “yes means yes” laws while ignoring the MRA completely. The human apes tendency to pander to women, to excuse them, to lower standards of accountability have led to a point where literally there are 75 men in college for every 100 women, and yet you hear nothing in the media other than “we need more women”…
      Its no surprise at this point why feminists get away with the sophistry they do, their “defense” of feminism tends to boil down to the dictionary defense, which is about as legitimate as a muslim waving away the horrors done in the name of their religion by simply stating “Islam is the religion of peace”, or when feminists try to shame women back into the fold by claiming there is a historical obligation, which is about as absurd as claiming african americans should have an eternal debt to the republican party for freeing the slaves… Feminists only get away with such intellectual mediocrity because of the sexism they cannot acknowledge, which is benevolent. Its why even Obama is citing completely debunked statistics like 1 in 5, or 75 cents on the dollar…
      Women have abandoned their end of the social contract while holding men to their end, to “provide and protect”, most feminist complaints are little more than demands for male protection. The current threat narrative hysteria over “cyberviolence” and “online harassment” is just more of the same, a demand for protection, all the while claiming to be equal. It really it just endless, but it happens to every advanced society once a certain level of comfort, the women become ever more entitled, and parasitical, and in many european countries even so self destructive that they will attempt to create a “rape culture” through mass immigration where one didn’t exist before. Its a question whether society makes it past this point, or if we will be weakened to the point where another civilization surpasses us…to probably repeat the cycle again.

      • kitten

        Queen Elizabeth 1st never married because if she had she would’ve no longer been in charge; her husband would have automatically been entitled to reign.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Strange, but I thought there were a number of women who were entitled to reign, but ended up in charge after marrying the King/ Emperor/ Sultan/ Maharaja/ whoever?!

          And I had to laugh when I read a Cosmo mag article on their ten businesswomen of the year:

          Nine had inherited “their” business

          The tenth was in the fashion business.

          But it was her husband who actually ran her business!!!

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      The sex of a monarch, or predominant sex of members of a parliament or senate, doesn’t matter. They all legislate in favour of women and ensure men are subservient to women anyway. It’s been socially and legally enforced since the Courts of Poitiers in the 12th Century and the codification of chivalry. Men are naturally protective of women, without the need for it, to be frank. It’s our primary limbic impulse. Feminism takes advantage of this, hence why men are the first to kill other men they suspect of hurting women. Soldiers are rallied into battle with cries of “You gonna let this foreign scum rape your wives?” and such. It’s just how it is.

      Men run societies, yes. Running them means doing the hard work. Women rule because women control life. Men are largely just expendable providers to them and their young. Sadly, the unnatural enforcement of chivalry is now killing people at terrible rates; almost entirely men, of course.

      Funnily enough, though feminists love dead men and want to cull us by 90 percent, the less of us there were, the more “patriarchal” society would become, as competition for males would produced a submissive “harem” effect. Anyway, you’re probably not on the ladder to understanding yet. Not that I recommend it. Ignorance is bliss. Stay there.

      • kitten

        You’re an ignoramus of the highest order. I bet this women bashing article is right your street. It fits your toady, stinking attitude.

        • disqus_QL05BqU79X

          It doesn’t bash women you slackjawed halfwit. It bashes an ideology that kills people for profit.

          • Lisette Muntslag

            Women don’t want to take responsibility for the mess that they have created in society….everything is blamed on men….what a world.

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            I don’t blame modern women. It’s not their fault that they were socially indoctrinated into being irresponsible – in the same way boys are indoctrinated into servitude. Kill the doctrine, not the people.

          • Lisette Muntslag

            How are you going to kill the doctrine if you don’t hold the women who push the doctrine accountable……not blaming people is a PC stand….you have a disease being inflicted on people in the name of political ideology but you don’t want to hold the people who inflict that disease on people accountable……why not?…..women today willingly glorify the non-sense….if you say you don’t blame them you take the same feminist position to say they are victims of something beyond themselves…..if it feels good do it if something goes wrong blame it on somebody else or on something…..makes no sense to me, but than again I came from another planet that’s why is doesn’t make sense to me.

          • kitten

            Oh yes it does you misogynistic retard.

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            I love people who comment this way; it exposes so much about the commentators themselves. Not only is everything you’ve typed a comical lie or a desperate personal attack (and lacking in basic grammatical skill), but also a projection.

            Thanks again. xxx

        • disqus_QL05BqU79X

          Ah you just swapped “toady” for “lickspittle.” Caught ya. Sorry you don’t know what either word means though!

          • kitten

            I couldn’t decide between the two but since you’ve pointed it out I’m calling you a toady, lickspittle misogynistic because that’s what you are.

        • digiman47

          You are George Galloway and I claim my £5

        • Aj Retro

          “Woman bashing”

          Stop this please.

          Criticizing feminism =/= attacking all women

        • Matthew

          “women-bashing”, as far as I read this article was critical of feminism, not women in general. Please do not generalise criticism of feminism as “women-bashing”.

    • Strazdas

      Queen Elizabeth did indeed rule in the 17th century. It takes a blind person to not see that females dominate todays society both socially and monetary. Perhaps we should have grown ups reading the articles instead?

      • kitten

        Oh poor diddums’.

        You regression chauvinists aren’t partly through the misogynistic acts of domestic violence and rape, and you lot don’t like it. :(

        • Matthew

          Because women can vote, we have a better mechanism for equality. Now women have a say, the issues you’re concerned with can be worked out, but let’s not pretend every issue raised by feminists is without consideration as important as any other. And actually yes, women do dominate money in the sense that they spend 70% of all disposable income, which is a little ironic if you consider that men make more than women. Women actually dominate a number of issues, not just negative ones, but in my country women are likely to receive 75% of the punishment a man will receive.

          In New York a woman who admitted to making a false rape accusation against three men was given just three years, while the men had already served four years each. That’s 75% of their punishment (for a crime they didn’t commit), and 25% of the overall suffering she put these men through, let alone that these men will have to register as sex offenders until such time as a judge expunges their records. In Los Angeles a couple was caught defrauding an insurance company, despite being married and having the exact same obligations, she received 18 months to his 36.

          I don’t mind you fighting for the issues you consider to be important, but please don’t pretend that every feminist out their is Susan B. Anthony (How many modern feminists would demand the same level of punishment as men if they committed a crime?) or every issue is equal to the right to vote.

          • Mr B J Mann

            A few women might demand the “right” to join the military:

            But how many feminists demand the draft for women?!?!!!

        • Strazdas

          and i never said that equality exists just because you can vote. And yes, women DO dominate countries money an societal structures. If you are blind to it that is your problem, not mine. There are many studies that find women to be primary budget holders that get to decide where money is spent.

  • disqus_QL05BqU79X

    “In the 1970s, feminists were ball-breaking, ass-kicking, devil-may-care thinkers — the likes of Greer, Gloria Steinem and Susan Sontag”

    No, they were terrorists funded by the CIA. Steinem was a former CIA informant. This is not a big conspiracy or secret. She talked about it way back when and then hacked that bit from history later on. The CIA funded Ms. Magazine; the source of today’s 100% fake rape and domestic violence myths.

    Feminism is designed to destroy civilian society, by destroying the composite communities, by destroying families, by destroying fathers; hence the removal of all fathers’ legal rights and the expansion of legislative statute to arrest and try almost only men. Governments love feminism and so many have adopted the cult as a state doctrine because it’s the most divisive and effective ideology in subjugating citizens into constantly funding government. Racism, classism and religious work reasonably well, but dividing the entire human race down the middle and pitting the halves against each other is the best way to break people down.

    Civilian feminists are just sock-puppets. Feminists never “won” women anything. Women have always been the privileged sex, since we were early primates.

    • Lisette Muntslag

      Exactly feminism is power and privileges for some women and exploitation and oppression for others.

      • disqus_QL05BqU79X

        Feminism does need a certain amount of real female victims of men, certainly. It’s why they battle the things that help men and boys; all too often brutalised males hurt women. They LOVE that.

      • Sue Smith

        Spot on!! I’ve always annoyed my gay feminist sister by saying “this is essentially a white bread issue about career options”. She’d froth at the mouth. Now she’s a rusted-on supporter of “Hillary”.

        • Lisette Muntslag

          People don’t want to hear it but its the ugly truth…..radical gender feminist have reduced women from human being to a mere vagina to keep the corrupt gravy train going and Hillary Clinton is leading the pack of wolves.

    • Perplexico

      I can’t stand feminists and your screed still comes off as one of the stupidest things I’ve ever read. That takes talent. Kudos.

      • disqus_QL05BqU79X

        Cheers.

    • http://www.workinprogress.com Nicetime

      What was the CIAs motive in this?

      I think you’ve got it wrong. I agree that feminism, along with multiculturalism and liberal individualism generally is probably a terminal disease for our culture, but I think you’re miles wide of the mark. If there is a conspiracy it began with a clique of cultural marxists emanating from Gramsci and the Frankfurt School. It was allowed to disseminate step by step because our liberal elite is weak, vacillating and believes in nothing. Read Corelli Barnet’s ‘The Collapse of British Power’. It describes the stupidity, cowardice and weakness that led us to where we found ourselves in 1939 and the decline has continued apace since.

      • disqus_QL05BqU79X

        CIA? Beats me, but it’s true. I mean, no surprise that Betty Friedan (who largely, if not singlehandedly, invented the “historic oppression of women”) was a vicious little Communist, but the Ms. Magazine thing is a fact all the same. Seek and ye shall find.

        Cultural Marxism, as we call it, goes back further than Frankfurt, I think. The truth will out, eventually, anyway. Too late, usually.

      • Sue Smith

        Yes, there being little or no real existential threats directly to the western world since WW2, the society and culture has turned in on itself. Seems to me that human beings are designed for adversary, and this “ism” mentality certainly suits that narrative. Stop gazing at your own navels, feministas et al.

  • Ian Woolley

    Great article and podcast. But I worry for you now, Emily, because if Charlotte Proudman does get decapitated by an internet troll, you’re going to look very, very foolish.

    Article on cultural polarisation here if anyone’s interested: http://cliscep.com/2015/10/23/the-poles-are-growing/

  • http://www.workinprogress.com Nicetime

    But this victory will last a couple of generations at most BECAUSE WE AREN’T REPRODUCING AT REPLACEMENT RATES!!! Nothing else actually matters. We are importing people (be they Poles or Somalians) who think we are a joke, and we are. We are the culture that went mad

    • Strazdas

      Doesnt matter really. The imported imigrants are different in first generation only. Theri kids and grandkids will become one of us whether the current imigrants want it or not. Assimilation takes time.

      • NK

        hence syrian invasion…

      • NK

        a while especially if they is muslim

      • Cyril Sneer

        “he imported imigrants are different in first generation only”

        Not true.

        “Theri kids and grandkids will become one of us whether the current imigrants want it or not. ”

        You’re wrong and what you’ve allowed is a timebomb for our children to deal with.

        We can clearly see that muslims for the most part don’t integrate. Which generation are we on now man? Social breakdown caused by increasing muslim population will further ensure there is no integration. In addition, you clearly know sweet f ck all about Islam.

        • Strazdas

          What i can see, quite clearly, is that first generation muslims dont integrate. their kids, though, majority you wouldnt even know they were muslims. For most immigrants we are still on generation 1 actually.

  • Alùcard Impàlèr

    Also, how come I can’t help but get the feeling that feminists SMELL bad?

  • David

    Always a bad sign when you have to resort to straw men to make your argument. No feminists were complaining about the advert on the tube because they were offended by bare flesh; they were complaining because it showed an idealised an unrealistic image of the female body, and presented this as an ideal to which women should strive. In fact, the response of many women was to post bikini pictures celebrating their own real bodies. So it’s not baring flesh that’s the problem for feminists, it’s the (male-imposed) idealised norms that are.

    • Aj Retro

      Those standards are only “unrealistic” for people who don’t want to put in the effort.

      It still comes down to feminists resenting other women being better than them at something.

    • Lee Patekar

      Sadly the image in the tube was of a real healthy woman who works out every day. The irony of you calling that woman unrealistic isn’t lost on me.

    • Hades2

      Oh let’s protect the weak minded women from unrealistic standards of beauty
      Cause it’s so upsetting to them, so BAN IT.
      Good God, where do they dig up manginas like you?

    • Alùcard Impàlèr

      But if women idealize “unrealistic” images of the male body, it’s perfectly fine, right? I remember the whole big stink feminists raised in the UK over Protein World’s “Are You Beach Body Ready?” ad campaign, but they didn’t seem to mind when the person in the ads was a muscular man…

    • Credi

      None of the women who were “celebrating” their real bodies will sleep with you for trying to defend them. Good luck.

    • Strazdas

      Nothing in that advert was unrealistic. Idealistic – sure. Thats a GOOD thing. we should stride for our ideals, not hate others for having better will to stick to their diet.

      Ah yes, the vandals defacing the adverts sure were celebrating. Too bad they werent celebrating justice considering what they did was in fact illegal. And yes, it is the norm. Because thats whats healthy. and healthy should be the norm.

      • freddiethegreat

        Wasn’t the ‘Wonderbra’ advert a bit better?

    • David

      Not going to respond to all you group-thinking drones individually, because you’re making exactly the same standard, boring argument. The majority of women, no matter how much they exercise, how well they eat, will not be able to attain a figure like that in the advert, because, without plastic surgery, there’s nothing they can do about hip shape, breast size, bone structure, etc.

      And in any case, none of this is relevant to the point I was making. Whether or not you agree with the opponents of the advert, it has nothing to with baring flesh, as the author falsely claims.

      • Alùcard Impàlèr

        >”group-thinking drones”

        It seems someone’s getting a BIT salty that no one’s agreeing with him. Awwwwww, too bad, so sad. Poor widdle baby!

      • Amaechi Jones

        I’m a feminist and it didn’t bother me. A lot of what my kind argue about is utter bollocks but I just ignore that and focus on the causes that actually matter. It is like anything in life ; you sort the wheat from the chaff.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Right, so you object to women being stabbed and you object to all men being labelled rapists.

          That doesn’t make you a feminist, just normal.

          Would anyone ever say:

          I’m a Narsty and it didn’t bother me. A lot of what my kind argue about is utter bollocks but I just ignore that and focus on the causes that actually matter: good autobahns, cheap people’s cars, trains running on time, camps for the workers, a cap on fat cat salaries, ban on unearned income and effectively nationalisation of the means of production.

          What’s not to like.

          OK, there might be a few Nasty things not to like, some a bit extreme, but I’m happy to show solidarity with my fellow Volk on the basis of the normal humane things they stand for that everyone agrees with, and ignore the Narsty bits.

          After all I don’t want to be shamed for being a reactionary dinosaur and not supporting some of the more extreme activists more radical progressive ideas…….

          Eugenics, abortion, planned parenhood, all those other modern ideas we copied from England, and Marx…….

      • freddiethegreat

        ‘Drones” indicates “male”. USe the neutral “bees” please

        • PaulMurrayCbr

          “Drones” means “people who don’t do any work, who just sit there, droning”. The irony being that in a beehive, drones working nonstop to keep the temperature and humidity correct is absolutely vital.

      • NK

        *sigh* and these women can;t be trusted to make a judgment as to weather they could get that body or not? they have to be protected from these adverts dont they? How about the male version? no one gave a sh*t about that. Also, advertising in general promotes images that have been doctored all the time. I don’t understand how this one was different. lol

      • cfuse

        If you look at a picture of someone else and feel bad about yourself, it is *your* attitude that is the problem, not their body.

        Trying to censor the world because you lack self esteem is typical feminist responsibility-shirking behaviour. Why take responsibility for yourself when you can blame someone else? They behave like young children.

      • Mr B J Mann

        And nothing to do with anything else you claim either because it was an ad campaign with female AND MALE models!

        Oh, and you clearly have “Size Zero self-awareness!

        Do you ever look in the mirror?!*

      • Cyril Sneer

        “The majority of women, no matter how much they exercise, how well they eat, will not be able to attain a figure like that”

        That’s irrelevant.

        There are many women who DO have bodies like that.

    • freddiethegreat

      Straw PERSONS, you objectifying sexist you!

    • NK

      what was unrealistic about it?

      • PaulMurrayCbr

        Realistically, it was probably photoshopped.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Nope unlike ads by women, for women, that look like dressed up Auschw!tz corpses, it was a completely natural health and fitness supplement campaign with matching “beach ready” men ads!

          Just shows how dumb feminists are!!!

          • P_S_W

            Not to mention that most of those actually shaming women for not having the right body image or right clothes and accessories are actually other women, not men especially.

            This is what really annoys me about this ‘battle’, the feminists are focussing on the wrong target if they’re interested in self-esteem re. body image.

      • Broccoli Bob

        Nothing. It showed a nice, well-proportioned, normal-bodied woman.

        It has come to the point that you get called “unreal” unless you’re covered in fat rolls.

    • Chani Joene Randazzo

      But it was a real woman. A real, healthy woman. Since when should a real woman have to hide her flesh in case someone calling themselves a Feminist decides they feel “body-shamed” by the existence of another woman? The author is right. The only alternative to this would be for all women to don the burka, because some women are just naturally slim, while others work as god damn rooftilers and are fit. They don’t do it to oppress those who are unfit. And, mind you, the same women who are screeching about this woman’s bodily dimensions would be out there in their lingerie with placards protesting against slut-shaming. So it’s ok to wear a bikini if you’re not deemed by most women to be physically attractive, but if you are, you’re oppressing women unless you wear a burka. Ok. got it.

    • Richard Vertrees

      I have never understood this argument. Physical beauty is only one aspect on any individual and in any society there will be an ideal form. As a man should I look at the statue of David and be offended that my own body does not measure up? Or can I appreciate it for what it is, a beautiful piece of art that celebrates the ideal male form.

      Also should we hide other aspects of individuality? Should we refrain from highlighting great minds to spare those that are not as intelligent or creative? I believe Steven Hawking is one of the most amazing people in the entire world, perhaps in the entire history of the human race, and it is entirely attributed to his spirit and his mind. I know I am no where near his level of intelligence or creativity, should I feel bad when I read an article on his achievements?

      This mentality by David spotlights that envy is a very powerful force in our society.

    • SarahAB

      There are a fair few straw men in this piece. I didn’t oppose the advert myself (and have a strained relationship with feminism) but your analysis of the objections to the ad is much more accurate than Hill’s.

      • David

        Thanks Sarah, you’re the only person so far who has realised that I was just summarising the feminist critique of the advert. All the other comments have just been knee-jerk angry explosions by insecure men.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Sorry, I must have missed your summary of the humanist critique of the objectifying idealised images of “beach-ready” MEN in the rest of the ad campaign!

          • David

            That would’ve had nothing to do with what was in the article.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Bit like the rest of your posts then!

    • MrAuContraire

      You sound like a man shaking his fist and howling at the pouring rain.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Bollards.

      There were matching male ads showed an idealised an unrealistic image of the MALE body, and presented this as an ideal to which MEN should strive, and no one complained about them!

      And most ads that show an idealised and unrealistic image of the female body, and present this as an ideal to which women should strive are not only by women, for women, but show an idealised image that at best men don’t like, at worst makes them gag!

    • Matthew

      Have you ever seen the Barbie vs He-Man picture? Its got a paragraph about how Barbie is an idealised and unrealistic image that is produced to try and convince women they have to fit this model in order to be considered beautiful…and then there’s he-man.

    • Broccoli Bob

      Spoken like a true obese, David,

      And no, we don’t like to look at your fat rolls, regardless of your gender. It’s not “society’s beauty standards”, it’s just the most basic æsthetic principle known to humankind. There’s nothing to celebrate about having a diseased, grotesquely repulsive body.

      (For the record, i’m a woman myself.)

