Via Tom, J4MB: The piece was written by a smug male columnist, a former ‘student socialist’. An extract: Personally, I’m not really into the whole men’s rights thing. [That’s it, ignore men’s rights, they’ll go away. Oops, they already have, and you’re too stupid to have noticed.]
Most “advocates” strike me as a little bit sad and a little bit obsessive. [I imagine the same could have been said about “advocates” for an end to slavery, improved rights for black people in the US, an end to apartheid in South Africa…]
A few are just plain creepy. [This is journalism of the lowest order. Would he not be more at home at the Australian edition of The Guardian?]
Still, from what I gleaned in the trailer — which of course I also never would have seen had the film not been banned — they didn’t seem like towering tyrants of patriarchal oppression.
Maybe that’s what upset the censors so much.
[Such an absurd comment could only have been made by an ignorant person who hasn’t seen the film. What upset the feminist censors so much was that the film was made by a former feminist who stopped being a feminist when she engaged with men’s rights advocates, and realised that what they had to say about gender matters was demonstrably true, and compelling – and that feminist narratives are all a tissue of lies.]
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment