Fairfax feminist whinge - men are mocked

'A gentle prod at inequality prompts a backlash of bile and vitriol'

Fairfax feminist, Adele Horin, writing for the feminised Sydney Morning Herald, came to the aid of the sisterhood in yesterday's edition. The sister she was defending with her mighty pen was well-known Jill Singer who had yet again exposed the public to her special brand of feminist reasoning on - you guessed it - the inequality of women. Jill Singer had a memorable feminist meltdown on Channel Seven's tabloid 'current affairs' program some years ago because her frightful, ignorant prejudiced male bosses would not allow her to speak her opinion on an issue dear to her feminist heart. Why was Horin's sisterhood indignation aroused? The following is from the opening of her comment:

...[Jill Singer writing in the Herald-Sun] argued women were still being treated as second-class citizens from Afghanistan to Australia.

She mentioned the laws in Afghanistan that Hamid Karzai introduced to legalise rape in marriage and ban women from seeking education or medical care without their husband's permission; she alluded to the problem of domestic violence in Australia and the abiding pay gap between full-time men and women workers, citing impeccable sources.

You have to smile at the mindless repetition of this stock feminist rhetoric, the result of uncritical confused feminist thinking. By running together the treatment of women in Afghanistan and the 'treatment' of women in Australia, she is giving the impression of cultural equivalence. Grouping the contentious claim of 'unequal' pay in Australia with 'legalised rape in marriage' in a culture diametrically opposed to the liberal-democratic order is especially repugnant. And we know that her 'impeccable sources' are the scribblings that constitute screwy statistical feminism. With reason, most men are infuriated with the constant irrational smear and having skewed statistical data thrown at them Would you expect men when they are smeared and slandered to react differently from the permanently furious feminists? Many men got angry and said so. Horin continues:

But the avalanche of online hate mail that greeted this gentle critique was truly breathtaking. Angry, name-calling and uncivil men responded in droves, revealing misogyny is still - along with Islamophobia - the last acceptable form of prejudice.

This is the nonsensical indignation you would expect from a feminist in the manured stable of Australia's two feminist newspapers, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. 'Gentle critique'? One drop of water falling on the head may not be noticed, may even be pleasant; a few thousand sends people mad.

There is one point of inequality between men and women that many women themselves recognise: the mouth. One of the first things a teenage boy will learn when he starts dating is that the female mouth runs with incomprehensible fluency, and more often than not it is prudent to stay out of that verbal arena. Sometimes it's not possible and that is when a lot of conflict between men and women occurs.

No doubt, for Horin and her sisters this is a typical misogynistic utterance. The trouble is that many women agree. It seems that women are as much the victim of the female mouth as men. Phyllis Chester some years ago wrote a book, Woman's Inhumanity to Woman, which dealt with this side of being female. Mia Freedman on Channel Nine's Today show said recently that men lie twice as much as women because women ask twice as many questions: 'if they could only shut their mouths...' A wise women, things being equal in a relationship, would judge when it is best not to rub their boyfriend's or husband's nose in their fluency. Horin and her anti-male type have no interest such judicious tact. The natural verbal ability of the female is to be exploited to the full.

The men who reacted to Singer were not reacting to a gentle critique. These men, most of whom would not be entertaining themselves week in week out with feminist theory, were reacting to years of the same whingeing that Singer and her like-minded sisters use to torture the male population.

But I believe the issue is far deeper than this. The ideology of feminism (I am not talking about commonsense fairness) has sabotaged the natural relationship between men and women. The most malignant part of this materialist based ideology is 'gender theory'. Gender theory is the expression of modern theorist insanity.

Most men have absolutely no idea of - and less interest in - the theory of feminism and its acceptance by our dominant political class. What they do see and feel is its concrete expression. It is for this and its purveyors that the average man is developing contempt. Unfortunately that contempt is sometimes intemperate, spiteful and uncivil. Feminists relish that. They can then do what they love doing to men: mock them unmercifully. It's a joy when they can sneer at the tradesmen-type mentality and laugh at their spelling mistakes. It's the great joy of the academic feminist in her cosy protected office to ridicule and mock men whose poor articulation, bad spelling and limited vocabulary are the result of their concentrating on actually doing and making things.

If men are not happy with the oppressiveness of feminists and feminism, the way to counter it is not abuse. It is taking up the responsibilities of being men and then acting resolutely to a counter a political ideology that is as much to the ordinary woman's disadvantage as it is to men's.

Finally, you have laugh at Horin's claim that misogyny and Islamophobia are the last two acceptable forms of prejudice. What a fantasy world this woman is in. All social legislation in the last twenty years in Australia is feminist legislation, most notably the Victorian Equality Opportunity Act. This piece of legislation is a political class document that advances and protects the cause of feminism. How do you think feminists are in the position to make an amendment to that act whose aim is to collapse Christian organisations? We all know that feminists think the Christian churches present one of the greatest obstacles to their levelling social vision.

As for Islamophobia, this is a PC-class bigot word like homophobia and is designed to shut down conversation about the problems Islamic migration presents for the West. The problems are highly visible in Europe (see my comments in the Dutch Report) but Horin's fantasy world will blind her to that reality. It is significant that Islamic organisations prevailed in the Victorian Administrative Tribunal against a Christian pastor for saying things not half as bad as those said by feminists and homosexuals about the Christian churches.

No, there is only one acceptable prejudice in Western society, not only in Australia, and that is free-ranging anti-Christian bigotry. The evidence is all around us, and is most visible among feminists.

Comment: gerard@gerardcharleswilson.com