We need to believe women…but…
She had it and then she dropped it. Australian Senator Janet Rice:
The #March4Justice rally has just kicked off at Parliament House and more than 100,000 people are marching for gender equality across the country today too. We have had ENOUGH! Enough of the misogyny, enough of harassment, enough of sexual violence and assault, enough of this toxic environment, and ENOUGH of the patriarchy! We need to believe women, we need action and we need an end to gendered violence.
It’s disgusting that neither the PM nor the Minister for Women can be bothered to join us and meet the women who have come to their doorstep today.
Enough is enough.
EDIT: I want to acknowledge a number of people in the comment section calling out my use of the term “womxn”. I sincerely apologise for my ignorance that this term is seen by many as being the opposite of inclusive and harmful to trans and gender diverse people – it was absolutely not my intention to platform anti-trans views! It was meant to exclude “men” from the term (i.e that women are not simply a derivative of men), not exclude trans people. Trans women are women (and hopefully one day this won’t even need to be stated). I had no idea it had been appropriated by TERFs and will definitely be looking into this more and having further discussions. Thanks to everyone who has brought this to my attention.
Must not talk about women. Must always change the subject to talk about men who call themselves women.
a) But … they’re not. Even if you get literally everyone in the world to say the words, the concept those words express does not map to reality. That is, they’re false. Even if you get everyone in the world to believe that the concept is true, it remains as false analytically as “married bachelor” or “square circle” or “2+2=5”. The only sort of truth it would enjoy would be in the sense of “considered to be true”. But “describes reality” and “follows from definition” are not the same thing as “endorsed by minds”.
b) As has been discussed here many times, the “man” in “woman” does not come from “male”. The entire justification for the existence of the words “womxn” and “womyn” is built on a false premise that people accept because of mere truthiness.
c) People are cowards before the mob, politicians even more sniveling than most. We need to move away from this culture of appeasement from the constant whimpers to do it to Julia. I have no idea how to accomplish that.
Women have to fight for our rights!
(If that’s okay with you guys)
Don’t you just love that she wants to take the word “men” out of the word “women”, but she doesn’t want to take actual men out of the category “women” (where they don’t belong)?
Janet Rice is a Senator for The Greens, who further describes herself as a “lesbian” off the strength of the fact that her husband decided late in life that he was a woman.
But everything is OK, our Prime Minister, Scotty From Marketing, just wants women to be happy that he didn’t have them shot.
Meanwhile, the nation’s Attorney-General is suing the ABC to Louise Milligan for a report that did not name him as a rapist. Last year he threatened to sue over another ABC/Milligan story that did name him in relation to lewd behaviour with junior staff, but didn’t follow through.
It is my hope that when this case comes to trial that the ABC and Milligan engage competent feminist lawyers who will treat Porter the same way those who allege rape are treated. Let them delve in to his past sexual history, the number of partners he has had, why his previous wife divorced him. One can only hope …
@ Roj Blake, on Scotty from Marketing’s “at least you can protest without being shot by my government”, this seems relevant:
“ There are men like Biden who benefit, to a degree unknowingly, from the fact that women never have the choice of voting for someone who represents their interests entirely. With them, there is always the hope that one day, they will understand how unjust it is to be able to rely on the support of a group not because you’re not hurting them, but because you’re hurting them less than the other guy. Then there are sexist arseholes who delight in the fact that for women, politics remains Hobson’s Choice, who make no effort whatsoever to hide the fact that left-wing men can set up their own protection racket, using right-wing men as the ultimate threat. “Nice abortion rights / maternity leave / child benefit you’ve got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it. Now hand over the hardcore porn!”
Men have always done this. Left-wing men point at right-wing men, right-wing men point at men in other countries (“see how they treat ‘their’ women! You lot have nothing to complain about!”). It happens on a smaller scale within communities and families. We side with the men who give us the least shit and who can blame them for noticing this? This very siding, borne of necessity, is then used to deflect all accusations of sexism. The left-wing man will say “it’s only old crones who think I’m sexist; all my younger female mates agree with me“. Just as the right-wing husband will say “it’s only the feminists who call this abuse; my missus loves it”. All the while, these men know, deep down, that “their” women are not necessarily endorsing their viewpoints. They are trying to suffer the least harm, because no harm at all is never an option.
The rise of Trump and of alt-right and incel communities has encouraged (self-styled) left-wing men to push their luck. Any woman who crosses the average brocialist – any woman who thinks female biology is politically salient, or that the sex trade harms women and girls, or that commercial surrogacy is some Handmaid’s Tale shit – will be told she is on the side of right-wing men, the enemy of women, and is hence her own worst enemy. Left-wing misogynists love calling feminists misogynists. It’s the ultimate gaslighting kick, robbing women of the very words to describe what you are doing to them. It is not just a method of control, but a form of psychological abuse.
Men cannot claim to support women while simultaneously using the fact of women’s oppression to manipulate them. They cannot pretend that threatening women with “Republican and Tory politics” demonstrates their compassion for womankind. These men are the political equivalent of the coercively controlling husband who demands gratitude from his wife on the basis that her ex used to punch her and he doesn’t.
I am pleased that Trump is gone. All the same, it concerns me that “cheer up, love, he’s hardly Trump!” will now be the standard response all feminist complaints regarding the Biden administration. Or, worse still: “if you don’t like it, you’re the same as Trump”.
Trump’s misogyny and racism will have won Biden support among voters who are not white and/or male and what a strange thing to be, a white man who has so much power not least because of another white man’s bigotry. If you stare at it for too long, it all starts to look like a massive conspiracy, an endless pact between white men who each stand to gain from the push-pull of aggression and promises of safety. The man you marry to escape your abusive father; the second husband who promises to treat you better than the first. All the good men who stand to benefit from the work of the front-line misogynists.
I’m not saying the good men can’t still be good, or shouldn’t be supported. I just hope that one day there’s a goodness that doesn’t depend on the badness, or on everyone else having to give thanks because we have no other choice.”
Full credit to Glosswitch. Sign up for her substack, The OK Karen.
Arcadia – standing ovation.
It’s sort of like when Planned Parenthood tried to explain to Bernie Sanders why they endorsed Hillary Clinton when he had a 100% rating from them, too. They explained the difference between being an ally and voting correctly and being an advocate who actually put forth the necessary things.
Many men seem to have a shitload of difficulty understanding that. (A lot of women, too, unfortunately.)
By the way, to make sure my last comment is not diluted by annoying common practices, I almost never give standing ovations. I have given maybe three standing ovations in my entire life. I do not follow the crowd when they all stand for that mediocre or bad performance of a second-rate play just because they think they should.
And…to reduce confusion…deleted should read ‘diluted’.
Heh – I was confused – wondering why you thought I would delete your comment.
It is a brilliant piece, and it deserved a wider readership in my view. The above was only a portion of the whole of that particular edition, but it was the part relevant here. I strongly recommend signing up to Victoria’s substack, as I have, The OK Karen, and she’ll send you similar brilliance regularly.
Arcadia: I second that. Follow her on Twitter too, if you do that kind of thing.