Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
IRISH PEOPLE EVACUATED from Afghanistan are currently travelling home with the French and Finnish militaries.
Two flights carrying Irish citizens left Kabul airport yesterday, with both planes landing outside of the country.
An Irish mission of Army Rangers and two diplomats – an Emergency Consular Assistance Team (ECAT) that landed in Afghanistan earlier this week evacuated 26 Irish people on top of a previous 10 who had already exited.
Speaking to RTÉ Radio One’s Morning Ireland, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence Simon Coveney outlined that “our citizens left on two separate flights yesterday”.
“At about half 11 yesterday morning, the French flight left, and that was predominantly our ECAT team of Army Rangers and one diplomat,” Coveney said.
“They’re flying home via Abu Dhabi. They’re currently in Abu Dhabi, that’s my understanding, and we’ll look to get them home as quickly as we can,” he said.
“The French are going to facilitate that, or at least bring them to Paris.”
The minister said that the other Irish people evacuated “are flying from Kabul to Helsinki with the Finnish military and they stopped in Tbilisi [in Georgia] on the way”.
“There’s one diplomat and two rangers who are accompanying 15 other Irish nationals and their dependents on that flight,” he said.
“They will arrive today in Helsinki and we will work with them to make sure that they get on commercial flights, predominantly into Dublin.”
However, around 60 Irish citizens and their families are still in Afghanistan, as well as 15 Afghan citizens with Irish residency.
“Most of them are in Kabul and we are in contact with all of those families, and we will stay in contact with them for as long as it takes,” Coveney said.
The Irish embassy in Abu Dhabi, the closest to Afghanistan, are involved with that process, but a team is also to be set up in Dublin to help to facilitate communication with the families.
“There are 15 Afghan citizens who are residents in Ireland, so people who would have been living in Ireland as Afghan citizens, some of them working here who would have gone home to Afghanistan for holidays or to see family and so on,” he said.
“We’re effectively treating them as Irish citizens as well and we will be working with all of those who want to leave Afghanistan to help them find ways of doing that.
But the truth is this is going to be an effort that many many countries are involved in, it will be an international community effort to ensure that foreign nationals who are in Afghanistan who want to get out will be facilitated in doing that, and that is going to be ongoing work in the days and weeks ahead.”
“In the immediate future I think we’re going to see a focus on exiting Kabul airport.” safely.
The Netherlands, Denmark, and Australia have already left Afghanistan and Coveney said he expects France and the UK to leave today.
“The operations to evacuate civilians out of Kabul airport are effectively closed now.”
Australia’s defence minister has said it pulled its troops out of the country because of intelligence about the safety risk to the airport.
Two blasts at the airport yesterday killed at least 72 people.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
She’s wrong simply because women don’t know when to stop. Women have already overtaken men regarding civil and human rights but are still looking for more. Men are becoming second class citizens the way women were and women still feel hard done by.
@Phil Swan: its comments like this that make the Journal’s decision to remove red thumbs, unrealistic and out of touch….in my (off topic) humble opinion. There is an certain element of extreme chauvinism and bigotry, who this move supports.
@Phil Swan: the very fact that you’ve lumped all women into one column makes your comment objectionable and false.
@Dave O Keeffe: the same way that modern day feminism labels all men as privileged and wife beaters….
@gjpb: no it doesn’t.
And if you think “privileged” means they always have power then you don’t understand the concept. Your privilege is not being female and having to deal with all the instances where being female is a disadvantage or dangerous. Same way I have the privilege of not experiencing racism because I am white. I also have the privilege of access to anywhere I want without trouble because I am able bodied.
And only wife beaters are wife beaters. There are husband beaters too. Please leave your logical fallacies at the door.
@Shanti: yes it does.why are there so many articles implying that men are rapists, wife beaters, want to discriminate against women, etc etc
The fact that so many men feel like this shows that the feminist message needs to change
@Phil Swan: wait until you become a second class citizen. It really sucks!
@Deborah Behan: in certain areas he already is
@Ciaran Ó Fallúin: Me either, shouldnt a good little cuck like yourself be off white knighting somewhere?
Deborah, you aren’t a second class citizen. You have rights and protections that men do not. The reverse does not apply.
@Deborah
You arent a second class citizen. As a young Irish woman you enjoy more rights than most demographics in Ireland and globally including men of a similar age and background as you in Ireland and yet in my experience young Irish women are more likely than anyone else in Ireland to demand concessions in every a variety of facets of life.
@Shanti: “Your privilege is not being female and having to deal with all the instances where being female is a disadvantage or dangerous. Same way I have the privilege of not experiencing racism because I am white.”
I notice you didn’t say, “Same way I have the privilege of not having to deal with all the instances where being male is a disadvantage or dangerous.”
One of the most insidious accomplishments of feminism has been their success in conflating of sexism and tribalism–the false characterization of sexism as an in-group/out-group dichotomy with the same basic dynamic as racism, classism, religious conflict/persecution, nationalism, etc.
Men and women have never been opposing tribes. They have always coexisted and cooperated within their families and cultures. The dynamic, and the psychological mechanism behind it, is completely different from the ones that facilitate tribal conflicts.
The reality is, Shanti, that it is more dangerous to be a man than a woman. It’s actually more dangerous to be a child than a woman in most western cultures. And while there are some instances in which women bear a higher risk (though not an exclusive one) of victimization, there are some instances where men bear the higher risk. While there are some spheres and circumstances where women are disadvantaged by sexism, there are others where men are disadvantaged by sexism.
“And only wife beaters are wife beaters. There are husband beaters too.” And it only took 40 years of research and activism on the part of non-feminists like Erin Pizzey to finally convince the feminist establishment of that.