  • Wonderkarp

    All I ask is, what has Feminism actually done in the last decade that was a good thing?

    • SarahAB

      Campaigned against FGM, honour violence, oppressive dress codes, often facing personal danger like this woman http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/23/kandahar-is-killing-all-its-brave-women.html

      • MrAuContraire

        Not sure that’s just a feminist thing.

      • Mr B J Mann

        FGM (and why only F, why not M, or simply GM?) is done by women, for women,

        Oppressive dress codes (and body image standards) are imposed by women and gays.

        Oh, and honour killings were introduced by the “progressive” lefty “liberals” to enable us to share in the colourful efnil vibrancy of other “cultures”!

      • Wonderkarp

        ok, let me rephrase my question.

        “All I ask is, what has Feminism actually done in the last decade in a 1st world country that was a good thing?”

    • tobydelamo

      Calling attention to the rape culture and the myriad ways it impacts women?

      • Wonderkarp

        Rapper Rick Ross published more straight albums about running an illegal drug and prostitution ring in LA, torturing rival gang members, killing cops, and blowing people’s heads off with assault rifles. Recently, he made one reference to rape, and he was all over the news, and his endorsers dropped him. In a society where rape rates have halved over the last decade, and a rape joke is considered more offensive than a Holocaust joke, no, there is no rape culture.

      • David Power

        Repeat after me…. There is no such thing as rape culture.

    • thesickmanofeurope_com

      “….what has Feminism actually done in the last decade that was a good thing…”

      It allowed women to become more promiscuous (like men)…..
      I now can have as much sex as I want (with the usual precautions of course) without having to commit and put a ring on their finger!
      Surely that IS a good thing!

      • Wonderkarp

        I dont think that was something Feminism did, as many Third Wave Feminists are Sex Negative.

        • thesickmanofeurope_com

          “…I dont think that was something Feminism did, as many Third Wave Feminists are Sex Negative….”

          No doubt most womyn that call themselves feminists are nothing but bitter sexual market rejects….but to say that the promiscuity of the “Strong and Independent” womyn today is not a direct result of feminism is pushing a bit.

          • Wonderkarp

            I would say it has more to do with the more mainstream usage of the internet. As the internet started to gain more prominence in peoples lives off their computers and into their phones, more ideas were exchanged, and more things became socially accepted. Especially with the advent of social media taking precedence in our lives. Its not like you could find something like Fetlife in the early days of social media with myspace.

            Feminism, Radical or otherwise, has been around for Decades, but Social media has been around for a fraction of the time. If Feminism did have an impact in sex positive promiscuous women, it would have happened decades sooner if at all. And the women I’ve met who have been promiscuous sure as shit don’t care for gender politics or modern feminism in general.

      • Quest for Liberty

        No. It is not a good thing.

        • thesickmanofeurope_com

          …No. It is not a good thing….

          It is for me!

  • freddiethegreat

    Having read the comments, could we vote on the following motion:
    “Feminists need to man up”

    • Lisette Muntslag

      I second that motion….!

      • Mr B J Mann

        And I second that e.motion!

  • Marisu

    I think your version of feminism is very naive and B/W. (starting from the image; fighting for equity doesn’t mean to fight against men & hate them, but to fight with them against a patriarchal system). It is a minority of feminists that you are focusing on, which are covering more immediate and personal issues (which is not bad either), but you are not thinking of all the injustices happening worldwide to women & which we are also trying to discuss and change: those who do not receive the same salary or nothing at all, those who are fired because they get pregnant, those who are sexually harassed, exploited occupationally, sexually abused and a long list. And men also suffer their share BECAUSE WE LIVE IN THE SAME PLANET, that’s why they are also part of the struggle, and why talking about masculinities is important too.

    There are many issues to discuss regarding feminism and some focuses on some, like sex and body and menstruation, while others about bigger topics, like race, inequiality, poverty. Why should be compare old & new fights if the times and priorities are completely different???

    • tobydelamo

      So much yes.

      The next wave will have to deal with we all know and are just not ready to speak: All penis-in-vagina is rape, flat out. There is no real consent that can happen in a patriarchal system. Women are trained from a young age to eroticize their own subjugation.

      How we deal with this horror will be the defining battle of feminism over the next 50 years at least.

      • SarahAB

        If you have your way, i.e. in redefining rape to meet your own extremely bizarre standards, I guess there won’t be many of us around in 50 years.

        • tobydelamo

          Don’t be so negative. Technology is incredible nowadays and we can basically do what we want as far as reproduction. We’re just not ready to take those leaps yet.

          • silent_pilot

            Do you hold an opinion on turkey baster-in-vagina being rape?

          • P_S_W

            I see. So you’re suggesting the eradication of the male species…

      • Mr B J Mann

        Except that men and women are trained, at home and at school, by feminists!

      • Wolfstarking

        You’re not a feminist you are a misandrist. You believe in female supremacy not equality, you want to see men exterminated. People like you aren’t taken seriously because you are extremists and extremists have always failed throughout history because being extreme is never good. Take for example religious extremists all crazy people.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Funny how the “progressive” lefty “liberals” still lie about a pay gap and rape culture but want to !slamify as well as feminise the West:

      Classic example of female “logic”!

    • Matthew

      What was fought for before were issues that limited a woman’s choice based on legal obligation/submission. What’s being fought for today varies greatly from country to country. In Syria, it’s a right to life, to vote and to all the rights women in the west have, in the west it’s “eye-rape”. You may be right in the sense that this may address only a fringe of the feminist movement, but let’s not pretend the issues of the world justify any form of radicalisation, such as the case of two Canadian feminists who have legally prevented a man from using the internet because he disagreed with them online. One person earlier in this thread called all men rapists, unless you agree, I doubt you’d think any current issue justifies referring to all men as rapists or the previous issue.

      You mention discussing “masculinities” and I’m inclined to ask, in what way? Such “conversations” already take place, in which men are told how terrible their “toxic masculinity” is, without being given any real kind of definition let alone any real reason to believe what is being said about how they’ve chosen to live their lives, just shamed because of their, often unintentional and unconscious, support of the “patriarchal system”.

      The reason you should consider the types of fights you’re going after is because not all of them are of the same seriousness. Being able to walk down the street without being ogled is not comparable to Syrian women’s right to exist and self-determinate, no matter how you slice it.

    • Matthew

      What was fought for before were issues that limited a woman’s choice based on legal obligation/submission. What’s being fought for today varies greatly from country to country. In Syria, it’s a right to life, to vote and to all the rights women in the west have, in the west it’s “eye-rape”. You may be right in the sense that this may address only a fringe of the feminist movement, but let’s not pretend the issues of the world justify any form of radicalisation, such as the case of two Canadian feminists who have legally prevented a man from using the internet because he disagreed with them online. One person earlier in this thread called all men rapists, unless you agree, I doubt you’d think any current issue justifies referring to all men as rapists or the previous issue.

      You mention discussing “masculinities” and I’m inclined to ask, in what way? Such “conversations” already take place, in which men are told how terrible their “toxic masculinity” is, without being given any real kind of definition let alone any real reason to believe what is being said about how they’ve chosen to live their lives, just shamed because of their, often unintentional and unconscious, support of the “patriarchal system”.

      The reason you should consider the types of fights you’re going after is because not all of them are of the same seriousness. Being able to walk down the street without being ogled is not comparable to Syrian women’s right to exist and self-determinate, no matter how you slice it.

  • aristophanes

    ‘Today, girls outperform boys at school — and have done since the mid-1970s. ‘

    Starting in the 1970s there were concerted moves to make examinations ‘girl friendly’.
    There were to be more questions that girls enjoy – empathy in history, environment rather than valency in chemistry, essays rather than scansion in Latin ….

    Questions were to be more predictable – ‘boys tend to handle the unexpected better because they have more confidence.’ That gender advantage was to be neutralised…..

    Guess what happened to results.

  • Paul Bovis

    Oh! Please. This is the twenty first century when men and women go out on drinking binges, have street fights, get tattooed, slag one another down, fight for the same job, wear what they want when they want. Domestic violence is a two way street, and if you don’t believe me come and watch my daughter in action. She is not alone either. Some people have a very narrow view of life and a biased attitude. If you watch social media like facebook, all you see is how good women are, how hard done by they are, how they are the only ones suffering, even most of the funnies are women leading or condemning the opposite sex.

    We need balance now and many old fashioned ideals need to be dumped in the trash on both sides. Just because a woman can do what a man can it does not take away her femininity or a man doing what a woman does normally will not lose his masculinity, though looking at some of my brothers these days I question that last statement.

    As to the statement “Today, girls outperform boys at school — and have done since the mid-1970s.”

    I did a higher level English course, with high marks and praise throughout the course. I worked hard at it. When the final exam came the whole paper was geared up with women’s questions. There was not one general knowledge question. I passed but it was a struggle, whilst those on the course that did not fair to well came out with glowing marks. So that stat is bull unfortunately.

    • PaulMurrayCbr

      What’s an example of a women’s questiion in an English exam?

      • Mr B J Mann

        Name?

    • Emman

      and your claims are bull because women and men are not the same and never will be. if you wonder why look at your first statement.

      • Daniel Bath

        What don’t you agree with, exactly?

  • tobydelamo

    All men are rapists, full stop. Let’s just deal with that one issue. In comparison all the other issues like pay gaps are unimportant and will sort themselves out if we just deal with the violence of men first.

    But, please. Let’s not pretend the biggest battles have been won. As long as my daughters and granddaughters will be raised in a rape culture, this is not freedom and it’s not equality.

    • Sue Smith

      Dear me, you do have a bleak outlook on the human condition. I have three adult sons and a husband and I can tell you all men are definitely NOT rapists, but what all my male relatives say is that these days there are legions of sluts – drunken women with little or no self respect and no moral code. – the difficulty is actually in finding the diminishing numbers of decent ones!!

      If females want to claim equal opportunity to behave like the worst of males then bully for them!!

      • tobydelamo

        Well, maybe you’ve been Stockholmed. Girls are trained from a young age to fetishize their submission to men and to not see the violence. Remember Price is Right? “Barker’s Beauties”? That’s just once example of the propaganda that teaches us we belong to men, that’s it’s our jb to parade around in swimsuits for the pleasure of an old man. And it’s no surprise that three of the ‘Beauties’, Dian, Janice and Holly had to file lawsuits involving sexual harassment or inhospitable workplaces.

        I regret there are sluts too. These are women that have eroticized their own degraded status in the patriarchy. They’re still the victims, though.

        PS- I do not mean to say the men in your family are *violent* rapists. But penis-in-vagina is always rape since a woman’s consent can only be manufactured and falsified in a patriarchal order.

        • Sue Smith

          How sad that you cannot engage yourself in the endlessly fascinating contest between the sexes. It’s sport to me!!

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            I think you’re talking to a troll, which means you need not dignify their BS with a response. They’re just here to stir up trouble.

          • MrAuContraire

            A reasonably sophisticated troll.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            But no less headache-inducing…ugh.

          • MrAuContraire

            Oh, yes of course, but once you’ve identified one they’re harmless. In fact I find there’s a certain amount of pleasure that can be had from the parody.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            Sadly, there really are people that believe this nonsense, and they honestly need psychological help. It’s not healthy to live in constant fear of one half of the human population…

          • tobydelamo

            I’ve stopped living in fear even though I know the world I live in. I’m a rational feminist and we believe in action, not fear.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            “Action” like shitposting on anti-feminist articles, roflmao!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Rational feminist?!

            What an oxymoron!!!

            What a moron!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Daniel Bath

            Rational?

          • Cyril Sneer

            There’s nothing remotely rational about you sweetheart.

            Did you like that? Sweetheart.

            Don’t worry your pretty little head about it.

          • tobydelamo

            That’s your way of ‘othering’ my viewpoint. It’s like calling me a wifebeater. There’s no way to answer it. But I’m going to answer it anyway.

            No, I am not a troll. I wish you would think about what I wrote and wonder why we didn’t grow up in a world where an old female gameshow host has her male “beauties” and sexually harasses and degrades them. Think about growing up in that kind of world and then maybe you won’t take things like Barker’s Beauties for granted or as part of the scenery.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            If you’re not a troll, then you need some SERIOUS mental help.

          • tobydelamo

            And again, you are othering my viewpoint by saying I need help which is a way of gaslighting me. Instead, why don’t you address the substance of what I wrote rather than attacking me as a person. Maybe if you grew up in a world where boys were paraded out in beauty pageants you would have more sensitivity to what I’m saying.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm…nahhhhhhh.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Sublime satire or seriously. Stockholmed yourself.

            For decades boys have been brought up in a feminised school system.

            And exposed daily to feminist misandrist male objectifying or ridiculing or demonising TV ads, “comedies”, soaps and “dramas”!

          • serialluncher

            You are gaslighting. Black is white and consensual sex is rape.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            Also, “othering” isn’t a word in the English language. If you’re gonna debate with me, please speak in proper English.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Did did you mean “mothering” dear?!

          • Sue Smith

            Thanks for the heads up!!

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            And if I’m wrong, and it really IS a mother and a schoolteacher…I feel so, SO bad for her children, as well as the children she teaches. Especially if her children are boys…but if they’re girls, that means she’ll teach them to constantly fear the opposite sex, so they’ll grow up sexually frustrated but not know why and remain miserable for life.

          • Alùcard Impàlèr

            By the way, she claims beauty pageants are also a form of “rape”. Which is odd, because I’m pretty sure all the women in them are willing, even PAID, participants. Guess anything that makes an unattractive old hag feel inadequate is “rape” by that logic…

        • MrAuContraire

          Hahahahaha.

        • Alùcard Impàlèr

          >”But penis-in-vagina is always rape”

          gr8 b8 m8, would r8 8/8

        • crella

          Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha!

        • cardigan

          “the propaganda that teaches us we belong to men”

          Ah, the gender outed!

          • Mr B J Mann

            She’s a backward oirish malady bot with a malfunctioning spellchecker!

        • https://www.facebook.com/taryn.lichenstein?__nodl Taryn Lichenstein

          I’m going to be charitable and just say that you are severely delusional at best and have suffered a psychotic break with reality at worst. Seek help. You desperately need it.

          Taryn

        • airmanjoe

          Recognized victimhood will always equal power, and thus feminists will never let go of this ‘patriarchal order’. Even if every government position was held by women, they would still invent a conspiracy whereby women were the victims of men, sort of like the propaganda that Nazis used against the Jews. They would say that they were still being influenced by the cultural norms set about long ago and that men were upholding them to salvage male priviledge or something.

          There will always be an excuse to demonize men. Your belief is unfalsifiable and can be molded to any situation.

          • Enigmatic Spirit

            In Australia we just had a female Prime Minister, never mind it was the top job with the most power in the land, every time she was criticized for policy she played the victim card.

        • Wolfstarking

          You are one of those crazy women that believe that all sex between a man and a woman is rape. Then you are one of that would want to see all women turn lesbians. People like you are the reason why many younger girls treat younger boys like shit and tell them horrible things. Also what can you tell me about feminists that encourage other women to falsely accuse men of rape? You are disgusting.

        • Daniel Bath

          You need help… really.

        • g1lgam3sh

          You have zoomed beyond parody, run right over pastiche and headed directly for pantomime.

          Bless your heart.

        • Hector

          “But penis-in-vagina is always rape since a woman’s consent can only be manufactured and falsified in a patriarchal order.”

          And this woman is a school teacher….

          Thanks from the patriarchy, Toby, you are doing a great job in discrediting and destroying feminism.

        • Cyril Sneer

          I would so like to find out your identity so that I can make a complaint to the school authorities. You should not be in any position to teach children neither should you be trusted around children!

    • pgtipsster

      Wonderful. Assuming you are male (and Toby is your name) that makes you a rapist. Perhaps you should turn yourself in to the nearest police station?

      • serialluncher

        Her profile says she’s a mother and a teacher. Scary.

        • Jethro Asquith

          Wow, what shit is she teaching her (and other’s) children!

        • Alùcard Impàlèr

          Oh, dear. Boys raised by radical feminists learn self-loathing, and girls raised by radical feminists learn to fear the opposite sex. In other words, CHILDREN raised by radical feminists end up completely miserable.

          And now she has the power to brainwash other peoples’ children as well. What a world we live in!

        • Cyril Sneer

          Yep she should be identified and sacked.

    • Matthew

      “All men are rapists, full stop.” No, “Rape” has a legal definition, it is a crime and unless you are prepared to take all men to court from the day they are born, you should not trivialise that word. Some men have raped some women, and yes, like it or not, some women have raped some men. We don’t get anywhere in the discussion of equality by saying “All X are Y.” That kind of regressive generalisation is what helps to prevent any real discussion on actual issues. Perhaps the worst aspect of this is that you are now trivialising an actual crime.

      There’s a story I once read from a Nurse’s blog. She talked about how, on her first day, a woman came in and just stood in the waiting area, crying. She had just been raped and literally dumped out of the car by her rapist at the hospital. She describes an immense amount of sadness in herself at seeing someone who had suffered so much, but two years and modern feminism later that situation would completely change. After hearing about concepts like “eye-rape” and “fart-rape” she no longer found the claim of “rape” to be immediately valid. She ends her tale with saying that a few days earlier a new nurse had come to her saying there was another victim in the waiting room, and she rolled her eyes.

      By claiming all men are rapists, you are trivialising rape and harming real victims of it. I’d ask you to consider that before you make such a boldly foolish claim again.

      If you want your daughters and granddaughters not to be afraid in the future, perhaps you should consider what language you use with them. Hopefully, their fathers will give them a good example of what a good man should be like, even if their mother/grandmother wants them to think of men as purely evil.

    • Shadowsafter

      “All men are rapists, full stop”
      You are repugnant, you are repugnant to anyone who believes in actual equality. You are exactly what is hateful and disgusting about third wave feminism, you are what makes people fight it so hard.
      You are what makes women turn away from it in increasing numbers, you are the reason more and more polls show people don’t think feminism stands for equality or justice.

      You are, in short, the reason this batch of feminists will never, ever win. For every reasonable person who sees bluntly state that all men are rapists with a straight face, we get another soldier in the ranks of people who will never, ever stop fighting you.
      So in short, keep doing what you’re doing.

      • https://www.facebook.com/taryn.lichenstein?__nodl Taryn Lichenstein

        Yes, I really hope they do continue making complete asses of themselves over non-issues. They have sealed their own doom, as increasing numbers of sane women recognize them for what they truly are, and decide that we want no part of it. There’s a new “sisterhood” forming and we will not allow these hate mongers to abuse our men or us another minute longer. We will stand against them. We’re coming for them. We WILL defeat them. The hate cult known as feminism’s days are numbered. Let the countdown begin.

        Taryn

    • Mr B J Mann

      YOU are RAPING Western Civilisation.

      And YOU will be the cause when your daughters and granddaughters end up REALLY living in a rape culture!!!!

    • http://banterloud.com/ armenia4ever

      This woman known as “Toby” raped me.

      I demand her execution, as I am a victim who should always be believed. I remind you that false rape accusations are so rare, that it’s almost certain she’s a vile rapist.

      When will the hanging occur as she is obviously guilty?

    • Slarbert

      If all men are rapists, then womanhood is victimhood. That’s a pretty pathetic way to define yourself.

    • Wolfstarking

      “All men are rapists, full stop” you are disgusting and exactly the reason of what’s wrong with third wave feminism. I hope your daughters won’t be the same like you which i doubt. I am a man and i have never raped anybody.

      • http://spudfuzz.deviantart.com/ Spudfuzz

        I grew up hating my mother because feminism made her racist, narcissistic and generally insane.

    • Shane Barakan

      Are you insane? How do they brainwash people into believing this stuff?

