I've written before about how this hyper-sensitive 'generation snowflake' society that is being created is turning our young men and women into liberty-unfriendly, censorious whinge-bots that are thoroughly unprepared for reasoned critical debate and understanding the superlative qualities of free expression for all.
I also pointed out on Facebook the other day the sharp contrast between thin-skinned second rate MPs wanting sexism to be a hate crime, and women on the front line in Syria courageously doing battle with the sanguinary thugs of Islamic State.
It's not for me to tell others how they should fight their battles, but I can, I think, make a couple of suggestions on how all this is being perceived in some quarters, and on whether there may actually be a method of handling these situations that's possibly a teensy weensy bit better.
In a blog a few weeks ago I made a point about how exposed modern day socialists are when they shout in anger about issues in which free market economics has claimed victory long ago. This got me thinking about whether, just possibly, the same might be starting to be true in theUK about women’s liberation. It’s
pretty clear that for most of our history men have dominated the landscape and
oppressed women in all sorts of horrible ways.
I also pointed out on Facebook the other day the sharp contrast between thin-skinned second rate MPs wanting sexism to be a hate crime, and women on the front line in Syria courageously doing battle with the sanguinary thugs of Islamic State.
It's not for me to tell others how they should fight their battles, but I can, I think, make a couple of suggestions on how all this is being perceived in some quarters, and on whether there may actually be a method of handling these situations that's possibly a teensy weensy bit better.
In a blog a few weeks ago I made a point about how exposed modern day socialists are when they shout in anger about issues in which free market economics has claimed victory long ago. This got me thinking about whether, just possibly, the same might be starting to be true in the
As a consequence, women’s liberation has certainly been a necessary and laudable part of history. But now that brains are the key to a successful career, not brawn, and that from the years up to 40 women are now out-earning men, is it perhaps worth considering that in some cases women’s liberation is beginning to send its artillery into battles that have already been won?
I
ask because if the answer is largely yes, then there are probably an awful lot
of feminists expending energy in places in which such energy is no longer
needed, which, by definition, means they are not expending energy in places
where it might well be needed.
I'll
leave it to feminists themselves to judge where best to devote time to causes -
I shall not presume to know the battles they should pick better than they do.
But I'd happily offer a couple of suggestions of battles that need a
reappraisal.
First,
as alluded to in the link above, a good example of poor use of energy is in a
video like this one,
with the reliably misinformed feminist Kate Smurthwaite arguing with the
reliably well-informed Kate Andrews from the ASI about gender pay, and making a
mess of things because she has her facts wrong, and is therefore pursuing
something that needs no pursuance.
Second,
I think when it comes to women facing negativity in the public arena - insults
on Twitter, unpleasant comments on Facebook, or vile abuse at the bottom of the
articles they write, the women who are saying the right things on this matter and
doing the most for women are the women who absolutely refuse to
be timid and self-pitying, and who repudiate the merest suggestion that women
require any special treatment in the hostile world of Internet debating (contrast
Ella Whelan's response at 7mins 38 compared with the feminists on the their
side of the debate in this video clip here).
In
my opinion, the women that do the most for the feminist cause are not the masochistic,
whinging harpes with whom the word 'feminism' is most readily associated; rather
they are the women who influence and inspire simply by doing what they do well
- being smart, witty, intelligent, creative and (ideally) kind.
For
just as it is one of those ironies that we rarely feel sorry for damaged people
who are always moaning and feeling sorry for themselves - it is only when they
stop that we actually feel sorry for them - so too it is the case that the women
who are always running on about how much they are trying to do to fight the
good fight for women are usually the ones doing far less good by imploring
others to 'Look at me!', 'Look at me!', 'It's really about me!'.
In my opinion, the real champions of women are not the household
name members of the witterati with those children's birthday party magic shows
going on in their heads - the likes of, Julie Bindel, Polly Toynbee, Laurie
Penny, Jack Monroe, Salma Yaqoob, Zoe Williams, Suzanne Moore, Kate Smurthwaite
and Yasmin
Alibhai-Brown. They are women like Janet Daley, Kate
Andrews, Julia Hartley-Brewer, Dia Chakravarty, Gillian Tett, Camilla Cavendish, Claire Fox
and Ella Whelan (who competently nails it in this interview on Sky News).