Is there a psychological driver behind feminism? Epistemol’s First Law, female anxiety, Philip Davies MP, Jess Phillips MP…

In 2013 I penned an article for AVfM, Is there a psychological driver behind feminism?. It covered the issue of female- and male-patterned brains, and their relation to feminism. My conclusion:

In my view, feminism is a movement driven by gender-untypical women who are ‘intermediate’ psychologically, and who demand ever more economic and political power. They’re facilitated by alpha males (e.g. David Cameron) who hand them that power on a plate, regardless of their lack of a democratic mandate to do so, and regardless of the harm caused to society in general. Until and unless we accept this reality, I think we’ll all suffer at the hands of feminist ideologues committed to a delusion, namely that gender-typical men and women – the vast majority – aren’t different psychologically.

I don’t think many people would disagree that women are typically, as a class, more anxious creatures than men. Male anxiety tends to result from real external threats, while female anxiety appears to exist even when external threats are, to all intents and purposes, non-existent (or close to non-existent). Much feminist activity is directed at provoking and sustaining female anxiety, creating a ‘climate of hysteria’, to the material benefit of professional feminist parasites.

‘Epistemol’ left the following comments in response to a recent blog piece:

Some [feminists] may well have mental health issues, I agree, but I once more offer Epistemol’s First Law for your consideration. Women suffer from “the three I’s”,  feelings of –

i. Insecurity
ii. Inadequacy
iii. Inferiority

These, to be fair, are not nice, to say the least, the temptation then being to deal with them in the easiest, not the best, way. Feelings of “the three R’s” –

i. Resentment
ii. Rancour
iii. Revenge

Much of feminism fits into these simple but profound categories.

Each may of course be further divided into almost infinite sub categories, but it’s as good a start as any, and better than most, I feel.

He’s right. We turn to the odious Jess Phillips MP, the winner of a Toxic Feminist of the Month award. Her narcissistic and anti-male maiden speech in the House of Commons – here (video, 6:38) – must surely be a prime contender for the most woeful such speech ever made. She infamously sought to stop Philip Davies having a debate in parliament on International Men’s Day (2015), the video (10:34) of her ultimately unsuccessful effort is here.

Our thanks to Kevin for this lengthy interview of the Yardley Yob, in yesterday’s Guardian. The interviewer is a woman, of course. The first excerpt primarily relates to anxiety:

The one thing Phillips hopes every reader will take from the book is how frightened she feels, all the time. This came as a surprise to me, and probably will to everyone who knows her: people have been marvelling at her apparent fearlessness for as long as she can remember. Female role models who can inspire confidence by example are pretty thin on the ground, so why disillusion her admirers by telling us she’s secretly terrified?

“Because I am.” But how does it help to say so? “So we all know that we all feel it.”

Phillips’ great fear is that women will put her success down to some miracle gift of freakish self-belief, to which they could never aspire. “That’s why they need to know that I’m scared shitless, too, just like them.” Another important theme of her book is the importance of “bigging yourself up”. Men do it all the time, she repeatedly points out, and women have to stop being so squeamish about saying they deserve what they want.

How can Phillips be a well-functioning MP, when she ‘feels frightened, all the time’? She can’t. Yet she’s directly responsible for saying and doing the things that lead to a backlash against her, and hence her anxiety, for example her opposition to the Philip Davies debate. She says, ‘women… deserve what they want’. Wow. What a combination of entitlement and narcissism there is in those few words. Another excerpt, Phillips speaking:

Positive discrimination is a thorny subject. I have made no secret of the fact that I was selected on an all-women shortlist. [She couldn’t have made it a secret, it was public knowledge. The best she could hope for was to seek to justify it. Here goes.]

People often use this to assert that I was not the best person for the job, merely the best woman. I wonder if Jessica Ennis-Hill was ever told this? “Er, sorry, Jess, your Olympic gold medal isn’t a real one, because you only competed against other women. Instead, we’ve given you this medal we call girlie gold.”

What a mind-numbingly stupid analogy, even by Phillips’s rock-bottom standards. Jessica Ennis-Hill was competing in a women’s sport. Phillips isn’t an MP in a female parliament , although parliament is deeply gynocentric. The end of the piece:

At the very same Labour conference where Corbyn was adorned with young, ethnically diverse women, I sat in a very cold hotel room with him and told him that I was willing to do all I could to make him look good. I was willing to organise events for women and roll him out. I was willing to help boost his feminist credentials. [my emphasis] But only if he guaranteed me a 50/50 cabinet, with women represented equally in every stratum of his shadow ministerial team. I told him I would look out for areas where he was going wrong and try to get in front of them, rather than criticising the howling, sexist gaffes afterwards. I made a promise to help him with his image, but I bloody well demanded he did stuff for Labour women, too. If he does, I will sing his praises. If he doesn’t, I shall make sure everybody knows it. [My emphasis. What a nasty, manipulative, bullying woman she is. It’s little wonder the Labour party is increasingly being referred to as the Labour party, and in opinion polls trails some 12 – 15 percentage points behind the Conservatives.]

