In the last BBRU, Here, at Suz Blog there's some really rubbish feminist boilerplate which has earned Kate Sumerthwaite, author of Cruella-blog a link to the right under "blogs by idiots". I doubt when I next do the roundup, I will be able to stick to the stance of strict political neutrality if I'm presented with someone applauding Harriet Harperson's attempt to introduce Jim Crow laws to the UK.

But let's just fisk Ms Sumerthwaite for a minute shall we. There's the strap line. "Kate - You're so right" from Johann Hari. Needless to say I think Mr Hari is a twat too - after all he thinks that Harman's plan to discriminate against white men is a "glistening reminder of what a Labour government is for". I sort of agree - this shit is what Labout is for, but I think you're an idiot to support something so palpably absurd. But there's more to get your teeth into. She describes her blog as "being the adventures of a woman whose principal interests are [not rape, ultra-violence and Beethoven but] secularism, feminism and stand-up comedy" a nod to Kubriks 1971 movie and Anthony Burgess's novel, but the only relevance is some implication that all men are in some way Alex DeLarge, and women are therefore better because they are more empathic, or something. Clearly she thinks everyone should think like her. Even Jeremy Clarkson, to whom she gives some editorial advice for Top Gear

As the environmental movement raised awareness of the impact carbon emissions had on the climate, the show could have incorporated advice on reducing emissions, on lower emission vehicles and emphasised that high-speed low-efficiency sports cars were the sort of things to be driven occasionally as a treat if you enjoyed that sort of thing

Advice which would make him giggle. Naturally she is absolutely convinced that Male capitalism is raping mother Ghia, and the only way to solve it is to constrain capitalism and prevent anyone having more fun than her. She goes on, pointing out that describing things as a bit "Girly" or "Gay" is sexist/homophobic before the inevitable environMENTAL whinge:

Then he gets on with denying climate change. Now of course he never says it’s not happening, because it is. Instead he says certain events may not be a direct result of it

For the record, he doesn't deny it's happening, he just doesn't think anything worthwhile can be done about it, and your best bet is to let technology sort it out. This means letting the economy grow. This is the Tim Worstall line, and one I agree with. Finally she makes the assertion that he's "racist" because he trades in national stereotypes - Italian cars that fall apart, German cars with a sat-nav that always takes you to Poland etc.... But British regions get the same stick, and in any case, what's wrong with laughing at foreigners?

It's the po-faced offence-taking joylessness of the feminist that I find so disturbing. In their world view, robust banter becomes hate speech, normal male courting behaviour at work becomes sexual harassment, being passed over for promotion is "discrimination". It's all one long plaintive wail of inadequacy, begging someone to make the nasty men go away so she can get on with being bitchy with the sisters without the snorts of derision from those of us with XY genotypes.

Whilst Cruella is merely silly and wet, "An open letter from a Feminist" is ridiculous in its hairy-legged self loathing. In one post the startling assertion is made that

Most feminists are agreed that no one is born a woman,

believing instead that "woman" is a western construct given to someone

with particular sex organs and which is expected to be manifested in particular behaviours- behaviours which most people recognise are taught and some think are innate

This is the old nature/nurture cannard which pretends that little boys do not play war and little girls do not play dolls tea parties unless told to by nasty patriarchal society (obviously there's overlap, but I've never heard of a girl with an action-man trench system in the garden) and seeks to force both into gender neutral play. Most people do not accept this fantasy, whatever she says, but it remains an attitude common in education, especially amongst the kind of drip who actually wants to deal with ankle-biters professionally. Perhaps they're seeking their intellectual equals?

It is clear that Boys who desire competition and value risk-taking are severely disadvantaged by the feminised atmosphere engendered by the baggy, vaguely-ethnic clothing brigade in the education system. With so much of education run and delivered by women, it is no wonder girls are outperforming boys in getting (increasingly worthless) qualifications. There are no Male role models. Out in the real world, the men who have rejected the feminist bullshit about continuous appraisal and all must get prizes get the plum jobs by taking risks. Women take the less risky wage-slave option. Choices explain the wage gap. Feminists think a batch of good GCSE's, A-levels and a good 2:1 in English lit qualify you to earn more than a risk-taker. It doesn't.

She goes on to lament the old "women dress up to please men" meme, whereas everyone with any sense knows women dress to compete with women, and men barely notice. "Sex in the City" is loathed by most straight men I know - but women think Carrie's "self 'n shoes" attitude is empowering, or something, rather than the "paraphernalia of objectification". Feminists yet again fail to see innate behaviours and instead ascribe them to some patriarchal conspiracy by the media. Face it, there's no sisterhood. Women love to bitch about other women's outfits. Men aren't interested.

OLFAF goes on to use transgender people and some obscure anthropology (to which she offers no links) to try and prove her point. Yes gender and sexuality are not binary but surely Man and Woman remain useful descriptors, and the genitalia, however much you wish it remains a biological reality only superficially susceptible to modern medicine. Most men and most women conform to the norm of their gender, whatever you do to train them against it... So what should be done about this societal ascribing of roles? In OLFAF's world, gender is all about socialisation so imagine a boy

...raised in feminist households and taught to critique their privilege and the naturalness of their gender...

Sounds like child abuse to me.

Someone go and tell these dears to put the kettle on for me, would you?