    • farkennel

      Your words are a case study in penis envy.

    • Agustina

      Hi I’m a 28 years old woman that has dealt with sexual abuse when I was 5.
      You and your “all men are rapists” rhetoric that your kind likes to spout are really damaging to real victims, all it does it breeding fake rape cases like mattress girl causing a “boy who cried wolf effect”… or “girl who cried rape” in this case.
      So please, shut up, and instead of only feeding your own confirmation bias, use your brain and use common sense.

    • g1lgam3sh

      “As long as my daughters and granddaughters will be raised in a rape culture, this is not freedom and it’s not equality.”

      How curious, are you a muslim?

    • P_S_W

      I take it you’ve never had consensual sex then…

    • Cyril Sneer

      “All men are rapists”

      I think it’s time you moved out of Tower Hamlets.

  • Vive108

    Let’s just say, Ms. Emily Hill, that it is quite obvious that you were born in 1983, and that you have been sorely miseducated. (It’s understandable, considering how Women’s Studies have been virtually eliminated from many higher education settings, and how neoliberal politics has used ignorance of women’s history to exploit women currently). A recent study by S. Laurel Wheldon and Mala Htun (published in the journal American Political Science Review) on violence against women – conducted over four decades and in 70 countries – revealed that the mobilization of feminist movements is more important for change than the wealth of nations, left-wing political parties, or the number of women politicians.

    Feminism has never been about merely “choice” in a structurally unjust society. Nor is it about every woman doing as she chooses (or every woman for her own). Feminism is about the liberation of women – as a class – from systemic sexism and male domination. Feminism is about naming the problem: male pattern violence against women & children. Feminism is, in its authentic form, radical – meaning roots-oriented. There is no post-sexism just as there is no post-racialism – we are far from liberated, if you take some time to peruse the social health statistics and the writings of radical feminists, including those of WoLF, the Women’s Liberation Front. It seems like you’ve been influenced by postmodernism and biophobia to the point of not being able to correctly identify what feminism is and how you might benefit from coming out as a radical feminist.

    • tobydelamo

      Thank you. I wish I had your articulateness and theoretical knowledge. Male pattern violence is the problem and it’s so easy for us to get distracted from that. Feminism is not about having equal access to a violent and necrophilic corporate/capitalist system.

      • Mr B J Mann

        No, female pattern non-logic is the problem.

        Especially since the feminisation of education has been extended from the infants school right up to universities.

        And it is now actually a crime to express logical thoughts.

        Or a man to express an opinion, even among consenting males.

        Safe space my posterior.

        Feminism is MACRO-aggression wrIt *LARGE* ! ! ! !

        • farkennel

          Stop triggering me! Lest I faint.

    • Mr B J Mann

      You mean professors of wimmins studies looked at data from 70 countries over 4 decades and decided that as the countries where women were treated most liberally treated women most liberally the obvious conclusion is that being allowed to play at silly little feminarsties reduces violence against women.

      There’s a reason why there is a special term for feminine logic.

      And for the word hysteria.

      And why, regardless of how many STEM (how phallic!) initiatives are introduced you will never have many real female engineers or science Nobel Prize winners.

      And you, and people (female, or feminized) like you are it!!!

    • Wolfstarking

      You are basically saying women aren’t capable of doing anything by themselves which is a disgusting thing to say.

      • Vive108

        You are basically saying you don’t understand structured class oppression, the histories of slavery emancipation & women’s suffrage, and the importance of social solidarities in dismantling injustice.

        • Shane Barakan

          It sounds like you’re just trying to string together as many buzzwords as you can think of.

        • Keikoandgilly

          No, Vive, you are just spouting a long paragraph of pro-authoritarian, bollocks that is aligned to a certain ideological view of “group think”. If woman emancipation includes the freedom of thought, then so too is someone, who clearly is a woman, thy sex, stating her views and observations.

          If observations are to be treated as subjective, as you are trying to force, why is her view any less than yours? She is free as are you, objectively, women have indeed far outperformed men in this ever changing society. That isn’t feminism’s doing, that’s modernity and the spirit of it. Your ideology is dying, and is archaic as traditional society back then.

          So enough buzzwords.

        • P_S_W

          I may just forward this post to the Campaign for Plain English…

    • g1lgam3sh

      Pseuds Corner beckons.

    • Johnathan Swift Jr.

      Virtually everything you write in reply to Emily Hill’s article is just full of cant and jargon, with precious few facts of any sort.

      Modern feminists seem to glory in the description of women in modern societies – the very ones that offer health, safety and security beyond the wildest imaginings of men and women of two centuries ago – as places of horror and repression. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the modern west, women have never had it so well.

      You all seem to be ignorant of history and the massive strides the free market and western ideals have made for everyone in the space of a few centuries since Mr. Watt got to work. Two hundred years ago, virtually everyone, all but the gentry, lived in poverty and squalor, but a little thing called the Industrial revolution occurred in free nations, ones with economic structures that allowed people to invent labor saving devices, agricultural implements, scientific instruments, to power factories that produced products that allowed us to, power, heat and light or homes, all of us. The division of labor that made possible allowed people to study, to delve deeper into the sciences, to make advances in health and nutrition. The standard of living leapt throughout the west, the freer the people and markets, the more they got ahead and now many of these advances are spreading to the third world, but unfortunately not the western values that allow people to take full advantage of them. The western world has been a boon for women and men. It has allowed men to be more productive while giving them much more leisure time. It has allowed women healthy childbirth and childrearing, healthier lives and choices that were unimaginable to them one hundred or two hundred years ago. And in the west, women enjoy the voting franchise and full legal equality, something they do not in most places in the third world.

      However, your supposed “sisters” in the third world are – as we exchange views freely here in the “structurally unjust” west – are being murdered, raped and sold into sex slavery by the thousands. I spend a lot of time debating modern feminists and find virtually all of you to be structurally worthless, because your real agenda is leftism, not the safety and security and welfare of women. You exist in a henhouse of like-minded women, all of whom have been so marinated in leftist agitprop, that you can’t see the forest for the trees.

      I will ask challenge you the same way I do all of your kind. Have you every protested outside of the Saudi Arabian embassy or any one of the Arab nations that don’t allow women to drive, to be on their own, who force them to dress head to foot in burlap sacks for their entire lives. Have you protested at a Mosque in London where they advocate the same rules for women in the U.K.?

      What have you done about Rotherham, where more than 1,2400 English girls were passed around in rape rings made up of mostly Pakistani men for more than a decade? All covered up by M.P.’s and the police for fear of inciting “anti-immigrant” sentiment. Now, unlike the fake rape crisis cooked up on American campuses – where rape has declined, yes declined dramatically in recent decades – this is a real one. What pray tell, have you done about it?

      “There will be more Rotherham-style child sexual exploitation scandals unearthed in the coming months as the “stone is lifted” on the scale of abuse perpetrated on the young, one of Britain’s top police officers has warned.”

      There are many other such scandals, all across the Euro Zone and you know what, I have heard very few feminists say a precious thing, let along organize a widespread protest. I can send you hundreds of links to videos (just look up rape and “Sweden” on Youtube or “Rape” and Rotherham” for example.) but here are a few.

      http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3846/britain-child-grooming

      http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

      Women in Syria and Iraq are now being murdered and raped by the thousands, yes, the thousands. Have you spoken out, organized a mass protest, one of the candlelit marches that modern feminists so love? Of course not, because you are virtually all gutless cowards, keyboard warriors who blather on about “structural” issues and the dreaded “patriarchy” from the safety of a warm, well-lit study or while marching in the safety of a modern western campus, while your “sisters” are being sold for the price of a pack of smokes, then held down and repeatedly violated by bearded jihadists. But apparently, due to the multicultural myopia and all the related can’t and tropes, the commonality of rape in the Islamic lands seems to be looked about as a quant cultural practice, one that could be cured if the jihadists just read enough Dworkin and Steinem?

      And of course, women have their genitals mutilated all over the Islamic lands in Africa and the Middle East. Our social betters tell us this is not really Islamic, but of course the practice thrives in the lands where women are really oppressed, rather than statistically oppressed. What have you done to stop this practice, which occurs now in places like London and Rotterdam among immigrants?

      http://www.forwarduk.org.uk/key-issues/fgm/

      In Africa, there have been thousands of young girls abducted by Jihadists, thousands. Once again, because they are black, Christian girls, they seem to be of little to no interest to western feminists. Racists all? Have you written the Home Office, your M.P. to have them dispatch the SAS to recuse these girls? It is well within the ability for the United States and United Kingdom military to help the Kenyans rescue these poor girls and other Christians from having their heads chopped of and their daughters raped? I have advocated to my elected representatives to rescue them, have you?

      There are real, violent rapes happening all over Western Europe right now, a wave of them, virtually all being perpetrated by immigrants from Muslim lands where if a woman is not covered and Muslim, then she is seen to be fair game. Although the mainstream media likes to sweep it under the rug, to live in the pretend world of the multi-culti bubble, there are real victims. Look at all the victims in places like Malmo, Stockholm and Oslo, levels of violence that were not even imaginable when I first arrived in Scandinavia in 1983, when the biggest problem in Copenhagen were drunk Swedes sleeping off a bender. Now, the brutal and savage murder of nice young Swedish girls is commonplace. There are lots of delightful images to educate yourself with of gang raped Swedish girls frozen in the snow. What have you done about these horrific crimes? I you see care about real women, not about silly abstract notions of the structural problems that the fascist left wants to “correct” by imposing a leftist superstate. I want to save real women from being raped and murdered, not to worry about whether a silly apples and orange “study” shows that women earn .77 on the dollar in a free western land.

      Politics and Science of course have precious little do do with each other and professionals from STEM disciplines often laugh at the idea that the studies that leftists base their world view on have the slightest bit to do with science. The whole peer review process is a scandal, just a circle jerk of like minded leftists who begin with a theory of the world and then set out to confirm it.

      It’s just like studies of sexual assault on campus. The blurring of distinctions between different types of unwanted romantic or sexual approaches has made recent studies absolutely useless. When you broaden the terminology in order to create an ever larger group of victims, then virtually every man becomes a victim as well, because what young person, especially in the alcohol sodden campuses of the present day (and I visited more than twenty of them last year) has had someone make a pass at them or touch them inappropriately, even me when I was a young person. If you are attracted to the boy or girl and they lay their lips on you, then it is love or leads to sex, but if you find them unappealing, its now sexual assault. Rape of course is a serious crime, one for trained investigators from the police department, not for a campus kangaroo court of warped Marxists.

      And like all of your cant and jargon, an “Unjust Society” is a meaningless phrase. My any measure of history the nations of North American, the Antipodes and Western Europe are incredibly just. And of course, what a just society to a left wing loon is far different from what it means to me, right? So, if you are going to have your utopia, then lay it out for us? How are you going to create your just society and then enforce its dictates? Because, I have news for you, as we have learned from the great just social experiments in the Soviet Union, North Korea and China, someone’s idea of universal justice comes from the barrel of a gun and has to be maintained by force. You realize that right?

      And as far as violence against women and children, what about men? Men are well represented among the victims of domestic violence. You do know that, right? If so, you should be equally hard on women who attack or batter men or men who batter other men. And, as a follow up, at what point to male children go from universal victims to universal victimizers and members of the patriarchy? Eight? Ten? Twelve? Sixteen? If your concern is sexual abuse and violence, you should not be a sexist about it, nor ignore cultures where it is more prevalent, far more prevalent, as that would make you sexist, racist and imperialist, right?

  • Woman In White

    The “feminist war” will continue unabated until Feminism will have finally destroyed its last enemy — itself.

    All of these revolutionary political movements carry within them the seed of their own destruction, and now that feminists are clamouring for a man to be named “woman” of the year, those seeds are starting to sprout.

    • Alùcard Impàlèr

      Kinda like what the Jacobins did to Robespierre, or the Bolsheviks did to Trotsky, huh? They always end up eating each other in the end…

    • Alùcard Impàlèr

      On second thought, maybe it wasn’t the Jacobins per se that killed Robespierre, but…eh, he was still killed by his own people.

  • disqus_Z1QXLYwyiM

    Feminism is about equality in all aspects of society and in all countries, its not just votes for women. Its equal representation in Parliament and equality other workplaces/sectors. Its stopping FGM and forced marriages. Equal education in poor and developing countries. To say its over is just ignorant.

    • Matthew

      There are real issues that women face every single day across the world, but it varies from country to country. Women already represent the highest number of graduates and those attending universities, they are poised to be exactly what you claim is a problem, it’s simply a matter of time. As for FGM and forced marriages, those are issues worth considering, but the more non-sensical issues like “Eye-rape”, “Fart-rape”, “Manspreading” and “Mansplaining” are thrown into the mix, the more serious issues become trivialised. When glancing at a woman is considered equivalent to raping her, most men are going to find themselves more concerned with not getting sued by some hipster on a subway than they are about real women’s issues across the world.

      Feminism may not be over, but at it’s current rate, it is arguing itself and all its issues into obscurity, in my opinion.

    • farkennel

      What planet are you on?

      • Lisette Muntslag

        Somewhere on the PC and psychological torture planet.

        • farkennel

          If I was smarter…and wittier…..I would have said that.

          • Lisette Muntslag

            You came close….:-)

          • farkennel

            You`re very generous with your appraisal young lady….thank you.

    • Lisette Muntslag

      Do you know that the radical feminist are oppressing men and women in the Western world….I am a woman, where in the world is my equality to be an individual, with the right to make my own decisions instead of having radical gender feminist do my thinking for me….why in the world I am being coerced to see myself as a vagina like feminism demand?

      • Harryagain

        Heh Heh!
        In the coming new world caliphate, you’ll be on your hands and knees scrubbing the floor, on your back in bed, wearing a burkha and walking six paces behind some man.
        Maybe you ought to get some practice in?

        • Lisette Muntslag

          Seem like you are projecting exactly what your are going to have to do….you need to start practicing so that you can keep your balls….fool…:-((

    • Stoater

      Feminism is somewhat quiet on the subject of FGM.
      Why is that ?
      As for women in parliament, I would vote for the best candidate for the job, gender doesn’t come into it.
      .

      • disqus_Z1QXLYwyiM

        It’s hardly quiet about it. Personally, (I’m making no claims to be an expert, I’m not even a woman) I think there are a few kinds of feminists:

        -The majority who are angry at society due to personal injustices they have faced
        due to being women and are mostly from developed nations that have the highest
        levels of gender equality (still not 100% mind)
        -The most effective, Feminists who actually do direct action via charities etc these
        are the ones who focus on bigger international issues that are important such as
        FGM, education, equal rights etc.
        -Writers, the Germain Greers personally not particularly fond of ’em as they profit
        from the hardships of other women although some do contribute to charities from
        their profits.
        -The exceptional, these are the Emmeline Pankhurst’s & Malala Yousafzai’s, who
        have huge impacts on the world.

        Obviously there are overlaps as these are broad definitions but you get the point.

        And as for Women in Parliament, it is supposed to be representational of the population, both Men and Women are equally as capable of being MP’s and working in cabinet positions so it should even out. However it is yet to be proven that a woman can do a good job as PM, but Merkel seems to be doing alright so maybe it is possible here.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

          Regardless of one’s politics, but I don’t think anybody could reasonably say that Margaret Thatcher was not a very effective PM (even if she did make mistakes. But then, what PM doesn’t?)

    • Adam Bromley

      Surely it should be about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes, they are not the same. If men favour certain careers over others and women do the same, the lack of a 50/50 split is irrelevant so long as those choices were freely made and without obstacles placed in their way as a result of gender. And in terms of MPs, parliamentary hours and working practices could be changed to accommodate childcare, which would make it easier for women to stand as MPs, but that’s equality of opportunity, not outcome. I agree about your other points where feminism has much to say, yet its vocal champions remain silent.

      • Enigmatic Spirit

        Meritocracy is a male system that rewards hard work, brains and skill. On the level playing field of equal opportunity women didn’t do too well. Meritocracy = Patriarchy. That’s why women need quotas to compete. Feminism is about handicapping men.

    • http://banterloud.com/ armenia4ever

      Right?

      I’m anxiously awaiting to see how “Eye-rape”, “Fart-rape”, “Manspreading” and “Mansplaining” advance the cause of equality.

  • sarahsmith232

    this has been written to please the older male ego, fair play, why not, they prob’ need some ego massaging, this has def’ become a hostile country for old white men.
    BUT – I would have to say, the business with the bikini model was not about flesh per say, it was about AIRBRUSHED flesh, as in, there wasn’t anywhere near enough of it, not because it was a near naked female. the model was an airbrushed, unrealistically thin cartoon, that’s what the feminists were railing against. they were right to do it, the tagline was – ‘are you beach ready?’. this really influences young girls brains, they compare themselves to this and obviously leaves them with v.low self-esteem. it also brainwashes males to believe that that model was realistic.
    so, no, that wasn’t about covering up, wasn’t about nakedness, that was railing against airbrushed unrealistic thinness. (to any male reading this – dream if you think you’re ever going to meet a size 6 with 38FF breasts).

    • farkennel

      I don`t mean to make you feel bad young lady…please don`t think this is my point.Do yourself an intellectual favour…..consult your Freud.

    • Stoater

      It is the gay men in the fashion business who promote this thinness.
      Most hetro men like curves and are attracted to smart women.
      Most men are as unintersted in bimbos as they find strident feminist repulsive.
      People like Emma Watson aren’t that bright.
      Chill out a bit sister.
      .

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      Unaware as you are that women are allowed to disagree with feminism and perhaps rally against a hateful cause that does not even speak for them, the piece has probably been written for a number of reasons. Free speech, I think it’s called.

      Anyway, you’re projecting. Men don’t want or need “fantasy” women. You’re describing modern young women.

      I’ve had sex with a woman fitting that description in your last line, though she was a GG cup. Frankly, she was a very odd looking lady. Still, it wasn’t the body I liked. Women have individual personalities too, I find.

    • Magic Carpet

      Airbrushed? I must be living in a virtual world for I see many, many women who are just as fit.

      Is it bad that young girls should aspire to have a fit body?

  • MatrixTransform

    Loved the wry humour. Especially loved that this was published. You’re brave. Kudos to you and to The Spectator
    Poor old 3rd Wave … theyre like the wicked witch in Snow White asking the mirror the same question every day.

  • http://banterloud.com/ armenia4ever

    I’m already anticipating a vicious attack on Emily by the sisterhood for expressing the “wrong opinions” on the subject of women in which she can only speak about said women if she bellows from the steeples the accepted dogma.

  • Johnny Cakes

    Great article, thanks Spectator, will return.

  • Craig

    As I explain on my website, feminists are taught from birth to complain about everything. I explain the four cornerstones of feminism in the Guidelines page: oppression, discrimination, sexism, and equality. As in, we, feminists, are “victims” of “oppression.” I analyze some of the very worst feminists in the Feminist Media Bias page, such as, Ana Marie Cox, Jessica Valenti, and Joan Walsh. I explain the three major branches of feminism: liberal, radical, and socialist. I know a lot of you are Brits, my website is mostly criticism of feminism. CenterRightAmerica.SquareSpace.com

    • Harryagain

      It’s a Brit paper so hardly surprising it’s mostly Brits here.
      You’ll have to use correct spelling if you post here.
      Your excessive use of zeds is disturbing.
      And lack of Us.

  • Josh Hess

    “19 per cent”

    nice

  • Josh Hess

    that went from “feminism is dead” to “woman are smarter than men”
    stay on topic mate

  • Agustina

    I really, really hope the author doesn’t get bullied for “wrongthink”.

    • Alùcard Impàlèr

      Read the comments below. Some of them have already called her “naive” or “stroking the male ego” or the like.

