Feminism may turn out to be a short-lived civil rights movement if we don’t wake up to the threat that females now face

[IwantToRetire]

Femicide appears to have become the “new black” this year. Misogyny has always been in fashion in one guise or another.

In the early 20th century it took the form of men trying to stop women having the vote. In the 1940s and 50s, it was the expectation that a woman’s place was in the home. When women rebelled and burned their bras in the 1960s and 70s, they were accused of being dangerous feminists.

Women have since been criticised for both earning a living, and staying at home to look after their children. They have had to put up with being sexually harassed at work, spawning the MeToo movement, been historically underpaid for generations compared with their male colleagues, and cruelly let down by a criminal justice system that has never done enough to protect them from men trying to rape and abuse them.

Then came the trans extremist movement which once again saw some men – identifying as female – trying to subjugate women by invading their spaces. We’ve seen academic women including <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/j3nIN/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/10/29/hounding-kathleen-stock-means-freedom-speech/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Kathleen Stock hounded out of universities, successful women like J K Rowling disowned by the very people she made famous, and ordinary women smeared as bigots simply for trying to stand up for the sisterhood and children’s safeguarding.

Until this week, however, I don’t recall ever seeing a woman be actively put in harm’s way in the name of “inclusivity”. In arguably the most grotesque example of rampant wokery the world has ever witnessed, Thursday saw Italian boxer <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/j3nIN/www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/08/01/angela-carini-imane-khelif-italian-boxer-punched/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Angela Carini – an athlete so tough she is nicknamed “the Tiger” – having to abandon a bout in just 46 seconds, after being pummelled by an opponent with XY chromosomes.

Article continues at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/02/women-are-under-vicious-attack-and-too-few-liberals-care/

Right up until the very end I agreed with her, but not her conclusion - full article can read at https://archive.ph/j3nIN

On re-reading the article by Camilla Tominey Associate Editor (seriously?) although she identifies violence against women as the problem, she seems quite unable to then make the obvious link, that violence against women is because men are violent.

The disconnect is startling.

I've read the whole article. I agree with her, and I like the article.

she CLEARLY makes the link that violence as against women is from violent men.

she just doesn't make the entirely stupid suggestion that 'well if men just stopped being violent then everything would be OK'.

Iran is a great example. Imagine if ,50% of the men in the country decided 'do you know what I want my daughter's and sisters and wife to have freedom in life, and I am going to protest the government' - those 50 % of men, and the women alongside them would actually stand a chance in making a change.

Without the support, strength and defence of those men, the women in Iran do not stand a chance. It's the same biological reality that says don't put a male in a boxing ring with a female.

Men have been getting raped in the army for centuries. No one cares. I know I used to work in the area.

I was about to say the same. It’s the man saying “If you want equal rights men should slam doors in your face”.Just an excuse for misogyny.

Ive never heard a feminist say anything of the kind. There is invariably more nuance.
But I have frequently heard people of bad faith or not bright, interpret it like that to make a crap point.
Usually men, but not always.

We've had some, "I'm as GC/feminist as they come but…[proceed to indicate that theirs is a self-identified status that is unlikely to be validated by posters on FWR]" posts and threads. Similarly, lots of self-appointed scolders who like to tell FWR posters that they're 'woman-ing or feminist-ing' in a manner that displeases them.

Such posters occasionally break out over in AIBU where their self-identity may last for longer with non-FWR regulars or those unaccustomed to reading Bunbury's Handbook.

Happy: "Men have been getting raped in the army for centuries. No one cares. I know I used to work in the area."

I have mixed feelings about this. It's taken a very long time to persuade men to acknowledge rape as a weapon on war. I'm mixed as to whether it's become easier to acknowledge this because soldiers can now displace this apprehension onto their female colleagues.

One difference and on-going difficulty here may lie in a willingness to explore and acknowledge whether rape and/or sexual humiliation and exploitation is use as a method to control/punish fellow soldiers, male and female, rather than the issue of rape by opposing forces?

Happy, despite the rhetoric of welfare etc., is there under-recognition or denial of the issue as an issue of control within the service in addition to part of warfare?

This is very true and I console myself with this thought when I see plenty of women on social media siding with wannabe females.

I quite often used to hear men laughing that they wouldn’t hold a door open for a woman “ because women want to be equal”. I don’t know if they routinely slammed doors in other men’s faces.