As little as 5 years ago, influential feminists were refusing to even come to the table to discuss the possibility that male victims of DV existed. In my province, back in 2013, a friend of mine was invited on a province-wide current events show called Alberta Prime Time to discuss male victims. Also invited was feminist Jan Reimer, the executive director of the Alberta Network of [battered] Women’s Shelters. She declined, telling producers that if she even showed up to talk about the subject, it would lend a false legitimacy to the idea that male victims exist. This woman was in charge of the entire provincial suite of government funded services for domestic violence victims.
Of course, in Alberta, as in most places in the west, battered men calling police for help are at least as likely to be arrested as assisted. In some jurisdictions, they’re actually twice as likely to be arrested as they are to be helped, and in one study I read it was impossible to mathematically determine how much more likely the men were to be arrested than their abusers were, because across the entire sample population, the incidence of arrest for the abusing woman was 0%.
Now you might not see that as a “female privilege”, but I certainly do.
Being able to pick up the phone and call a hotline, and have the person on the other end NOT accuse you of being the abusive party, or refer you to anger management or batterer rehabilitation services? Going to a shelter and NOT being turned away because of your gender, even if they have plenty of room? Having government authorized agencies that will legitimate your decision to remove your children from their other parent’s custody, so you WON’T be risking a charge of kidnapping and custodial interference? Being able to call police and NOT worry about being the one who ends up in jail while your abuser remains in the home with your children now in their sole care?
Those are ACTUAL female privileges, Shanti. Privilege: “a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.”
Worse, these are not vague, ephemeral social or cultural privileges. There’s no “woo” about them. One need not go hunting for them under layers of social norms, or perform mental gymnastics to convince skeptics they’re real. They don’t exist in an “invisible knapsack”. They are privileges openly and blatantly institutionalized and codified by governmental agencies and systems, and horrifyingly, sometimes by legal statute.
And while I’ve had feminists tell me, scoffingly, that “oh sure, I have “privilege” but I have to be abused to get it. Big whoop,” I would suggest that this attitude is so lacking in basic compassion as to be borderline sociopathic. When women find themselves in potentially life-destroying circumstances, they have institutional and legal privileges that men in those same circumstances don’t.
I’m still trying to parse how feminists can claim that society is inherently misogynistic when it institutionalizes these types of norms. There are some who claim the norms are based on misogynistic stereotypes, such as “women are weak”, but if so, why have feminist organizations spent the last 40 or 50 years lobbying to codify them, and to keep them codified?
Perhaps you can explain.
@girlwriteswhat: good comment..
Bullshit logic. Seeing as being male statistically means you’re far more likely to be homeless, violently assaulted, murdered, incarcerated, die in the workplace, commit suicide, achieve lower academically and have a shorter overall lifespan…does this mean NOT being male also counts as a ‘privelige’? Let’s not even go onto the ‘not experiencing racism because I am white’ insanity.
Agreed!
@girlwriteswhat: Karen, what a woman! Great work
@Shanti: George Francis Hamilton played a part in the construction of the pedagogy of sectarianism when he suggested George Curzon “… should so plan the educational textbooks that the differences between community and community are further strengthened … If we could break educated Indians into two sections holding widely different views, we should, by such a division,strengthen our position against the subtle and continuous attack which the spread of education must make upon our system of government’. The partition of India happened about 34 years after that was written. The idea of divide and rule has been used and refined because it works. Strong traditional societies aren’t good for business and that’s why oligarchs prefer liberalism in consumer societies and tyrannical strong men in resource rich third world countries. Up until about the time Machiavelli wrote the Prince, sovereigns in Europe exercised power much the same as chimps do – through force of arms. Things took a psychological turn thereafter to the point that ideas and emotions have been weaponised and the divide and rule concept keeps rolling out evermore weak individuals. Behaviourally modern humans have been around for between 40 to 50,000 years and yet here we are still being played by muppets by psychos.
@Chaa Bi Daft’ohe: meant like muppets by psychos
I’m going to watch the comments section on this all day, my girlfriend will make me tea and sandwiches.
“What’s a good comeback when my boyfriend says “make me a sandwich”?” “You better come back with a goddamn sandwich!”
@Cranium: and strong cup of tea!!!
@David: You’re sending her in to where the food can be mixed with bodily fluids and where the knives are kept?
You truly are the bravest of the brave!! Try to enjoy your sandwich…
@DaisyChainsaw: It’s a joke love, don’t worry your pretty little head about it. I make a better sandwich than she does.
@David: You better!
@DaisyChainsaw: so you support domestic violence Daisy?
I personally feel that men and women are both equally discriminated against in our society today. Women are discriminated against in terms of employment and being seen as having a role just at home. Men are discriminated against in our justice system getting higher sentences than women for the same crimes. Men are also hugely at a disadvantage when it comes to court proceedings involving children. The only way these problems can be solved is if both sides come together and stop advocating for just men and just women and advocate for equality to all
@Dean: ‘equally discriminated against’? Where do you start with a comment like that. You might want to think a little harder.
Sometimes when the words are confusing it helps if you have somebody put them in a sentence, let me help you.
America, 18th century, slavery… The male slaves and the female slaves were equally discriminated against.
You’re welcome.
@Dean: Come back to us when you are told that your body is no longer your own.. Or when you are portrayed as no more than a prize to be won in 90% of popular culture.
@Dean: so what you’re saying is equality for all? Congratulations you are a feminist because that’s all we want is equality! I’m all for equal prison sentences, equal parental rights and yes it would be great if we could work together.
@Deborah Behan: agree with you in theory.however feminism these days just demonizes men
“Come back to us when you are told your body is no longer your own”
Circumcision and conscript kinda fulfil those requirements and they overwhelmingly affect men more than women
@Emeralds: poor you, did they perform the forced circumcision before they slapped the camouflage on you or as it after?