      • cartimandua

        I think I called her stupid and an uncle Tom. She gets paid for writing this tripe so she writes it.

    • http://spudfuzz.deviantart.com/ Spudfuzz

      Women are free to exercise freedom of speech and thought up until the feminists no longer agree with it lol.

  • cartimandua

    The trouble is “Em” we now have English women having acid thrown in their faces . That’s a lovely habit brought in with cultures which never had beastly beastly feminism.
    Acid attacks, honour killings, forced marriage, FGM, veiling and we don’t need feminism any more according to Emily.
    As Eliza Doolittle said gaaarn!

    • Johnny Foreigner

      I thought this was all part of cultural enrichment? Give it time to bed in, acid attacks are effective and the Islamification of this country is moving forward nicely. Can’t wait for the first stoning, Bradford or Birmingham, wadda you think?

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      The Suffragettes threw acid in people’s faces. At polling stations. It is they that delayed female enfranchisement. Do learn some real history.

      PEOPLE, not simply women, are victims of violence, forced marriage, honour killings and GM. You only care about female victims, who are the minority victims of all of the above, GM especially. That’s what feminism does to people.

      Looking forward to being called a misogynist etc. etc. for pointing out simple facts that even kids can see.

    • Hades2

      All of these problems are third world problems being imported over here through poorly executed immigration policies, often supported by these feminists my I add.
      Immigrants, NOT Western society.
      See the difference?
      They require LAWS to be enforced, not more crap*y feminism that has not said a god da*mn thing against Islamism to date!
      It’s common sense to understand this FFS
      Sigh it appears that people will use Muslim fundamentalism to limit people’s freedoms in this country in as many ways that they can.

  • Alan Dunaway

    “Since the suffragettes won us the vote…”

    This isn’t really correct. The Suffragettes actually only wanted votes for middle and upper class women only. They thought working class women should still not be allowed to vote. They were also opposed to votes for non-whites. At the time a large proportion of men were also unable to vote (including many of those sent off to fight in the trenches). It was SuffraGISTS and male MPs that passed an act of Parliament that gave everyone the vote (it wasn’t just about women). The idea that there was a time in history in which all men could vote and all women could not is a complete lie.

    • Steve Moxon

      Yes. The Suffrascists actually held back votes for women, which long had majority backing amongst MPs, until, in the wake of WWI massive extension of male suffrage was necessary in sync with massive widening of the income tax base to pay for the war.
      The upper-class and upper-middle-class women who were the suffrascists were elitist-separatist bigots who campaigned for a new education qualification to bar most men and women from voting; so to falsely represent them as warriors for equality is one of the biggest political and historical frauds of all time.
      What’s more, they well know most of the men in the trenches hadn’t got the vote, and a major faction campaigned for universal conscription, and were the main force in the ‘white feather’ abomination.
      In short, the suffragettes were complete c***s.

      • Hades2

        excellent post and perfect summation of the history of the Suffragettes that the Streep film most certainly will gloss over.

      • DollarPound

        Greetings and kudos, Mr Moxon. More power to you.

  • Johnny Foreigner

    Proudman gave you a spanking Emily, I hope you can put together a better and more coherent retort in future, as this subject needs to be explored further.

  • stephen richards

    It is also worth remembering that Emmeline & Christabel Pankhurst (OBE) actively advocated conscription into the military, for working class girls & boys, many as young as 13, for the privilege of serving King & Empire, Boys sent to the front & girls into munitions factories. I don’t recall seeing this in the film. History rewritten as myth, subsidised by the tax payer.

    • Hades2

      Vile, I knew about the white feather stuff, but this level of class exploitation of children from these bitches is terrible
      But here we apparently are, whitewashing the truth for our new cultural overlords the feminists and their male lackeys…

    • Mr. E

      Men still have to sign up for Selective Service (aka “The Draft”) in order to vote. But women get their citizenship for free.

  • Damon

    “Who will wave placards, or lie on the carpet of film premieres, for the cause of under-performing boys?”

    Any decent person, I would suppose. Or are you seriously suggesting that boys’ welfare is less important than that of girls?

    • MrWetherbee

      Based on the lack of effort and attention that boys’ issues have been getting over the last decade plus, “decent” people aren’t doing anything to reconcile them. Take the decline in boys school performance – how bad does that have to get before we do something about it?

      • Damon

        Indeed, the educational welfare of working-class boys, in particular, *should* be an absolute priority.

    • Daniel Gill

      I believe Ms. Hill is saying that it is very much as important, but is lamenting that it is not treated with the same gravity or even interest – hence, ‘unfashionable’.

    • Mr. E

      No, the suggestion is that FEMINISTS aren’t actually about equality.

      • Damon

        Yes, but the implication was that there was a GENERAL indifference to the plight of under-performing boys, and it was that implication that irritated me. Plenty of people care about the educational welfare of boys – although some feminists might not.

        • Jack Rocks

          Well, there is a general indifference to it in the bureaucracy. That’s part of the problem. Read Christina Hoff Sommers on this.

  • WomanAgitator

    Speaking of feminism – I’m a heterosexual guy and can’t understand why some men are attracted to other men. I don’t hate homosexuals – I just don’t understand a man being sexually attracted to another man. Kind of freaks me out a little, so I guess I’m homophobic. Interestingly enough – even though guy/guy intimacy is foreign to me – I’ve always liked gay men in general. Anyway – Here’s a homosexual male that thinks feminists have gone stark raving mad. I’m wondering if this attitude towards feminists is common among gay males. Don’t lesbians in general loath men as a group?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiESisEL43c

    • Hades2

      I’m glad we know you’re a heterosexual now (?!)
      That’s a relief.
      Anyway, I think you’ll find about the other that it’s only SOME Lesbians that are arch feminists
      And why would all lesbians hate men?
      They certainly don’t have to f**k them so that takes the heat & bitterness out quite a bit right there and then
      I know Lesbians that love men and gay guys that are very attached to women so are supportive of feminism
      Depends on the person really, doesn’t it
      We are all individuals after all.
      Jesus, your post was a fountain of ignorance really, wasn’t it?

      • WomanAgitator

        Right – cause anyone that asks honest questions – to you – is ignorant. You sound like someone that spends all of their time calling others ignorant.

        • Hades2

          Today, just you actually
          Actually this week tbh.
          Anyway instead of being this way maybe get out of your little space and speak to people that aren’t exactly like you (or you think are) and you might evolve a bit :)
          It’s the way you think, all lesbians all this and that

          There’s your problem right there you see.
          You’d actually make a good radical feminist
          They tend to think in generalities like this all the time,
          And that is NOT generalisation, it’s a fact when it comes to men at least.

          • WomanAgitator

            “Anyway instead of being this way maybe get out of your little space and
            speak to people that aren’t exactly like you (or you think are) and you
            might evolve a bit :)”

            You must be crazy or just joking. That’s what I just did. What are you raving about? You sound like one of those PC police that tell others what they’re allowed to think and say. I didn’t say all lesbians are this or that, did I? Maybe you should check your reading comprehension.

          • Hades2

            ‘Don’t lesbians in general loath men as a group?’

            Er, There you go
            Raving?
            Don’t think so, it’s a Sunday afternoon.
            Okay, you said ‘in general’
            So whatever but how is coming onto a spectator thread getting out of one’s space?
            I meant in the real world dude.

          • WomanAgitator

            You obviously don’t know the difference between a question and a statement of fact.

          • Hades2

            Questions can be loaded with assumptions that reveal the actual perspective of a person more than the answer can

          • WomanAgitator

            You’ve proven that to a tee.

          • Hades2

            likewise, but honestly I shouldn’t have had a go at you
            you’re just inexperienced with the world hence your lack of sophistication.

          • WomanAgitator

            Nice shaming of anyone that asks questions. I think your lack of sophistication is what’s really on display here.

          • Hades2

            hahaha
            I don’t think so
            Anyway, I did say I should have left you, didn’t I?
            And I don’t shame everyone!

          • WomanAgitator

            When you call someone unsophisticated, you’re rejecting the notion that sometimes people are genuinely looking for answers. That’s an attempt at shaming and humiliation – which clearly displays a lack of sophistication. Now – if I’d said I hate gays or lesbians, you’d have a point. But instead – you attacked me for having views that I don’t.

          • Hades2

            Oh for goodness sakes you are clearly not worldly and for the record this whole ‘I know what you are but what am I?’ sh*t is very childish and boring.
            But I’ll take it all back and apologise for hurting your feelings.
            My suggestion that one of your post was ignorant really isn’t worth getting this upset about!
            Jesus give it a rest and stop being so sensitive
            But I am sorry for being overly critical…
            Jeez!

          • WomanAgitator

            I’m not upset. When you give someone enough rope, they hang themselves, which is exactly what I’ve done with you. If anyone is upset, it’s obviously you. You didn’t hurt my feelings at all. You actually exposed to everyone here a lot about yourself.

          • Hades2

            Rubbish I am watching the TV barely following this
            But Its pathetic to go ON about this
            Just because i thought one of your posts was lame and childish (which to is btw)
            And If you’re not upset you certainly GO ON as if you are

          • WomanAgitator

            Men spend the first nine months of their lives trying to get out of that thing and the rest of their lives trying to get right back in there.

            –George Carlin

          • Hades2

            I’ll remove the posts if you wish and we can forget it
            Okay?

          • WomanAgitator

            No. Let’s leave them. I think it’s good for people to see something like our conversation play out.

          • Hades2

            Okay done but if you keep on nagging me then it might not play out the way you want it.
            You’ve not won a teddy bear or anything, you just had a little moan because I criticised you about your simplistic worldview
            But of course you AREN’T upset lol
            And frankly i still feel the same and there is nothing you can nag me about that will change it.

  • Hector

    3rd wave feminism has me turned away from women for ever. I will never marry, I will never take up the traditional role society demanded of men, I avoid long term relationships with women like the plaque. I fucked about 80 women in my life and once exposed, they where all horrible entitled princesses. Why the hell would I buy the cow if I can have the milk for free? I have a double master’s degree but decided to stick to a simple minimalistic lifestyle and I love it. I am in my mid forties, no debts, no mortgages, no obligations exept to myself and I have a sea of free time. I am staring at a society in decline. My advice to men: never marry or trust a woman. She will ruin you financially eventually, taking your house, kids and half your salary. Don’t do it. I have seen too many friends of mine been taken to the cleaners in the family courts. Stay as far away from females as you can. Fuck ’em and dump ’em. They have no respect for a decent man these days anymore.

    • P_S_W

      As much as I despair of your attitude, I can’t say I blame you for having it.

    • DollarPound

      Greetings brother, from a fellow MGTOW.
      I went my own way about 15 years ago, and I am just getting richer and richer. I too have no debts, no mortgage, no obligations. And I have never been more at peace with myself.

    • Nat

      Hector,
      You are entitled to not to want to commit and/or to get married. However, you are being unfair and wrong with the way you describe women.
      First of all, you should not despise the women you have slept with. If they didn’t agree to sleep with you in the first place, you would never have sex.
      Second of all, these ‘princesses’ might have behaved the way they did because of the way society, the media, etc. conditioned them to be. Look at how women are constantly photoshopped in magazines, having to wear sexy clothing and make-up, etc. Would stars, like Beyonce or Lady Gaga, be as successful if they didn’t play the game? Maybe if the women you were with did not feel so insecure because of the media and fashion industries, they would not have behaved the way you condemn. Basically, it is not entirely their fault. Women’s main role used to be having babies, now if they don’t behave like a sexual object, they don’t matter nor exist. You say ‘society is in decline’ but who is at the head of those industries? Who is didacting the rules?
      Third of all, you seem to only care about your own desires and to not want to care for anyone else, which is your right, but maybe the women you met were like you. After all, doesn’t the way we behave impact on who we choose to date! Sleeping with 80 women has never been a sure way to find a wife, which you didn’t want in the first place. Therefore these women only did what you were asking for. Women are not either mothers or whores.
      Also, women don’t have Penis envy. They want to be treated like human beings, just like men, and not objects or for what they can give to men.
      Girls usually perform better than boys in schools. For people, if a girl does well at school it’s because she works hard, but if a boy does well it’s because he’s smart. Girls have had to live with this prejudice all their youth and now they’re grown-ups, even though they performed better at their exams, they are given jobs with less responsibilities and are under-paid just because they’re women, might have babies and have to stop their career for a while. If you were a woman, wouldn’t you want what you deserve? Wouldn’t you be angry?
      I’m always sad to hear that some men think that feminists are men-haters. They only want what they are entitled to: being treated for what they can do and NOT for their gender.
      I’ve personally worked with men and women where everyone was treated equally and rewarded fairly. My male colleagues did not feel threaten by women because the environment we were in encouraged equal partnership between them.
      To finish with, you have the right to choose the lifestyle you want – i.e. only caring about yourself – but stop blaming it on women. It was your decision but not a result of your experiences with them.

      PS: Men AND women can behave badly in relationships. It is not a gender issue. It is a humankind issue.

      • Hector

        To sum it up: It’s society’s fault, it’s the supposed evil patriarchy’s fault, it’s the toxic attitude of men who are responsible. That’s what you come up with.

        And no the pay gap is a myth, alread debunked over a thousend time by various institutions, And yes girls have more degrees, however in useless degrees; look that one up yourself. Perhaps you can come up with the myth of rape culture?

        Start lookig in the mirror for one second instead of blaming everyone en everything else. For once take responsibilty for your own female behaviour as a group.

        Your feminist sisters created this environment, not us men. You made your bed now lie in it. Carry your own god damn weight.

        • Nat

          It is quite ironic to see that you are accusing me of blaming society when all you did in your first post is to blame others (women) for not wanting to get married.
          Society, the media and education shape people’s mentalities and opinions so of course they have an impact in this matter.
          Saying that women only get useless degrees is not your place to say. You have no legitimacy in doing so.
          I don’t have to take responsibilty for women as a group. I only take responsibilty for my own actions. I am not asking to take responsibility for other men.
          Also, you’re saying that women should not have started to ask for more than being ordered around by either their fathers or husbands. If people had never rebelled against the established order, you would not have had access to rights we have nowadays, like free education for all and the freedom of speech. We have the privilege to have these rights because people spoke up and fought for them. Just because it doesn’t affect you doesn’t mean it’s acceptable.

      • LoggerheadShrike

        Hah! You can’t be serious. The fashion industry? The fashion industry is almost entirely women, with a small handful of gays involved. Women heckle each other about clothes etc … not men. Media? Again, go look at the demographic that’s into celebrity gossip and entertainment news and all that jazz. Again … it’s not men. If you’re trapped by the BS culture you’ve created for yourselves, maybe you should take a look at what you do instead of looking around for others to blame for it.

    • △rcticSku△

      TRP is that way buddy ->

  • WomanAgitator

    Men have been manipulated and exploited by women for centuries. Women expect men to bring more to the table than women do financially and physically – or they’re not “marriageable”; hence the provider and protector role with which men have been sadistically saddled.

    “Traditional”, in the context of relationships between men and women, is a term used to describe the financial, legal, physical, spiritual and psychological exploitation of men by women.

    “Chivalry” is the social manipulation of men’s ego and sense of worth for purposes of encouraging men to sacrifice for women – even if the sacrifice means men’s deaths. Chivalry is gynocentrism and a women first mindset – AKA male disposability.

    Fortunately, marriage rates are dropping the globe over and women are having to learn to fend for themselves. For every woman that opts out of marriage, another man is saved from the life destruction of divorce. To counter men’s escape from this most misandric of institutions, many nations are now enabling de facto marriage – which essentially forces marriage upon men after X number of months of cohabitation and gives girlfriends the rights to alimony and asset division should their boyfriends dump them. In the UK – it’s called the Cohabitation Rights Bill.

    Rape culture is the latest of the hypergynocentric (feminist) inventions. Both progressives and conservatives can get behind ‘affirmative consent’ because it demonizes men and potentially stops hookup culture – all with the foundation of deeply fraudulent, almost entirely made up rape statistics. Such manipulation of statistics to push a political agenda should in and of itself be a crime. It’s mass fraud on a global scale.

    Affirmative consent is a very simple concept – yet people seem to want to make it complicated. It was never intended to stop rape. It was intended to stop hookup culture and give women the power to destroy the lives of men when women don’t get their way. Affirmative consent means that if you can’t definitively prove she said yes throughout the sexual encounter – then if she accuses you of rape or sexual assault – you get expelled and your future as a man is destroyed. Major backers have even admitted that AC was intended to make men fear sex with women. Hypergynocentrists (feminists) have been pushing to have ‘Yes Means Yes’ made a part of VAWA or a facsimile thereof ever since mattress girl and the Rolling Stone UVA rape hoax.

    Ever notice that adult women go after adolescent boys when they rape? Know why? Because young boys are weaker, less powerful, naive and are not yet able to counter adult women in sexual situations. Ever wonder what would happen if society drilled into these boys’ heads that these women are rapists in the same way they drill into women’s heads that drunken regret sex is rape? What happens instead? Women are given probation – not prison like men – and the boys are taught that they were lucky. As always, hypocrisy and double standards are the hallmarks of hypergynocentrism.

    Ever since white-knight Ronald Reagan enacted no-fault divorce (the divorce rape of men) in the US, marriage and committed relationships have become anti-male. There is no worse decision you can make as a man than give a woman the ring of power – or any power for that matter.

    How is it empowerment for women to eschew marriage and traditional roles but weakness and misogyny if men act in kind? How did women imagine that they’d walk away from their traditional roles and not expect men to do the same? How is it that men suffering 98% of workplace deaths and deaths related to national defense isn’t cause for a gender based national outcry – but rape is considered the most horrific of crimes? Hypocrisy and double standards – that’s how. Between suicides, workplace and national defense deaths, tens upon tens of thousands of men, in the US alone die every year. Know why there’s no national campaign to stop this horrific exploitation of men? I think we all know why.

    It’s important to remember that women demand all of the special treatment and exploitation of men listed above – but it is other men that enact the policies and legislation that enforces male disposability, hypergynocentrism (feminism) and destroy men by the hundreds of thousands in divorce court every single year.

    When it comes to femsplaining and toxic-femininity, the hypocrisy and double standards are usually thick enough to choke a horse. You can find examples of femsplaining, discrimination against men, sexism against men, toxic-femininity, hypocrisy and double standards all throughout feminist discourse. The best way to stop this campus rape would be to have men and women only colleges – yet women demand more and more coed dorms and fraternities. Know why? The answer is more simple than you thought. Women can’t control men’s speech in male-only spaces, nor can they manipulate, exploit and/or destroy men’s lives without close proximity to their targets. This is why women are fine with women-only gyms and other women-only (safe) spaces but protest male-only fraternities and other male-only spaces.

  • Rob

    You were doing so well until i scrolled down and saw on the right hand side for the editors choice

    “Women’s issues are for everyone now, not just feminists”

    • Mr. E

      Yeah, they had to throw at least *some* bullsh*t in there or they couldn’t call it “Feminism”.

  • Filbert Almond

    The great irony of feminism is that the more powerful women become~ the more powerful feminism is. (Feminism is the status quo. Taught in universities~ in all major news publications~ within the gov’t etc etc).
    However~ the more powerful feminism is~ the more ‘oppressed’ women seem to be. So the irony of feminism is that the more power women have~ the more oppressed they claim to be.
    This is why feminism is essentially a mental illness.

    • ksoileau

      Money quote: “So the irony of feminism is that the more power women have~ the more oppressed they claim to be.This is why feminism is essentially a mental illness.”

    • PolishKnightUSA

      I call this the squeaky wheel gets the grease so the greasiest wheels are usually the squeakiest.

