Snarky Oracle!
Telly Talk Supreme
Yes. Either you're silenced like Geoff Norcott and Damian Green (whose respectful and astute observations about the men's wellbeing conversation being shut down, were drowned out by aggressive accusations of sexism) or there are calls to cancel entirely.
Everyone is now raking over Laurence Fox's choice of words in great depth. It's right that he should be held accountable, but it's wrong that the earlier debate in which comments made by Ava herself were, to put it gently, incredibly unhelpful and dismissive is being conveniently buried as a result.
Articles I've read have been all about what Fox said without any real conversation about the reason for his exasperation. The comments beneath the Politics Live video tell exactly where people's real frustrations lie with the context of the bigger picture.
It's a fund-raising, money-making venture. It's huge. So the faux/dishonest outrage can never end.
And the more the culture tries to placate and accommodate the feminist hydra, the more carnivorous it becomes because they realize their endless efforts are working. Like 4-year-old children who act-out worse and worse because you're trying to make them "happy" by rewarding their ugliest behavior. (Which is where the "all men are children" trope comes from -- it's overt projection).
Men won't defend themselves (despite 'old-boy-network' cliches) and women have an innate in-group preference (unless, of course, one of them gets mad at the other).
One must never criticize women, never criticize feminists, and never talk back to big sister. Ever.
I mean, how bad is the dark side of women that we're never allowed to talk about it?? (Sure, there's a well-documented dark side to men, but that's all we're allowed to talk about).
We tend to prefer women who lie and get caught lying to men who are innocent and are proven innocent.
There's a reason for that.
I'm not hugely au fait with the history of feminism, but it does (to me, at least) seem to have become more glaringly misandrist as it's evolved. Though I suppose this could be to do with the misandry being given more of a podium in recent years through social media. And I suppose it's equally possible that any voices of reason are being drowned out by the less reasonable ones.
Unfortunately, the more reasonable feminist voices have nothing to do with the movement. The radical feminist rhetoric has long-since taken over that movement as a whole (and the media, and education, etc...).
The feminist movement has little concern for women nor women who are genuine victims of abuse... Take the Amber Heard /Johnny Depp trial last year. She was her own worst witness; the jury saw she was horrible; the audio recordings (which I'd already heard online) had Amber admitting to Depp that she was the abuser; she concedes her frustrations with him that he refuses to fight with her; and her taunting him that if it went to court, she would win "because I'm a thin blonde woman."
Never mind her own previous arrest for domestic abuse of her lesbian lover. When Depp won the case, the media and feminists came out against the verdict with their usual "misogynist patriarchy" assertions, ignoring the evidence against Amber. (One women's violence shelter came out in support of Johnny Depp during the trial, realizing that Amber's antics actually hurt the truly abused, but that was barely reported).
Samantha Guthrie of NBC did a decent interview with Amber right after the trial, and it was very damning. But soon, significantly-edited versions of the interview emerged which made Amber look a wee bit less-pathological.
6 months later, they roll out Gloria Steinem -- like Hannibal Lecter on a dolly, the woman is a hundred years old -- and she offers her public support for Amber Heard. So once the queen of second/third wave had spoken, dozens of feminist organizations that had not already done so instantly lined-up behind Steinem and Heard.
Why would they do this when it hurts the credibility of women who undergo genuine abuse? Because the feminists care not a whit about women nor abused women (and certainly not children or falsely-accused men). Feminists care about feminists -- and they care most about feminists like Amber Heard who get caught red-handed lying egregiously. And that's who they circle the wagons around.
They care nothing about women. They care about bad women, and bad women who lie.
That's who they relate to, because that's what they are.
Sadly, yes.
But once you see it and accept it, you can relax. You can give up trying to accommodate it.
There seems to be this "shit-testing" impulse in women (that 4 year old analogy). If you give in to it, the women "like" it but then don't respect the guy as a result and, hence, treat him worse (while increasing her demands). If he refuses to tolerate her behavior, she sees him as "strong" (and, biologically, possibly a better provider, as is always her main concern) so she's aroused and intrigued by the rejection.
I've certainly experienced that myself (and I'm not even trying to get them into bed!).
No, not all women are this way.
But historical, and Biblical, warnings about women long-regarded as "chauvinistic" seem to have a concrete basis.
Many guys don't have a clue. And, to be fair, neither do many well-intentioned women. Because we're not supposed to look at it, the Medusa behind the curtain.
Last edited by a moderator: