Last night we posted a link to a Daily Mail article by Jenni Murray, on women who sexually abuse male minors – here.
We thank William Gruff for posting an interesting response, which takes up the remainder of this blog post:
“Mrs Murray’s article suggests a number of questions and shows, I think, that some of the less irrational feminists, those who present themselves as ‘thinkers’, however shallow, and whose public credibility is essential to their continued employment in a ratings dependent public sphere, are having to face the fact that little girls are not actually made of sugar and spice and all things nice and can no longer continue to assert the contrary.
All literary work is subject to the perception of the reader. My perception is that Mrs Murray has suddenly woken up to find one of her sacred bubbles has been well and truly burst by her own kind. She faces at least two personal intellectual crises. The first is that she has been forced to accept the delusion shattering reality of females as rather more than very rare perpetrators with males as rather more than very rare victims.
That she is intellectually and emotionally incapable of accepting the truth is demonstrated by her traditionally female responses: “I / she didn’t do it” (unavailable to Mrs Murray because guilt has been proven); (when guilt has been proven) “it was not my / her fault” (unavailable to Mrs Murray because guilt has been proven); “I / she couldn’t help it”, which the sad old feminist uses to excuse the women’s crimes.
Read on to learn that the immediacy of social media and men are the problem:
‘There are a number of theories for this apparent rise in female sexual abuse. Many believe social media and the proliferation of text messaging and sexy selfies have begun to erode traditional moral boundaries.
A passing fancy that might once have simply flitted through the mind, but never been pursued, for example, can now be only too easily written down and ‘sent’ at the click of a button.
Or could this corruption of women (let’s not forget that as little as two decades ago, the idea of a grown woman having sex with a child would have caused a huge moral outcry) be borne out of the fact that a growing number of females are deeply disappointed with their relationships with adult males?
All too often we hear that the internet is enabling men, to pursue affairs for which they might otherwise have had no opportunity. The rise of internet porn has made some men assume extreme and brutal sexual practices are normal and theirs to enjoy by right.
Could it be that sex with a boy makes women who have fallen foul of such men feel they have regained the upper hand?’
All pure, unadulterated gynocentric tripe. Particularly objectionable is the line:
‘A passing fancy that might once have simply flitted through the mind, but never been pursued, for example, can now be only too easily written down and ‘sent’ at the click of a button.’
Can any man imagine a similar ‘passing fancy’ – a ‘passing fancy’ that should not be ‘flitting’ through his mind under any circumstances – being excused because it can ‘now be only too easily written down and ‘sent’ at the click of a button.‘?
Note also that the ‘corruption of women’ may be due to ‘the fact (sic) that a growing number of females are deeply disappointed with their relationships with adult males‘. Can any man imagine a similar offence being mitigated because he is ‘deeply disappointed with [his] relationships with adult [fe]males’?
Ultimately, it’s all the men’s fault, and the technology, never the women’s.
The second intellectual crisis stems from the inconvenient fact that almost all of the women she cites have grown up during her twenty eight year tenure of the Woman’s Hour presenter’s chair, during which she has constantly wittered on about a woman’s right to have everything she wants, women’s nicer side than men, their inability to do wrong and women’s special circumstances deserving complete absolution from responsibility when, very rarely and through no fault of their own, women do actually do wrong.
It may just have dawned on the idiotic Mrs Murray that she may, in part, bear some responsibility for the ‘disturbing rise of the women child sex predators’. All that aside, if the ‘staggering leniency’ shown to the disgusting perverts she cites really has ‘depressed and disappointed [her] more than anything that [she’s] read for a very long time’ she should have a chat with that other great taxpayer-funded feminist guardian of women’s privileges, Alison Saunders.”