      Have you ever noticed that the most aggressive and nasty people who get the most also tend to be the most miserable and uncaring for others? I often notice that even in old age, that these people are the most nasty and miserable, living in the nursing home, and die in a miserable state. I wonder how or why they decided to engage in that life path.

      I think what happens is that the type A folks who barge around and bump into people to get what they want, and cry a river when they feel wronged, and push others aside when they are in the wrong, do get good results. Through their ruthlessness, they often do achieve a certain level of success.

      And that’s the bad life lesson they get.

      Then when it doesn’t matter anymore and they’re too weak to step on someone else and nobody is going to feel sorry for them, they have spent their whole lives believing their own narrative that they wind up miserable and dying in a nursing home or cursing at kids from their walkers on the street.

      And this is the life of many aging European women. I met a lot of old German women like this. But a lot of type A men are like this as well.

    • Agonizing Truth

      It is a mental illness! It is only referred to as a “political movement” for the sake of politeness.

      It’s time to stop being so polite.

  • redrum

    she’s joking isn’t she? when we have fgm growing in the UK, sharia law permits divorce by stating I divorce you 3 times and the state does nothing about it …. I’d say we’re fast going back to the dark ages. And I write that as a woman

    • DollarPound

      We have MGM in the UK too, and we’ve had it for far longer and it is performed on far more people. But you don’t care because they’re men.

      We have homelessness too. But you don’t care, because most homeless people are men.

      We have huge gender bias in the funding of cancer screening programs. But you don’t care because it’s men on the receiving end.

      We have huge gender imbalance in the teaching profession, which affects boys education tremendously. But you don’t care.

      We have a massive gender imbalance in workplace deaths. But you don’t care.

      We have a massive gender imbalance in suicide. But you don’t care.

      We have a gender imbalance of 16:1 in the prison population. Ditto.

      We have virtually zero prosecutions for paternity fraud, even though the DNA evidence is irrefutable and it would be the easiest crime in the world to detect with routine testing.

      We have an 80% higher rate of sudden or unexplained deaths amongst baby boys. But you just don’t care. You’ve been raised to consider men expendable.

      All of which is consistent with the author’s point – “Who will wave placards, or lie on the carpet of film premieres, for the cause of under-performing boys?”

      • Mr. E

        Yeah, but she’s a WOMAN. You know, incapable of FEELING anything for MEN.

      • Jack Rocks

        Indeed, according to some feminists having prostate cancer is a sign of your privilege. Unbelievable I know.

      • ksoileau

        Post of the day! Spot on!

      • kelsey

        This is where the mens rights movement should come in. Instead of tearing feminists down for supporting and advocating for women, maybe the mens rights movement should actually do something positive and work to address these issues.

        • PolishKnightUSA

          This is a classic false narrative from the feminists. Here’s how it goes:

          “I’m a feminist! Support more rights for women! Women women women!”
          “I’m anti-feminist because feminism hates men!”
          “No feminism doesn’t hate men! It’s about equality! That helps men too!”
          “Oh, well great. Here are all the inequalities that harm men. X, Y, Z….”
          “Wait! That’s not a women’s issue! You’ll have to ask an MRA for that!”
          “OK, what government sponsored organizations can I contact?”
          “None. MRA’s are not feminists so they’re anti-equality by definition!”

          Get it? Feminism is “equality” and “equality” is about women’s interests and therefore, men’s rights are not feminist issues and are anti-equality by definition.

          If it floats like a log, it’s a witch! Burn! It’s like something out of Monty Python.

          And yes, the MRA movement does do a lot of positive things such as addressing shared custody for parents that feminists oppose because feminists put women’s interests ahead of the children. MRA’s also are dealing with feminists trying to define rape with a broad brush that causes lots of false convictions and putting minority men into jail for rapes for specious accusations. The list goes on. Feminism as an equality movement is like Sharia law as an equality movement.

        • Cyril Sneer

          That’s right you don’t care about mens equality issues, only womens.

          Thanks for confirming that you’re not interested in ‘equality of the sexes’.

    • Mr. E

      So, woman, what are you doing about MGM ???

      Why should I, as a MAN, give a flying f*ck about FGM ???

      • Carlos Kingston

        First part, spot on. Second part, because you’re human! Don’t be a hypocrite asking women to care about MGM while you don’t care about FGM as well. Two wrongs don’t make a right and you’re doing a disservice to the cause of ending MGM. This FGM business could be used as a levy to bring attention to MGM, the double standards and the discrimination of boys.
        Look up The Elephant in the Hospital Room on YouTube. Greatest lecture I’ve ever seen on MGM. You can then share it where it will do good. I shared it with Mike Buchanan who has now posted it on his channel as well.

        • Mr. E

          Of course, but you have to wake people up to their indifference.

    • asdfff

      these are the problems (imported into this country from the barbaric islamic countires) only affect those females unfortunate enough to be born into islamic communities and do not reflect on position of women in the UK as a whole. FGM, sharia law etc (which constitute nationwide plight that affect all of us as a society) should be addressed by cutting down islam in this country.

      feminists are picking petty fights, they don’t care about the issues you have mentioned. you didn’t get the point of the article.

  • WomanAgitator

    Why all men should be gay:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiESisEL43c

    I used to think gay men were overtly gynocentric. My bad.

  • Hawko133 .

    Enjoyed the article. However, seeing seeing this is a few standard deviations left of feminist media (because women are always right. Get it? Puns…Funny… I don’t need your validation to know I’m hilarious) I am guessing that this article is not going to be popular

    • DollarPound

      I wonder how many new readers the spectator might have got from this article? My guess is several thousand

  • chalkhillblue

    “Since the suffragettes won us the vote, women have made greater strides than men have made in millennia.”

    What is that supposed to mean exactly? In case you have not noticed, in one millennium alone we have moved from a primitive and violent society to a reasonably civilised one, with the most extraordinary advances in science, technology, industry, democracy, health, education, welfare, art, architecture and music. Almost all of these advances have been made by creative, brave and intelligent men. Are you ignorant of all that or do you merely sneer at it?

    It was men who made a comfortable life possible for women so that you and your generation can now revel in your supposed triumph. If women really do rule the future, so be it (though I personally doubt it) but, whatever happens, you cannot take away from men the fact that we made it all possible for you in the first place. You simply take it for granted, bank it and then gloat and sneer at us. Perhaps that is a consequence of the bad education that you evidently had in the 1990s.

    • Mr. E

      “It was men who made a comfortable life possible for women”

      Yeah, they always spew their garbage and forget that pretty much *everything* was brought to them by… wait for it… a MAN. Even the mediums which they choose to belittle and berate us– the press, the radio, the telegraph, the telephone, the television, the computer, the Internet– all made by men. Not to mention all those nifty, labor-saving household appliances that gave women enough free time from housework to sit around and complain.

      • Carlos Kingston

        I’ll just add to your fine list: Contraception was invented by men as well. Ah, the evil patriarchy lol

    • cartimandua

      Women have made huge contributions and everything they did in science or the arts they did while pregnant breastfeeding or carrying a toddler.

  • WomanAgitator

    Look around you. What do you see? Who created and built all that you see? Was it a massive workforce of impoverished, over-worked, exploited, unicorn like women – or was it a massive workforce of men enslaved, abused and impoverished working on women’s behalf? Which gender was the “true” oppressed gender? Women don’t want these questions asked. As a man – I have difficulty asking these questions myself – to a point. I now see the true oppressed gender – and that makes me very, very angry.

    Women – take care. The truth is about to be exposed. You’d better exit post haste – because when men find out you’ve been lying to them all along – when men find out your greatest talent is the manipulation and usury of men – I’m going to lead them in your public, most inhumane, bloody, rapey, female sacrifice. I guarantee.

  • elvira

    Is feminism ‘over’?
    There’s a simple test: just ask yourself if a male is still insulted by being referred to or addressed in female terms. If it’s demeaning for a man to be ‘Lady Mayoress’, for example, when it’s not demeaning for a woman to be ‘Lord Mayor’; if it’s insulting to address a group of men as ‘you ladies’ when it’s not insulting to call a group of women ‘you guys’; when a boy is humiliated by being offered pink toys or accessories but the same is not true for girls being offered the same things in, say, blue or camouflage; when boys insult each other with “You woman!” and it’s unthinkable for a male nurse ever to be addressed as ‘Sister’ – then females do not have equal status with males, and feminism is not over.

    • Mr. E

      But the idea of MALES having equal rights with FEMALES never crossed your mind, huh?

      • elvira

        Yes, it has, frequently. I’ve often thought it a pity that a Lord Mayor’s husband never gets the honorable title of ‘Lady Mayoress’, that boys can’t freely choose to wear pink clothes or ride a pink bike, and that a man risks ridicule if he drinks anything other than beer in a pub. But all these things arise from the fact that female stuff is considered inferior to male stuff.

        • Mr. E

          Did you ever consider that it might simply be because you females push everything to such wacky extremes that men don’t *WANT* to be associated with anything female?

          • elvira

            So you’re saying men look down on anything female because women sometimes ask them to consider looking in a new way at things they’ve been taking for granted? You’re rather making my point for me.

          • Mr. E

            No, I’m saying that you Feminists have to make everything such a freakin production that nobody wants to be associated with you. Look around, your numbers are dropping like a rock.

          • elvira

            But it’s been considered demeaning for boys and men to be associated with anything female (not just feminist) for centuries. How do you explain that? Are you going to say it’s because women have always been so horrible? Because if you are you’re only proving my point again.

          • Mr. E

            So I take it you consider yourself an MRA?

          • elvira

            And I take it you haven’t actually got an answer to the point I’m making!

          • Mr. E

            That actually was an answer. A little to esoteric for you I suppose.

          • LoggerheadShrike

            Women (I hope!) would not be so stupid as to think a lazy boy being called a sloth means that sloths are bad. So it goes with boys lacking masculine qualities being compared to girls. In both cases, there is nothing wrong with the thing the boy is being compared to – it’s about those qualities being present in the boy, and it doesn’t mean those qualities are inherently wrong, they’re just wrong in a boy.
            Things are esteemed for their particular qualities, in the context of what they are. We are pleased with a knife that is very sharp, but nobody wants a very sharp hammer. We are happy when a drink is cold, not so happy when dinner’s cold. And so on and so forth.

    • Jack Rocks

      You seem to be denying that men and women are biologically different in both physiology and psychology and, to show just how far feminism has descended to triviality, you’re concerned about the colour of toys.

      You make Brendan’s point for him.

      • cartimandua

        Emily is female?? And the biology is not relevant. Brain types are not gendered and we need empathy brains as well as systematizing brains.

        • Jack Rocks

          “brain types are not gendered”

          Oh, that testosterone the foetus experiences at around 6 weeks has strong effects on physiology in every area of the Human body except the most important: the brain.

          Strange.

      • elvira

        I’m not denying anything. I’m merely asking you to consider whether it’s still the case that a male is demeaned by being allocated female titles and attributes, while the same is not true in reverse. And you have no answer to that.
        As for the colour of toys – I’m concerned about it because children are. How many boys would be happy to be seen riding a pink bike? Do you really think other boys wouldn’t mock him for riding a ‘girly bike’?

        • LoggerheadShrike

          I like how feminists pick perennial things that are never going to change as their justification for grabbing more goodies. It’s smart. You never have to worry that the gravy train will end, because boys will always tease each other about being girly, and there will always be some violence between people of different genders.

      • elvira

        Are you seriously saying you believe that contempt for females is biologically determined in males? That it goes with the XY? That of twin foetuses the boy will feel automatically superior to his sister before anybody tells him to?

        I rather think you’re making my point for me if you think being concerned with the colour of toys is ‘descending into triviality’ – because that’s exactly what boys are concerned with. Try giving a 10-year-old boy a pink bike to ride to school and see how he feels about it – 99 times out of a hundred he will feel utterly humiliated and would rather walk to school, no matter how far, than be seen with a ‘girls’ bike’, because using ‘girl stuff’ demeans boys.
        In an equal world that would indeed be seen as a trivial concern and his parents would tell him he’s being ridiculous; in the current situation, they are more likely to buy him a new bike rather than make him use his sister’s outgrown one, and in fact might be rather worried if he were to be happy with the pink one.

        • Jack Rocks

          “contempt for females”, just… what the hell are you wittering on about? I have absolutely no ideal.

          You seem to be denying that males and females have different traits on average, and worse, that men should not be allowed pride in theirs (apparently it’s perfectly fine for women to revel in theirs).

          Just admit you hate men and let that be the end of it.

    • ksoileau

      Of course, we’ve come so far that a woman doesn’t feel insulted being mistakenly called “Sir” by a stranger. LOL

    • Geo

      So what is your solution? Language policing? Or simply angry marches on campuses?

      • elvira

        The language is just the symptom, and what happens on campuses doesn’t necessarily affect life outside them. Changes in attitudes can only come about gradually, but the starting point is to admit that there’s a problem – which this article was denying.

  • http://jasbirtsingh.blogspot.ca/ One Man’s Hope

    Hello women everywhere, you have my utmost respect. You have exceeded your own expectations, have surpassed men in academic achievement, have proven yourselves in the workforce, and have risen to the top of the corporate ladder. You have proven yourselves over and over again (not that you needed to in the first place, but I understand you wanted to feel equal to men in all respects). Now that your feminist movement has achieved everything that it first set out to do, congratulations.

    Now please allow me to offer some friendly and constructive criticism on the price you paid to achieve all this.

    While you were putting in all those long hours doing everything that men did to pursue higher education and a career (ultimately to earn more money), you neglected to think about how you would find a man to marry and have children with before the expiry of your biological clock. To put it mildly, and it pains me to have to say this, but this delay has meant that you got older, and you are now perhaps not as attractive as you once were in your late teens and early twenties. As a result, your position in the marriage market has suffered. You now have more diplomas and money than men, but you are left single with only a pet to love and care for. This is a great price to pay. I know it isn’t fair, but this is what often happens.

    In hindsight, I think that feminism originally had some good goals, but it went about it entirely the wrong way by trying to compete with men. It has produced catastrophic results for children and society as a whole.

    http://jasbirtsingh.blogspot.ca/2014/06/women-get-diamond-ring-before-your.html

    • Mr. E

      Shhh! Don’t spoil it for them…

    • cartimandua

      The countries where women are “traditional” are hells on earth that’s the problem you have.
      Maybe women look around and cannot be bothered with marrying selfish men.
      For every unmarried woman there is a puerile Peter Pan who wont grow up.
      The reality is that housing is now so expensive only the very poor can afford children.

      • PolishKnightUSA

        Who raises these Puerile Peter Pans, exactly?

        In my traditional working class neighborhood I grew up in, most of the sons went on to quickly grow up and become productive. Their fathers set an example that they were to work hard, couldn’t be helpless Victims waiting for the state to rescue them, and go out and find a nice woman and start a family. These men were not perfect by any means: They often drank hard and could be yobs (I think is the term), but the women weren’t saints either. They seemed to do the best they could under the circumstances.

        When the “working class” became the “welfare class”, even an attempt for men to grow up went out the window. Why develop any kind of work ethic when the state rewards NOT working?

        Sure, there are grown up men around but professional women don’t “look around” but rather act like they’re in a Jane Austen novel and complain that the men hitting on them are jerks. A man who wants a good wife to raise wonderful children will go to the ends of the earth to find her. Most professional women put less effort into finding a good man than they do researching their iphone mobile plan.

        Carti, I’m not the best looking man around, or even the most successful by any means, but I worked hard and found pretty women and eventually married a nice one and have been married 11 years now. Governments could give liberated women all a billion pounds/Euros (take your pick) each, and they would still complain that they can’t get their lives to work.

        In the meantime, visit Malmo, Sweden and gaze upon the future of liberated women.

    • PolishKnightUSA

      One Man’s Hope, I agree with most of what you said except for the notion that feminism was ever “good”. Like Emma Watson today, feminism has always had postive spin propaganda claiming that, someday, men would benefit too when women equally shared responsibilities and men could take a few days off from the factory without being guilted and nagged into going back to work.

      Don’t you believe it!

      Feminism back then, now, and all along has been about goodie grabs for (certain) women, bashing men to justify the grab, and finding excuses for women to avoid personal responsibility such as “I like “traditonalism” when it suits me. Tee hee!” That’s been going on since the suffragette movement when the Titanic started to sink and all of them said that whatever the men in power said about protecting women first was A-ok with them.

      The only women, FYI, who refused the lifeboat space at the expense of men were doing so out of love for their husbands, not feminism. Not a single suffragette refused a lifeboat or even protested against sexism when it was suiting them.

      In the states, we have a popular comic strip, “Peanuts” about this smart alek nasty girl, Lucy, who repeatedly tricks poor, naive Charlie Brown into trying to kick a football and tells him that this time, for sure, she won’t pull it away and have him fall over. She smiles and tells him she means it and he buys it. The joke is that this has happened dozens of times and poor, chivalrous Charlie falls for it. He doesn’t learn. Finally, in an episode of Family Guy, Charlie gets his kick. I highly suggest looking it up on youtube.

      Give it up. Feminism is a failure. A western, chivalrous patriarchal experiment that didn’t work. Time for the men to pull the plug.

  • dgirlinpink

    How very egocentric and media gullible you are. Feminism is not just in the rare one off attention grabbing media circus, it’s in the women who work the domestic violence hot lines, its the Malala’s who fight for girls education, it’s the women who work full days and still are responsible for the weight of child and house care. We’ve come a long way but just because you’ve made doesn’t mean every woman has. How about wearing your high heels and make-up (btw they don’t care a bit) to a women’s sporting event which has yet to get enough of an audience to make money or to a fundraiser to help girls being sold into slavery…. supporting women is about all women, not just those of us lucky not to be lucky recipients of our feminist fore-mothers. Now pay it forward.

    • Mr. E

      How come you don’t have a single thumbs-up?

      • Kanaris

        She does now!

        • Mr. E

          Nice of you to take pity on her.

          • Kanaris

            Oh I wasn’t, merely agreeing with everything she said.

          • Mr. E

            Well, I reckon everybody needs a sycophant.

    • Solage 1386

      How about the 1400 females gang-raped and forced into prostitution in Rotherham? We are STILL waiting for the feminist protest march through Rotherham city centre. We wait in vain, it seems…..

      • cartimandua

        They would get beaten up for being “racist”.

        • Solage 1386

          Are you the same Cartimandua who occasionally posts in the Daily Repress? I post comments there too, using the name Miss Floribunda Rose!

    • Jack Rocks

      It is about all of those things but we would call that “classical feminism”. Radical feminism is something entirely different. It’s women with trust funds, books and kickstarters to sell, YouTube videos and speaking tours to promote.

      Try and square your first few sentences there with things like “manspreading” or the radfem concept of “privilege” and see just how perverted an ideology it has become.

      • PolishKnightUSA

        All feminism can be summed in two ways:

        1) Looking for more goodies and handouts when it suits them, becoming helpless damsels when the lifeboats are lowered (see The Titanic)
        2) Man hating girls with daddy issues.

        Even the “nice” feminists almost always look for excuses when equality doesn’t suit them or demand special rights rather than equal rights. What does “free” daycare have to do with equality? Did men get free daycare? Did men get free contraception? Did men get free 2 years paid childcare leave?

        The ideal “feminist” equality world is getting high paying jobs they needn’t show up for to get a paycheck, their kids raised by the state, for free, free healthcare, free housing, and basically the world truly owing them a living. Review the narrative (a false narrative) of Marie Antoinette living in a fantasy world of privilege and that’s what feminists think of as “equality”.

        In the background, just as Roman senators lived a life of luxury while the majority of people were slaves or serfs working in the basement with 21 year lifespans to keep the baths going, that’s what feminism wants to do with men (and children). Make the rest of humanity into sub-human slaves to prop up their privileges.

        • LoggerheadShrike

          Wants to do? Already did, I’d say.

