Charlotte Proudman is the odious 27-year-old feminist barrister who took to social media in a cynical attempt to publicly humiliate a 57-year-old solicitor she’d approached. He responded with a private message, saying her LinkedIn profile photograph was ‘stunning’. We duly presented her with our inaugural Toxic Feminist of the Month award, her certificate is here.
Lord Sumption is the Supreme Court judge who recently made some perfectly sensible remarks about gender diversity among senior judges – here. The toxic feminist responded with an article in the Guardian, which included this gem:
Recognising and challenging institutional sexism needs to be combined with a genuine commitment to equal representation. Incrementalism has failed. We need the introduction of quotas for QCs and the judiciary.
Tom Utley is a Daily Mail columnist with a talent for getting to the heart of matters. My thanks to M for pointing me to his recent article about Lord Sumption’s remarks, and Ms Proudman’s response to them. He refers to her as ‘Little Miss Anti-Sexism’, pleasingly, and ends the piece with this:
As for the interests of justice, it beats me why anyone should think it important that a criminal or a divorcing couple should have a 50/50 chance of coming up before a woman, rather than a man. All we require of judges, surely, is that they be fair-minded, incorruptible and learned in the law.
Their sex is neither here nor there — and if female lawyers wish to drop out before they reach the top, whether to have babies or because they don’t like the working conditions, then good luck to them. No harm done.
Which brings me to a painful and inconvenient truth, seldom discussed — and guaranteed to bring the wrath of feminists crashing down about the ears of anyone who raises it.
But here goes: while it’s of no great public concern that women lawyers tend to drop out, it matters enormously that so many female doctors do the same.
The figures are frightening. It costs taxpayers at least £500,000 to train a doctor.
Meanwhile, the drop-out rate for women after they’ve qualified, coupled with their greater tendency to work part-time and to retire early, means it’s necessary on average to train two female doctors to do the same amount of work over a lifetime as a man. [my emphasis]
Yet medical schools continue to admit more women than men, while 61 per cent of doctors under the age of 30 are women.
In the week that it emerged that staff shortages mean newly qualified GPs are being paid £90 an hour to work at weekends, isn’t it time we started asking a deeply uncomfortable question? Which is more important: sexual equality or an affordable NHS, open for business round-the-clock?
Justice for Men & Boys 
What Charlotte Proudman is saying, without realising it, is that even though women have equal opportunity, they either are not willing to put the hours in, or do not have the aptitude to get into the judiciary at similar numbers to men. Therefore since the men are out competing the women for these jobs, she has to rig the system so women only have to compete against women, at the expense of blocking men, who clearly must have at least equal ability to them, to progress into these positions.
So while she has no real proof that women do not have equal opportunity (they do as higher numbers are now becoming lawyers then men), she just uses ideology and basic maths as her argument.She is more than willing to take away equal opportunity from men. That is not equality. Equal representation is nothing to do with equal rights. If all people have the same equal opportunity, then peoples’ choices will decide what profession they follow. Norway as a country proves this most conclusively. If women become the majority she will not call for male quotas.
Women are the majority of new doctors because of choice and equal opportunity, no quotas required. What seems to missing are doctors contracts that require them to put in the hours the service they provide requires.
This mantra of equal representation in areas only where women are not participating as much as men is pure sexism on the part of feminists. They do no use this argument in any arena where women dominate. In fact anywhere they dominate the numbers, they are more than happy to keep it that way. Supremacy of women in any area is the norm they truly appear to desire. Once or if it is already the case, they say or do nothing about it. Education is probably the one area that I feel more representation of men would be a good thing for all. We definitely need more male teachers below college level, 90% of primary school or lower are female. This is case of where there is actual institutional discrimination in recruitment and in teacher unions against male teachers. Even qualified male teachers can find it almost impossible to get jobs at this level. This is actually about equal opportunity for the male teachers and not equal representation. As a lawyer this is something Charlotte, with her simple minded view of equality, should be desperate to be looking into, to be true to her misguided goal of equal representation through quotas for “women only” agenda. I am sure we will never hear her do any such thing, and back or fight for this proposal for more opportunity for male teachers.
Any lawyer who is not about fairness should not be one that gets to be a judge at all. Artificial fairness is artificial justice, and is no justice at all.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
Tom Utley may be talking about the case of Rajaratnam v Care UK Clinical Services Ltd,, involving a woman GP who had not fully completed the vocational element of her training, applying for a part time job with an out of hours care provider ( with a £10K pay premium) without being prepared actually to work the anti-social hours required by the job. When the employer refused to comply with her quite rigid requirements, she cried sex discrimination.
Choices have consequences, and these women should have to accept the consequences of their choices. A child free woman willing to prioritise work in the way a man does is rewarded in the same way.
The case report is available on http://www.bailii.org, neutral citation UKEAT/0435/14/DA.
LikeLike