@Shanti: “Come back to us when you are told that your body is no longer your own..”
I’m sure you’d have said the same to a veteran who was drafted by his government, and had a couple of his limbs blown off. “Come back to us when you’re told that your body is not your own.” You do realize that there are still men alive today who’ve been through that, right? And you do realize that even if you live in a country without a formalized draft registry like the US, the conscription legislation your country will invoke in case of need will name ONLY men as property of the government.
Hey, why don’t you also tell it to the next guy you meet whose parents decided to cut part of his body off when he was born. “Come back to us when you’re told that your body is not your own.”
@Deborah Behan:
I love it when people give me that “Congratulations, you are a feminist” line.
“Fantastic. So that makes me an internal critic. So, as I was saying…”
Oh, so Emma Watson is the only paradigm of feminism, is she? This piece is pathetic and I’d go in to that a bit better if many authors hadn’t already picked apart this authors ill-conceived positions online in far more succinct ways than I am capable. Though I’ll admit, she’s picked her audience well. Her thoughts will be right at home here.
@Titus Groan: You’re wrong except about the part where you admit you’re not capable of defeating her argument and the part where her piece is welcomed, But you know what they say, a stopped clock is right twice a day and unfortunately which is a pity because now you have to go spend the rest of the day being wrong.
@Darren Tully: Oh, I’m capable my friend. But why bother? This lady is quite well known. She will have heard it all before to no avail.
Would it be much too vulgar a display of power for you, Titus?
@Titus Groan: you think you are above the other commentators here yet you still comment
@gjpb: I’m above you, it’s different.
@Titus Groan: nope. You use a few fancy words trying to make yourself look smart. That’s it.
Still laugh at your comment where you said you were a scientist and you would know yet you incorrectly analysed the data given to you in the post.
@Titus Groan: Who else should she address when adressing the HeforShe campaign? Anita Saarkeesian? Julie Bindle? Cristina Hoff Sommers? HeforShe was a feminist campaign and any amount of common sense should serve you in understanding when criticizing the campaign feminists, she is criticizing those feminists involved. Using a ‘Not All’ argument is juvenille and quite silly tbh, of course it is not all, it is all involved….
Regardless, Karen I believe is excellent in the points she raises and would be interested to see who you believe has or can “debunk” her positions.
@James Guinan: and her entire criticism is about class.. Not gender equality.. Funny that, seems entirely a red herring..
@Shanti: What percentage of true knowladge on a specific topic is formed from expirience?
The criticism is, that there is better more knowledgeable people more deserving of such a platform that poor sleepless Emma has been afforded.
Why do you think Karen’s criticisms are about class on this issue?
Personally I do not buy into either feminists narrative here, ‘yes Karen is infact a feminist aswell as a MRA’ I think personal choice and traditional gender roles are what is causing the issues raised and neither side is propositioning a new alternative in place of what they want to deconstruct, ‘which has been done in some regard in the west’. But Karen is on point here in her criticisms of the HeforShe campaign and as to why it has largely failed.
Also, why do you seem to think applying identity politics is a ‘red herring’ as Karen has.
Yeah, I analysed what you gave me fine. The bone of contention arose when you outright stated that murder and psychological abuse were as important as each other. See, that’s not misinterpreting your “data”, that’s calling you the tool that you are. And apparently you were disgruntled enough about the exchange to follow me on to another thread which is kind of weird, to be honest since I forgot who you were up until that point. Nevertheless, I need not prove myself to you. I know what I am as many people here do. It’s demonstrated often enough. So on that note, happy stalking.
@Titus Groan: I never stated that. That’s where your analysis is wrong so please don’t misquote me
@Titus Groan: brought it up again so people know you consistently talk rubbish on various articles
@Titus Groan: “Oh, I’m capable my friend. But why bother? This lady is quite well known. She will have heard it all before to no avail.”
Oh, believe me, I have heard it all before. But you’re welcome to try.
@Titus Groan: It I’d read many succinct counter arguments I’d at least parody/paraphrase them instead of writing that windy little comment you made.
So basically you are saying Emma Watson lived an entitled life, therefore wouldn’t understand women’s needs, therefore feminism is a non-issue. Righto.
@CazzoA: the author is confusing social discrimination with gender discrimination. She clearly doesn’t understand either.
@CazzoA: she’s a men rights activist! Say no more.
@Deborah Behan:
Oh yes, becaause being a Men’s right activist is so wrong….
You ain’t a feminist if you deny another humanitarian movement or use it as a slur.
@CazzoA: No. That is not at all what she said. She even expressed the opposite.
@Quentin Montagne: No she didn’t. She has dismissed the HeForShe campaign as an attempt at reintroducing chivalry. It’s nothing of the sort. Its about standing up for gender equality across the social,political and gender divide.
This article flip flops all over the place.
It would have been helpful if the author could have provided a list of qualifying factors one must meet in order to speak against discrimination.
And if one doesn’t meet those factors, just sit down, be quiet and smile like a good little girl there.
@Laura-Anne: well if you’re white and have a full time job you just sit down and keep quiet.
@Laura-Anne: well for a start she did write this; “As a daughter of working class parents, the former wife of a working class man, who raised three children and two stepchildren while living well under the poverty line and burying one of them along the way”. And I’ll add the pure idiocy of your comment because suggesting that a person needs to meet a litany of criteria before being allowed to join a debate and advocate a position is rather discriminatory. Its not a lot to go on but your comment looks like the kind of thinking prevalent nowadays among the illiberal liberals who have gone so far to the Left they bamboozled themselves in Orwellian mind forged manacles and want to drag the rest of us down with them. We are mammals and therefore social creatures. Thought is social, debate is natural. (can’t believe I’m having to ‘mansplain’ this – no not surprised now that I think of it)
@Chaa Bi Daft’ohe: firstly, thank you for taking the time to write so many words.
