In April this year Germaine Greer alluded to ‘village India’ during a televised panel discussion on her home turf Down Under. The topic was child marriage and the veteran feminist asserted that it was quite wrong to make the assumption that sexual intercourse would be part of that particular marital arrangement. She went on to say that ‘it is not expected that the little girl will be subject to sexual intercourse’ and that anyway ‘her mother-in-law probably’ would be looking out for her. ‘Access to the child’ would happen only when said child was ‘able to deal with it.’ Right. That’s ok then.

At the moment, India’s not looking a great place for little girls to grow up. The most recent horrific reports are all about child rape and girls as young as ten giving birth after having been raped by fathers, stepfathers, uncles, teachers. Sexual abuse is rife in India. According to Unicef, there is a rape of a child under 16 every 155 minutes, a child under ten every 13 hours. More than 10,000 children were raped in 2015, 240million women were married before they turned 18 and 50 per cent of abusers are known to the child or are ‘persons in trust or care givers’. Information was not provided about quite what had happened to the decorum-enforcing mothers-in-law. Maybe Greer can enlighten the concerned. One thing’s for sure: this epidemic of appalling crime that sees children as young as three or four being raped is not all happening within the squalid despair of Delhi or Mumbai slums. It’s also in that more fanciful village setting invoked by Greer. Why? Because the problem is not just to do with social deprivation in urban breakdown, but one that has become widespread within the country’s very culture. A couple of years ago a courageous Indian male MP, Rajeev Chandrasekhar, began a campaign to draw attention to the ‘culture of secrecy and denial’ in a place where parents are reluctant to admit child sexual abuse and incest is always hushed up. Campaigners say they are up against ‘a conspiracy of silence’.

They certainly are. Greer and the sisterhood that she and her ilk have fostered over a good few decades now have bought into that very conspiracy. It is not just India, let’s be clear, but many other parts of the world, especially Africa. As the most high-profile professional controversialist on such matters, Greer has form. Indeed she surpassed herself on the same TV show when she likened female genital mutilation to cosmetic labia reduction in the West. Many years ago she argued that any attempt to outlaw the practice would amount to ‘an attack on cultural identity’. She posed the question in her book The Whole Woman: ‘If an Ohio punk has the right to have her genitalia operated on, why has not the Somali woman the same right?’ Those remarks in 1999 drew widespread criticism, and the Commons International Development Select Committee called them ‘simplistic and offensive’.

So why does any of this matter now? It matters because this week the government has published its long-awaited Race Audit and among the findings are that Pakistani women are living in an ‘entirely different society’ and are ‘shockingly badly integrated’ in Britain. These are women who do not speak English and do not go to work. Louise Casey, the government’s integration tsar, has said that Britain needs to be ‘less shy’ in setting out rules and expectations for immigrants and called for an oath of allegiance, adding that it would be ‘no bad thing’ if there were lessons on the British way of life as well as helping immigrants develop their language skills.

What we have now in this country are many thousands of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) women living in the margins: silent, voiceless, subject to abuse. Is feminism doing anything to help? Not really. In fact, not at all. Does the Women’s Equality Party founded by Sandi Toksvig and Catherine Mayer have anything in its policies? Of course not. You see, feminism is interested only in what it sees as domestic violence and repression perpetrated by white men. That’s moral relativism for you. If white men, or some fundamentalist Christian sect, were found to be carrying out FGM procedures, there’d no doubt be calls to lock them up and throw away the key. Quite right too.

In an interview four years ago with Jon Snow of Channel 4, Greer’s fellow Antipodean, poet, essayist and erstwhile broadcaster Clive James was commenting after the shooting by the Taliban of Malala Yousafzai as she tried to go to school. James berated feminists for their failure to speak out: ‘Germaine is only one of many feminists who should have said much more about this and much earlier.’ On the attempted murder of a young girl by the Islamic hard line, he said ‘We shouldn’t need that kind of publicity for what is plainly an injustice.’ His view was that the ‘women of the world, the feminists of the world, and above all women of the Islamic world have to intervene against the structure’.

