Sunday, March 28, 2010

The joke’s on you if you’re male and Right-wing

From Peter Hitchens' blog

"I don't much like UKIP or its ex-leader Nigel Farage. I’ve called UKIP a ‘Dad’s Army’ party for years. So I was quite flattered to see that ‘Interviewer of the Year’ Camilla Long used my phrase in her extraordinary interview with Mr Farage.

But I was then puzzled to see that she spent a great deal of energy on the fact that Mr Farage once suffered from cancer and had a testicle removed as a result.

She even rang him up afterwards to ask which one it was. He took this in good part.

But should we?

Can you imagine what would happen to a male journalist who interviewed a liberal female politician who had lost a breast to cancer, made that the jokey theme of the resulting article, and rang her up afterwards to ask which breast it was?

Can you picture the outrage of the cancer charities, the wild storm of fury on Twitter, the pink-ribboned crowds gathering outside the newspaper’s office? But because Mr Farage is male and his cause is ‘Right-wing’, you can do what you like".

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not sure Farage is right wing. Certainly there is enough about him and UKIP to ensure that I will not vote for either. But I would not call Farage right wing. More accurately I would call him outspoken and a maverick. Wanting the UK out of the EC is not particularly right wing. Tony Ben once advocated the same in the past.

On occasions I find it hard not to like Farage. Seeing him tearing into Von Rompuy is a pure delight.

Sadly other views that he expounds are less attractive to me.

BrusselsLout said...

A word of caution here gentlemen, about the men's movement aligning itself with the political right wing. There are 2 reasons.

Firstly, the American Republican Party is currently trying to gain support from men's rights supporters and fathers' rights groups, etc. However, they are doing nothing to include men's issues into their policies. Moreover, they are still in support of feminist dogma and campaigning on it. Both Rich Zubaty and Bernard Chapin have mentioned this.

Secondly, bear in mind that parties of the left at one time stood up for disadvantaged MEN. (And women, of course, but they certainly did not exclude men.) Support of modern anti-male feminism by the American Democrats and the British Labour Party is a recent phenomenon. I believe that feminism does not naturally belong there and that it will one day fade.

As a separate issue, I feel quite disgusted that mouthy bints like Camilla Long can feel free to make jokes about men's injuries, and sexual jokes at that.

She needs a good punch in the tit, the sack from her job and exclusion from public office.

Heretic said...

I wasn't defending Farage - actually I don't know who he is - I was just pointing out the double-standards shown by feminists. It could have been any man.

I've never regarded myself as right-wing. I was left-wing for years, until I became sick of their bigotry and irrationality, and arrogant self-righteousness. There is a right-wing element in the men's movement, mostly American, that I find distasteful. I regard myself as a liberal, and this often surprises lefties and feminists; they often seem to confuse liberalism with socialism. They think that I am attacking them for being too liberal. The opposite is the case. My problem is that they are authoritarian puritans, and seem to hold liberal democracy in open contempt, while at the same time stealing its clothes.

BrusselsLout said...

I've never regarded myself as right-wing. I was left-wing for years, until I became sick of their bigotry and irrationality, and arrogant self-righteousness.

I know!

There is a right-wing element in the men's movement, mostly American, that I find distasteful.

Veteran MRA Rich Zubaty (author of the pricelessly defiant What Men Know That Women Don't) has said exactly the same thing.

Anonymous said...

Just to add to the general discussion about political alignment. I would say the what characterizes me is a very fierce independence. I can not abide any political party that would smother me, and I guess that is all of them.

I am more interested in liberty than wealth. I am vehemently opposed to marriage since that is the most smothering of all situations. I don't venerate the family and wish I had avoided having one. I believe young men are too stupid to navigate their lives properly - well I know I was anyway.

I am quite happy to be called a misogynist. In so much as I wish to be involved with women at all then I would put them in the category of children.

JimmyGiro said...

@ Heretic
Your comment above deserves to be pasted into the main article, as way of a conclusion.

@ Anon 10:02am
With you on that brother.

@ All
There has become a problem with the meaning of terms such as 'right wing', 'left wing', 'fascism', etc.. These terms have become too elastic to be relied upon with any premise of an argument. Therefore we have to stipulate how we are using such terms by way of a short definition, usually at the beginning of any essay.

Richard Ford said...

It comes down (to me) to the issue of a persons right to a private life.

Feminists believe the personal is political and this abolishes the private sphere. In other words the individual becomes social property and not free.

I have no problems with the mixed economy, transport expenditures and a national health service. This places me well on the left of the mens movement. The problem is that I am also in favour of indiviual freedom and the right to a private life. This means that I am socialy to the right og most people.

There is a great deal of bundling things together that do not belong.

Anonymous said...

I would agree with Richard Ford at least superficially. If the state was like a helpful uncle who was always in the background ready to give assistance then I like you Richard would not object to this at all.

The trouble I have is that this is not always the case. I think it is rather complicated and to cover all the cases would make this comment too long.

My general understanding is that whenever the state is involved then the end point will be a bad one. That does not mean that there can not be a phase when in general the effects are good. I myself benefited from the Butler reforms of the sixties. However that could be seen as the thin end of a fat wedge. I was able to have higher education which previously I would not. However, that was 40 years ago. The end result in what we see now is an education system totally controlled and I would say deformed by government.

I also question if it is possible to have personal freedom when the state is so pervasive and powerful. In the end they are going to control men down to the last item.

Just in passing I could add that I see the state as being female.

BrusselsLout said...

The categorizations of left and right are no longer relevant to people's lives. Yet this is what we are stuck with. The main parties on the left and right are both authoritarian. The one in the middle doesn't know what it is but never shows its teeth whenever it appears it might. The green one is so feminized it's not even worth contemplating.

But contrary to what has been suggested time and again, I do not for one minute believe the Conservatives respect personal freedoms. (Business and economic freedom yes, but this is a world away from civil liberties.)

It was a Conservative government who introduced the minimum sentence for rape. (No crime should have a minimum sentence.) It was the Conservatives again who first contemplated abolishing the double-jeopardy rule (although it was Labour who actually crushed it). It was the Conservatives who first spoke of allowing hearsay evidence into the courtroom (with Labour continuing these attempts). A Conservative campaigning slogan was to build more prisons. Labour hijacked this mentality and made it their own.

Thatcher was the first prime minister to "tackle" social problems with the introduction of more and more new laws. Labour copied.

So, gentlemen, we obviously have a serious hole in our democracy: we desperately need a libertarian party. (I am personally very dissatisfied with the one currently on offer.) Because, this is one thing that stands out as common to all of us. We are all libertarians. I have not come across one authoritarian MRA.

And this is hardly surprising. Authority is feminization. It's women who want tougher laws, longer sentences and more men in uniform to protect them. They scare easier. Whenever I visit the UK I am perplexed as much as I feel disturbed by the number of CCTV cameras everywhere. And who wants these? Exactly. Women. It makes them "feel safer".

We need a change of political emphasis. The left/right dichotomy is not a real one.

I am not voting in the forthcoming election. I don't have anyone to vote for.

Anonymous said...

Brussels would not the best outcome of the election be that they all loose, diminish and then vanish all together?

I think the UK is dead. Here it is inconceivable that some one like Ron Paul could ever exist. In fact I think it astonishing that he is able to exist at all in any place.

I just don't think Liberty is an idea that has any hold in the UK political imagination or indeed amongst the people at large.

If I am in a party then that party has only one member.