        • Carlos Kingston

          Like when it was women who killed the Equal Rights Act in the US because they didn’t want actual equality (Selective Service etc). They attempted to amend the proposal to keep women’s special privileges but that failed. Now Men’s Rights Activists are the one’s supporting the ERA. Very telling indeed.
          Or how women didn’t the vote when it came with the cost men had to pay (the draft) and regular men only getting the vote as a payoff for being sent to slaughter to die for the establishment.
          Thanks for your posts btw. Elaborate as needed for complex issues. That Titanic smack down was truly a thing of beauty.
          As always, when debunked they just pretend it didn’t happen and move on to the next talking point. Always dodging and derailing.

          • PolishKnightUSA

            Thanks. One of my favorite feminist games over the decades was the Orwellian word game: “Equal does not mean the same”. When it suited women, such as getting more money for (unequal) work, then equal meant the same (at least as much as the man) but when it didn’t suit the woman, then it doesn’t (equal work means she comes in for half the hours while taking time off for HER family.)

            Get it?

            Ironically, Schlafly who single handedly took down the ERA largely committed a bluff. Just as The Wise Latina today can make up what the Constitution means by saying that a ‘privacy right’ applies to abortion or equal application of laws applies to gay marriage, a justice or judge can say that women aren’t subject to the draft while being “equal” in every other way that suits them. Heck, it’s largely already happened.

            The problem for feminists was that they couldn’t get up and say: “Listen. Ladies. Don’t worry. The ERA will only mean that women get all the goodies while the courts will not hold you to equality where it doesn’t suit you because feminism is a man hating movement!” wasn’t possible since that would let the cat out of the bag. A lot of dumb guys out there still buy into this equality nonsense including a lot of genuine MRA’s doing good work.

    • Magic Carpet

      You are complaining a women’s sporting event doesn’t get a big audience? What’s the solution to that? Force people to like it and pay for it? Modern feminism in a nutshell.

      • cartimandua

        Supporting womens sport supports the health of women and their children.

        • Jamie Johnson

          Women’s sports programs were initiated to get more women into sports. Then after a couple of decades some became good enough to start professional leagues. And right there is the problem. There are not actually enough women interested in women’s sports=lower media attention=less pay for the EVERYONE involved. The problem you are talking about is caused by women themselves not supporting other women. lol

        • Magic Carpet

          By buying a season ticket to a men’s football team, I’m actually supporting the health of men and their children? Cool.

      • PolishKnightUSA

        In the states, it’s not uncommon for the men’s college football team to be so profitable (more on this later) that then funds all the other remaining, and unpopular athletic programs at the university: women’s and men’s gymnastics, curling, track, etc.

        Not that I think these unpopular sports are “bad” for being unpopular. On the contrary, I think the football programs are awful. The jocks are effectively forced to go to university because they can’t go directly from secondary school to the major leagues. So there’s a tremendous incentive for cheating and lowering academic standards. Football is a destructive sport (lots of injuries) while track, swimming, etc. are more healthy and demonstrate exercise of discipline. A day watching the Olympics is more inspiring than an entire season of football, European or American.

        But that’s the economic system. People love football and they’ll pay a lot for it, via to advertisers, and then that money flows into the educational system and some is distributed to more worthy (in my opinion) athletic programs and some gets siphoned off in corruption. Welcome to how things work!

    • PolishKnightUSA

      “it’s the women who work full days and still are responsible for the weight of child and house care.”

      One second.

      Hahahahahaha!

      Boo hoo! Sometimes life isn’t fair! Waaaaaah! Why can’t helpless Victims be treated as equals?

      It’s like a child who puts their hand on a hot stove, burns it, and nobody gives her credit for the oppression she’s suffered! Why can’t women do as they please and have everything they want?

      That’s life folks! Feminism rails against a Patriarchy that can’t give them everything they want.

      Here’s the thing: If a woman wants a liberated man who splits childcare, etc. then there are plenty of such men out there, who often earn a lot less, and she can then work longer hours and earn more than the average man. Most women are uninterested in such a lifestyle. They want to quit their job when it suits them and, surprisingly, employers don’t like paying women to not work. That’s an oppressive concept that the world doesn’t revolve around you, but there it is.

      Regarding the DV hotline: With so many women with welfare and opportunities to work, again, why chase after the bad boys? Sure, there are a few women who are 1950’s housewives with 4 kids afraid to leave the home but the USA and British government provide more funds than the space program to get a woman out of a DV household. Why are women with choices still chasing after the Patriarchy that they claim oppresses them?

      Folks, feminism isn’t a movement that ‘went off track’ and now needs correcting. It’s not even a movement that struggles against the patriarchy. It’s always been a paradoxical joke. A tool for the elitist patriarchs to manipulate naive women voters into voting for their causes (male voters tend to be smarter.) Since feminism, wages have deflated and the cost of living has gone up. Congrats ladies, you’re just so smart!

    • https://twitter.com/phaislum phaislum

      >Feminism is not just in the rare one off attention grabbing media circus, it’s in the
      >women who work the domestic violence hot lines

      That’s why male victims of domestic violence who are calling these hot lines for help get help denied because they are ONLY helping women or are referred to batterer programs. Well, or even worse: They get laughed at.
      What a great bunch of people you are.

      https://nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/3977-researcher-what-hap-3977

    • Cyril Sneer

      So what you’re saying is that you’re sexist.

  • Justthepip

    ‘Time to move on’. You wish jellyfish. As if we are going to just ‘move on’ from what feminism and those who enabled have done to society.

    • cartimandua

      I think you mean “for” society. Unless you think Muslim countries are lovely.

  • Felix

    I’ve rarely seen a front page that has made me more angry. How someone (especially a woman) can say that ‘it is time to move on’ from feminism, it is properly disgusting and blindingly patronising. There is still so much gender inequality in terms of domestic abuse statistics, to the pay gap etc. Emily Hill is truly a talentless hack, pandering to the increasingly right-wing readership of the Spectator.

    • Magic Carpet

      How dare she betray her sisters and decide to think for herself and embrace victimhood for life?

    • Quest for Liberty

      Feminism is a gynocentric movement pretty much redundant in the modern day. The pay gap you refer to is a myth: women earn the same amount for the same job and, as she mentions in the article, largely out-earn men until life choices (mainly having children) hamper this. Moreover, apart from the fact that most violent crimes are inflicted on men, women enjoy legal and institutional privilege that me are excepted from.

      What is patronising is the defunct army of third wave feminists telling women that they are too oppressed and weak to do things without extra help, especially government help (e.g. forced quotas), to get on an equal footing with males.

      • cartimandua

        Womens pay and financial well being falls off a cliff when they become Mothers.
        And the reason you care is that 40% of marriages break up and she gets the kids while he has to work to support two households and his kids end up in poverty.
        You don’t want kids fine but many men do and they want to be Fathers to them.

        • Carlos Kingston

          If 70-80% of divorces weren’t filed for by women, they’d have a much easier life then. Men (with children) filing for divorce unilaterally usually takes her being terrible (constant cheating is is one example) because on average men are far less self-serving and care more about their children’s well-being as well as being around them. Granted there are some drunk violent horrible men, but not enough to cause that kind of discrepancy in percentages.

        • Geo

          Women’s pay falls off a cliff because having children means taking a year off work. So first of all, you aren’t working, and when [if] you return, you cannot expect to pick up where you left off. The world cannot stop turning to accommodate pregnancy.

      • PolishKnightUSA

        The “feminism used to have merit but now is redundant” is flawed in that feminism never really had merit. It was always a man-hating goodie-grab movement that appealed to selfish women.

        Even seemingly egalitarian feminism was sold to women like this: “Girls. You can earn as much as a man (or more!) and then you can marry a househusband to look after your kids OR you can marry the rich alpha male who earns twice as much as you do!”

        I have talked with women friends (including a feminist who wrote a book published by a major publisher) who told me that she and her friends would choose to marry the rich alpha male and “some other woman” could have the “choice” to marry the sensitive guy househusband.

        It’s like teling women they can all choose to either be princesses or work in a donut shop is that there’s more princesses than are needed and not enough donut shop workers.

        So why does feminism continue to push the extreme narrative even in western nations that are about as feminist as Middle Eastern nations are Patriarchal? The answer is riding an angry bear: It’s a lot of fun but will be highly unfun the second you stop. If feminism were to admit that women really have it easy, then the whole system that props up fake equality would collapse. Without “positive discrimination”, women would quickly flee the workplace and as men flooded in, sexism would reinforce itself. What we have now is kind of like a communist China narrative where everyone is taught that ‘nothing happened in Tiananem Square but if someone who was there tells you they did, be sure to report it!” It’s truly an Orwellian universe. Without constantly bashing men, the weak men of the West might actually grow pair(s). Keep ’em down.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

      To add to @questforliberty:disqus ‘s remarks, there’s no gender inequality in domestic violence. DV is more closely coupled with age, educational status, income (and to a lesser extent, cultural background) than it is gender. The greatest predictor of DV is whether the couple experienced or witnessed DV as children growing up. DV is generational, not gendered.

      Erin Pizzey (y’know, only the foundress of the women’s refuge movement) has been saying this for decades, but it doesn’t fit the feminist “women good, men bad” narrative and strangely, nobody wants to know.

      Women are about as violent as men (in fact, possibly moreso) — particularly given the modern, expanded definition of DV (which includes emotional and financial abuse and controlling behaviours, many things women are equally capable of) — it’s just that they do less damage and fewer men end up in the A&E clinic.

      If memory serves, about 50% of DV cases are bilateral (both parties initiate violence) and of those that are unilateral, the woman starts it 70% of the time. Oh, and the incidence of DV in gay male couples is less than hetero couples, and higher still in lesbian couples, which would be consistent with those data.

      You talk of sexism: how’s “what did he do to deserve it?” for you? It’s d@mnable victim blaming that would never be tolerated by feminists in respect of women.

      Emily Hill is truly a talentless hack, pandering to the increasingly right-wing readership of the Spectator.

      Feminists are spineless cowards and hypocrites who, above all, seek power to force others to think as they do, pandering to the insecurities and genuine hardships many women have experienced (but without word for the genuine hardships faced by many men).

      The infantilisation of women by feminists is far more misogynist than most men will ever be (though there is no question that there are pockets of dreadful misogyny amongst some men, but it’s nothing like as common as feminists say it is. Remember, disagreeing with a woman or criticising her ideas and ideology is not misogyny. It’s just disagreement.).

      • cartimandua

        rubbish stats mate utter rubbish. You think women from cultures where killing women is accepted are “equal domestic abusers”????

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

          Oh, by all means, discard data when they are inconvenient. (I bet you don’t discard studies that support the opposite proposition, though. I wonder why. Could it be bias? An agenda, mayhaps?)

          But be sure that you discard the whole of a study (viz. the British Crime Survey) when you do. If you call the BCS rubbish, then you don’t get to use any other BCS data in support of any argument you make (such as the estimated annual incidence of rape, a number that is far higher than police reports would suggest).

          Now, one paper or study might be rubbish (happens all the time), but Martin Fiebert (CA State U., Long Beech) maintains a bibliography that must be around 300 peer reviewed papers or so documenting female-on-male DV.

          You going to say that all of those papers are “rubbish”? How open minded of you.

          Science is not a smorgasbord. You don’t get to pick and choose what evidence to accept, only to question the methodology and execution of the study that produced it.

          And, though anecdotal rather than scientific, don’t you think the foundress of the women’s refuge movement (and who worked the proverbial coalface for years) just might have some valuable insights in the matter?

          Or are you only allowed an opinion if it concurs with feminist orthodoxy?

          Interesting, BTW, how you pick up on the one element (culture) that I expressly said was a lesser factor, and ignored everything else.

        • PolishKnightUSA

          One thing is for sure: They probably don’t have a lot of studies in those referred-to-countries that abuse women showing that it’s a problem.

          Universities and governments that have hundreds of departments commissioned to study the needs and victimization of women are no doubt going to produce a lot of studies that show what they want to see just as Iran has a study that shows that are no gays there. It’s not Science, but it also doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out either.

          Nonetheless, there are plenty of studies available to show that women abuse men all the time but the feminist laws discourage police from reporting it or even arrest the man as a victim. I’m reminded of rape victims in particular nations where the victim is arrested for “adultery”. Feminism is basically kind of like a reverse of those laws in the west but ironically enforced by a western Patriarchy.

    • cartimandua

      She gets paid for writing anti woman tripe .

      • Agonizing Truth

        When very, very few women identify as feminists then it is pretty disingenuous to try to equate “anti-feminist” with “anti-woman”. When your movement can’t even draw 20% of the women in your country to its banner, the banner of a movement that claims to be all about fighting for their rights and privileges, that is a spectacular failure.

        • cartimandua

          Quite a few very young women do identify as feminists. Sadly a lot of women think all battles won.
          In the U.S. They are turning women into wombs owned by the states again. It’s not a steady state of equality at all.

    • PolishKnightUSA

      Many DV statistics show that women regularly attack men and that society finds this “funny”. Turn on the TV sometime and observe how often in advertising or the media where a woman attacks a man for saying something that offends her and the audience laughs or the product placement pitches it as funny.

      Naturally, feminist and chivalrous organizations seeking to disproportionately portray women as victims of DV will prove it when there is no attention provided for male victims. Ever hear of rose colored glasses? Put some on and you’ll see everything as red! It’s amazing!

      But sure, for those men who are white knights and out to rescue the helpless (but equal) princess., feminism has a place for them. I know several such guys who got to “give up their privilege” and even married feminists and later, the feminists dumped the guys and slept with a biker gang. I saw it happen all the time. If those guys think that’s paradise on Earth, more power to ’em. I can’t think of a more fitting punishment or reward, however one wants to see it.

      • cartimandua

        There are whole countries where it is legal (and honourable) to murder women for being rape and incest victims.
        Poland still prefers a woman goes blind than lets her have an abortion to save her sight.

        • PolishKnightUSA

          [violin playing]

          “New flash! Women have it tough someplace in the world! Privileged white women in Europe, demand special goodies (for themselves) in a noble gesture of solidarity!”

          I literally saw this paradigm decades ago when a professional white woman complained about how tough women had it in the middle east and then argued that’s why her husband had to buy her a diamond ring (at the time, probably 10 African children died to mine it for her).

          Indeed, Cartimandua, women continue to be oppressed in those places, seemingly, because the men don’t pander and protect women and hand them things while apologizing for not treating them as equals. It’s one thing to ask daddy for another toy to make up for “oppressing” you, it’s another to try to whine to a man who geniuinely wants to oppress you to stop doing so.
          Yeah, why don’t you go to the worst of these countries and try holding up a sign demanding equality and special privileges and see how far you get?

          Hahahahaha!

          • cartimandua

            So its OK with you that women in Poland have to lose their eyesight, minds, or lives because of the anti woman laws then.

            http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/mar/21/Poland

            “the court found that Ms Tysiac’s privacy rights had been violated and her treatment had caused her “severe distress and anguish”. She was awarded costs and €25,000 (£17,000) in damages. After giving birth, Ms Tysiac suffered a retinal haemorrhage, making her eyesight so poor she needed daily medical treatment. She can see no further than 1.5 metres and fears she will go completely blind.

            Poland practises one of the most restrictive abortion regimes in Europe, banning and criminalising it except on medical grounds, risk to life, and where pregnancy results from sexual violence.

            In the EU only Malta, where abortion is outlawed, and Ireland have more draconian regimes. Illegal abortion, however, is thriving in Poland. Polish NGOs estimate some 200,000 women are having backstreet abortions every year.”

          • PolishKnightUSA

            Your link didn’t work.

            In any case, again, so what? There’s lots of secondary tragedies caused by social policy. For example, a man whose ordered to pay child support may not have the money so he robs a bank and kills people. Do you think robbing a bank and killing people is ok?

            And sheesh, one would think that “equal” Polish women who live in the Schengen zone would have the ability to board a train and go to Berlin? There’s medical tourism in the opposite direction!

            In the life of “equal” women, they can be oppressed by a Patriarch if avoiding oppression requires them to have to figure out how to walk to a bus stop to go somewhere better. In the meantime, us men go with the clothes on our backs to find better work, to find wives when the selection of local women is poor, to find new opportunities, etc.

            Feminism is an equality movement that works, kind of, when the EU has trillions of dollars to fund it (along with the remaining 5 billion of humanity that want to get in and a free deal.) The USSR had better economic fundamentals.

          • PolishKnightUSA

            I want you to know I found that the URL you posted had a typo. To fix it, spell “Poland” with a lowercase p: “poland” and it works.

            Here’s what I found from the cite:

            A court found that a woman could sue the government because she lost her eyesight IN SPITE OF the “anti woman” laws that allowed a woman an abortion if her life or health was threatened.

            The “privacy violation” doesn’t sound like a lot of sense but I recognize it from the rationalization used to legalize abortions in the USA by claiming that it violented a Constitutional right to “privacy”. That’s strange in that I’m not allowed to practice amateur surgery or set up a meth lab in my home using the argument that I have a Constitutional right to privacy there. :-)

            In any case, Emma Watson’s and other feminist’s references to “dictionary definition of feminism” as equality doesn’t jibe with this issue. Do men have a right to abortion that they’re denying to women? Or a right to not get beaten up by our spouses? Or taking off for 2 years paid paternity leave we’re denying to women? When do I get a share of those Patriarchal privileges?

            Note that Cartimandua won’t face up to these logical inconsistencies or facts but rather will, well, act like a girl and run away. What a surprise. She’s tough when she has a list of childish talking points that were given to her by western authorities. She’s so brave and noble! Now run away.

          • Agonizing Truth

            Western feminitwits don’t have anything remotely close to the guts needed to do that. They want to scream about how women in London and Paris and New York are “soooooooo oppressed” by being whistled at by construction workers but turn a blind eye to the suffering of women in places where women really are oppressed. Ever seen the video of the idiot feminists (sorry if that was redundant) in Argentina I believe it was literally physically assaulting male priests and rubbing their bare breasts in their faces? Try that in Saudi Arabia and they would be getting acquainted with a sandbag wall and a firing squad rather quickly.

          • PolishKnightUSA

            I’ll disagree with you only to illustrate a larger point: Western feminists often exploit the suffering other women, locally and abroad (pardon the pun), to justify more entitlements for themselves. This is why they have rape awareness marches every other week not because local western men are supposedly so tolerant of rape, but rather to drum up a big barrel of white knight pity. I had a nickname for one feminist, “taliban girl”, who back in 1999 compared conservative (western) men to the Taliban. The irony was later lost on her when it was those same conservative men that went to war with the Taliban 2 years later AND feminists joined an alliance with Islam to retain their leftist privileges.

            But that’s not the best part.

            The best part is how feminists and nearly everyone else have so little compassion for lower class working men. Indeed, it’s been vogue to bash working class western men as serfs since King Arthur pulled the sword out of the stone. They’re losers because they earn a living rather than figuring a way to rip someone else off legally or not. Our culture respects Tony Soprano more than Artie, his friend who ran Vusuvios. Briefly, the socialist movement honored such men with a hammer and sickle flag but that was soon abandoned for the welfare state recipients.

            Want to see a world where men don’t bother buying into the myth of hard work that receives little pay or recognition? Indeed, go to the third world where everything is falling apart due to corruption, vice, and theft. Without the west to bankroll those hellholes via corruption of its own, they would be total pits that even their wealthy would have found miserable to live in. Without a strong working and middle class to build and keep roads, electricity, plumbing, etc. the wealthy would have to spend money on castle-like dwellings just to maintain a semblence of living like a working class home today.

