Our last post yesterday concerned a major exam board agreeing to include female composers in it’s A level syllabus, in a shameful, pathetic, and ultimately futile attempt to placate a whiny 17-year-old feminist schoolgirl. She (and others like her) will be invigorated by the concession, not placated. They won’t be happy until at least 50% of the composers in the syllabus are women, however little merit some or most of the women have, compared with the best male alternatives.

Ian has left a comment in response, which I thought merited a blog post in itself:

I see no problem with the inclusion on the syllabus of Mrs Mills and her fabulous suite of All Time Party Hits. That said though, I can’t for the life of me think of any other left-handed, red-haired, freckled lady composers working in holistic native Celtic peace-lullabies written for the Peruvian vegan free-bleeding non-aggressive nose-flute, which I suspect is more along the lines of what is actually wanted here.

Perhaps it would be easier to simply ‘discover’ ‘evidence’ ‘proving’ that Mozart, Chopin, Beethoven et al were in fact women, and to then have the textbooks books ‘corrected’?

You can order a copy of The Very Best of Mrs Mills here. Ironically, Mrs Mills was clearly not a feminist. On the CD cover she’s clearly smiling.

Our thanks to Mike for this. A whiny feminist schoolgirl has ‘forced’ one of the country’s leading exam boards to change its music syllabus. Thin end of the wedge, anyone? What could possibly go wrong?

The ‘journalist’ is Paul Gallagher who – to his eternal shame – expresses not a single word of criticism of what’s happened, not does he report the views of anyone else who might reasonably object to it. Excerpts from his dismal piece of feminist propaganda:

At a meeting this week the 17-year-old received a personal apology from Mark Anderson, Managing Director of Edexcel’s parent company Pearson, and an assurance that the course will change. She had written to him demanding change following her involvement in a ‘Fearless Futures’ programme exploring gender inequality, which she said enabled her to recognise “normalised sexism”.

Ms McCabe, who is currently studying maths, music and history at Twyford Church of England High School in London, told The Independent: “There’s been a lot of progress. I didn’t think it would be as easy [to change the syllabus] as it was, but Edexcel have been great – they automatically saw the need to rectify this and are making changes as soon as possible for the new course.

“They are also reviewing their other qualifications to ensure they are diverse and inclusive. They are speaking to lots of specialists in the industry and leading academics to see who they feel should be included – and to senior examiners because there are Ofqual guidelines which they have to set.”…

Ms McCabe is not resting on her laurels and has already written to Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, as she wants to “role (sic) this process out to other exam boards”.

The teenager said: “It’s not just Edexcel [where this problem exists], other exam boards are at fault too. Edexcel is the leader in A level music but there are other people studying music with different exam boards so they should have the opportunity to learn about women composers too.”

Mr Anderson said: “We are fully committed to ensuring diversity is better reflected through our revised music A-level, which will begin to be taught in Autumn 2016. We have met with Jessy, listened to her views and are taking her feedback on board, as well as the views of other musical experts in the UK.”

‘Other musical experts’? Give me strength. Jessy McCabe is 17 and studying music for her A Level. Does Mr Anderson not know that the first rule of dealing with difficult people, is not to reward them for being difficult? Even (or especially?) if they’re 17-year-old schoolgirls? He’s helped create a monster. Our considered opinions on this matter:

Mark Anderson needs to strap on a pair.

We hope Pearson’s share price crashes in response to his idiocy.

A tip of the hat to Steve Hill, who’s posted the only comment on the article so far:

OK chaps and chappesses. Without googling, write down a list of all the famous classical composers you know. Stop when you get to a woman.

Four weeks ago we sent Anne Longfield a letter concerning MGM, and this afternoon we received her response along with the correspondence records we’d requested. Her letter, along with the records, combine to paint a historical picture of utter disinterest in MGM in her organization.

I’m about to send her a public challenge which, if not acted upon by 5pm next Wednesday, will result in her winning this month’s Lying Feminist of the Month award. The challenge is an acid test of her integrity, and I hope she responds appropriately.

Shocking. Women today, eh?

Another scandal, this time in Billingham, Cleveland.

Some recommended reading from our Key topics page:

6 dangerous rape myths (Hannah Wallen)

10 reasons false rape allegations are common (Jonathan Taylor)

13 reasons women lie about being raped (Janet Bloomfield)

Interesting. From the article:

In another such impersonation case, in April a judge in Scotland gave Christine Wilson probation for seducing two underage girls:

The 26-year-old from Aberdeen, who has “gender identity disorder”, previously admitted two charges of obtaining sexual intimacy by fraud in a legal first in Scotland.

She told her teenage victims her name was Chris and had sexual contact with both of them on various occasions in 2008 and 2010. Her first victim ended the fraudulent relationship after being shown Wilson’s passport photograph.

Lord Bannatyne said the offences were very unusual and added that the fact that her disorder led her to “genuinely feel” that she was male had significantly lowered her “culpability”.

He put her on probation and ordered her to carry out 240 hours of community service.

The tortured thinking employed here by Lord Bannatyne is astonishing. The woman was shown leniency – the classic for women, no custodial sentence – because she genuinely ‘felt’ she was male, significantly lowering her culpability. Logically, the same leniency would be shown to anyone who ‘feels’ male, regardless of their actual sex. But no, being a man in this situation would certainly result in a prison sentence, while being a woman would almost guarantee a non-custodial sentence.

Our thanks to Jeff for this, from February 2014, when William Hague was Foreign Secretary. He said in a speech in Washington that all men should feel shame of rape in war zones. Why? Applying the same logic, should all women feel shame because women commit sexual offences against men, women, and children? Or because women kill their babies and children (far more mothers than fathers do so). Or because many women commit paternity fraud? Or because many women aren’t held properly accountable by the criminal justice system, unlike men? Or because many women give birth to babies with brain damage and other lifelong problems resulting from pregnant women drinking alcohol and/or smoking during pregnancy, despite being fully aware of the risks? No, because class guilt must only ever be experienced by men, never by women.

Hague always pandered to feminists on this issue. To them, women being raped is an infinitely more pressing issue than men being killed. From the article:

Mr Hague and Dr Denis Mukwege, founder of the Panzi hospital in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, were today being presented with the university’s annual Hillary Rodham Clinton Awards for Advancing Women in Peace and Security. [That would be the same odious woman who claimed women are the primary victims of war.]

The Foreign Secretary was due to stress how actress Angelina Jolie had been key in persuading him to take up the cause of campaigning against sexual violence in wars.

Because of feminists, the world’s gone mad. Our thanks to Female fed up with feminism for tweeting a link to the piece – by Katherine Timpf – along with the comment:

Intellectual dishonesty getting stupider by the day.

Good news from AVfM.

Anyone who doesn’t become angry after hearing the words uttered here by an American paediatrician cannot be in possession of a moral compass.