Mattys Modern Life
Everyone’s favourite misandrist came out with another column yesterday condemning the “loutish” behaviour at Summernats, a festival for rev-heads in Canberra.
I admit, not being in any way inclined to care about a festival for cars, this is the first I have ever heard of this festival. The column details some behaviour that may have happened there (although the stories listed are all anecdotal) that, if true, is certainly not acceptable and I am not making excuses for it. Nobody deserves to be harassed or attacked in any way. One of the stories in her column details a woman having a crowd of men try to take their clothes off. If true, this is both unacceptable and criminal behaviour and should be treated as such.
Yet, to somehow pin this as the fault of the festival itself is also not acceptable. If women have been the victims of sexual assault, at any time, they should report it to the police, or security, immediately. I suspect, however, that the festival would act immediately and swiftly to remove or arrest any offenders once notified. I also suspect that Clementine knows this. If she doesn’t, it speaks volumes on her ignorance, not to mention her bigotry.
So let’s talk about the column itself and why it is yet another thinly-veiled attack on men and “toxic masculinity”, otherwise known as masculinity, not to mention a weak defence of her own misandry.
“Rohan Thomson’s photo essay for Fairfax captured a slice of this over the weekend, most notably in the image of a lone woman surrounded by more than 20 men (who were reportedly chanting, “Black top! Black top!” at her, Summernats code for “hey you in the [insert colour of shirt here], show us yah tits!”). But this is just boys being boys. Right?”
And? How does she know the woman wasn’t loving every minute of it? Why is chanting as a group to have a woman show her breasts somehow bad or immoral? I understand that it’s crass and unlikely to yield results in most cases (although the photo essay showed plenty of “results”), but who exactly is getting hurt by saying “tits out for the boys”? If a group of woman in the street said to a man “penis out for the girls” would that be evidence of a group of idiots being idiots and girls having a laugh? Or would it be “toxic femininity”?
I remember hearing a saying when I was younger, I can’t recall where exactly, but it went something like this: “The only thing worse than being treated as a sexual object is not being treated as one.”
To be treated as a sexual object is literally the hidden goal behind essentially everything we do. Complaining about people being treated as a sexual object says more about the individual complaining that it does about the ones doing the “treating”.
If the woman in the picture is uncomfortable, or doesn’t like it, she can walk away. Besides, she doesn’t look uncomfortable or worried at all in the photo, quite the contrary, she looks like she’s having a great time (although photos can be deceiving). Who is Clementine to stop this woman from receiving accolades of men surrounding her? If she is uncomfortable, walk away and if the men follow her and continue chanting, despite it being obviously not wanted, then she can say the men were out of line. Then she should go to security and ask for assistance.
Yes, Clementine, this is just boys being boys and you are just a prude being a prude.
…why and how this kind of sexually predatory behaviour becomes normalised, particularly at events traditionally considered to be the domain of men.
Here is the definition of a sexual predator – a person who has committed a sexually violent offence and especially one who is likely to commit more sexual offences.
So, given that definition, would someone care to explain to me how shouting, “tits out for the boys,” is predatory? Anyone? Where is the violence being committed? Is she being held against her will? Can someone please explain this to me? If the woman is free to walk away, how is this “predatory” behaviour? A predator, by definition, wants to catch its prey. Allowing easy escape seems a little bit counter to that goal.
Yes, men can be crass and vulgar – it’s what we are, we aren’t always proud of it, but we also don’t see any harm in a little bit of vulgarity amongst mates. It’s fun, it’s bonding, it is what it is. We should not have to change our behaviour to suit an angry feminist sitting behind a computer screen.
As she notes, this is a domain that is traditionally the dominated by men; this is a bloke zone. If women don’t like it, they don’t have to go, and if they were genuinely sexually assaulted, they should report it immediately. It’s just that simple.
“Like most women, I’ve had groups of men holler at me on the street to show them naked parts of my body.”
Hah! Unlikely… moving on.
“Given that this kind of obnoxious posturing is expressed most often by multiple men at once rather than individual men working alone, it seems reasonable to assume that part of the attraction lies in the pursuit of fraternal bonding.”
Yeah, and? So men aren’t allowed to bond if you don’t like the way they are bonding? Give me a break, talk about a thinly-veiled attempt at attacking men simply for being men and wanting to have fun with their mates.
Do you know what else men do to “bond”? Run into a hail of machine gun fire with their mates because another man, who was told to by another man (who is probably a politician), told them to. Clementine Ford does not get to pick and choose the way males harmlessly bond with each other. Especially not when she is the beneficiary of that same bonding and the sacrifices men have made in order to protect their mates and the country in the past. The same biological instinct drives both situations.
Nobody is forcing her or any woman get their tits out (if they are, see above), nobody is doing anything but say stuff that some women might not like. Well, boo hoo! If you don’t like it, suck it up.
“Indeed, the whole “boys being boys” excuse is regularly trotted out to defend this kind of activity, with women routinely instructed to stop being so sensitive because it’s apparently all just a bit of fun and it doesn’t really mean anything.”
Yes! Stop being so sensitive. Nobody is responsible for anyone’s feelings other than the individual who has them, nobody. If you don’t like the way a man is behaving towards you, walk away. If you don’t like the attention you are going to get at a festival for testosterone-driven redheads, don’t go. Why is being a mature, self-determining, grown up such a tough concept to get across these days?