Secondly, I think we are actually making the same point. The author lists her qualifying factors by going through her working class background. In the same article, she states that Emma Watson has no right to speak about discrimination by using the “queen” metaphor. Discrediting another woman’s argument because she does not come from the same economic or social background.
And incidentally, implying my comment is idiotic because it does not fall in line with your thinking does not ring true with the “debate is natural” sentiment.
Let me know if you need me to womansplain for you.
@Laura-Anne: language in an imperfect tool as is my ability to comprehend stuff I’ve read sometimes. I apologise but have to add that my comment related to the first sentence of your’s – you might have been thinking about the queen metaphor when you wrote it but I can’t read your mind -
@Laura-Anne: Never did I say Emma Watson has no right to speak on any topic whatsoever. But one has to concede (I would hope) that someone in her position might have a difficult time relating to the concerns of someone who used to spend 5 minutes calculating the price per gram of different brands of cheese in the grocery store, or deciding whether to buy milk or meat today because there’s not enough money for both.
“Discrediting another woman’s argument because she does not come from the same economic or social background.”
That argument was the argument of the feminists whose backlash allegedly left her bedridden. While I agree with their argument–that someone in Emma Watson’s position is ill-suited to understanding the day to day concerns of working class women, Watson’s arguments stand alone and are wanting.
But I stand corrected. Never again will I concede that feminists might have a point. Marie Antoinette is perfectly situated to understand the problems and concerns of the peasantry, and heaven forfend anyone insinuate otherwise.
So why don’t you address MY argument against Emma Watson. You know, the argument that her HeForShe project is nothing more than old-school, patriarchal chivalry in a skirt and lipstick. Explain to me how it isn’t.
Author needs to take a chill pill. Just because she comes from a working class background (which she’s very keen to flag by the way) this gives her the right to understand “ordinary women” and lambast Watson? From what I understand Watson has flagged a range of issues. Obviously people will have different opinions on some of them and she seems a bit of a goon, but surely there are other public representatives out there more deserving of our swings.
How about every person grows up out of whatever ideology they have and takes in a deep breath-full of reality and then starts dealing with themselves and other people instead of buying into the crap our societies churn out. Oh right….there wouldn’t be ego’s to boost, reputations to make and money to milk out of that.
How did you get past Aoife Barry, Karen?
Poor written meninist drivel. What do men have? Try nearly all the wealth in the world. It isn’t more believable because it’s written by a woman.
@Louise MacMahon: You’ve just reminded me I have to go to the post office tomorrow and pick up my monthly stipend for being male. God it’s great being a man.
@Louise MacMahon: I don’t have nearly all the wealth in the world.
@Louise MacMahon: men have higher unemployment rates, higher suicide rates, less chance of getting custody of their child, poorer performance at school, etc etc. Feminism does nothing to address these issues but states it wants equality.feminism paints men as over privileged, potential rapists and wife beaters.it does nothing for men. I agree with the comment above that we all need to work together to improve all our lives
@gjpb: men hold the vast majority of positions of power in the world.
It’s a shame those men aren’t more interested in helping *their* fellow men, but they do seem a little more interested in that than improving the lot of women..
@Shanti: just because some men hold power doesn’t mean that all men are privileged. A lot of men have it much worse than women
“Men” don’t have nearly all the wealth in the world because “men” aren’t s corporate entity.
The homeless men you step over ever day do t get any benefit from Bill Gates’ having a big bank account
At the core of the brief article is the idea that Watson was a bad choice for a bad idea.
Karen Straughan is a well respected commentator and got this 100% correct.
Much of 3rd wave intersectionalist feminism is irrelevant to working class women. And is perpetuated by middle-class activists divorced from the daily plights of ordinary people.
The selling-point to recruit white-knights (He for She) is grossly dishonest, and obviously a re-branding of the ancient code of chivalry.
But don’t let the Facts stop the manginas taking vicarious offence on behalf of the sisterhood. I can smell the virtue signalling approach.
@Liam Mac Roibin: Hahahaha, well respected…. by the MRAs who appreciate a female mascot.
@Liam Mac Roibin: spot the person who has no idea what intersectionality is about..
The whole reason it exists is a load of feminists not feeling like the predominantly middle class WHITE feminists cared for them.
Intersectionality realises that if you are working class, you have the double whammy of both class and gender working against you. If you’re black, you have to deal with racism too, if you’re disabled that too brings all sorts of challenges that other feminists don’t face. If you are trans the TERFs specifically want to exclude you.
Intersectionality is about recognising the additional and by no means less important issues that compound the inequality faced by women, but you’d know that if you were getting your information from people who actually invested in it rather than those who merely seek to criticise it.. Indeed, “third wave feminism is bad” is merely a code for “of course I don’t object to you voting or working, I just don’t want to have to acknowledge any other inequalities”.
@Shanti: ” Intersectionality ” ; the mechanism whereby people who no longer can credibly claim oppression coopt other identitarian tribes so as to be able to continue to tax resources from their favored “oppressor”. Illarity ensues when the inherent pettiness of entitlement-culture turns the cultists against each other.
Ought to be in the dictionary.
Feminist attacks feminist for not being the right type of feminist.
@clad: I’m not sure Straughan is a feminist.
@Titus Groan: She is, she also happens to be a Men’s Rights advocate. The feminists she has engaged with over her honey badger radio podcast are the ones who have painted her as ‘anti feminist’ something she has rather claimed the opposite of. Maybe check out her sources and positions she has claimed for herself on her platforms before swinging in the dark at what they are. It is rather easy, they are all sourced in the article.
