Isn’t this career going well?

Most people will know me as the feminazi lawyer. The Daily Mail labelled me a feminazi after I had the temerity to challenge sexism, a crime that apparently justifies invoking the terminology of national socialism. It is rather fitting that the term has gained traction among the rightwing media, as it was popularised by right-leaning polemicist Rush Limbaugh in the 1990s (although he credits economics professor Thomas Hazlett for coining the term).

Feminazi is not an innocuous insult. According to Limbaugh a feminazi is “a feminist to whom the important thing in life is ensuring that as many abortions as possible occur”. In comparing feminists to the Nazis, Limbaugh is cynically deploying iconography of the most odious kind.

One of the joys of watching this go on is that the only people who can afford to do the occasional Guardian piece (CiF pays £85) while studying for their PhD are birds being supported by their hedge fund boyfriends.

71 thoughts on “Isn’t this career going well?”

  1. She’s not going to make journalism her career.

    Her prose is brittle and humourless like she’s writing an essay for school. She has a tin ear for polemics. It’s also obvious her main source of research is Wikipedia.

    Polly and Penny needn’t fear the competition, if the roasting she’s getting from Guardian commenters is any guide.

    Maybe she should release a sex tape?

  2. Comments only lasted three hours before being closed… don’t think she got the rapturous reception she expected, even from the Guardian.

  3. One of the worst articles I have ever seen (and given the Guardian roster that’s no mean feat:

    ‘Claiming that those who challenge gender inequality are feminazis is, arguably, libellous. It is a false statement because feminists are not Nazis, and it could be defamatory because being branded some kind of a crypto-Nazi implies extremist and even homicidal ambitions – precisely why Limbaugh referred to “as many abortions as possible”. Labelling someone a feminazi publicly castigates and vilifies them and creates public perceptions that are untrue. It renders them at risk of being stigmatised, hated and unemployable. All of this for daring to contest the abuse of women.’

    So she now wants her opinions beyond challenge or protected by libel law? the worry is in Corbynite Britain her wishes might be granted! The staggering thing is she made it through law school in the first place – I am guessing the standard of qualification is not what it was.

  4. “The staggering thing is she made it through law school in the first place – I am guessing the standard of qualification is not what it was.”

    It can’t be hard, becoming a lawyer. There’s so many of ’em. Try ringing round from Yellow Pages. There’s hordes of them. Try doing the same for plumbers.
    There must be an argument for reclassifying lawyering from a profession to unskilled casual labour.

  5. I saw a comment on CIF from a recent law graduate moaning that he couldn’t find a job but those who did only a business degree were having no problems. I felt like replying to the twat that if only he had done the economics module that all those undeserving employed who only had a business degree did then he might understand. But I couldn’t be arsed to make an account.

  6. Van Patten: “It is a false statement because feminists are not Nazis…”

    Hey, if it looks like a Nazi, walks like a Nazi and, errr, quacks like a Nazi…

  7. Law is now the most popular first degree subject. And the postgraduate two-year courses offered by various law colleges are over-subscribed. Both routes require a further two years of a training contract (what used to be articles), but training contracts are hard to come by – unless you have a good 2:1 or a 1st, have chosen the right specialist options and probably have some additional skill to offer. So most of those law graduates/post-graduates will never be employed in the law.

  8. Bloke in spain

    I think you are probably right: Brings to mind Shakespeare – Henry VI Part 2:

    ‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.’

  9. Van Patten – “The staggering thing is she made it through law school in the first place”

    She also got into Cambridge for a PhD, but then I guess that institution is not what it was either.

  10. So Much For Subtlety

    Edward Lud – “I shouldn’t be left alone with a pair of scissors.”

    I am confused. Because you’re a feminist and might be tempted to carry out a 9th trimester abortion?

  11. From Ms Proudman’s article:

    “gal-Qaida”

    I like it! I like it!

    “One thing that puzzles many is why women label other women feminazis. In truth, this is likely to be a form of self-protection and self-advancement.”

    She says this in a screed devoted to her own virtue-signalling! Evidently, self-awareness is not our Charlotte’s strong point.

    Btw, Zoe Williams wrote a similar piece over a fortnight ago:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/feminazi-go-to-term-for-trolls-out-to-silence-women-charlotte-proudman

    So Charlotte is merely cantering over the same old ground.

  12. Bloke in North Dorset

    £85 for that drive? No wonder the Guardian is in financial trouble.

    And are there really that many gullible advertises who want there products associated with that level of clickbait? There’s no wonder there’s been a rise in the use of adblockers.