In a world where how you appear matters so much, we women have got to wake up to the fact that they need us more than we need them. We must sweat our assets; let’s go full-on Tyra Banks and get finger-snapping demanding.

Jeremy agreed, and so far so good. [my emphasis] We have found a way to work together, to set up events to help women get involved, stand as mayors or local candidates. We have got to a place that, if it’s about women, they give me a call. We are getting there, slowly but surely.

We can but hope that the voters – especially the male voters – of Birmingham Yardley will give this sexist harpie the swift boot up the a*** she so richly deserves, on 7 May, 2020.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

4 thoughts on “Is there a psychological driver behind feminism? Epistemol’s First Law, female anxiety, Philip Davies MP, Jess Phillips MP…

  1. People often use this to assert that I was not the best person for the
    job, merely the best woman. I wonder if Jessica Ennis-Hill was ever told
    this? “Er, sorry, Jess, your Olympic gold medal isn’t a real one,
    because you only competed against other women. Instead, we’ve given you
    this medal we call girlie gold.”

    Women’s medals are ‘girlie gold’ because they are incapable of competing against men on an equal footing, which is why the French Jockey Club has recently ruled that female jockeys are to be allowed a weight advantage, which is exactly what all women shortlists are. A woman elected from an all women shortlist has conceded that she doubted her ability to win otherwise.

    Like

  2. ‘Women suffer from “the three I’s”, feelings of –

    i. Insecurity
    ii. Inadequacy
    iii. Inferiority

    These, to be fair, are not nice, to say the least, the temptation then being to deal with them in the easiest, not the best, way. Feelings of “the three R’s” –

    i. Resentment
    ii. Rancour
    iii. Revenge’

    I think that this applies to a large proportion of women which is why feminist misandry has such traction.

    Like

  3. Mike Buchanan writes, “Much feminist activity is directed at provoking and sustaining female anxiety, creating a ‘climate of hysteria’, to the material benefit of professional feminist parasites.”

    Seldom can more accurate words have been written on this subject, which home in on their deserving target at the speed of veracity, like truth seeking arrows striking the bullseye with a satisfying thud.

    It’s another way of saying that pre-existing fault lines and weaknesses have been identified in people in general, and women in particular, and deliberately exaggerated and exploited for political, financial, material, social and personal gain.

    Of these, the political concern me most, since they have the potential to do most damage — which presumably, is one of the reasons why j4mb is a political party, not just a pressure group.
    In a time of outrage fatigue, it’s not easy to find sufficient adjectives to do justice to the situation. However, I would offer pernicious, culpable, despicable, vile, grotesque, deceitful, manipulative, mendacious and parasitic as suitable ingredients for being stirred into the pudding.
    Please add more of your own as they occur to you.

    Incidentally, if you click the link to the Grauniad article in Mike’s post, (please do) you will find it includes a close up photo of Jess Phillips.
    Since she herself mentions her make up twice, I don’t see why I shouldn’t too.
    I notice she has lipsticked-in a non existant mouth shape in the form of a cute little girly bow that contradicts her gobby persona.
    Oddly enough, if you go here;

    http://www.standard.co.UK/news/London/night-czar-amy-lam-i-was-groped-on-tube-a3460036.html

    you will find a photo of Amy Lamé London’s newly appointed (by Sadique Khan) “Night Zcar”, a feminist nonsense post if ever there was one, who has done EXACTLY the same thing.
    Is this the give away visual Freudian slip of indicating that since your mouth is false, then so is what you are saying with it — is it also attempting to cover up that you have put far too much into it, by presenting it as too small to stuff too much into anyway?

        Hmmm.... sounds shockingly credible to me - but you decide.
    

    Like

  4. That analogy concerning the Olympics is just astonishing. Thinking about it further, perhaps Philips really thinks in Olympic terms. Afterall she wants half all jobs to go to women and presumably she also expects all women to be a good 10% behind men in their performance/ability?

    Looking at her seat, what makes her election to Parliament all the more disappointing is that her predecessor was the best Lib Dem MP, John Hemming. While somewhat eccentric/unpredictable, he was a MASSIVE (and very good) critic of family courts and one of a tiny number of Lib Dems actually worth voting for (another being MSP Mike Rumbles In Scotland). The good news is that he’s been selected as their candidate to stand against Philips: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/former-birmingham-mp-john-hemming-11726845

    Like

Leave a reply to Slowcoach Cancel reply