A woman has posted a comment in response to the short piece accessible through the link to our associated website, Anti-Feminism League:

You have an article titled, “A Voice for Men.”

You title your blog, “Justice for Men and Boys.”

And yet men have led the world for generations. It is their majority voice that has been heard. Men have been granted the right to define and distribute “justice.”

Feminism can seem “wrong” if someone is miseducated about it. Simply, it is about equality for everyone. Allowing women their right to share their voices and be heard, to be treated justly, does not mean that people are fighting for the opposite for men. We just want to even the playing field.

People are people. You shouldn’t respond to this comment. Just let it sink in.

Peace.

Normally I just delete silly comments like these, but for some reason I clicked on the link of the website associated with her, the URL of which came through at the same time as her email address. Her website is Deeper thoughts of a woman.. and it was created in February 2010 – 67 months ago.

It’s a WordPress blog, using the same software we employ for our sites. So what ‘deeper thoughts’ has this woman had in the past 67 months? None, evidently. The only content she’s ever posted has been the title. Priceless. 

The Julie Bindel interview reported by the HEqual website earlier today was with RadFem Collective. The organization’s strapline displays more self-awareness than we might expect from radical feminists:

POSITIVELY REVOLTING WOMEN

Our thanks to the person who alerted us to the crazy ladies’ next annual event which will be held next weekend in London. From the details, with explanatory additions in square brackets:

RadFem Collective will not tolerate prejudiced and/or oppressive language or behaviour towards any woman attending our event. [Prejudiced and/or oppressive language or behaviour towards men will be encouraged, indeed required.] We are opposed to any ideologies of oppression. [Other than radical feminism, obviously.]

It is a central part of radical feminist analysis that gender is a tool of women’s oppression, not women’s liberation. [It’s a whackadoodle theory, but yes, it’s a central part of radical feminism.] None of the organisers consider ourselves to have an innate gender – neither masculine, feminine, trans, cis, gender queer, or any other gender. We are gender abolitionists who have been raised and socialized as girls and women *because of our female bodies* in the context of patriarchy. [We’ve been raised and socialized as girls and women in the context of a theory, patriarchy, the evidence base for which is considerably poorer than that for the ‘tooth fairy’ theory. Pretty robust, then. Oops, sorry for the female objectifying language there… er… very robust, then.]

It will surely be an uplifting and event, although men and male-to-female transsexuals are specifically excluded, in stark contrast to the 2014 Detroit International Conference on Men’s Issues, at which many of the speakers and audience members were women. For all I know, there were transsexuals there too. They would certainly have faced no hostility.

Speakers will include Julie Bindel and Sarah Ditum. In February 2014 we published a blog piece about the latter, We need to talk about Sarah Ditum. It included a link to a key paper by Professor Simon Baron-Cohen and others, published in 2000. The full Abstract:

Sexual dimorphism in sociability has been documented in humans. The present study aimed to ascertain whether the sexual dimorphism is a result of biological or socio-cultural differences between the two sexes.

102 human neonates, who by definition have not yet been influenced by social and cultural factors, were tested to see if there was a difference in looking time at a face (social object) and a mobile (physical-mechanical object).

Results showed that the male infants showed a stronger interest in the physical-mechanical mobile while the female infants showed a stronger interest in the face. The results of this research clearly demonstrate that sex differences are in part biological in origin. [My emphasis.]

What reasonable person couldn’t accept that final sentence?

A cringe-inducing recent piece by Chris Moss, a male writer, in the laughably titled ‘Thinking Man’ section of the Telegraph. It wouldn’t be out of place in the New Statesman, Guardian or Independent. What depths this once fine newspaper has descended to.

An excellent new piece from HEqual.

A more entertaining piece in the Telegraph. In response to the question on the Telegraph page, ‘Should naked women be used as fruit platters?’, 15,497 respondents (63% of the total) answered, ‘Yes’. Even feminist ‘comediennes’ Kate Smurfwit and Sandi Toxic could make something out of this story.

Our thanks to Jeff for this. The title of the piece is, ‘Girls should play with Lego not Barbies to make them more interested in science and maths says leading woman physicist’. Athene Donald really should consult a psychology professor at the same university, Simon Baron-Cohen, on what is known about gender-typical choice preferences, which are evident as early as the weeks following birth. We strongly recommend his book The Essential Difference: Men, Women, and the Extreme Male Brain (2012). You don’t see him wittering on mindlessly about experimental physics, do you? What expertise does Prof Donald, an experimental physicist, have in the area about which she is pontificating?

Even if we ignore gender-typical interests and aptitudes, there would remain a perfectly simple explanation for why girls are attracted to Humanities subjects rather than the sciences. Put simply, they require the investment of far less effort to achieve a given grade. Girls’ subject choices are probably nothing other than an early reflection of something the renowned sociologist Dr Catherine Hakim explained in her paper on Preference Theory (2000), namely:

Four out of seven British men are work-centred.

One in seven British women is work-centred.

Apropos of nothing, Simon Baron-Cohen’s cousin is Sacha Baron-Cohen of Ali G fame.

The last professorial winner of our ‘Gormless Feminist of the Month’ award was back in May – Kirstein Rummery, of Stirling University. Her certificate is here.

No columnist captures the essence of issues with more wit and perception than Quentin Letts. Enjoy.

Our thanks to AVfM for this. From the article:

The obviously personality disordered Ms. Kiefer has been arrested and charged with filing a false police report and disorderly conduct. She could face prison time up to three years and may be held responsible for the tens of thousands of dollars of tax-payer resources that were wasted.

She could face those consequences, but we can be confident she won’t. Because gynocentrism.

Our thanks to Tim for this. It’s good to see such a piece in the Telegraph. I’ve posted a comment, and invite you to do likewise. Thank you.

An interesting piece by Gerald Warner for The Conservative Woman website. My only quibble would be with the title, presumably not chose by Warner himself. Cultural Marxism colonised Western boardrooms years ago. We need only observe the craven capitulation of FTSE100 companies to the government’s demands for more women on their boards, following the Davies Report (2011), for evidence of that fact.