  13. JuliaM

    Absolutely – I can recall the Great Peter Simple pointing out that Hitler was the most influential figure in world history – but in precisely the opposite way he envisaged. Everything he reviled is now officially lauded (no doubt people can find exceptions nowadays) and everything he lauded is considered anathema. This extends even into debate – where Godwin’s Law is a truism.

    Lord knows I don’t hold much of a brief for that classic stool pigeon ‘Lawrence from Guernsey’, but perhaps I’m a bit too quick to invoke the Nazis whenever Richard Murphy enters the discussion – and using them can be a poor man’s way of shutting down debate. However, in this context, the label is pretty accurate…..

  14. Her Phd sounds completely worthless

    “Drawing on her experience as a barrister, Charlotte is researching FGM in the UK, asking why law has failed to eliminate FGM, and whether law is an appropriate instrument to change the attitudes and behaviour of affected communities towards FGM.”

    Seriously, that’s a Phd? Everyone knows what the problem is: unless you’re going to medically examine the daughter’s of parents of Sudanese origin coming back into the country, it’s almost undetectable as a crime.

  15. One thing about the legal profession is that it likes to stick together. I get the impression the reason why people defending themselves usually goes badly is the judge is punishing them for not hiring one of his mates.

    But one solution is to to simply expand the market. There’s a new advert on Classic FM at the moment, encouraging you to sue your dentist if you think you can make some money. Apparently the directors are dentally and legally qualified. I’d love to see what that means. The only result of this will be higher dental bills as dentists insurance premiums go up.

  16. Theophrastus

    So Charlotte is merely cantering over the same old ground.

    It does give us another opportunity to admire her fine haunches and fetlocks though.

  17. From Cambridge’s website:

    Thesis Title:What is the role of law in changing harmful social and cultural practices, specifically female genital mutilation in England and Wales

    and

    While there has not been a successful prosecution for FGM in the UK despite criminalising the practice in 1985, Charlotte is researching the extent to which law has changed the behaviour, attitudes and beliefs of FGM practicing community members and professionals. Aware of the perceived legal double standard in prohibiting FGM while tolerating female genital cosmetic surgery, Charlotte is exploring whether the legal double standard is undermining attempts to change FGM practicing communities’ behaviour, attitudes and beliefs towards FGM. Keen to ground theoretical debates in women’s lived experiences, Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with FGM practicing community members and professionals responsible for designing and enforcing FGM legislation in England and Wales.

    I suspect from the mangled prose that “Charlotte” wrote the lot herself. There’s more if you like

    http://www.sociology.cam.ac.uk/people/graduate-students/cproudman

  18. I was hoping for “Aware of the perceived legal double standard in prohibiting FGM while tolerating circumcision“, but it was not to be.

  19. As Gene Pitney observed :

    “When the final showdown came to pass,

    A law-book was no good”

    The brass-neck of this female is astonishing. A few quotes from the Radical-Hub femmi-site would have done the trick. They routinely gloat about enslaving, castrating and caging all the worlds male population. And some don’t stop short of anything less than world wide extermination of all males.

    I still wouldn’t call them Nazis tho’ Why single out just one brand of socialism? Rather let us say this legal loser is a good socialist.

  20. So Much For Subtlety

    birds being supported by their hedge fund boyfriends.

    Sounds like someone is taking le vice Anglais to whole new levels.

  21. So Much For Subtlety

    Andrew K – “Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with FGM practicing community members and professionals responsible for designing and enforcing FGM legislation in England and Wales.”

    So she is going to get a Ph.D. for sitting down with some other women and having a cup of tea?

    How many do you think? Six? Twelve?

  22. So Much For Subtlety

    Edward Lud – “What can I say, Sir Subtlety, except that I am a woman trapped inside a man’s body?”

    Good news! There is room for you on the Iranian women’s Football team:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/iran-soccer-womens-national-team-ian-tuttle

    Now I may be a Trans-Exclusionary Reactionary Old Fogey (or what used to be called normal) but I notice women are so physically capable of competing with men that eight women unfortunate enough to be born male out-competed the women to get on the national team

  23. So Much For Subtlety

    I do like the Daily Mail. A national treasure it is. This useless bint’s fifteen minutes is not up yet. She gets a look-in here:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3255989/Male-executives-frightened-help-women-work-case-accused-sexual-harassment-new-book-claims.html

    So it looks like casual banter with younger women will be both punished and compulsory.