Mothers-in-law in places like that notional ‘village in India’ would be a start, Germaine. But those girls, those women could use some extra help too. Dare we hope that feminists might also, as Casey urges, be ‘a bit less shy’ when it comes to calling out a ‘bad thing’ such as forced marriage, child brides, female circumcision? Or is it that the ‘bad thing’, the repression that is keeping women out of view, is not really a bad thing if it’s in the name of cultural (non-white) identity? Come on, sisters, what do you really think? What are you actually going to do about it? How about a march in central London, a demo outside all those embassies where we can proclaim that FGM and all those other forms of female oppression are not, to use Casey’s term, ‘the British way of life’ and we’re having none of it?


  1. They’re not really interested in the victims, only the perpetrators, namely: men. And only if they are white. Feminists should be ashamed of their response to Rotherham, et al. Barely a squeak.

    • I didn’t hear even a squeak.
      Like all leftist groups they are hypocrites driven by hatred of everyday norms.

  2. Much of the so-called third wave feminism seems to be motivated by misandry. But the politico-media pretend that it is not and avoid using that word.

  3. Most strongly illustrated in the silence on the gendercide of pre-born girls in the UK and worldwide from those who have the arrogance to think they speak for all women. The mistake is to allow them the name “feminist”. They are not feminist. They are anarchist.

  4. Modern feminism has divorced itself from its ancestral grounding in reality (lack of voting/work/legal rights) and drifted into selfish and increasingly absurd fantasies. Given that they have now undermined the very nature of womanhood, one can hardly be surprised that the oppression of non-white girls and women falls under their radar. Girls and women are different to boys, after all.

    • Agree except the ‘reality’ grounding of feminism – this was the first drop of poison and I think the true situation of women in the past has been deliberately misrepresented in order to feed the lie on which the modern feminism is founded.

      • Indeed, the revisionism has also focussed on the male as predator and oppressor of women in history rather than as defender and protector. A strange inconsistency persists in the way that, despite feminism and “equality”, politics and the law still deems women “vulnerable” and seek to establish a presumption that special privileges and protection are required for them.

        Much feminist advantage has been gained by this essentially patriarchal instinct and the House of Commons is populated by more White Knights than masculinists. The skewed “rule” seems to be that masculinism is always misogyny whilst feminism is never misandry. The quad of possibles has been forced into a binary of absolutes which whilst advancing feminism undermines true equality.

  5. Germaine Greer does say some unexpected truths:
    “These days, contraception is abortion, because the third-generation Pills cannot be shown to prevent sperm fertilising an ovum.* Yet no one feels so strongly against abortion at any stage that they picket the factories where birth control pills are produced.
    IUDs are clearly abortifacient: these devices work by creating inflammation of the uterus, often accompanied by infection. Women who accept them as contraceptive devices are actually being equipped with a do-it-yourself abortionist’s tool. The outcome is frequent occult abortion, heavy bleeding and pelvic inflammatory disease, with the accompanying elevated risk of ectopic pregnancy.
    Whether you feel that the creation and wastage of so many embryos is an important issue or not, you must see that the cynical deception of millions of women by selling abortifacients as if they were contraceptives is incompatible with the respect due to women as human beings. ” The Whole Woman Doubleday

  6. I can remember not too long ago the ‘great grope of Cologne’ when Merkels insanity led to hundreds if not thousands of Muslim men rampaging around the city sexually assaulting any woman they fancied.

    Feminism failed that night when it claimed that ‘it’s not rape when Muslims do it’ and that they would not criticise Muslims in case it gave ammunition to ‘bigots’ (people who fail to submit and join their insanity).

    I have watched a queue of female Labour MPs all of them ready to spit poison about white males, meekly submit to covering their hair when entering a building with Muslims in it, and then not objecting to segregated audiences. Nor have they objected to preachers being allowed into Britain (Khaled Al-Saqaby) who have produced videos on how to beat your wife in accordance with Islamic law.