@James Guinan: funny, she lists being a men’s rights advocate, spends the entire article bashing feminism for a class / economic privilege issue and is generally claiming that feminism is bad..
Why on earth would anyone think she wasn’t a feminist?? Oh yeah, she’s an egalitarian, explains why money is the main thing she seems to be focused on..
@Shanti: Criticism does and should come from internal sources of a movement, it is a concept of housekeeping and an openess to better ideas to adapt and inprove movement. Or do you believe this should not and does not happen?
@James Guinan: She’s not a feminist, bud. Google her.
@Titus Groan: I stand corrected, didn’t google her, I went to her youtube, seemingly she has changed her stance on Feminism a while ago. Well I guess she fails to see the value in ammending an argument with the simple addition of the word “also” as almost every popular feminist does, in regards to gender equality issues.
Take one look at Family Law around the world and you will see: it is either male-biased or female-biased. Equality isn’t the recognition of both sexes. Equality is gender blindness. It is seeing beyond one’s sex and sexuality. It is seeing a person, and automatically supporting their right to freedom of expression, of fulfilment, of nourishment and safety, of dignity and empowerment.
I appreciate that there are places in this world where women continue to be mercilessly and viciously oppressed. It turns my stomach. As does extreme feminists who try to make me feel guilty. They see my gender, my chromosomal pattern, and apply some mystical connection between me and horrible men thousands of miles away. I am Man. I am Guilty.
I see our Family Courts where mothers get more rights than fathers and children suffer behind closed doors. I see jobs where women get half a year to raise their children while men are expected to come back ASAP after two weeks of dole. I see TV advertisements that continue to portray men as lazy, foolish, selfish, incompetent, unreliable, haphazard and clownish.
A narrative exists where men deserve their comeuppance. Where we as a gender now have the tables turned. That is not equality or justice. That is childish revenge.
I am not a feminist. I am a humanist. Within all of us lie hopes and dreams and desires and fears. We have archaic stereotypes imprinted on our psyches every day by greedy media titans and consumerist empires. We cling to the tough man/nurturing woman images while inside we know: everyone is different.
We are all equal, and we are all different.
I will continue to do as I have done since childhood. I will treat men and women with the respect they as humans inherently deserve. I will avoid or battle toxic people and ideas. And I will hold the door for ladies, and for guys.
Emma Watson wants to be the voice of feminism. Feminism needs to bugger off. It’s singleminded and self contradictory. It is riddled with conflicting views of angry protestors. It has virtues, but it is leading to misandrist backlash.
It needs to be replaced with humanism/equality. And it needs representatives who are male, female and everyone in between.
@James Elford: most sensible thing on here
@James Elford:
HUMANISM:
1. A rationalist outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.
1.1 A Renaissance cultural movement which turned away from medieval scholasticism and revived interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought.
1.2 (among some contemporary writers) a system of thought criticized as being centred on the notion of the rational, autonomous self and ignoring the conditioned nature of the individual.
I’m afraid that’s not what humanism is about.. And before you go there, Egalitarianism is about property and wealth.
The reason feminism has “fem” at the beginning of it is
A) women started out very much on the back foot, you are well aware of this and don’t need it explained.
B) it aims to make the “femme” acceptable in society. Think about it, being compared to a female is an insult in many cases. (You’re such a girl! Crying like a little b1tch, what a pussy…) yes, apparently being associated with femininity is a bad thing, we still need to erase that mentality if we are going to be equals, would you not agree?
@Shanti: what about all the negative connections with men – you are such a d1ck etc
At least James is promoting equality between both while you are creating divisions
@James Elford: actually a lot of feminist rhetoric that I’ve read expressly acknowledges the impact of patriarchal social structures on men too. Although much of what makes headlines is the focus on the women’s aspect of it, a lot of that press is down to the fact that it generates clicks and frenzied debate on websites, exactly like we are seeing on this page. And lo, we’re all falling for it, hook, line, and sinker.
I see ads that portray men as clueless fuddy duddies to be just as unhelpful and sexist as ads that objectify women or, for example, reinforce traditional social roles (E.g., cleaning products, which feature mostly women). That frustrates me too. It frustrates me that fathers get almost no parental leave because firstly it deprives them of fatherhood and secondly it means the cycle of women staying home to look after the kids because she earns less, thereby stymying her career and earnings potential, meaning it never makes sense for the father to take time out of work to be a father, because then the entire family is financially punished. The status quo stays the same: Women’s professional contribution is implicitly undervalued, men’s role as fathers and husbands is implicitly undervalued. And we all continue banging our heads off the wall and sink further into a them-versus-us narrative.
@Shanti: Meaning feminism start – always come back to – fraudulent premises.
Thank you for confirming.
@Shanti:
How quaint that the term feminism represents all that is good and just in the modern world, whereas the term patriarchy represents all that is oppressive and evil.
Sure, feminists aren’t blaming men for the world’s problems. You just named everything bad after them.
@James Elford: I love your comment so hard
Jeez, get over yourself Emma, your an entertainer, stick to the day job.
@Agrippa: do you really believe people should only ever talk about their jobs or are you just thick?
Whenever there is a discussion which seeks to weigh up the pros and cons of each sex, one big elephant is always overlooked. Women have the gift of childbirth and its worth more than any real or imagined men’s advantage. It’s a gift that cannot be measured in surveys, it cannot be appropriated to allow men take 50 per cent of the deliveries. It’s a rare thing, to have the ability to reproduce and carry new life into the world. Value it, treasure it, mind it.