    Although ironically the Daily Mail also recommends this article:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3252018/No-hymen-no-diamond-Male-activist-Facebook-group-mocked-demanding-women-virgins-married.html

    That is first class trolling! I am impressed Facebook allows it. Given Zuckerberg has had a word with Merkel and agreed to do something about anti-immigration comments on Facebook.

  24. Perhaps she could revive her flagging career(s), popularity and causes by sleeping with Jeremy Corbyn and for this somehow to become known to the public.

  25. “the only people who can afford to do the occasional Guardian piece (CiF pays £85) while studying for their PhD are birds being supported by their hedge fund boyfriends.”

    ?

    I could have afforded to write CiF articles whilst doing my PhD funded by the Economics and Social Research Council.

    [also, I don’t understand why this woman attracts so much nastiness, I reckon she was quite right to castigate that creepy fucker from commenting on her looks]

  26. “Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with FGM practicing community members and professionals responsible for designing and enforcing FGM legislation in England and Wales.”

    Shouldn’t whoever wrote this be able to spell “practising” correctly?

  27. I made a comment on that thread:

    “Is this the first time in history that someone has fallen into prominence by being a no-trick pony?”

    It received recommends more quickly than any other comment I have ever posted (I am not, generally, supportive of the CIF milieu).

    Naturally, it was quickly deleted without trace – not even a place-holder.

  28. “Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with FGM practicing community members”

    Er, so she’s interviewing the people who actually do it? Doesn’t she have an obligation to report them to the police? or are they already convicted ones? Judging by her statement of how rarely it has been prosecuted, probably they aren’t.

  29. also, I don’t understand why this woman attracts so much nastiness, I reckon she was quite right to castigate that creepy fucker from commenting on her looks

    I thought he was commenting on the professional quality of the profile pic, not the content.

  30. @ Luis Enrique
    Since the elderly lawyer did *not* comment on her looks – he complimented her on the photograph

  31. “Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with FGM practicing community members”

    Anyone want a bet that no matter what she gets told over tea and biscuits, that she concludes it’s all a massive male plot imposed on helpless female victims?

  32. Rob
    It’s her tortured syntax, which is not easy to parse.
    Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with FGM practicing community members
    means (if you close one eye and squint)
    Charlotte’s empirical research involves qualitative semi-structured interviews with members of communities which practice FGM

  33. So Much For Subtlety

    Luis Enrique – “[also, I don’t understand why this woman attracts so much nastiness, I reckon she was quite right to castigate that creepy fucker from commenting on her looks]”

    So where do you stand on the release of the names of the murderers of Jamie Bulger? You think that calling a photo “stunning”, which most of us would think pretty harmless, deserves international naming and shaming. How about the murder of a two year old boy?

    soarer – “Is this the first time in history that someone has fallen into prominence by being a no-trick pony?”

    You, sir, are a hero.

    Rob – “Er, so she’s interviewing the people who actually do it?”

    I don’t think so. She is interviewing FGM-practicing-community members. Not FGM-practicing community members

    Members of communities that practise FGM. Or to be more accurate, I would guess, a handful of lesbian activists from said communities. I wonder if Konnie Huq’s sister will be one?

  34. ‘Aware of the perceived legal double standard in prohibiting FGM while tolerating female genital cosmetic surgery Charlotte is exploring whether the legal double standard is undermining attempts to change FGM practicing communities’ behaviour, attitudes and beliefs towards FGM’

    Er, is the answer ‘No, because you don’t get held down by your dad while an old man in a dirty dress reshapes your labia for cosmetic reasons’?

    Can I have my doctorate now?

  35. So Much For Subtlety

    Interested – “Er, is the answer ‘No, because you don’t get held down by your dad while an old man in a dirty dress reshapes your labia for cosmetic reasons’? Can I have my doctorate now?”

    No, I don’t think so. Because the only acceptable answer in modern academia is “Yes, because the pressure of modern Western White heterosexual male sexual objectification is so great that it more than equals the cruelty of traditional diverse and vibrant cultural practises such as FGM which, alas, too many narrow-minded people, you know, Tory voters, have failed to appreciate for their true worth.”

    So no doctorate for you!

    (Although in passing, it may be that I have lived a sheltered life, but I have never actually heard of a male objecting to the shape of his woman’s labia. But I am sure it is all men’s fault anyway)

  36. Luis Enrique,

    “[also, I don’t understand why this woman attracts so much nastiness, I reckon she was quite right to castigate that creepy fucker from commenting on her looks]”

    Do women want to get shagged? And if they do, how do they expect blokes to start the process except with a compliment?