    It beggars belief that these hypocrites can pick the spec out of the eyes of the white British, yet fail to see the entire lumber yard in the eye of those they champion

    As for Malala Yousefzai seeing as you mentioned her, the lie that she was shot while campaigning for female education has been widely promoted by the Western press and liberal politicians. Yousefzai was shot because she insulted the Taleban on several occasions, and they have gone to great lengths to tell the West this, including producing a religious justification for why they did it. Unfortunately for them it isn’t what the liberals want to hear, and so the fake news goes on.

    The Taleban have never been opposed to the education of girls, but are opposed to mixed education proving another lie the liberals have promoted.

    Alas one the great evils in Britain which promotes this, the BBC is being allowed to be as biased as it pleases, and the oversight body OFCOM with the hopeless Sharon White as its head is proving every bit as useless as the BBC Trust it replaced, because that too was utterly useless.
    Somehow though I sincerly doubt that Red Theresa the traitor will do anything about it.

  7. The Indian Supreme Court has just ruled that a man’s sexual intercourse with his wife who is below the age of 18 is rape.

    That’s not going to stop what’s happening in the dark recesses of Indian society. But it might help.

    Not necessarily among the 150 million strong Muslim population though. Both Shi’a and Sunni Islam forbid sexual intercourse with minors, but not any other kind of sexual contact from birth. See Fatwa no 31409 (Mufakathat) Incestuous ‘thighing’ of infants,

    • Meanwhile in other news:
      Pakistan’s Senate has struck down legislation governing the minimum age girls can marry, saying a Bill to increase the legal age from 16 to 18 was un-Islamic.

      The Child Marriage Restraint Bill was rejected after Senator Sehar Kamran, the lawmaker driving the proposal, had her request for a deferment denied on the grounds that she would not be present.

      The chairman of the Senate Standing Committee, Rehman Malik, cited advice from religious scholars as reasons why he thought the committee should reject the Bill.
      “I have also discussed it with religious scholars and they also believe that girls can be married before the age of 18 according to Islam, so these kinds of bills cannot be passed,” he said in the Senate Wednesday.

      However, in a statement posted to Twitter following the vote, a spokesperson for Malik said the committee plans to reconsider the Bill and would seek further advice from “representatives of NGOs on Human Rights and Women’s Rights and renowned scholars of the country.”

      • Thanks for this. Given that the Prophet married a girl of 6, I’m surprised Pakistan has a minimum of 16. Not that much attention is paid to it, I don’t suppose.

  8. It’s much easier to make everybody get in a panic about child abuse ‘everywhere’ in the UK, and put all their efforts into feeling virtuous with all the red tape that goes by the name of ‘safeguarding’. If one kids oneself that the entire UK population er

  9. A very prescient article and a clear inditement of the absurdity of the feminists’ current position. I can’t help thinking that it is their inability to integrate with mainstream society which is the greatest problem and prevents a full and frank discussion of what is really going on.
    I would love to take Germaine and the sisters to listen to the story of a young Afghan woman I met this week. She spoke no English, despite having been in the UK for 9 years – not even enough to say her name – and when I asked her husband what she did in her ‘free’ time he told me(without a flicker of irony in his expression) that she looked after the children of his disabled relative. We are allowing the importation of very young women as little more than domestic and sexual slaves.

  10. The article seems to focus a lot on Germaine Greer, and extrapolate from her views on village India to ‘feminists won’t fight for British Pakistani women’. Not a well constructed argument in my view, and not even true. I know women who identify as feminist who work hard to support British Pakistani women, providing refuge from domestic abuse, and support through sharia ‘divorce’.

    • Working hard to support British Pakistani women, providing refuge from domestic abuse, and support through sharia ‘divorce’.

      It is mere passive acceptance of the status quo and not actively opposing wrongs occasioned.
      Perhaps I need to remind you that Sharia law is not legal or recognised in the UK until Theresa May formally introduces it as planned following Mona Siddiqqi’s Prince Alwaleed center report of how it can best be done.

