Feminism And Sexism At The Tab

'They get to virtue-signal their tolerance and acceptance whilst ignoring those who need it. Typical.'

By Jordan Holbrook: In partnership with Bloomberg, The Tab is currently running a competition to vote for the society that people think is doing the most to support equality at university – the four categories available are BAME (Black and Minority Ethnic), Gender, Disability and LGBT+. The competition states:
“The winner of The Tab Society Of The Year 2017-18 will receive expert mentorship from Bloomberg, diversity training and the chance to spend the day at their office in London.
The Tab is proud to partner with Bloomberg to champion societies at uni doing their part in promoting LGBTQ+ rights, supporting those with disabilities, representing BAME and empowering women.”
So, to qualify, you have to be working towards the empowerment and support of people who are LGBTQ+, BAME and/or female (in other words: not straight, able-bodied, white men). As someone who argues equality should be equality of opportunity for all, I am always suspect of these sorts of initiatives, especially when there appear to be no systems/initiatives for the groups that are not represented.
Today’s post shall focus only on the so-called ‘Gender Equality’ competition they are runnning. Here, they use the phrase ‘gender equality’ but, those are merely weasel-words standing in place for ‘feminist agenda’, a confession that is openly made by many of the entrants (read: University of Birmingham Conservatives).
Something in the prize that irks me is the offer of ‘diversity training’. As anyone with any history or experience of ‘diversity training’ will know, these things are vehemently anti-male, rife with patriarchy theory and are saturated with feminist thought (look, for example, at these ‘Consent Classes’ universities hold).
As it stands, a total of 22 societies from 16 universities are in the run:

1. University of Birmingham Conservatives – Birmingham
2. Dance Society – Newcastle
3. Women In Work – St. Andrews
4. Women’s rugby – UEA
5. FemEng – Female Engineering Society – Glasgow
6. Dance – Sheffield
7. Women for Women International Society – St Andrews
8. Women of Colour – Royal Holloway
9. Women in STEM – Edinburgh
10. Pole Dancing Club – Glasgow
11. Female Voice Choir – Edinburgh
12. Women’s Canoe Club – Leeds
13. Women in Leadership Society – Leeds
14. It Happens Here – Newcastle
15. Women in Business – Durham
16. Women’s lacrosse – Sussex
17. Theatre with Teeth – Exeter
18. Durham University Days for Girls – Durham
19. Women in Science – Bath
20. Warwick Finance Societies – Warwick
21. Netball Club – Leicester
22. Blank Verse – Cardiff

Reading through the profiles of many of these universities’ societies betrays just how naïve and ideologically possessed these hapless students are. Claiming to stand for gender equality yet focussing entirely on women’s issues and not even a fragment of a concern for male issues. Only two out of twenty-two are open to more than women, one is ambiguous and the other nineteen are geared for women only! Good one, 86% of the societies vying for top status as leaders of gender equality are not open to all genders. Right-oh!
Only the ‘Pole Dancing Club’ in Glasgow and the ‘Women in Leadership Society’ in Leeds specifically state they are open to all, PDC stating they break “gender stereotypes and empowers all genders to take an active role in their physical, social and mental wellbeing” and WiLS say they aim to “empower students, irrespective of gender, socioeconomic status, or ethnicity to succeed both professionally and personally”. The ambiguous society is “It Happens Here” up in Newcastle who are “currently in the process of setting up a peer support group for survivors of sexual assault”. As they are do not make reference to sex/gender, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
However, the overall double-speak at play is staggering: “we support gender equality” versus “women-only”. In fact, several of the societies boast their ‘women-only’ status as a virtue. Only in the mind of these delusional Leftists can they use sex-discrimination as evidence of gender equality!
Second, if the discussion is of gender equality in university, perhaps they could start with representation at university!? For example, this academic year there were nearly 100,000 more female applications than male and entry rates to university were 27.8% for men and 37.7% for women.
Also, women have a higher chance of getting a 2:1 or a 1^st than men and are less likely to drop out, scholarships are thrown at women by the spade-full to try and meet gender quotas and male societies are being blocked on the grounds they are dangerous and non-inclusive (whilst allowing FemSoc to continue). In fact, near every step of the way the education system is failing boys. According to the Higher Education Policy Institute, the sex disparity in education is a “national scandal”.
Considering all the above, why do people still assume that ‘gender-equality’ initiatives have to favour women!? Should they not, as the title seems to suggest, favour those who require them? It would appear not.
This is yet another example of a campaign claiming to be for ‘gender equality’ but is actually the polar opposite. Not that I expect them to care, why would they!? They get to virtue-signal their tolerance and acceptance whilst ignoring those who need it. Typical.

Source