@Zx5vZulB: yes, but if you don’t want to, be that because it would be disastrous to your health or well being, it doesn’t seem like a privilege. I’ve often wondered whether the original oppression of women stems from a sort of envy of this biological function..
@Zx5vZulB: Yes, and not so great if your ability to have children – which necessitates time off to recover and nature a young baby – hinders your career development, it’s not just a gift, it’s also something you’re effectively professionally punished for.
@Shanti: Except the privileges granted to women because they CAN carry children don’t go away when they decide not to.
OMG Karen Straughan writing for the Journal!
This is all fake news to me, I don’t understand what Watson wants, or why another woman is moaning at her. Women. They’re all feck1n mad.
@Zx5vZulB: hahahahaha. Needed that. Thanks. If only the whole planet would stop taking themselves too seriously things would be so much better.
@A H: too bloody right. Women and are not and never will be equal. So would you. all ‘Build A bridge, and get over it’
@Ann Moynihan: oops left out half the sentence. Parkinsons playing up! Now that’s a issue worthy of discussion!
Great speech by Emma thanks for highlighting it.
Terrible article. She essentially had no point but seems to be angry with Emma Watson for something or other.
Why is there always a battle?
White V black
Men V women
Catholic V Protestant
Rich v Poor
Public V private ?
Why can’t we accept that we are all different and that every one has their own battle wether good or bad.
It’s just life Try to enjoy it.
@Stephen Maher: I think that’s the aim.. Sadly, we aren’t there yet. It would be amazing to be there and not have to worry about this utter nonsense anymore, wouldn’t it?
@Shanti: it sure is.I believe in equality for all.its a shame modern day feminism only pushes women’s rights while belittling men
Karen Straughan on the Journal!!! I love this lady, been following her on YouTube for ages, absolutely love her!!
I’ve absolutely no idea what this is all about but have to say I think Emma Watson is a ride.
Poor written meninist drivel. What do men have? Try nearly all the wealth in the world. It isn’t more believable because it’s written by a woman.
@Louise MacMahon: We do ? Where is my share ?
Womens problems will never stop. They keep imagining new ones everyday to break us men down mentally
@Patrick Pints:
Imagining?
What makes you come to the conclusion that any of it is imagined? Is it because *you* don’t experience it?
Maybe because they’ve been shown empirically to be imaginary, like the wage gap?
@Shanti: Manspreading, mansplaining, manterrupting, manslamming, sexist air conditioning, microaggressions, #BanBossy, etc etc.
Not that women don’t have problems. They do. But feminists don’t help their cause when they keep inventing things like the above.
Manspreading is men sitting comfortably on the subway. Due to the typical seat heights and average differences between male and female anatomy (particularly their longer legs, higher center of gravity and narrower pelvic structure), it is more comfortable and stable for men to sit with their legs apart, particularly when sitting in a sideways seat. I have long legs myself, broad shoulders and a narrow pelvis, and I have to sit that way to keep from toppling sideways during stops. Some feminists in the US have described manspreading as a male assertion of patriarchal dominance and entitlement over public spaces, and a means of keeping women in their place.
I suppose if you’re a feminist, that’s the way you might experience manspreading–a reflection of the dominance of men and the subordination of women. I don’t experience it that way. I just see a guy sitting comfortably on the subway, and if his legs are in my way, I just ask him politely to adjust himself. “Excuse me, could you make a bit more room?” I’ve never had a single one fail to politely comply with my request.
Would I call manspreading an imaginary problem? Not entirely–men do tend to spread their knees on the subway. But is it the problem feminists imagine? Yeah, I don’t think so.
Ah would you get lost with your male privilege crap and go out and enjoy life.
Emma Watson and her fans need to spend one day, just one, in our Family courts to see “Male Privilege’ and ‘Patriarchy’ in operation. Makes me sick! Deluded snowflakes is an understatement.
@Vic Nolan: How did you?
Funny, they removed the in camera rule in the UK and it became abundantly clear that there was no discrimination. That the statistics were the result of what sort of access was *sought* by the father.. Indeed, it showed that men get precisely what they ask for, provided there is no valid reason why they should not.
@Shanti: Many fathers do not want 50/50 or sole custody of children, you’re correct. Those who do want custody, however, tend to be warned away from seeking it by their attorneys. It’s an expensive battle they will rarely win.
I know a man in the US who spent 6 years and nearly $250,000 to secure joint custody of his kids. No criminal record. No allegations of abuse. No alcoholism or other issues. Perfectly fit, normal white collar man.
Not every father has that kind of money.
If things are changing in the UK, that’s excellent. But one can’t assume that a man who doesn’t seek custody doesn’t want custody, just like you can’t assume a spouse agreeing in a settlement to pay generous maintenance is agreeing to it because they want to pay the maintenance out of the goodness of their hearts. The amount (maintenance or custody) they agree to in any negotiated settlement will be based on predicted outcomes should the case need to be resolved in court.
It will also be, at least in part, based on the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of the opposing spouse. Lawyers will come right out and advise you, after a year or two of negotiations, whether an ex is going to be recalcitrant and combative all the way to a judge’s ruling, what roadblocks they can and will throw in your way, how they are able to drag the process out and waste your money on requests for summary judgment, emergency orders, nuisance applications, etc. A single application can waste a year of your time and tens of thousands of your dollars before a judge even lays eyes on it, if the applying party wants to drag their feet (I know this from experience, being on the receiving end of a threatened application).
And if the UK is like the US and Canada, men are often stuck paying maintenance during the process and may be required to pay their ex’s legal fees as well.
During my divorce negotiations which did not go to court, we had two case conferences where a judge looked over everything, spoke with us both, and advised us what the likely outcome would be if it did go to court.
The family court is the final step on this journey. Men will by that time know what the likely outcome will be, and they’ll be making their requests largely based on that.
