This is most odd about feminism

Margaret Atwood: Equalising wealth is a key piece of the puzzle

It would appear that Ms. Atwood doesn’t know that wealth is unequally spread – women have more of it*. All those widows…..

* So I recall, at least.

Lola Okolosie: Free childcare is essential for equality

Why? Takes two to tango, why shouldn’t both who tangoed cover the costs of having done so?

Polly Toynbee: Gender equality will take generations
How long will it take to de-objectify women?

About when humans aren’t humans then.

No, this does not mean that women are only objects. But to demand that they never are is to deny the basics of human sexuality – for both men and women.

Athene Donald: Automation may disrupt gender roles

I think automation will cause quite a disruption in terms of work and gender roles, but this is a real unknown. People can speculate all they like but we are humans and don’t necessarily behave as the rational actors that economists describe.

Idiocy. We can look at what automation has done to gender roles. It will be as it was isn’t a bad rule of thumb really – and this past couple of hundred years has changed gender roles rather considerably, hasn’t it?

Julie Bindel: Working-class feminists will rise

There will be an uprising of those the labour movement has forgotten. Hair-splitting, divisive “identity politics” based on individual “rights” will be replaced with a revolutionary movement based on a recognition of structural inequalities and new ways to end oppression.

Ah, yes, the revolution.

20 comments on “This is most odd about feminism

  1. Working class women are more likely to rise and slaughter the likes of Julie Bindel if they keep up with the sneering cf interview darts girls on ITV.

  2. Free childcare is important only if you want to prioritise one particular sort of society – one where women work but still have children. In effect we make a world where women work and don’t have children. But the sensible alternative is a world where women have children but don’t work.

    The long patriarchy that began with bronze age wheat-based agriculture is being replaced by a technocracy, so male-line inheritance no longer demands female chastity, and upper-body strength no longer means dominance.

    So good to know that East Asia does not have a patriarchy problem. Being, you know, rice eaters by and large. Male preference still means female chastity. What is more female happiness still demands female chastity – the risk of divorce and of marital unhappiness is directly correlated to the number of sexual partners before marriage.

    Women have brains, work keyboards, and outnumber men in universities.

    Unfortunately women have evolved to be parasitic and so they are doing nothing useful with those brains, keyboards and numbers at university. Women, by and large, continue to choose non-careers and to marry men who earn. There is little sign of this changing.

    However, some men have been penis-flexing, combining power-play thrills with squeezing female competition out of the workplace and inspiring widespread female pushback. What will be the result? Give us a hint!

    Fear the female pushback! In reality Western men are spineless and give women whatever they want without much of a fight at all. Virtually every Western country gave women the vote within 15-20 years of them asking for it.

    Women can now have multiple sexual partners without being burned at the stake

    As if they were ever burned at the stake for sleeping around.

    but the pornographication of male expectations means the meat-slabbification of women, so older women are being told to their horror. Why can’t sex be fun for all?

    Because in the end most women are chasing a small number of high quality men. And if those men demand anal sex on the first date, well some women are going to do it. The more that we introduce a proper marketplace for sex, the more that high quality men are going to be able to demand.

    Meanwhile, wars rage, mass rape is used to “humiliate the enemy”, totalitarianisms oppress, human rights are voided, famine rules, medical care is nonexistent, and women are trafficked and enslaved.

    Yes, all the people the Guardian support are vile aren’t they?

    Will you have begun by equalising wealth, for instance? Surely that’s a key piece of the puzzle. Or will you be battling chaos in a collapsed economy and a ravaged ecosphere?

    Well the more men go on strike and stop bothering the quicker than collapse will be.

  3. How long will it take to de-objectify women?

    When women stop responding to it. Male behaviour towards females is based on what works. If women don’t want men to wolf-whistle or otherwise objectify them, then stop responding to it.

    Otherwise, if you succeed in getting 90% of men to stop objectifying women, you’re just handing over the future to the 10% who didn’t stop.

  4. Never underestimate the size of the task to reverse all history since time began. To recreate society so women are fully equal to men, we are making a revolution more radically profound than any other ever. Forget French or Russian political revolutions, liberation for women means digging up the roots of human culture, nothing less.

    All previous attempts to “reverse all history…to recreate society” have ended very badly, Polly. And, though there’s some scope for change at the margins, “the roots of human culture” are deep in the biological nature of our sexually dimorphic species….

  5. “When women stop responding to it. Male behaviour towards females is based on what works.”

    I’ve always said that when mild mannered accountants who spot trains in their spare time get the sort of female attention that is currently reserved for footballers and rock stars, then guess what every man will want to be?

  6. When the mutaween come to gag ’em and bag ’em and auction them off, it’ll be “You knew we were doing something stupid, why didn’t you stop us?”

  7. “When women stop responding to it. Male behaviour towards females is based on what works.”

    I’ve seen some throughly bizarre ‘pulling’ techniques. And you are right. They work. But not all that often, I reckon.

    So if a guy is prepared to try something bizarre 100 times, because the cost of failure is as negligible as a ‘fuck of, creep’ then 99 women who expect better have to put up with it because of the one that doen’t. If the cost of failure is raised to, say, a kick in the balls and/or a serious shaming, guys will be a bit more interested in not being twats. So I can see why women want to rally the sisterhood to punish stuff that the vast majority might reasonably not want to have to put up with.

    And men who are not naturally inclined to be twats should want the general standard raised too.

  8. In passing, Theresa May thinks that people being rude to women puts them off public life. So what’s the solution? Do we need ask?

    And that’s why I think it’s right that we are consulting on a new offence of intimidation of parliamentary candidates and campaigners.

    ‘I think we also see, sadly, women often suffering from bullying and harassment on social media.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5355839/Prime-Minister-says-social-media-threatens-democracy.html#ixzz56KHZBwwi

    Special rules for our Ruling Class? Why does this woman consider herself a Tory?

  9. And speaking of the Revolution – An Australian vegan accuses farmers of raping their cows. And not in the fun way either. Over to our Agricultural Correspondent Tim N:

    Viewers tore into a militant vegan who claimed the dairy industry rapes and ‘sexually violates’ cows on This Morning as he sat next to two farmers who received death threats after posting photos of their calves online.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5353603/Furious-viewers-blast-vegan-campaigner-Morning.html#ixzz56KIsNwei

    We sent Australia all our murderers. They sent back Germaine Greer, Peter Tatchell and this idiot. Revenge?

  10. Is the link going on about women’s votes? Ah yes, the 150th anniversary of women gettibng the vote. Yes, 150 years. 1869 all householders got the municipal vote regardless of sex on the good grounds of: if you’re paying rates you should hjave a say in how they are spent. My great-grandmother, her mother, her grandnmother, her sister-in-law, her two aunts, all voted before 1918.

    Ah yes, but local governemnt is an annoying irritating irrelevance, isn’t it, especially to the centralise-everything command-society command-o-crats in the self-named ‘progressives’, isn’t it.

  11. Well it’s surely a victory of sorts when a leftie feminist comes out against identity politics?

  12. As Polly is advocating digging up human culture, can someone club the bitch with a heavy stick, not because they want to shag her, but because she’s of no use to the tribe (even engaged in its destruction), and is beyond child-bearing and fugly.

  13. “I’ve seen some throughly bizarre ‘pulling’ techniques. And you are right. They work. But not all that often, I reckon.”

    Bloke at Uni (early 90s) just used “Fancy a shag?”. He reckoned it worked one time out of 10…

  14. The Thought Gang,

    The problem is that there’s no agreed definition of bad behaviour. The same behaviour can be either flattering or creepy, depending on the people involved. And don’t even try codifying it: the whole point about the rules of attraction is that they’re forever mutating, subject to fashionable whims and the spirit of the times.

    Much of modern feminism is women bickering amongst themselves about what the rules should be.

  15. @So Much For Subtlety, February 6, 2018 at 10:06 am

    Women have brains, work keyboards, and outnumber men in universities.

    Unfortunately women have evolved to be parasitic and so they are doing nothing useful with those brains, keyboards and numbers at university. Women, by and large, continue to choose non-careers and to marry men who earn. There is little sign of this changing.

    +1

    Related: more females studying medicine. Young female GPs go on multiple maternity leave, then work part-time – more GPs required.

  16. @So Much For Subtlety, February 6, 2018 at 12:24 pm

    Criminalising “mocking or insulting Politicians and Campaigners” next? . It’s the norm in EU

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.