Thursday, August 23, 2007

[feminism] where higham's coming from

This is the horse after the cart and should have been done before the last post but still - I need to explain from whence I'm coming on this matter of feminism.

1. From a very early age [4], I had what could be construed as girlfriends and though both sets of parents probably saw it as amusing, it had the effect of my upbringing being normal [not "usual" as usual in those days meant separation of the genders until "coming out"].

Far from learning to respect the opposite sex as "ladies", I saw nothing different or unusual at all and judged her on how she acted and if she'd do the things we all liked to do - ride bikes, smoke, talk rubbish. Very early I saw that they were more moral than us - girls would castigate me for my behaviour and so I drifted off to my mates.

2. I've always tried to correct anomalies so when I became a teacher and saw girls continually lowering themselves before the male in maths, science and sport, I thought to hell with that and began a campaign of many years building them up, presenting chances of success and so on until I realized some girls had a social agenda to appear lesser.

The high or low point possibly came when we took a cricket team to St Peters School and there were two girls in it. St Peters were respectful but their coach took me aside and virtually asked what the hell I was doing - striking a blow for feminism? I hadn't thought about it that way before - seriously.

What made it worse was that one of our girls got their star batsman out with a ball which cut back from the edge of the pitch, then proceeded to do a pirouhette and cartwheel. I spoke to her about dour gentlemen cricketers later.

She played two more games, then not because she was a girl but because she was basically inconsistent, she couldn't be kept in the team over some pretty hot boys and so that particular experiment ended - there were others along the way.

My attitude was that girls could do anything boys could do if they really wanted to but it was shown through events that it wasn't entirely so - that there were some things they did better, some not as well for whatever reasons - social, whatever, I didn't explore that.

3. I can say in all honesty that if they didn't mind James being quite close to their daughters [which some did], there were more than a few parents who pushed for the girls to go into his stream because it increased the girls' chance of academic success. It came out, actually, through rumblings from two boys who felt I favoured the girls more.

4. So it's fair to say I've spent my working life building girls up and though I have many male clients, there are a lot of women who come along, preparing for new positions and I try to get them thinking strongly, thinking manager and going through the whole business construct and how to get round it and in fact, over it.

Understandably, with a background like that, one develops an understanding of the female mind in a non-confrontational setting and often when I expect she can do such and such, she stops me and says well she's not all that confident about that and so on.

Then it's a case of believing in her, cutting away the excess baggage and helping her upwards. When she comes back with thanks later [and she always has got the job] I refuse to accept the thanks because all I did was utilize her own talent I knew was there and state the bleedin' obvious. Easy as pie. If the product is good in the first place, it's easy to sell.

5. So that's the frame of mind I was in when I wrote the feminism post. Not some woman hater hiding in his room with a computer, not some jilted and jaundiced lover but a man who detests the treason which has been committed on women by the Feminists.

There are so many fantastically talented [and beautiful] women who still don't give themselves a chance and I don't mean the vocal and the bloggers - I mean Mary Smith from Dartford who doesn't have a computer but does have an ipod and cell phone.

Feminism just gets in the way of that and turns men against them, without respect and with increasing violence and mind playing. A woman does have certain vulnerabilities, as we do and Feminism simply highlights them and supplies men with the ammunition to treat them badly.

I want to cut away that baggage and so, as you can see from the last few posts, do a hell of a lot of women. I say again - when you don't work within the totality of humanity to improve the lot of all disadvantaged groups, when you set yourself at a distance from the other gender which the Feminists and Gay Mafia do [see quotes in the post below], then not only are you buying yourself trouble but you're also betraying humanity.

Such people are my enemy because I am pro-humanity.

8 comments:

  1. Nice story, James, and I agree with you. While the financiers cabal is your story, mine is the Pomo cabal. Feminism was made for the express purpose of setting women against men ... white, Western ones, that is. Women have become part of the Oppressed versus the Oppressor narrative, an 'epic myth', thought up to inspire the masses against the establishment (of white Christian males: what I term the White Patriarch archtype). This has been going on since Rousseau invented it, and Marx and Hitler improved it to perfection.
    Down with feminism and the lot! A la Lanterne! The Counter-Revolution is starting today.
    Cheers, mate - have one on me!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am so delighted - I can't tell you how much - that women of sense write and speak like you do. It's so nice to know that the true intelligentsia is not all on the Fem-Pomo side and to find some erudite writing for common sense.