Many women also don’t want custody. They have abortions, and are lauded for it
Instead of Feeling this was an Article about Equality, which is what Feminism is to me. I just feel it is an Angry Hate filled Article about Emma Watson, because she has Money. We are all different, we all have different Struggles as Women, as Men, we need to be coming together as Humans & just looking out for each other.
@Mary Buckley: I get that impression every time I read anything from the mens rights movement.. No matter the subject (even if the inequalities they are discussing are very real and in need of attention) inevitably the majority of the piece will focus on how evil and nasty feminists are.. Which sadly is precisely what they accuse the feminist movement of doing (it’s also not helping those men who need that help).
Feminism adds to men’s struggles by demonising them and agitating against giving them equal rights
Hadn’t heard if this author before … and sincerely hope I never hear of her again. What a load of tripe.
That’s nice. I’m surprised the author didn’t get a man to write it for her.
This inane piece of dribble is exactly why we need feminism, women attacking women for standing up for women & men, ideals are exactly that ideals until put into practise, you can’t give answers to something that hasn’t been a real experience with real results, maybe stop crying about how wealthy & “privileged” Emma Watson is & realise that she’s still a woman. Maybe not with the same experiences you have but undoubtedly with her own experiences, those are all she can speak on.
Maybe if we just treat people like human beings instead of with gender specific stereotypes & judgement this debate wouldn’t even be an issue.
@Steffy Croke: ‘Maybe if we just treat people like human beings instead of with gender specific stereotypes & judgement this debate wouldn’t even be an issue.’ So unlike how the academic feminist position does?
@James Guinan:
Until the inequalities created by gender cease to exist, that will continue..
@Shanti: Some inequalities are natural and some are essential social constructs for the survival of the species, case and point, men on average are stronger therefore as in any case of self defence should not strike back against an opponent they are physically superior to when restraining and isolating the treat is an option, women on average are more often sexually desirable to the opposite sex ‘night club culture, who is in receipt of resources in such an envoirnment?’, Women are left in a more vurnable position than they were prior to being pregnant, Men having to go fight and die in wars throughout all history ‘sadly because one man can impregnate many women to regrow a population in a short period of time, the same cannot be said for the opposite as one woman cannot be impregnated by many times by many men in a short period of time’. I should go on, but I am going to assume you are well aware of the differences between men and women which cannot be changed and hence conclude, there will always be inequality between the sexes, it is a matter of answering the question, which inequalities are willimg to deem acceptable in society.
@Steffy Croke: “maybe stop crying about how wealthy & “privileged” Emma Watson is & realise that she’s still a woman.”
You do realize that I was describing the feminist backlash against Watson, not my own reaction to her. Granted, she and I don’t have a whole lot in common, and forgive me for conceding in the article that the feminists who attacked her kind of had a point.
“Maybe if we just treat people like human beings instead of with gender specific stereotypes & judgement this debate wouldn’t even be an issue.”
You seem to be arguing against your earlier point here. I should realize that she is “still a woman” and (I assume?) therefore an appropriate spokesperson for women. Being a woman is qualification enough.
But at the same time I should treat people like human beings, not members of a gender group, which kind of means that Watson being a woman does not necessarily make her an appropriate spokesperson for women. It also kind of means that women as a group will have such a broad variety of experiences, opinions and beliefs that having any one spokesperson for the whole shebang is kind of ridiculous.
Which is it? I’m confused.
Also, it’s “drivel”, not “dribble”.
“as a daughter of working class parents bla bla bla” – that doesn’t make you more qualified than anyone else to offer a opinion. I stopped reading at that point.
Not one clear argument or objective point made beyond a swipe at Watson. But the author is ‘working class’ so obviously knows best.
Feminism as we see today is a sham. It doesn’t stand up against selective gendercide, which takes away the rights of unborn girls for no reason other than they are female. So-called feminists pressurise women into believing that they should all be working in a job outside the home, even though they would much prefer to be at home raising their children and they don’t support women in this category. Like a lot of other things, liberals have hijacked feminism to push their own anti family agenda and do absolutely for the majority of women. Women need to stop looking to film and television people for affirmation; these people mostly can’t hold a relationship together for more than a few years and are no example to anyone with their private lives. They are only skilled in acting and have no qualifications to advise anyone. Money and fame are not qualifications for anything!
Incoherent nonsense
Trying to figure out what a gender counter-theorist is. Is it a fluidity thingy?
@molly coddled: it’s an anti feminist..
How about she F’ing shuts the F up with her constant feminazi rhetoric!
@Panem et Circenses: why “feminazi”?
Are they advocating the eradication of the male sex?
Some of them are, yes
@Emeralds: And precious few Nice Feminists call out the Not Real Feminists.
Though they will ask the guy who does why he hates women or if a girl broke his heart, with a cutesy emoji, and everything.
I have no issue with opposing societal problems between men and women, and if someone wants to raise these issues in the hope of creating equality. Whatever floats the boat so to speak. I do not and never will agree with demonising someone based on their gender alone. Its not like any of us had a choice and neither gender should be made less or more for something outside of our control.
@Charles McCarthy: agreed. So imagine how it feels to have your gender seen as an insult your entire life?
You’re such a girl!!
Meanwhile we are taught that boys will be boys, so if they’re hitting you or hurting you, that just means they like you..
We are taught this bunkum from childhood. Women grow up being socialised to take abuse.
Then we look at the movies we grew up with, the female is a trophy who starts out uninterested – but the male protagonist can “win” her. Then we learn the lesson that no means try harder, you can win your prize..