    I really doubt that if he’d sent her a message and she had the hots for the guy that she would have reported him for it. Women like to talk about conduct in the office, that men shouldn’t hit on women, but if a guy hits on them that they fancy, they don’t go to HR. They shag him.

    So, how is a man supposed to know? Or should he not make even the most subtle move? Are women OK with that? That hot guy in the office will never make a move on them. Maybe he’ll go and shag someone else for fear of the consequences.

    At one time, people were sensible about these things. Sexual harassment wasn’t a guy passing a compliment, or even asking a co-worker if she’d like to grab a coffee sometime. It was after he was turned down and still didn’t get the message.

    It’s about being reasonable. Using the minimum amount of force. I couldn’t hire someone like Proudman, because I need people who can work together and her personality suggests otherwise.

  37. She attracts so much nastiness because she is one molecule of steel at the cutting edge of the blade that is destroying our society.

    I have daughters – I don’t want them to be harrassed. But I do want them to be happy, and this woman is likely to set back that process, not enhance it.

  38. Rob, you’d think so wouldn’t you but in the spirit of feminist progress and multicultural respect she could probably justify rolling up her sleeves and rummaging through a sink of off-cuts with impunity.

  39. yes right. he was just talking about the quality of the photography.

    stigler that’s the right argument to make in some contexts, but not this one. yes somebody has to make a move, but there’s a time and place, and commenting on appearance isn’t the way to do it. I mean really, do you try to chat up women with an opening gambit: “nice legs?” I don’t think it’s a big deal, I don’t think he did anything terribly wrong, I just think she was quite entitled to reply with something like: I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to be commenting on my appearance in this context

    [smfs you are a barking loon – Jamie Bulger?].

  40. > Er, so she’s interviewing the people who actually do it? Doesn’t she have an obligation to report them to the police?

    Probably not. I don’t think it’s even obligatory (yet) to report child abuse, which would be the first thing to go into any such regime. And if it were the case, then for the majority of crimes (possibly excluding crimes against kids, which I recognise does include FGM) I suspect that bona fide researchers would be able to defend their (in)actions based on the nature of research work. These days, they have ethics committees to go through, and I suspect that would be the sticking point.

    > Thesis Title: What is the role of law in changing harmful social and cultural practices, specifically female genital mutilation in England and Wales

    That title, though! I hope one of her supervisors persuades her to re-work it a bit. It’s so laborious: I wouldn’t want such a testament to my inability to write succinctly hanging over me for the rest of my career.

    > also, I don’t understand why this woman attracts so much nastiness, I reckon she was quite right to castigate that creepy fucker from commenting on her looks

    I suspect it’s the fact that she chose to subject to the public pillory a guy who made what seems to have been an ill-judged and ill-placed, but not essentially ill-willed, remark about her appearance. I don’t need to defend his actions — and don’t wish to — in order to say that she should have dealt with it better, and having made a mistake, would have done better to have apologised.

  41. @So Much For Subtlety

    You are too kind. I would post more on here but often, by the time I arrive, you have already said what I wanted to say, and rather better than I would have.

    For example, just yesterday:

    “The fact is there is so much money in politics because the politicians control so much. When they spend trillions and regulate ten times that, it is important to buy protection. The solution is to remove the power of politicians to ruin our lives on a whim and hence the need to buy them off.

    Small government is the only long term form of honest government.”

    Very true, but also pithy 🙂

  42. Luis – “I just think she was quite entitled to reply with something like: I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to be commenting on my appearance in this context”

    Not an entirely unreasonable point and if she’d pinged him one back to say that no-one would really care (or know).

    However, what people objected to was her spouting off all over social media in an attempt to damage his career and promote hers.

  43. Luis Enrique,

    “I mean really, do you try to chat up women with an opening gambit: “nice legs?” I don’t think it’s a big deal, I don’t think he did anything terribly wrong, I just think she was quite entitled to reply with something like: I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to be commenting on my appearance in this context”

    Sure. I actually have no problem with someone even replying with “piss off, creep”. But posting people’s emails or going to the regulator is pretty vulgar.

  44. @Philip Walker
    > I don’t think it’s even obligatory (yet) to report child abuse, which would be the first thing to go into any such regime.

    What is being proposed is far more sinister and far reaching than that. They want you to report *allegations* of child abuse. So now instead of someone using their common sense and seeing that the person reporting the allegation is clearly doing so for their own ends, and just quietly ignoring it, they will be compelled to report it. Quite how this is going to result in anything other than paralysis for certain professions, and lots of innocents being punished is hard to see.

    Prediction. If Corbyn, God forbid, were ever elected there would be a positive consent law passed, which would mean that unless the man could prove positive consent, by a signed document or photograph, he would automatically be guilty of rape if a woman made a complaint.

    Impossible. It’s a reality in several American universities as I type.

  45. Would it be ungentlemanly to keep an album of photographs and signed positive consents? Maybe have them framed?

  46. “I don’t think so. She is interviewing FGM-practicing-community members. Not FGM-practicing community members”

    Ok. You would think a fucking lawyer, of all people, would understand the importance of using precise language. Then again, that’s why she has gone into politics instead, I suppose.

  47. “smfs you are a barking loon – Jamie Bulger?”

    I assume that SMFS is making the point that if it was unacceptable for the murderers of Jamie Bulger to be ‘outed’ in the press (their identity having been changed post prison), how come its OK for someone to be ‘outed’ for the non-crime (as yet) of being ever so slightly inappropriate on a social network?

  48. yes right. he was just talking about the quality of the photography.

    Really. And having seen the photograph in question, it was clearly taken by a talented professional. It is a stunning portrait photograph.

    And I say that while at the same time knowing for certain that I wouldn’t glance twice at the subject, should I pass her in the street.

  49. @ Luis Enrique
    An earlier blogpost showed the Dally Wail photograph of her – so, yes, it was the photography not the subject that was worth complimenting.

  50. AndrewK/SMFS

    ‘Have you never heard the expression “elephants’ ears”?’

    Or even ‘love flaps’?

    Interested:

    “I have daughters – I don’t want them to be harrassed. But I do want them to be happy, and this woman is likely to set back that process, not enhance it.”

    Exactly so.

  51. Ian Reid,

    “Prediction. If Corbyn, God forbid, were ever elected there would be a positive consent law passed, which would mean that unless the man could prove positive consent, by a signed document or photograph, he would automatically be guilty of rape if a woman made a complaint.”

    To be fair to the man, one of the few things where he’s on the side of angels is that he’s more in favour of liberalising sex work than most politicians and only appointed wimmin to ministries of Magic, Sound, Fun and Silly Walks

  52. Bloke not in Cymru

    I worked somewhere where one of the female managers used to complain about male staff making her uncormfortable and asking to work with someone else. Trouble was usually it was project managers etc. who wouldn’t let her get her own way or opposed her in some fashion.
    Shame was our manager would never take it to HR as he didn’t want the fuss even though at least one person I know of wanted to make it official, so she constantly got away with it.

  53. Interested nails it – she didn’t do anything that will be valuable for our society in the actions that she took.

    BiW – With the raw material he had, I agree, it was very competently done – I don’t think he will be short of work. Hmmm… sexist pig me assuming it was a man..;)

  54. So Much For Subtlety

    Andrew K – “What a sheltered life you lead! Have you never heard the expression “elephants’ ears”?”

    Actually no. I must have led a very sheltered life. Even worse, it means I have been pulling my weight in the heterosexual patrinormative oppression stakes. I do apologise and shall try to make up for it in the future.

    Luis Enrique – “I mean really, do you try to chat up women with an opening gambit: “nice legs?””

    Ummm, well yes I do. I didn’t know that wasn’t acceptable any more. It doesn’t always work but it rarely gets anything but a smile.

    “I don’t think it’s a big deal, I don’t think he did anything terribly wrong, I just think she was quite entitled to reply with something like: I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to be commenting on my appearance in this context”

    So do we all. But that is not what she did is it?

    “[smfs you are a barking loon – Jamie Bulger?].”

    I try, I try. So international shaming for comment on someone’s picture. Legal protection for murdering a two year old boy. You don’t think your priorities are a little off?

  55. So Much For Subtlety

    Ian Reid

    Prediction. If Cameron, God forbid, were ever elected again there will be a positive consent law passed, which would mean that unless the man could prove positive consent, by a signed document or photograph, he would automatically be guilty of rape if a woman made a complaint.

    It doesn’t matter which Lib-Dem is in office. They will all pass this law. It is coming. There is nothing much we can do about it.

  56. The term of art is “beef flaps”, and it’s a fetish for some people. Reddit has a plethora of content on the subject for those who are interested.

  57. sackcloth and ashes

    ‘Her PhD will be three years spent tortuously and deliberately ignoring who does it and why’.

    I’d be surprised if the opposite was the case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *