A curious thing happened online last week: young women were subjected to vile abuse and yet feminists didn’t come to their defence.
The women were branded “dumber than dogshit”, “bimbos”, “dangerous”. And yet feminists didn’t kick up a fuss. Despite having spent the past five years going on about how terrible it is to be insulted by oafish men online, feminists kept strangely schtum about this particular war of words on women.
How come? Why the sudden collapse in the sisterhood’s stand against abuse? Because the women being targeted were the wrong kind of women.
They are immoral women, bad women, undeserving of support from the prim, well-bred women who make up much of modern-day feminism.
Yes, these were the grid girls and darts girls — the glamorous models who bring sass to Formula 1 and darts by looking attractive and happy.
Or who used to, rather. They’ve now been unceremoniously dumped after the overlords of these sports decreed that they were “inappropriate”.
In short, the women were redefined as “offensive”, the latest “problematic” thing that would have to be sacrificed to appease the gods of PC: those insatiable offence-takers who are always primed to howl “inappropriate!” at things they don’t like (a secular version of Islamists shouting “haram!”).
Some of the models took to social media and the airwaves and did a fine job of defending their glamorous work. They asked why they should get the heave-ho just because the sight of them in a flattering boob tube horrifies prudes and feminists.
As British darts girl, Charlotte Wood said on TV: “I thought feminism was meant to help us... I feel like we’re having our rights taken away.”
feminists looked the other way, or even joined in, when tragic men on the internet started lecturing and even verbally abusing the grid girls and darts girls.
Charlotte hit on something incredibly important: modern feminism, an increasingly posh, stiff, censorious affair, is not really about helping women. In fact, if any woman makes a choice feminists disagree with, they’ll be thrown under the bus.
And so it was that feminists smiled as these young models were sacked. They are bad women, so screw them. The new feminism’s joyless puritanism and unforgiving streak have rarely been so brilliantly exposed.
It was summed up in the cringe-inducing sight of British feminist Sally Howard telling two sacked darts girls during a TV discussion that people sometimes have to “suffer” for the good of “social progress”.
How unsisterly, how spiteful. Don’t let feminists tell you they care for women; they’re more than happy for some women to “suffer” — those “lower” women, those women who defy feminist diktat by using their sexual prowess to make a buck.
This is why feminists looked the other way, or even joined in, when tragic men on the internet started lecturing and even verbally abusing the grid girls and darts girls.
These PC blokes, desperate to advertise their feminist credentials, told the girls that in stupidly playing men’s sexual games they were making themselves complicit in the objectification of women, and therefore making it more likely women will be mistreated or attacked.
What a vile argument. It amounts to saying these women must cover up or else they will inflame “rape culture” — a new version of when sexist old dinosaurs used to say that girls in mini-skirts shouldn’t be surprised if they get assaulted. Perhaps all women should wear the burka?
We could call these men “woke misogynists” — people who think they’re right-on and progressive when really they’re just sexists dolled up as feminists who get off on telling young women not to be so dumb and overtly sexual. And feminists stand by as these men say these things because, disgracefully, they agree with them.