There’s some enormous cultural shifting required, but it is possible to change. I don’t think the majority of men are comfortable with the roles carved out for them by our culture, and women definitely aren’t. I was under the impression that the heforshe campaign was to try and get men on side in this, given that it’s as much for their benefit as women’s..
It seams to me that u can’t successfully redefine the role of women in modern society without symaltaneously redefining the role for men. These new definitions of men’s roles in today’s world are usually ignored or just expected to fall into step behind the new roles for women. As is implied in this article.
@Paul Ahern: the first sensible comment here.
The prior definition of strong and stoic excludes a lot of men. And our culture also lacks any sort of “coming of age” ritual (women “come of age” when we become fertile), but there’s no equivalent defining marker for men. And I would hazard a guess it leaves *some* feeling lost and feeling a desire to assert their “manhood”. But of course, the definition of manhood is almost non existent outside of that patriarchal strong, silent, stoic, breadwinner role which is outdated and kinda nonsense..
This is an area that while feminists can help with, it is ultimately not our place to determine what manhood is, we do not experience it, so we should not define it. But I for one would support any attempt to try and fix this, as it can only be of benefit to men.
Here’s a summary of the entire article:
Emma Watson has not suffered enough in her life for her ideas and opinions to be valid. In fact, all you people who are lucky enough to be middle class or upper class, none of your opinions about inequality are valid either. You should just whisht and don’t be doing silly things like advocating for others. Because money.
This article was ridiculous and a pain to read. All I saw was a woman who hated that someone famous and wealthy was trying to make a difference and was hurt that she isn’t famous enough to do so herself.
And I genuinely do not understand what on earth she meant by saying that men are being exploited?? And made to be servants by women in this with the “expectation” of freedom after when in fact they’ll still be servants even after…. what?
No really, what???
You know what would prove that this feminism lark was about equality? If they dared to take on established norms which privilege women and discriminate against men…like rights for fathers…like the woman not always being given automatic custody of children and the keys to the family home. How about that??? How about a true gender equality a woman has no more rights than a man to expect any of these things. But that will never happen. These things are all brushed over because they aren’t issues…they definitely aren’t things any feminist would want changed…let alone dear sweet innocent Emma Watson. Bleet on all you like Emma…but don’t expect a damp thing to change or one man to back you until it’s real unabashed and true equality for both the sexes that you are promoting. But then again it’s all about the women isn’t it??? Feminists…what ever way you dress them up they are Charlatans…every last one of them.
@Kevin Tyrrell: Feminism I feel has been given the wrong name, but feminism is about equality for all. Once women are equal to men we are all equal and therefore we can live in a world that no longer needs femisnim then we are all happy
@Kevin Tyrrell: the European Court of Human Rights (ECRH)has been used to ensure the equal rights of Irish women; access to free legal aid which didn’t exist prior to a case in the 80′s as women reliant on their spouses income had no access to the courts, thus no access to the protection of the courts regarding legal separation, now legal aid is available to those that need it, Irish members of the gay community (some of whom are men) David Norris successfully fought to decriminalize homosexuality, finally Irish widowers are entitled to claim a surviving spouse pension just like their female counterparts, thanks to a case taken in the ECRH. if you wish to mount a campaign to rectify social Injustice by all means do so, then see who rows in behind, complaining about how ineffective feminism has been at advancing the rights of men is at best ridiculous at worst facetious.
Next time you slip on a condom, remember who lead the campaign to legalize contraception in this country.
Great to see Karen appearing in the journal to provide some balance to the feminist nonsense. Please come again.
This author is a well known anti- feminist, she is known for her crazy views and hatred of the womens rights movement. Men are oppressed under capitalism, everyone is, but we live in a patriarchy where women are the oppressed gender. For god’s sake, why was Karen straughan given this platform for her article?? It’s clearly just incorrect. We struggle enough in society as women without having women haters like this given a platform and legitimizing their hateful views.
here is a popular phrase at the moment, used when a state or group act on way the an individual disagree with, it’s “not in my name” which is fair enough, opposition to what might be othewise construed as the popular belief.
The author on the other hand denied the right to express an opinion, suggest a course of action, based on the fact that the purposer had walked a mile on her shoes.
In the fight against patriarchy something bell hooks stated has stuck with me. It’s at the end of a long debate in response to an audience question allies in the fight against patriarchy, it’s about 1hr36 min on do feel free to skip to the end of you don’t have time to listen to an informative debate right now. The link of below
https://youtu.be/5OmgqXao1ng
When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business: but he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken. -Deuteronomy 24:5
She getting her Babs out again ?
What a stupid and ridiculous article with no argument what so ever.
Victimising men because women want to have equal rights as men. What world are you living in that makes you think that women have the upper hand? Feminism is not about women’s rights. It’s about equal rights for all. It’s about standing up against the old fashioned views that it’s ok to abuse your wife, it’s ok to pay women less, it’s ok to rape women because that’s what they are there for, it’s ok to say girls can’t play sports like soccer coz they are girls.
Emma Watson may be very lucky to be white, well off etc but there you are discriminating against her for being that way which was not her choice. It doesn’t matter what your background is if you are trying to make a positive difference in the world. And if men and women get to be equal men will not be “free” to be treated the way many women are wrongly treated today. We will all be equal. Men are not better than women. Women are not better than men. Some skin colours are not better than others and vice versa. It’s time humanity coped on and quit having this primitive view of each other so we can live in a world that does not need feminism!
You need to rethink your silly article.
I fancy the arse off her.
“The woman feminism promised and never delivered”
Preach, sister!
Emma Watson does not need to address men’s problems as we’re the privileged class and its our job to serve women. I stand with Emma Watson!
@Toon Army: “Right” to understand ? Cognition has to be state-approved before it can inluence thoughts, now ?
‘course it does.
have your say