Douglas Murray asks: Does Owen Jones have a woman problem?

[RoyalCorgi]

I think we know the answer:

unherd.com/2021/08/does-owen-jones-have-a-woman-problem/

This is why we continue to make our case and use reason and fact to do so. Because if we have confidence in our argument (as we should) and be persistent and resolute in making and defending it, people of eother sex who fairly assess it will be persuaded.

This is how a decent, rational, pluralistic society should work. Not by bullies shoiting pejoratives at people and imposing conclusions on people by totalitarian fiat.

I'm not surprised Murray, who always had this approach, looks like he's being persuaded. I am delighted, tbh.

How will Murray fare?
I don't think Murray will care what they do and OJ and his followers know that, so my guess is that they probably won't bother. Sarah Ditum did care and OJ knew it.

I don't think Douglas will be revising his view that the magical status of full time mother makes up for not having the opportunity to build up a decent pension, so don't hold your breath for any real feminism. He's just noticed the fucking obvious.

(I''m on hols so don't have my copy of the madness of crowds to hand to see the correct quote, but there was definitely some rose tinted romanticism about full time motherhood which ignored economic reality).

very much enjoying the use / used side debate. you vipers are endlessly informative.

@ArabellaScott - absolutely, excellent examples.

God, never mind the specific use of 'used', I'm typoing like I've got frankfurters for fingers.

For me it's how the term "privilege" gets used beastlyslumber. Often as a club to beat down enemies with any nuance disregarded.

Youtuber

I'm quite proud of DM writing this. It takes something for men, even highly intelligent men like him, to ackowledge previously unseen sexism is really quite refreshing.

Male privilege on display in a times article today about nudists in Sherwood Forest. Many comments saying what's wrong with a bit of nudity just chill out. Obviously never been flashed at. And do not fear a serious sexual assault.

@nauticant

For me it's how the term "privilege" gets used beastlyslumber. Often as a club to beat down enemies with any nuance disregarded.

i think that's true. and an ordinary man will legitimately not feel particularly privileged.

people struggle with the idea that this kind of structural inequality / privilege operates at class level. It's not about YOU, it's about the class you're a member of. The outcomes for the class you're part of may well be different to your own personal outcomes. An individual man probably isn't an MP and never stands a chance of being one. That doesn't change the fact that only 34% of MPs are women though does it?

Does male privilege really exist? I did not used to think so. But in recent years, I’ve come to realise that not only might it exist, but that, at least in one respect, I may also benefit from it

No shit, Sherlock!

The thing about Ditum's article was that it was so mild and fence-sitting that you'd have to be insane to take offence at it. OJ and rational thought parted company long ago, so it's no surprise he saw it as an opportunity to give a woman a good kicking.

Some interesting humility from Ed West - mobile.twitter.com/edwest/status/1423564513178181632

This is the kind of thing I'd write if I wasn't such a coward [linking to article]. The only genuinely transgressive female film remake would be High Noon but with Julie Bindel in the Gary Cooper role and everyone too scared to come to her aide [sic]

@MajesticWhine

Male privilege on display in a times article today about nudists in Sherwood Forest. Many comments saying what's wrong with a bit of nudity just chill out. Obviously never been flashed at. And do not fear a serious sexual assault.

The comments were making jokes too. That's all very well having a bit of banter. But women would be scared if you were walking a forest alone and saw a naked man. It would put you off walking there alone ever again. And you certainly wouldn't go with your children.

Does Owen Jones have a woman problem?

Doug Murray's follow up articles:

Is Katie Hopkins a bit racist?
I think the Pope might secretly be a Catholic.
I've just realised that Kim Kardashian like attention.

It's possible Donald Trump wasn't a great choice for POTUS.

Owen Jones is so scared of being on the 'wrong side' of anything, that an accusation of misogyny will really hit him where it hurts! Unfortunately for him though, we can all see its true. Women just aren't even on his radar as people who might have needs and desires of their own.

He is so cowardly on the trans issue as well. He almost always mutes comments when he tweets about it, and would never H have a woman such as Helen Joyce or Nic Williams on his show to actually thrash out the issues with, because he knows he would get roasted. Simple questions like 'should male rapists be housed in female prisons if they so desire' would expose him instantly. So instead he does things with people like Piers Morgan, who people expect to disagree with him, and who will never actually get to the crux of the issue and is therefore 'safe'. Such a coward.

@beastlyslumber

I sort of agree with DM to an extent about male privilege. There are definitely many aspects of life where males are privileged over females. But I don't believe there is a blanket male privilege that confers advantage onto males in every situation. I think a lot of times, men get defensive about the idea of male privilege because it is used in that blanket way, and they can easily see that males are not always subject to an advantage in life (e.g. in education, or certain industries like publishing, the creative arts etc). When it is broken down into specific situations, it's much easier to recognise and discuss. I suppose all I'm saying is that 'male privilege' is a term that is wide open to many competing interpretations, and this makes it inefficient at expressing the concepts we want to express. Anyway, I'm glad DM sees the misogyny inherent in OJ's approach and the very real situation where males' speech is more free than ours. And I'm very pleased to imagine LOJ reading this and seeing himself called out for his woman-hating - and described as a YouTuber

If I may quote a section of the above "and they can easily see that males are not always subject to an advantage in life (e.g. in education, or certain industries like publishing, the creative arts etc)"

In secondary schools, 63% of teaching staff are female, compared with only 38% of headteachers. In primary schools only 14% of teaching staff are male, but 27% of headteachers are male.

Someone I know did a dissertation on the differences between the sexes in the field of graphic design. The research for it found that there were 41% more men in creative roles, about equal percentages in logistical roles and 44% more women in office roles than in studio roles. Only around 10% of creative directors are women.

As ever, look at the roles, especially the senior roles.

males are not always subject to an advantage in life (e.g. in education, or certain industries like publishing, the creative arts etc

Up until recently, women were required to give up a teaching job if they married.

As for literature and the arts, given the centuries of almost wholly male dominated culture, it's a bit naive to say males don't have an enormous advantage in terms of historical and cultural context, let alone the unavoidable impact of bearing children that continues to affect females. VIDA count is good on literature, the Gorilla Girls are good on visual arts.

Owen Jones is so scared of being on the 'wrong side' of anything, that an accusation of misogyny will really hit him where it hurts!

Women are always accusing OJ of misogyny, but it's like water off a duck's back. I don't think he sees misogyny as a bad thing, in the same way that some anti-racists don't see anti-Semitism as a bad thing. From OJ's pov, I think women are simply an irrelevance.

I was meaning in terms of students' experiences @Chersfrozenface when I mentioned education. As far as I'm aware, white working class boys have worse educational experiences and outcomes than any other demographic. But those boys are told they have privilege over everyone else.

In terms of the breakdown of men's and women's roles in different industries, I think it's way more complex than just privilege/sexism. This may play a role to an extent everywhere, and definitely plays a role in some industries more than others. But there are so many other factors in play that it doesn't make sense to reduce it just to that. For example, men don't give birth, so they don't take time out of careers and are more easily able to get promotions. (I agree that we could do more to work around this, but the fact is that it's a problem in many careers to be away for 3, 6, 9 months or more. You could argue it's sexism that we don't do more about this, but equally you could look at the financial ability of companies to allow career breaks, the effect on their competitiveness in the market, or the nature of the business, clients etc that might mean an employee being away can't help but fall behind.) Another reason for disparity might be that women and men don't always want to do the same jobs - it isn't necessarily obvious that women are being kept out of graphic design roles because of sexism, for example. Maybe they are just going for the roles they've trained for and are interested in? I don't really know anything about graphic design, so I'm just speculating. Maybe it is an industry rife with sexism, I don't know. But I think it's unlikely that if a qualified and talent female is going for a role, she wouldn't get the job on the basis of her sex - partly because that's illegal. Not to say it doesn't ever happen, but most businesses want to be the best/most competitive and that means hiring the best people, male or female. To explain it just by sexism, you'd need a lot more information. E.g. you'd need to know how many women were applying for those roles compared to how many got the jobs. Same with senior roles in education. Are women applying for those roles to the same extent as men are? If not, is that because of sexism, or because for some other reason not as many women want those particular jobs? I'm not saying it has to be one or the other; there could be lots of reasons and sexism could easily be somewhere in the mix.

I just think that there is way more complexity and nuance to many of these situations and we do a disservice to women and men by reducing it to this one simple explanation when it really misses out a lot of the complicated stuff of life, relationships and society. Life isn't that simple!

As for literature and the arts, given the centuries of almost wholly male dominated culture, it's a bit naive to say males don't have an enormous advantage in terms of historical and cultural context, let alone the unavoidable impact of bearing children that continues to affect females.

Is the fact that women bear children sexism though? If so, then male privilege just means 'not being a woman'? I just think it's too broad a concept to be rhetorically or politically useful.

As for the advantage males have in the arts, what does that consist of? I'm familiar with publishing, where there is no obvious (to me) advantage of being a male. I'm not saying you're wrong, but what does that advantage consist of? I think it's important to be specific. If it's that men are more likely to get their book reviewed in certain publications, for example - that's a real, concrete thing we can and should do something about. But we should also notice celebrate the successes of women in making industries our own, changing the law, and achieving real equality. Just because we've been kept down historically doesn't mean that we will always be victims.

