Jolyon Maugham QC comes out as a misogynist on Twitter

[AlessandraAsteriti]

After posting this tone-deaf tweet, Maugham doubles down when asked by women to consider fairness and safety of female rugby players. What can make an adult, intelligent person pretend they do not understand the difference between females and males anymore?

I know quite a few QCs professionally and personally (not this bell end I hasten to add). All are very intelligent, strikingly so, clearly and obviously much brighter than the average person. JM has never appeared to me to be in this class, based on his tweets and his general manner of behaviour in public, which displays a marked lack of awareness of how he might appear to other people (pompous, pious, bit of an all round prick).
Perhaps he just slipped through the net. Kissed the right arses and slipped through. Seems plausible.

I read through most of that twitter thread earlier. I didn't see any abuse or "grassing up". I did see a lot of rational well argued perspectives. It's interesting that he chose to interpret that as "abuse".

It's interesting that he chose to interpret that as "abuse".

Especially when he thinks a male folding a woman like a deckchair is 'nothing to see here.'

Wonder if there’s an elite men’s rugby club willing to invite JM to play a match with them? Maybe he’d find out how it feels to be outweighed, out-muscled, out-testosterone’d on the pitch. I’m sure he’d give it a go

Posters are suggesting that Maugham can't see the problem. I disagree. I'd say he sees that the conflict is between a special type of man and a mass of uppity women and the natural order needs to prevail and the special men need to be prioritised. For him, the problem is neither here nor there. It's a low priority matter that once he's decided who needs to be supported can just fade away as not being important enough to think about.

Obviously that won't apply to "his" women. He'd be pretty keen to make sure they weren't exposed to harm. But other women? No, he's not much bothered about those.

He is an absolute classic misogynist.

Obviously that won't apply to "his" women. He'd be pretty keen to make sure they weren't exposed to harm. But other women? No, he's not much bothered about those.

Agreed. It's very much as Marina Hyde says in her column today about Prince Andrew. He doesn't put his daughters and ex-wife in the same category as the women he abuses and exploits.

Much as all this stuff depresses me, the one thing I'll say for it is that it provides enormous clarity in discovering which men are on the side of women and which men hate them. I think many of us would naturally assume that the majority of educated, liberal-minded men are quite supportive of women. This single issue has demonstrated how many of them really do despise us. It's quite bracing. It has also, mercifully, allowed us to identify the handful of men who are on our side and are prepared to stick their neck out and say so.

Yes, totally agree with this from Fermatstheorem. It is a very deliberate stance. Lord Moonie’s tweet is very funny grin. Hadley was, as ever, also excellent. I was also pleased to see this from Matthew d’Ancona

Appreciation also ought to go to Helen Joyce from The Economist who tackled him on this and has written excellent articles as well as tweeting regularly from a gender-critical standpoint. Her tweet argument with Anthony Watson was something to behold (before he blocked me).

I think many of us would naturally assume that the majority of educated, liberal-minded men are quite supportive of women

Why would you think this, other than being brainwashed by the branding that left means good.

Power corrupts, education, liberal-ness, colour, class none of it matters.

What’s his back story? Has a wife/husband? Andy sister or daughters?

twitter.com/AdrianYalland/status/1164537621181272065?s=19 and he kept at it throughout the day.

Why would you think this, other than being brainwashed by the branding that left means good.

Because the left - broadly speaking - has a better record of promoting social justice and standing up for oppressed groups than the right. And most liberal-minded men will at least pay lip service to feminism.

People assume men on the left are more feminist because they tend to pay more attention to what people say than to what they do.

LordProfFekko here's what I read about his background before. I really felt for him then, I think a lot of people did. Shame he can't empathise with women who have struggled and had things snatched away from them. www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/katie-hopkins-jo-maugham-etonian-father-qc-barrister-twitter-a7917621.html

I wonder what made him go so wrong?

I think as with lots of other men and a fair few women, the thing that made him go wrong was just living in this world, absorbing the omnipresent messages that women are less important than men, that feminism is hysterical and nasty and going 'too far', and that it's important for women to be kind to men.

You never hear feminists imploring for kindness when we ask men not to commit violence against us and strip away our sex-based rights. We invoke reason and equality. We don't say, "Please be kind to these women who don't want to share space with people with penises."

But women are constantly implored to "be kind" when it comes to trans rights. And it's dishonest firstly because it isn't kind to women - on the contrary, it's unkind to them - and secondly because when you ask someone to be kind, you imply they have the power. That they have something and can choose to share that or not. When actually we're being given no choice at all. It's being given away regardless and our whole power lies in whether to smile sweetly about that or whether to get angry and fight it.

Reading that article I’m afraid I lost all sympathy with his reference to “the Etonian way.” Just because your father was a dishonourable scumbag does not entitle you to smear thousands of other men as the same.
God these people. They’re just so awful.

I lost all sympathy for him when he posted misogynist twaddle on twitter. That's not what I'd call a terribly sad life. I left home, went to London and worked in shops at sixteen, however it didn't force me into prostitution.

Now being picked up in right wings circles...

Guido Fawkes @ guidofawkes
Do take a look and enjoy woke @jolyonmaugham versus the @twitter feminists on the subject of six foot women who possess a penis playing women's rugby. Carnage on the field and on @twitter.

@RedToothBrush

Maugham walked his way into this with open eyes ... it's hilarious!

One assumes Maugham's wife does not play Rugby. Would he be so keen if she did?

Appreciation also ought to go to Helen Joyce from The Economist

Just read through her Twitter timeline. Definitely agree NotAtMyAge. Thanks for heads up.

Piers Morgan @piersmorgan
I don’t think it’s funny. I think transgender women born with male biological bodies should not be allowed to compete against women born with female biological bodies - or it will destroy women’s sport. That doesn’t make me ‘transphobic’, it makes me sensible.

One of those REALLY annoying times when you agree with Piers Morgan....

He has a wife and at least one daughter, I think two

Sanctimonious is the word that came to my mind reading his tweets. Nitwit. When you're wrong, have the guts to admit it.

It's so obvious that a great many men have a kneejerk response, not reaching the conscious level, that if a man is effeminate or has any other womanish tendencies that he is very much to be pitied for degrading himself in that way and that it's very good and kind of woke men not to beat him up or otherwise attack him. They assume all their responsibilities are discharged by consigning these also ran men to women who can be relied on to look after all sorts of lame ducks.

There's a mirror response to women who think they aren't real women because they don't like the gender stereotypes. The men pay lip service to welcoming trans men into the world of men, but they've made their real feelings clear by ensuring that the Freemasons won't have them as members and the aristocracy will ignore transmen's identities for inheritance/title purposes.