“Even those people who downplay the impact confirm the behaviour exists in statements like “you just have to know what to expect” or, ominously, “make sure you go with your boyfriend or a male friend and don’t go to Tuff Street after dark”.
Wait, what? You mean take some personal responsibility for yourself? How could anyone do that! Much better to simply whine and moan about how annoying and yucky boys are if you ask me…
“When I asked members of my Facebook page to share their experiences..”
You can read the stories she relays for yourself if you wish to; they are what you would expect. One woman complains of “sexual harassment,” which could mean anything in Feministese. Another sounded genuinely distressing, if it was true. Again, see my comments above, actual sexual assault is never acceptable, but we will go over this bit, a little more, shortly.
The reason I highlight this sentence is because anyone who knows about Clementine Ford knows that you don’t last long on her page if you post any kind of counter-argument. Go and try it for yourself here, see how long you can last. Rules are, no insulting or genuinely offensive comments (actual racism, misogyny, swearing etc). Only good, well-reasoned arguments that counter her point.
You won’t last long. Let me know how you go.
The point being, her asking her Facebook page/fans for stories about this festival is like asking your mum how cool you are. The answer you get might not be as honest as you need it to be, but it will certainly be exactly what you want.
As a feminist writer, I’m used to being told that I hate men and want to demonise everything they do… I will also be told that if I want to focus on “real abuse”, I should look to the Middle East and Islam, and stop laying into the good men of Australia. But I’m interested in the cognitive dissonance that instructs people to, on the one hand, fiercely defend men against charges of misogynist objectification while insisting on the other that people (and women especially) should know what to expect when they enter these environments.
Interesting how she completely dismisses her own cognitive dissonance on the issue of Islam whilst attacking others for what she perceives as their own cognitive dissonance. I would be shocked, almost to death, if she were to write a column about the inherent misogyny (actual provable misogyny, not to mention hatred of gays and other issues) within the Islamic community around the world, let alone Australia. It will never happen, although I would welcome being proven wrong on this. If Leftists start talking about Islam in this way, we are a long way to winning that battle.
Nobody is saying that this kind of festival is something that most women would, or should, attend. The behaviour of the men is, indeed, crass and boorish, but that doesn’t make it “misogyny”. Men objectify women, we do it all the time. We see a nice looking woman and we check them out, this is perfectly natural and acceptable. Just as women objectify men. This doesn’t mean we hate women; I’d say the opposite is true for reasons that should be obvious.
Defending the behaviour of these men as “boys being boys” whilst also warning women what to expect if they go is not “cognitive dissonance” in any way whatsoever. It is simply understanding the situation and how individual choice works.
“Why are women told in general to modify our behaviour… yet when evidence of mass sexual harassment is reported at a specific event populated by people with actual faces and community standing, it’s discounted as men blowing off steam and … having fun?”
Why are men being told to change their behaviour at a festival specifically promoted to men as thing for men to do? This same woman would cry blue murder if the festival was made men’s only. Women have women’s only areas all over the place, yet clubs that don’t allow women are shamed and attacked as “sexist”.
She can’t have it both ways. She can’t demand men change their behaviour in some situations then refuse even the suggestion that women change their behaviour in others. That’s a blatant double standard.
Who is she to decide what constitutes “blowing off steam” to someone who is not her? Who made her the arbiter of all things that can and can’t be done in a free society?
If nobody is committing a crime, or initiating force on another human being, what gives her the right to demand anyone change their behaviour, no matter how crude?
“Why are the events like the mass groping at Cologne used as an example of how immigrant men pose a threat to “our women”, yet white Australian men acting in a similar fashion at a car show is dismissed as “boys being boys”?”
Never forget, this is the same woman who labelled the justifiable outrage over the Cologne sex attacks, actual sexual predatory behaviour committed in organised groups for the purpose of sexual accosting women, “racism”.
This woman parodies herself.
The fact that it needs to be explained to her that there is a difference between being sexually assaulted by a large group of men and men shouting, “tits out for the boys,” says so much about modern feminists. The fact that she would defend such despicable acts in others by accusing people of “racism” simply for pointing out where the attackers came from and that it was the fault of Angela Merkel’s open borders policy, says all you need to know about this woman and what she stands for.
The fact that the only thing close to the Cologne sex attacks that she has is an uncorroborated anecdotal account from someone on her extremely biased and unreliable Facebook page says it all. Summernats have played down reports in the past, and most of the violence seems about what you would expect from a normal night out on the town. Once again, not defending actual violence (I live by the non-aggression principle and have been the victim of both violence and domestic abuse), just calling for a reasonable perspective on the matter. Something that Clementine needs a large dose of.
Finally, she ends on a lovely note of puritanical garbage, quoting an email she received from a woman:
She wrote, “I wish it were banned. Every year I wonder how many young women have their fates changed.”
There you have it, “anything I don’t like should be banned”. This is the modern Left in a nutshell. Puritanical in the extreme whilst failing to hold a mirror to their own toxic lunacy. Clementine Ford doesn’t like it, therefore it should be banned, end of story, no more discussion.
I have a better suggestion: let’s ban Clementine Ford and her toxic feminist fundamentalism. Let’s stop her from spewing her hatred all over the place, because I don’t like what she has to say. Let’s just ban her from speaking altogether. I wonder if she would be happy with that solution?
Somehow I can’t see that solution fly. Besides, who would we roll our eyes at once a week?
Mattys Modern Life writes regularly and brilliantly at https://www.minds.com/MattysModernLife.