Sorry for the long posts! I just wanted to respond to those points. Will shut up now.

@RoyalCorgi

I did not used to think so.

I am slightly bugged by the "used" - it should be "use". Common mistake...

I think the biggest manifestation of male privilege is men's manifest sense of entitlement about their own behaviour and the fear women have of challenging them. Men (some men) think it's their right to piss on the street, or to put their feet up on the train seat, or to shove past women on the pavement, or to shout abuse at a teenage girl from a car window. Women will almost never challenge that behaviour because they're too frightened. Male control women through the constant threat of violence. Douglas will simply have gone through life not noticing this until he sees it on Twitter, where it's hard not to notice it.

Could you say 'I used not to think so' ? I do quite like Murray - he doesn't creep me out like Boyce and others. It is quite revealing that another gay man has picked up on OJs apparent antipathy to women.

It does make that much difference if women are attracted to certain jobs, like taking time away from work or willingly priorise family care responsibilities ahead of careers, or are pressured into all of those things. Its the fact that for many a long and healthy retirement relies on doing want men are more inclined to do or more able to do. Women are less wealthy in old age because they arent following the typical mans path. The system is set up to prioritise men and disadvantage women.

I think the reason so many men dispute ‘male privilege’ is the name itself. It must be difficult to accept you have privilege If your life is difficult in other ways - for example if you are poor, or black, or have a disability, etc. I can see why an unemployed, working class man living in shared accommodation would find it hard to accept he has privilege over Melinda Gates.

If it was referred to as ‘male advantage’ I think more people would understand and accept it.

Very interesting. I think more blatantly misogynistic men know on some primal level that they will probably always have the upper hand, which is chilling; because in reality, most men are physically stronger and won't hesitate to use that, even to keep social advantages. They also have centuries of controlling the money, which is a further step up the power ladder.

I doubt men are gonna all of a sudden give up societal power, especially some. Some of it is down to how boys are socialized, so if the power evens out, it'd take a while. Plus, many women probably aren't gonna stoop to, say, violence, intimidation, rape, etc and I bet men know this. Maybe why as a whole women don't do well in business, cuz they are less mean?

plus, we can see that even currently when women try to fight for even just basic rights and safety, men feel threatened for some reason. And I think religions have done a moral disservice by placing men on a pedestal; it's entrenched in most societies.

I don't see women being able to have a fair fight or win but that's pessimistic and we must keep trying. Women are there to support all things men, even religions said so, so anything counter is whining, ungrateful, ill. We are the cattle of the humans. Honestly, humans treat animals better than fellow humans.

The only way I see women gaining some semblance of rights, safety, proper power is to have to literally physically fight, and most (even me) wouldn't be able or willing, and men know this.

Also, I've learned that a lot of men pay lip service to women's rights but to me it's only to look good to girls and women so they can still keep keep their power and attitudes and not be chastised. I mean most men aren't blatant woman-haters, so either a small minority of men run everything, or many are silently agreeing (and women too do this...i have internalised misogyny i didn't realize until slowly as I've gotten older).

Also women are trained not to speak up, disagree, fight. And I think most of us know if it came down to a literal, overt women vs men, that we would lose. Maybe women will evolve to shoot electricity out of their eyes haha, level the playing field.

It's sad. I even, for one, have just accepted it as a reality. Know the world is a danger, try to do the safety things when going out, etc. Cuz what else can we do? It's not gonna matter to men unless it affects them, and it hasn't and won't in the near future. Some men who have daughters etc might change. And not all are hateful etc. Power seems to beget evil, tyranny, bad things...and men on this planet have most of it. However any shred of personal freedom or power a woman has enrages men to no end. I've seen it. It makes no sense. They are enraged if a woman tells them no, for anything, but especially their bodies. I think modern men are enraged at the fact they can't fully go out and rape every female whenever they want, you know, cuz laws etc (albeit not perfect ones, but still, in some countries it's a no-no and I think men are mad. Had a guy I told no get enraged, said "it's ALWAYS the woman's choice and it's not fair." wtf, it was about my body and I said no, only for rage to be spewed and no amount of me saying, well if a man said no to a woman then she should respect that too, it's about respect not girl or boy. They don't get it, maybe cuz most men aren't in positions to be thought of as cattle for a group of humans ffs).

Maybe the inner, good part of humanity will surface some day. I guess all we can do is speak out, which again is stifled. I have no answers either aside to hide from society and let the men burn it to the ground and hopefully God or Something will start over and edit aggression out of humanity.