            That’s not to say that femetwits don’t have guts. Some do, sort of. More like stupidity. Imagine a child you’ve shielded from scissors all their lives and then they demand, and get, access to the cutlery. Better have a lot of neosporin around! :-) It’s truly astounding how reckless and stupid western women can be. I remember running around as a kid in the forest doing stupid things with a bb gun and I was nowhere near as dumb and reckless as these women are when it comes to their personal choices.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

          Yeah, and that is a serious and real problem that feminists (indeed, all of us) should be addressing. Instead, all we get is feminists mewling about how bad women have it in their own country and who should be on bank notes etc.

          The only snag about the domestic politics of other countries is that every time a western country has tried to interfere, things have pretty much always gone rather badly wrong. Most countries don’t like foreigners marching in (sometimes quite literally) and telling them how to run their affairs. I’m pretty sure we’d resist it, for example.

          I’m not saying that women of some demographics aren’t still disadvantaged: I’m saying that the problems they face are real, but are not nearly as bad as they used to be nor as bad as feminists say they are — and that women don’t have a monopoly on hardship and oppression.

          And I’m with you on the abortion thing. If you aren’t already aware of it, go look up the case of Savita Halappanavar who died (in Republic of Ireland) from complications from pregnancy (I forget what, probably pre-eclampsia) that an abortion would have prevented.

          Instead, both mother and child needlessly died. Which is doubly stupid, because Irish law actually would have permitted an abortion in that case, but the hospital wanted to play it safe and refused to do it. I call that criminal negligence.

          • PolishKnightUSA

            And one wonders how many women in Sweden and Norway have been raped by foreign “migrants” and this is covered up by the left because non-westerners tend to vote for increases in the welfare state (especially in the USA). So in order to make a happy, Soviet USA, Europe is destorying itself including the women’s rights they claim to have wanted all along.

            “Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power.” — OBrien, 1984, in the Ministry of Love and Positive Discrimination.

        • Mr B J Mann

          There are whole countries where it is legal (and honourable) to murder women for being rape and incest victims.

          And the “progressive” lefty “liberals” want to import their “cultures” to “enrich” the West with such “vibrant” benefits.

          Poland still prefers a woman goes blind than lets her have an abortion to save her sight.

          Feel free to enlighten us with what any other woman would probably be able to intuitively know that means??!?!?!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Actually, checking up, in Poland abortion id legal cases of foetal abnormality, risk to the health and life of the mother, and rape or incest.

            Are you complaining that that is “one in the eye” for feminists who want to use abortion as a substitute for contraception?!

      • Mr B J Mann

        Apparently the DV statistics are for ALL (recorded) victims, female AND male, but the feminists then try to give the impression the numbers are entirely female.

        And, of course, a man would rarely report being the victim of a woman.

        And if he did he would probably be arrested for hurting his partners hand with his cheek!

        Or dinting her frying pan with his head?!

        Not to mention all the glasses he broke by letting them hit the wall instead of him?!?!?!

        • PolishKnightUSA

          A woman tells me that she saw another woman attack her boyfriend in broad daylight, kick his car (and dent it), and the policeman who showed up was concerned she might have hurt her foot attacking the man’s property.

          When I saw an episode of COPS a few years ago, I saw a similar situation but reversed: A guy threw a punch at his own wall in anger and the cop smilingly locked him up for “vandalism” (even though technically such a charge is BS since that would require the property owner to press charges if it’s rented and if the perpetrator did NOT intend to make restitution.)

          Funny thing is that the feminists who shriek on and on about rape and DV are doing so not out of legitimate fear that such a horror might happen to them but rather the opposite: They’re crying wolf so that a white knight will ride up and “rescue” them with some kind of privilege. Their claims of oppression are just the opposite: tools to extract more feminine damsel privilege. They talk of “rape culture” when the reality is that without rape culture, they wouldn’t have their privileges. They secretly fear that if rape or DV were to truly stop, that would be the end of their coveted gravy train. Nobody loves rape and DV more than they do!

    • Cyril Sneer

      You should try the family justice courts for gender ‘equality’ or lack of.

      But that’s ok because that puts women in the privileged position at the expense of fathers.

      And not a peep from the feminists.

      That’s the feminist movement in a nutshell – bunch of sexists c nts wanting to do men over.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Five THOUSAND men commit suicide each year!

      Who drives them to it?!?!

      Hundreds of men die of “accidental” poisoning!!!

      And how many men die in car accidents caused by females distracting them with their back-seat driving?!?!!

      And there is NO pay “gap”!

      Women with the same qualifications and experience EARN MORE then men!!

      Feminists create the lie by comparing the average for all working men with the average for all working, part timing, pin moneying and maternity leaving wimmin!!!

  • The dude

    This article is fuccin great!!! So much truth. The only people who speak negatively of this article are femnazis. If you’re a femnazi reading this kill yourself, it’s not a joke the world would literally be infinitely better without you.

    • cartimandua

      And you are a psycho a nasty violent psycho who should be in BROADMOOR.

      • Mr B J Mann

        So what do you say about that “diversity” officer who says k!ll all men?!

        Or that feminasty who said that 90% of men should be culled?1?!

      • anonuk

        On what grounds? Disagreeing with a feminist?

        • Geo

          I dislike modern feminism as much as the next person, but I struggle to understand why anyone would defend the advocacy of suicide.

  • PolishKnightUSA

    “What started as a genuine crusade against genuine prejudice has become a form of pointless attention-seeking.”

    Er, hello! That’s what it’s ALWAYS been. The feminist paradigm is basically a damsel in distress screaming that the white knight whose rescuing her from the dragon is no better than the dragon because he doesn’t treat her as an equal. Feminism has always been a Victim narrative which is why it’s so closely wedded to western chivarly and doesn’t work outside of the west. Being a helpless victim demanding your oppressor to rescue you from, er, him isn’t going to work when the oppressor is REALLY an oppressor. The feminism worldview is ultimately that of a spoiled, bourgeois child rebelling against her parents but unable to go out on her own.

    100 years ago in 1915, women suffragettes of the time had an opportunity to protest against inequality when lifeboats on the Titanic were being handed to women and innocent men were being told to drown. All the rage and fury the feminists had previously shown against inequality, when it meant more goodies for themselves, was quietly tabled. Feminists demanded pro-female family courts a century ago that are now ravaging working class homes and putting minority boys into prison as efficiently as a Dickenson style story factory. If you’re going to be a selfish monster, be sure to be a pretty selfish monster that flirts with a naive white knight fool to go out and beat up the innocent to show how “noble” he is.

    • cartimandua

      Actually only 1st class women (and men) were put in the lifeboats. Most of the rest were left to drown.

      • PolishKnightUSA

        Wrongo!

        Look up the statistics: Women in third class had a better survival rate than men in first class which shows that being a woman trumped (pardon the pun, great Presidential candidate!) economic class.

        They’re all equal until the lifeboats are lowered.

        Here’s a poem from the time that mocked this “oppression” narrative:

        “Votes for women!”
        Was the cry,
        Reaching upward to the Sky.
        Crashing glass
        And flashing eye-
        “Votes for Women!”
        Was the cry.
        “Boats for women!”
        Was the Cry.
        When the brave
        Were come to die.
        When the end
        Was drawing nigh-
        “Boats for women!”
        Was the cry.

        Feminism is a joke. Like the notion of witches flyijng around on brooms, it’s a product of cultural orthodoxy. When men stop protecting women to be “equals”, that will be the end of it.

        • cartimandua

          The point probably was that back then men might be able to swim but women never could.
          They couldn’t swim and they were wearing corsets and voluminous skirts if of course they were not pregnant which many were before the pill.

          • PolishKnightUSA

            Haahahah! Again, you’re proving the author’s point: Women aren’t treated as equals because they’re so helpless. It’s all men’s fault!

            So take off the corset. Perhaps the EU needs a special government program to teach women how to take off clothes? (If (pretty) women like, I’ll teach them for free! :-)

            In any case, as you grasp for straws to deny this obvious example of feminine privilege under the Patriarchy, you don’t even think the excuses through. Swimming wasn’t an issue since the cold water of the winter North Atlantic killed swimmers from hypothermia in under a half hour.

            What the Titanic showed, and what feminism has shown since then, is that feminists are noble equality goodie-grabbers when it comes to “equality” “for” women and in seconds, go back a century the second real equality not to their favor rears its head.

            Think about it: You personally know that the white knight western chivalrous narrative is a joke. You need strong, chivalrous men to be around you to allow you to complain about how “oppressed” you. When men such as me can comment and worse, in other places in the world really put things into action, you’re like a damsel tied to a stake with the dragon (me) approaching.

            That being said, I think we both agree that the Patriarchy as it is needs to end. Let’s reform it and make it more like the other patriarchies around the world. The way that feminists have bitten the hand that has protects them, you can be fully confident that I won’t be coming to YOUR rescue!

          • humann

            Congratulations. You win the most specious internet argument of the week award. You could be an olympic swimmer, male or female, and you still wouldn’t last an hour in waters the temperature of those the Titanic sank in. Most people would be unconscious within 15 minutes.

            Also, do you know what corsets were made of? How about the hoops in those hoop skirts? That’s right, both baleen and wood float. As if it would have mattered.

            Oh look, it’s a 19th century woman going for a swim even though the evil patriarchy is trying to prevent her.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So are you backtracking on your original claim?

            Or claiming that upper class men couldn’t swim and wore corsets?!

            And voluminous skirts and got pregnant?!?!!!!!

          • disqus_QL05BqU79X

            LOLz.

          • Geo

            Men usually manage swimming until they contract hypothermia.

      • Mr B J Mann

        No, and the Suffragettes, including Pankhurst, handed out white feathers to unenfranchised men, and underage boys who wouldn’t have the vote if they survived to grow up, who managed to get sent home to Blighty with shell-shock, instead of being shot for refusing to defend their wimminfolk?!

  • cartimandua

    So Poland lets women’s health suffer while there are 200 thousand illegal abortions a year and Ireland
    forces a rape victim to stay pregnant and force feeds her when she tries to starve herself to death.

    But “Emily” thinks things are just fine.

    • Gregy buu

      That’s the best you’ve got? You don’t even live in Poland and you fail to realize that she’s not talking shoot Poland either. Feminism huh?

      • cartimandua

        You missed the posters handle “PolishKnight”. There is a point about mentioning the horrors of near countries let alone far off ones.
        The BS ends up here.
        Muslim anti woman countries are hells on earth people flee from in their millions. Catholic countries in the southern hemisphere are hells on earth people flee from in their millions.
        Its because if women are treated like chattel there is overpopulation, conflict, and mass migrations.
        The countries of northern Europe have been more successful because women have been more equal from the getgo.
        Its not a steady state. It has to be guarded.

        • PolishKnightUSA

          One of the amusing paradoxes of Western Feminism and Leftism is the notion that Europe, especially, is the ideal culture that the rest of the world should aspire to and then….

          They seek to replace the entire population of Europe with non-Westerners who bring their cultures and values into place.

          Just as feminists can demand to be treated as “equals” while cashing welfare (or whatever Brits call them) cheques, non-western immigrants can do that even better. If feminists can accuse the working men who spend 60 hours a day in the factory to pay for a welfare mother’s lifestyle as “privileged”, why can’t a non-western immigrant also cash cheques while screaming they’re entitled to more?

          The problem with setting a bad example is that it seems to be an amazingly popular idea that catches on fast.

          Western feminism, and even western chivalry which birthed it, so to speak, won’t be around in 50 years. Either the west will collapse and things will “progress” in one manner, or the west will start to re-examine the assumption that rich white women spending all day griping that they are oppressed should be the number one priority.

          • cartimandua

            Your definition of feminist is completely absurd.
            Western culture IS better and it is better because of gender equality. Its an obvious economic advantage just to begin with.
            If Catholic Poland was such hot stuff why did so many Poles leave it?

          • PolishKnightUSA

            Again, if western culture is so better, then why do leftists and feminism encourage “diversity” and to celebrate and incorperate non-western cultures and people’s into Europe and the west along with their values?

            Actually, the western culture seemed to do a lot better before modern feminism came into being (all other things equal, of course.) Back in the 1960’s, in the states, we didn’t have home computers, mobile phones, or CAT scans, but medical care and education was so cheap that people paid in cash or worked part-time to pay for it. A single income was sufficient to raise a family and buy a home for most working class households.

            The more goodies feminists grab, the more economically unattainable they seem to become. In a way, that seems to be a rather Zen and Karma way of things working out.

            I didn’t “define” feminism but rather observed that how feminists themselves defined feminism is self-conflicting. A woman centric philosophy that claims to be merely about equality.

          • David Power

            In fact he his quite right and you are incredibly wrong.

            In reality feminism is proving to be the most dangerous of societal follies. In fact Feminism is already a dead woman walking. All feminism has is shaming language and the State (ironically, ultimately other men) to keep men to the feminist line.

            Because Feminism, in its relentless quest to toxify western women, has managed to get them to reject Motherhood, vilify Fatherhood, sacrifice Childhood, abandon Nationhood, in favour of victimhood

            But now, increasingly, the shaming doesn’t work. And men are disengaging from society in general to avoid entanglements with the state; if you don’t get married, you can’t be divorced, if you don’t co-habit you can’t have half your stuff appropriated, if you don’t have children, you can’t be on the hook for child support, if you don’t enter the corporate world you can’t be accused of ‘harassment’ and if you don’t date you drastically reduce your chance of a false rape accusation.

            These are genuine threat points for men in the modern world that didn’t exist before feminism. It speaks to the feeble minds of feminists that they would think that men will simply carry on as they did when these threats did not exist. For the last 50 years men (mostly) still did. But that’s over now.

            So men are doing what they have always done: survey their environment, understand it, and behave rationally according to it. Which means, increasingly, living their lives without regard to what women want. This does not mean living without sex, relationships or female company. Just that the investment men make in all these areas is being dramatically reduced.

            As feminism reduces the value of women (in men’s eyes), so men are reducing the amount of time, effort, attention and money they are willing to spend for the declining benefits modern women now bring to their lives.

            But the real news is that the true cost of feminism, first born by men, and then children, is now being passed on to women. Record numbers of women are living alone, record numbers of women are childless, record numbers are on psychiatric medication, record numbers are facing a life-time of wage slavery in grinding jobs that they can never leave. And still feminism spins these outcomes as the conscious choices of these women and as ’empowering’.

            And yet, women’s self-reported happiness, across all classes, all races, all demographics is lower than ever since records began 50 years ago. Tellingly, for the first time ever, their happiness is also now lower than men’s.

            But you do not need to read ‘The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness’ to know this. Just talk to the increasing number of 30 and 40 year old childless spinsters one on one – not in a group – to get the REAL story. The REAL effect of feminism in the REAL world. These women don’t give two hoots about feminism, they are just wondering where all the good husbands, hell, ANY decent man, went.

            Mostly, disgusted with what feminism has done to women, he walked away.

            For the truth is that men don’t want to fight women, it goes against the core of what it means to be a man. But feminism thrust men into a fight that they neither started nor wanted. To the point that feminists are reduced to crowing about ‘winning’ battles that men never turned up for.

            And even now, as feminism pushes and pushes and pushes to ever more absurd levels, as ever more restrictions are placed on normal masculine behavior, ever more insane definitions of ‘rape’, ‘assault’, and ‘aggression’ are drafted into law in increasingly desperate attempts to somehow, anyhow, cast women as perpetual victims – even now – men are still refusing to be drawn into a real battle.

            That’s how deeply men do not want to fight women.

            The sound of the final battle between the sexes will not be heard in the streets or legislatures. It will not be televised or reported. There will be no flags hoisted or victory parades. Because it is already in progress. It is happening all around us in plain sight, for those with the eyes to see it.

            And men are deploying the most devastating weapon of all – indifference. In this final battle who cares least wins.

            The time has come to reap the harvest of feminism, and for women the fruit will be bitterest of all.

            It’s pretty simple, women. Either abandon feminism or abandon all hope of being wives and mothers. Because men will not abide feminism and you cannot force us to accept it. 70 years of a totalitarian government could not make communism work. And no amount of resorting to State force is going to make a feminist society viable.

          • anonuk

            I don’t think we’re quite at that point yet- but in 30 or so years time, if radical feminism makes gains, that is likely to be the case.

          • fairplay

            So you agree with the author of the article under discussion and accept we DO have gender equality here and now in this country.

            Time to concentrate efforts on other countries?

          • Mr B J Mann

            Because it was destroyed by the Left.

            Which is what feminists are trying to do in the West!

          • Bruce

            Oh, they will. We kafirs will need to pay the jizya before too many more decades go by. All because the lazy idiots running Europe think they can import 3rd world muslims, magically turn them into westernized Europeans, and use them to pay for their bloated, ridiculous welfare states.

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      Comical feminist fantasy. Please, get a grip.

  • Andrian Harsono

    “Harry Potter star Emma Watson, who delivered a highly praised speech to the UN, lamenting that her girlfriends had given up competitive sport because they were worried it might make their arms look ‘muscly’.”

    Yes, and plenty of boys go to the gym, read, shave and dress well to impress friends, family, colleagues and ladies. Ultimately, regardless of gender, we all change our behaviours and day-to-day habits for the sake of our loved ones. So I really don’t understand what the big deal is.

    Otherwise, fantastic article, thank you for that.

    • Geo

      I’m starting to think that feminsim has gone into complete reverse and now advocates less choice for women. Page three being another example of the sisterhood knowing best.

  • Oliver

    This is epic. Feminists today are a superfluous bunch of blue haired, vintage catseye spectacle wearing, pearl clutching, authoritarian, puritanical, ultra privileged killjoys.

    Be gone back to your gender studies cul de sac

    • cartimandua

      You may love the idea of living in Pakistan but most normal people don’t.

      • PolishKnightUSA

        Just wait a few decades, and London and Pakistan will be the same place.

        Isn’t it wonderful how things work out?

        • cartimandua

          Well you should back true feminism then because men are too embarrassed or too complicit to tell minorities to stop having children others pay for.
          That would also be Poles by the way . Their family size is larger than normal and their wages on the low side.

          • PolishKnightUSA

            It’s funny that Poles are being targeted for resentment by Brits and Germans for being so bad when they’re being scapegoated for these traits because it’s not politically correct to address Turkish and non-white immigrants. Hmmm, scapegoating Poles in Germany. Like that hasn’t happened before. :-)

            “True feminism”. True feminism is this: Women getting high paying jobs handed to them by quota. Only showing up for work part time and for “equal” pay for equal work. The state raising her kids (even if she is at home much of the time). Free healthcare. Free everything. Lots of money and she doens’t pay for anything.

            Sheesh, it sounds like being the Queen of England.

            The problem is that there’s not enough money for “equal” women to all be the Queen of England and do as they please while the serfs, men, pay for everything. Serfs are then imported (hello Poland!) but those rotten Poles actually go home and spend the money there so they bring in instead non-whites who work, for a short while, and then go on welfare. Also, while they have all that free time, they eye up attacking the local feminists walking home from their high paying job.

            My Polish friend told me that criminals in Sweden have a nickname for the Swedes. They call them “kattunge” or “kittens” becase they’re so easy to rob and attack. Welcome to the feminist paradise!

        • David Power

          Gullible feminist patsies like cartimandua will never grasp the connection between feminism, mass immigration and the decline of the west. She is just another deluded fool.

          But the fact is, no country on the the planet embraced feminism as enthusiastically or more comprehensively than Sweden and look what it has lead them too.

          Anyone with eyes to see, understands that Sweden is now very serious trouble. But in truth, immigration is just the symptom of a disease Sweden was infected with some time ago…

          In his famous essay “Managing Oneself”, Peter Drucker advises strongly the need to understand your strengths and weaknesses, and observed that you can never win by improving your weaknesses but only by improving your strengths.