    I love Dale O'Leary's simple manifesto of how relations should be and would love to write to her if it were possible.

    My bitter regret is that my two most constant readers here, being feminist, may now give up on me in disgust but I do believe the truth had to be told.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't think WL and JMB will abandon you, James!

    I don't know where I stand in this debate. Of course there should be equal pay and rights, but I want to be protected and cared for by my man, as I, in my way, protect and care for him.

    I tend to get on better with men, I suspect because I like to flirt, and I can do that because I am secure in myself as a woman and as one who is loved.

    I don't know what this says about me ...

    ReplyDelete
  4. James, how could you think such a thing. Even though WL and I have been emailing constantly about this thread and wondering why on earth you were saying some of these things, we would never go away in a huff.

    I just see that we have different opinions, based on our experiences.

    I do get incensed by grand sweeping statements which are so blatantly untrue. For example, Cassandra's

    " Feminism was made for the express purpose of setting women against men"

    What? (I would really like to use some unladylike initials here!)

    This movement has been around for a long time, since before the turn of the twentieth century, when its sole purpose was to get the vote for women.

    Over the years it has evolved to deal with other pressing concerns for women.

    I have been an adult from the fifties on and have seen it evolve and change in many ways. It has many advocates with different philosophies and different rhetoric. Some we (both men and women) can all agree with. Others not at all. Just like a political party, which runs the spectrum from left to right or right to left if you prefer. Do members of a political party all leave because of this spectrum of beliefs. Of course not.

    This is the same with Feminism. Some on the left, some on the right. Don't dismiss those on the right if you don't like the ideas of those on the left. And vice versa.

    I do like this post James. Somehow it seems more like the you I have imagined, instead of the one who has been appearing in this thread recently. The one who let the girls play on the cricket team if they were better than the boys.

    If you had posted it first instead of last it would not have made a difference. I think it's better to close with this. That is if this is the closure and not just a pause in the onslaught.

    I'm sorry I appeared crusty to you. I don't think that's quite complimentary. I think we are in agreement on some things and not on others. As I said we all have opinions based on our life experiences as well as the theory. Well at my age anyway. A young person gets their ideas from books or educational institutions and modifies them as they experience life.
    I think you have read that I was a virtual orphan at the age of 17. When my father died, well committed suicide, when I was 17, it was not my mother who looked after me, but I looked after my mother. I grew up very fast with no one to rely on but myself. I'm sure that has coloured my belief in women being able to do whatever is necessary and not having to rely on men to take care of them. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate men or being treated nicely by them, because I do.

    I don't know why I'm back here commenting when I said I wouldn't but although some of your statements may have me shaking my head and frothing at the mouth, this has been a small part of your contribution to the blogosphere and I will certainly be back. I wish I was better at the quizzes. What I want to know is, if you were taking them yourself without knowing the answers, how many would you get right? Honestly now!
    regards
    jmb

    ReplyDelete
  5. OK - time for me to shut the trap on it, I think. Time for more pleasant blogging.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nice, honest post, james and I do see where you're coming from. Perhaps the difficulty lies in how we each define feminism? I define it as a freedom movement not a movement to accuse or "put down" men.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Aah, you don't think I'd abandon you , do you, Jamesie? You're too much fun!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree. I think the feminist movement did a lot for women but to a point and then it imploded on itself, somewhat. I always feel the need, due to how confident and independant I normally am :) , to defensively state that I am not a feminist. I believe in equality - equal pay for both sexes based on merit etc.
    I recall in Canada, that a woman was walking down the street bare breasted and was arrested. The feminists jumped on it and said that breasts are not sexual as they sustain life, and a bunch of silly women protested at the parliament bldgs bare breasted. It went to the high court and it became legal and not public indecency for all women to walk around bare breasted.
    I don't think too many women did- who would really want to( esp in a Canadian winter) but what did it solve? EVERYONE views breasts as sexual - even if they are functional.
    That was going to the extreme, I think.
    Great post James...there need to be more men ,who think like you do, out there.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.