      A Feminist approach should be to encourage the women to abandon the horrible discriminatory Sharia approach and use the existing British legal system.

      I think that rather that provide evidence that the piece is “not well constructed argument” you have done the reverse and proved that those who call themselves ‘feminists’ will not fight for Pakistani women !

      • You misunderstand. It is the women they support not the system. A system which usually leaves the women – and their children – destitute. And they can’t use the British legal system because they are not married under the British legal system in the first place – as you ought to know.

        A friend of mine is a feminist, an activist, and herself a British Pakistani woman. She works hard to support women in her community and isn’t afraid to speak up. And I know shes not the only one. She walks a fine line, and, it seems to me, runs quite a personal risk. So I don’t really care for articles like this which I think are glib and misleading.

        • Come on Shaun, some are married under English law and anyone who is not does not legally need to obtain a Shaira divorce unless they want to participate in the nonsense.

          The point is that by not persuading these women to abandon the process and calling it out for what it is they are supporting the system it operates in and perpetuating it. Helping the women to remain in chains is not helping them at all, the only way is to break the chains, and that is what the feminists are failing to do.

          The Sharia system in the UK at present only works by willing participation of indoctrinated religious zealots who believe that it is Gods sacred word, and that they will burn in Hell because a man on a flying donkey said so.

          Supporting these women is aiding and abetting their oppression and proves feminists will not speak out.

          If you want to see what happens to women who really do speak out in that community from the appalling Labour rabble then take a look at Mona Lones experience as a councillor in Hulme Manchester, and it wasn’t the Muslim community who got her, it was white Labour.

          • I have no idea how many are unmarried. Personal experience suggests a lot. They are isolated by culture and language and utterly dependent on their community. So saying ‘stuff Islam, I’m off’ isn’t really an option.

            Your remarks about flying donkeys make you sound like a bigot. And as for Mona Lones her ordeal seems to have left the internet untouched, so I’m none the wiser. Assuming you’ve got her name right. Which you didn’t manage with me btw.

          • Bigot? ! Ha ha ha ‘Racism the first refuge of the left wing scoundrel’!

            Did Mohammed claim he flew on a winged donkey or not? If you think this is reasonable then you probably think anyone wishing to worship the old Greek Gods deserves as much respect?

            As for Mona Lone, it was ‘Amina’ apologies for the wild goose chase

            As for the actions of your supportive friend Dietrich Bonhoeffer had a thing or two to say about that.

            “We are not to simply bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, we are to drive a spoke into the wheel itself.”

        • You are completely misconstruing the point of the article. You say you know a brave, dedicated, British Pakistani woman, who is a feminist, who cares about the injustices under discussion.

          “And I know she’s not the only one.”

          Fine: so there are two, or even three, like her. You obviously are tremendously vicariously virtuous on behalf of your friend, but you have nothing really to say about the subject of the article, which is that feminism, in general, is doing very little indeed for the victims of islamic dogma. Germaine Greer figures prominently, as you complain, but that’s because she is a prominent person, who claims to speak for feminists. If other self-styled feminists fail to disabuse her and us of that claim, we have to assume that the rest agree with her, unless they take the trouble explicitly to contradict her.

          The fact is that muslims, actually muslim men, are top of the heap in the Victim Identity competition, even where most so-called feminists are concerned. That’s how the “feminist” Premier of Canada, Justin Trudeau, could attend a mosque and, unabashed, salute the blatant segregation of the sexes. He didn’t ignore it. He genuinely praised it. The feminist abandonment of genuine women’s concerns was also plain to see in the Washington DC Women’s March, fronted by the sharia-promoting bigot, Linda Sarsour.

          So, great: you know a brave feminist. Where are the others?

  11. For them the only rape culture exists in their heads in western society perpetrated by evil white cisgender men.

  12. But crusaders for “equality” get money (from white male taxpayers)
    Best not jeopardize the gravy train…

Comments are closed.