          By wholeheartedly adopting the feminist doctrine of androgyny, Sweden has done exactly the opposite. And so has been chronically weakened by building on it’s women’s weaknesses in an attempt to make them the equal of it’s men, rather than encouraging them in their natural strengths.

          And while this charade has been going on, it’s men were encouraged to adopt ever increasing feminine attitudes and lifestyles at the expense of their own natural strengths, now deemed unnecessary in the new gender-neutral economy.

          “The strongest sign of a decaying nation is the feminisation of its men and the masculinisation of its women.” (Taylor Caldwell 1970)

          In fact, once Sweden adopted the bogus feminist narrative of androgyny, it’s decline was inevitable. The whole nation, from its Education System, Legal Framework and Political Institutions, was essentially feminised.

          But it’s not just Sweden. All western nations have been guilty of blindly accepting the bogus teachings of feminism and are currently experiencing a corresponding rapid decline.

          Which is hardly surprising when you consider that the impact of this perverse gender flipping strategy on our society, is… plummeting marriage and birth rates, combined with ever rising numbers of childless women and fatherless children, together with grotesquely inflated home prices, and exploding credit card debt.

          But that’s just the half of it. The real problem for today’s Europe is that with its wholesale adoption of feminine priorities and the implementation of fem-centric national policies, the west has weakened itself to such a degree, that it is now ripe for take over by a more predatory and far less tolerant culture.

          Why?

          Well, as any Evolutionary Psychologist will tell you, the male and female psyche’s are in fact very different. They will explain how Men and women faced quite different survival threats throughout the vast majority of human history, and thus evolved very different psychological survival imperatives.

          For instance, in our past, when one tribe was conquered and over-run by another, the consequences for the Men and Women of the defeated tribe were very different. The Men and male children of a defeated tribe were very likely to be slaughtered by the invading tribe. This would have been in stark contrast to the fate of a defeated tribe’s women and girls, who would usually have been eventually assimilated into the invading tribe.

          So throughout history, the burden of border guarding fell almost exclusively to the male of the Species. Consequently, men evolved a psyche which has a much more heightened border guarding (an extent ion of mate guarding) mentality compared to Women.

          And so, the consequence of the rise of feminism and the feminisation of national priorities, has left western societies dangerously vulnerable to being over-run by more predatory cultures. Cultures which are far less tolerant, particularly towards women, than anything seen here in the west for centuries. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0HTSwUig2-0

          But this is nothing new. Despite what contemporary feminists would have us believe, feminism has been tried many times throughout human history. In fact, it usually heralds the decline of a culture.

          The oxford academic J.D. Urwin, happened upon this phenomenon in his exhaustively researched book “Sex and Culture” in which he analyses 80 primitive cultures and a number of past empires.

          He found that, without exception, the level of decline of these cultures was directly paralleled by the degree of political influence given to women. His historical examples include the Sumerians, Babylonians, Athenians, Romans, Teutons, and Anglo-Saxons (600s – 900s), and English (1500s – 1900s).

          In every case, he found that all of these cultures were established and thrived while controlled entirely by Men and thus embracing masculine priorities, and began to rapidly decline when the cultures priorities shifted towards the feminine after women were given increasingly greater political influence.

          So it would seem that Europe is merely following in the footsteps of countless past cultures that were eventually over-run, due to foolishly allowing female political power to over feminise their laws, politics and national priorities, particularly in the areas of border guarding, national sovereignty and a sustainable birth rate.

          Unfortunately, towards the end of his book, Urwin concludes that once this process has begun, it is irreversible.

      • Oliver

        Don’t hide behind the skirts of Pakistani women. You know what this article is about. It’s not about FEMEN protesting Islamic oppression of women. It’s about neon haired clowns who went to university and live in one of the safest, most free, most diverse and equal societies on the planet and in history. (Societies which actually give women extra privileges, protections and funds when men receive none) complaining about trivialities like “manspreading” and “microaggression”, bullying people like Matt Taylor to tears for the crime of wearing a funky shirt, hounding people like Tim Hunt out of their careers for the crime of making a clunky joke and claiming the righteous anger and fragility of the victim of brutal systematic oppression by dreaming up mythological war torn Congo levels of rape on some of the poshest and safest university campuses on the planet.

        Western feminists are superfluous, frivolous, puritanical, authoritarian, superstitious, anti science, anti humour, anti sex, racist, professional victims and dishonest political extremists who are rapidly becoming a laughing stock on the internet and slowly but surely in the real world.

        By all means take your feminism to Pakistan where it is needed and you might actually be doing something brave. Otherwise get out there and enjoy the freedom, wealth and extra privileges you as a Western woman enjoy.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Whichever perm, or wave, or whatever of feminism that Greer belongs to believe than trans wo/men have no right to share their safe spaces.

          But who said:

          “Human beings have an inalienable right to invent themselves; when that right is pre-empted it is called brain-washing.” – The Times, London (01.02.1986)

          Yup, it was Germaine Greer!

      • David Power

        You need to stop arguing with PolishKight, he is making you look like a self-entitled deluded fool.

    • △rcticSku△

      What about poor white male feminists with natural colour hair who didn’t study gender studies and don’t wear glasses?

      heh.

      • Mr B J Mann

        Yeah, pity them, because despite all their sucking up to the feminist they didn’t stand a cat in hell’s chance of getting laid!

      • Ajt

        They’re just hoping to get laid.

    • Bruce

      Best description ever.

  • jazeroth

    “The “women’s vote” is announced as crucial in every election campaign and this time round is no exception. Ahead of the general election on 7 May, the parties are making a concerted effort to appeal to women, who make up 52% of the British electorate”

    52% is a huge amount of power and these women vote for women’s view only.

    also that barrister should of been charged for sexual harassment. i bet he wasn’t. meaning, in my opinion it didn’t happen!

    how does this lawyer get up and talk to a judge she is such a whiny little girl

    • PolishKnightUSA

      In the states, at least, this is no longer the case. The voting gap in the last presidential election was 4% in favor of women for the Democrats, but get this: 12% in favor of men for the Republican candidate.

      So even factoring in a 52% aging female electorate, the voting gap in favor of the men’s candidate was 6%!!!!

      Here’s the thing: Since feminism is anti-male (not that it is, of course, it’s just that men are the cause of all bad things in the world but that’s not really hating men so it goes), married women tend to care about their sons and husbands and will vote for a party that is not perceived as man-hating as much. Single mothers tend to vote overwhelming for feminist interests (for some reason, they seem to have problems getting along with men.)

      In the meantime, the demographics of Europe and the USA are changing to reflect cultures that have a, how shall we say, less “progressive” view of gender equality? The Democratic party in the states celebrates cultural repression of women, to pander to their new electorate, that I would have found shocking for the Republicans to endorse 50 years ago. The new cultural norm of the left is, to me, rather religiously prudish.

      • cartimandua

        Thing is women actually get out and vote far more than men do.
        Feminism is not anti male. Honestly you sound soo whiny. What you don’t want women to be decently paid? In that case a lot of children end up in poverty.

        • PolishKnightUSA

          It’s funny that you make specious claim (women get out and vote far more than men do. Do you at least provide a BS number like the 77 cents wage gap myth for that?) Next, is an unsupported statement (Feminism is not anti male.) And then next, you engage in conduct that sounds like typical female behavior (accuse me of being unmanly, whiney, even as that’s all “equal” feminism does in the west.)

          In answer to your question, being decently paid and being equally paid are two different matters. Do you want to pay your plumber as much as a doctor for “equal” work? (They both come into work, they both do work you need…) Are plumbers decently paid compared to doctors? The wage gap myth is apples and oranges even as feminists lie and claim its not.
          Now about the kids in poverty: Well, don’t have children out of wedlock and sleep with ISIS members who run off and maybe they won’t starve. Just a suggestion…

          • anonuk

            “Well, don’t have children out of wedlock and sleep with ISIS members who run off and maybe they won’t starve.”

            You are interfering in my right to spend my free time and use my body as I see fit!

          • PolishKnightUSA

            Hahaha! Funny!

        • Sam XXX

          Men have to work during the week so they cannot vote.

        • disqus_QL05BqU79X

          Feminism is 100% anti-male. Its a massively funded ideology designed to kill off fathers. You’re just a sock-puppet who’s yet to realise it. Sorry.

          Women are paid more than men for the same work, or less.

        • Geo

          Who said that non-feminsts want anyone to be badly-paid?

  • rockylives

    The only substantive cause for feminism in this age is to resist the Islamification of Europe and to attempt to force Islamic countries to treat their women as equals to men.

    A minority of brave feminists devote themselves to this work: the true heirs to the Pankhursts.

    The majority waste their (and everyone else’s) time on micro-grievances and misandry.

  • horus752

    I think Emily just had a “drop the mic” moment. Bravo!

  • Scott Barker

    This article is a thing of absolute beauty. Feminists will prove how disingenuous they are by bashing it. I mean this was written by a strong and empowered woman right?

    • Bruce

      They’ll claim she’s internalizing her own oppression and is basically the feminist version of a “house negro,” as the Democrat welfare slaves call any black who doesn’t align with them. They aren’t thinking “correctly” so they must be demonized and ostracized.

      internalization = leftist codeword for acknowledging reality

      • cartimandua

        Uncle Tom and yes she is.

    • cartimandua

      No it was written by a hack dissing women in order to get paid.

      • Mr B J Mann

        To get laid?

        Oh, sorry……..

      • disqus_QL05BqU79X

        She’s dissing a hate cult, not women. What you just said is what all media outlets do about men, to get paid. Grow up.

      • ummm…

        and you are spreading your ideological radicalism for free

  • ManOfKent

    I think those feminists who have given up sanitary towels (not mentioned above) should be congratulated. After all they must attract many flies and other creepy crawlies away from the rest of us!

    Like all movements whose real agenda is one of self promotion, privilege and entitlement (and never equality) it was only a matter of time before it collapsed in on itself. Thus is the fate of the feminist.

  • fairplay

    Women in this country are not victims surely?
    There may be countries where this could be true but this is not one of them.

    • cartimandua

      There is still too much violence towards women.

      http://kareningalasmith.com/counting-dead-women/2015-2/

      97 up to Sept this year.

      • fairplay

        What is your comment and link related to? I did not think that this article related to violence against women and my comment had nothing to do with that either.

        • cartimandua

          You said women in this country are no longer victims. I supplied you with the names and faces of women who have been murdered just this year because they were women.
          It doesn’t include violent assaults or acid attacks etc.
          The “battle” has not been won we just do better than say Pakistan.
          whoop whoop!

          • fairplay

            We ae discussing two different things then.

          • Mario Rossi

            murdered because they are women?

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

        So stipulated; however, that is no reason to deny the reality of violence toward men, especially that which is perpetrated by women. Nor is it ground to ignore the myriad of other issues men uniquely face.

        It’s fine if you’re not interested in such matters, but you have no legitimate interest in interfering with those who do.

      • Mariya13

        And roughly 300 brown children male and female are blown up by drone strikes a week by america.

        Where is that statistic?

        Stfu with your woman worshipping, the fact is infinitely more than 97 people are dying per day in this world by all kinds of causes, 97 is nothing.

        Its not even a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of 1% of the worlds population.

      • disqus_QL05BqU79X

        Violence against women is a direct product of violence against men. One day, you may learn this and realise that ignorant bystanders who repeat feminist lies are just as big a part of the problem as the psychopaths at the core of the cult.

      • Mr B J Mann

        Wot, 2 or 3 women a week?!

        And how many men die of “accidental” poisoning each year?

        And how many of unknown cause in a domestic environment?

        In fact, how many men “accidentally” fall down the stairs?!

        And why do nearly 5,000 men commit suicide in the UK every year?

        And who drives them to it?

        Or maybe even does it to them?!

        Oh, and how many men (and children) are killed by women every year?!

  • Adam Castle

    Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

  • porcelaincheekbones

    Meanwhile a Swedish journalist who attempted to film in a No-Go zone about stoning got stoned. Carry on.

    • cartimandua

      And Sweden now has a rape rate up there with Lesotho and South Africa. Safety for women is not a steady state it has to be guarded. Migration puts it at risk.

      • ummm…

        what does migration have to do with it? I just want to hear your say it.

      • anonuk

        What Sweden counts as rape, that’s the real question. This is what happens when you get the Wimmin’s Freedom Army and various Millie Tants to write your laws on sexual assault.

        • Mario Rossi

          rape is legally determined in a very detailed way from a physical point of view

  • disqus_9I6C4azbIA

    It seems to me that movements calling for equality often are actually after superiority. It looks to me that women have achieved this goal.

    • disqus_QL05BqU79X

      There’s never actually been a period in human history where women have NOT enjoyed some measure of privilege over men. Most popular history you read is fiction.

      Feminism in its modern form was designed merely to extend the disparity in gender rights, as has been done before. Gynocentrism goes in cycles of intensity; in a few decades in the UK, social collapse will start the (currently up-swinging) cycle anew.

      • disqus_9I6C4azbIA

        This is so true today. The Scottish government believe that women should not be jailed, even those who admit to sexual abuse of children,

        • disqus_QL05BqU79X

          I’m not the kind of person who foams at the mouth in anger at that and demands that women be jailed at the rate men are. Prison does not work. Less men in prison would be a start, to be honest. 85% of them wouldn’t even be locked up of the courts treated men with the leniency they do women.

          Open, honest debate is a good fixed point for moving forward. We need to start educating the next generation of children with some actual truth and stop the cycles of abuse. Only blaming men simply exonerates female abusers (by far the greater demographic of child abusers) and creates the next generation of young men with disdain for the world.

          Feminists know this and this is why they need the cycles to continue. Funding. Always follow the money.

          • disqus_9I6C4azbIA

            The Scottish government belive women should not be jailed because as I understand it that women commit crime for different reason from men. I think that they are seen to commit crime because of the men they have chosen as partners.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Yup!

            Even the 1esb!ans!!!

          • disqus_9I6C4azbIA

            Homosexual pratices by women has never been against the law so of course such women ? would never be jailed.

          • Mr B J Mann

            H0mos-xual domestic v!olence is lega1 in Scotland?!?!?!!!!

          • anonuk

            So women are unable to take responsibility for their own actions?

            I wonder what the Pankhursts would say to that argument being made 100 years on.

          • disqus_9I6C4azbIA

            Well exactually it is always the fault of men.

  • nataliejaneg

    I was almost convinced by this article … then I read the comments. Oh dear! Seems there is still a long way to go. :(

    • Jack Mahon

      Do you know what a backlash is? It’s when a hate movement (feminism) becomes so abusive, bigoted, and irrational that the general public is driven to anger and certain people, especially in an anonymous internet forum, lash out. Sooooooo……..you think you’re fixing it by requesting more of the same?

    • Eric Lauder

      Modern feminists bashing innocent boys and men (the victim of Emma Sulkowicz, scientist Matt Taylor – just two little examples) while saying feminism represents all women, meh, it could even spread misogyny, you know?

  • cd

    The reason why fewer young men are going to university is that they realise it is a con. You basically get yourself into debt in order to pay for a degree that is of little use (Law degrees are pretty worthless now as well) in order to subsidise some work-dodging academic’s life-style. The truth, is that the amount of student debt is increasing and women will be the ones that will be in debt most. If you think that is something to celebrate then perhaps the world would be better ran by men entirely.

    Most graduates in the physical sciences and engineering subjects are men. These are worthwhile subjects because you can get a job with them. Liberal arts degrees are becoming less valuable than retail or service experience and are without doubt less valuable than apprenticeships. That’s the emerging truth and men have got the message.

    As for GCSEs. The move from exam-centric system in the old O Levels toward coursework suited girls better. Girls do better in coursework than boys. Boys do better in exams. The balance shifted too far in one direction. It is a self full-filling prophecy.

    • ckombo

      Here here.

    • anonuk

      GCSEs are being reformed. Coursework done at home, usaually with parents’ help in middle-class homes, went out five, ten years ago. Now, it’s all going to be contingent on the exam- and the difference between the top three grades and the rest is going to be stretched.

  • MrGrowser

    Hmmmm.

    Methinks that ‘victory’ will only be achieved when western women become the Eloi and western men, the Morlocks……

  • DollarPound

    You portray the suffragettes as blameless heroines. Many were violent criminals who attempted to undermine the state at a time of war.

    Before the war, the Suffragettes set 107 buildings on fire in the first 7 months of 1914. The contents of hundreds of letter boxes were set alight or corrosive acids or liquids poured over the letters and postcards inside. Thousands of shop and office windows were smashed with hammers. Bombs and incendiary devices were placed in and outside of banks, churches and even Westminster Abbey.

    This at a time when 40% of men did not have the vote.

  • Rectal Prolapse
  • Mr B J Mann

    For those who think the battle can so easily be won, I refer them to this response of mine to David King:

    I refer Mr King to:

    http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm

    But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he didn’t have the slightest clue why!

    All the Way Down the Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in America
    Professor Joseph E. Olson and Professor David B. Kopel

    Historical Notes No. 43

    ISSN 0267-7105 ISBN 1 85637 571 4

    I. Introduction http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm#I.%20Introduction

    Is it possible for a nation to go from wide-open freedom for a civil liberty, to near-total destruction of that liberty, in just a few decades? “Yes,” warn many American civil libertarians, arguing that allegedly “reasonable” restrictions on civil liberty today will start the nation down “the slippery slope” to severe repression in the future.[3] In response, proponents of today’s reasonable restrictions argue that the jeremiads about slippery slopes are unrealistic or even paranoid.[4]

    This Essay aims to refine the understanding of slippery slopes by examining a particular nation that did slide all the way down the slippery slope.(p.400) When the twentieth century began, the right to arms in Great Britain was robust, and subject to virtually no restrictions. As the century closes, the right has been almost obliterated. In studying the destruction of the British right to arms, this Essay draws conclusions about how slippery slopes operate in real life, and about what kinds of conditions increase or decrease the risk that the first steps down a hill will turn into a slide down a slippery slope.

    For purposes of this Essay, the reader will not be asked to make a judgement about the righteousness of the (former) British right to arms or the wisdom of current British gun prohibitions and controls. Instead, the object is simply to examine how a right that is widely respected and unrestricted can, one “reasonable” step at a time, be extinguished. This Essay pays particular attention to how the public’s “rights consciousness,” which forms such a strong barrier against repressive laws, can weaken and then disappear. The investigation of the British experience offers some insights about the current gun control debate in the United States, and also about ongoing debates over other civil liberties. This Essay does not require that the reader have any affection for the British right to arms; presumably, the reader does have affection for some civil liberties, and the Essay aims to discover principles about how slippery slopes operate. These principles can be applied to any debate where slippery slopes are an issue…….

    2. United We Stand? http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm#2.%20United%20We%20Stand

    Unwilling to support the right to keep and bear arms for defense, as opposed to the privilege to use sporting weapons, British gun owners have also been unwilling to band together for defensive purposes. While Britain has a large number of groups that promote particular shooting disciplines, such as the Clay Pigeon Shooting Association, the National Small-Bore Rifle Association, and the United Kingdom Practical Shooting Association, most of these organizations content themselves simply with running their own competitions. Getting involved in legislative affairs would hardly occur to them and they would never dream of getting involved in legislative affairs on an issue that did not affect their own discipline. The clay pigeon folks paid no attention to how the government was restricting handguns, nor did the handgunners care much about what the government did to the rifle shooters. Indeed, during the debate on the post-Dunblane handgun ban, one might hear a shotgunner claiming that people who enjoy practical pistol shooting are “killers,” while a handgunner on a television program retorted that rifles and shotguns are more dangerous than handguns.[291] This rhetoric is the political equivalent of gun-owners forming a firing squad by standing in a circle.

    [My emphasis]

    • Mr B J Mann