Ever since the outing of serial sexual attacker Harvey Weinstein, men have been on public trial. They have been subjected to an across-the-board character assassination. Innocent until proved guilty in the law maybe, but in the trial by media that’s followed they’ve been presumed guilty without recourse to due process.

One man is dead. Several other men’s reputations, family lives and perhaps their careers too have been irretrievably damaged.

Yet the bullying continues. Women commentators, instead of re-directing women to the law to pursue their grievances, continue to encourage the media witch-hunt,  the viciousness of its tone scaling up, not down the while: ‘Almost every day’, Nesrene Malik wrote, ‘there is a man’s sneering, hovering head sitting on top of a few hundred words of what is really no less than the sort of existential hysteria of an animal whose cosy ecosystem has been disturbed.’

If such derogatory commentary is anything to go by, Carl Sargeant’s death is not proving the watershed moment some of us hoped for. In what appears to be a cop-out, Labour now says its investigation into allegations that led to Mr Sargeant’s death can’t continue. If the police don’t take it up his reputation will  have died with him.

So this ever more ludicrous trial by media  goes on, its justification still insisted on, not least by one of its instigators, Jane Merrick.  As my co-ed commented yesterday, it must take a huge amount of self-delusion to be invested in such nonsense. Who do they think they are? Rosa Parks? Not one of these women seems prepared to take any responsibility for her own actions.

But men are silent. They stand accused of  sexual harassment en masse; of creating a climate of fear and intimidation in which women have to work, an allegation serious enough  for the PM to put it before other business, but they still stay silent.

Where’s their protest? Will they not speak out even in self defence? Not even to condemn the casual conflation of  flirtation, inconsequential body-touching or familiar or derogatory comments (all of which women are ‘guilty’ of too) with serious sexual assault?

Of the four hundred and twenty two male MPs just two have had the guts to do so. Veteran member Sir Roger Gale alone dared take to the airwaves, while Graham Brady, the chairman of the 1922 Committee, remarked on ‘a degree of anguish that these things also unfairly tarnish the vast majority of MPs who are committed to public service and to doing good for their constituents’.

Are we to believe the rest are in accord with the vindictive Mrs Leadsom? That they stand squarely behind Jeremy Corbyn’s denunciation of a culture of degradation in Westminster? Do they want us to believe they are all guilty?

The silence is deafening. As the united front of Corbyn, Cable and May met to ‘collectively signal their virtue’, as one commentator on this site put it, we heard not so much as a bleat.

You would think men would be infuriated by the double standards, the aspersion cast on their sex, the myths perpetuated by attention-seeking ‘I too have been abused by ten Tory MPs’ Guardianista female columnists and by the idea that we live in some sort patriarchal theocracy, rather than a society in which women are already on top.

Newspaper editors appear totally uninterested in exploring men’s reactions to MeToo, in finding out whether men feel angry, abused or despairing. Do men not count? Or is it that editors fear ‘unpublishable’ responses that would ‘label’ them as unreconstructed in the eyes of the feminist thought police, should they print what they find out?

The mainstream media’s male commentators seem as cowed as the male MPs. Perhaps they are all genuine converts to the feminist cause,  fearing  Marina Hyde  might turn on them having dealt with Westminster. ‘I read recently’ she joked, ‘that parliamentary authorities spent £130k on pest control, but it turns out to have been the wrong kind of pest’.

Are they as fearful of the feminist columnists as male MPs are of the feminist MPs like Jess Phillips who takes any witch-hunt talk by male colleagues as a mark of their guilt?

Imagine, for one minute, the furore were a man was to write about women as pests to be eliminated. This, surely, has to be the real culture of harassment and one that has crept up on us.

Perhaps it is a case of who needs enemies when you have ‘friends’ like the insufferably smug Guardian commentator Jonathan Friedland who says ‘on sexual harassment we men need to be clear: the problem is not women, it is us’.

No, Jonathan. The problem society has today with bad, coarse and aggressive behaviour, online and off, with the breakdown of respect between the sexes (which appears to infect Labour’s ranks  particularly badly) is one of women’s as well of men’s making.

Dare say as much, as former political editor Michael White did –  that female hacks could prey even on ugly old backbenchers (as Melissa Kite was later to confirm) and you’re smacked down – by another man, namely the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn who told him he ‘may want to apologise’ for his ‘outburst’.

The question remains of why far less PC men than he are kow-towing to this harpy led onslaught on their freedom of expression? Is it their innate chivalry? Do they not like contradicting women? Or are they genuinely scared?

Perhaps the answer is to be found in Niall McCrae’s  response to David Kurten’s article on this site, that modern men find themselves caught in a cleft stick: ‘ . . . hit with their (the feminists’) unshakable dichotomy of power relations. So (that) just like a black person can never be racist, a woman can never be sexist, because she is of a disempowered group’.

If the silence of the men lays bare one thing, it is the myth of their male privilege. What it reveals by contrast, I fear, is the reverse, an appalling crisis of male confidence. It is not men’s masculinity that is toxic but the feminist attack on it.


  1. Hash Tag not all men, but men are good at knowing when the game is rigged against them. When they spot this they stop playing and walk. Don’t believe me? Look at the declining marriage figures. The left always eats its own, so head down mouth shut. Why would men want to reason with media and political system that looks mentally ill? The real scandal is the sickening incompetece of all our politicians and “journalists”. How can people pay a mortgage three times mine writing such sh$t? When will the Gaurdian finaly run out of money and just die? Men are silent because we just don’t care any more. Society has spat on us for decades, demonised us poor white an blus collar Joes that get up at 5 in the morning earn enough to pay taxes and be allowed to keep the difference. Men have had to accused of toxic masculinity and privilage shamed by 20 something no bodies while pure evil has been perpetrated in Hollywood. My holding a door open is toxic while rape is fine as long as I donate to the right political parties. I work hard, obey the law and dont cheat on my taxes( I would love to cheat on my taxes, don’t get me wrong but I do not earn nearly enough to do so) and I know how to change a tire you WILL miss me when I am gone. I couldn’t care less. A plague on all your houses.

    • Men are now cowed by the relentless propaganda of the Feministas, the politicians, the religious institutions and the mass media.
      Is it surprising that many of us have given up?

      • Maybe – but I’m not cowed, nor have I given up. But then, I am surrounded by women – a mother, a mother-in-law, a wife and three daughters – who all understand that their strength lies in femininity rather than feminism. Despite this apparent lack of ’empowerment’ in their lives, they all know how the mating game works and have coped with unwanted advances without resorting to a fit of the vapours. They know of the casting couch and they know its existence is as much due to the willingness of women to trade sexual favours for fame and money as it is to pathetic men.

        Like Conservative Woman, they represent the real world – so do not give up!

        • I think the concept of “giving up” referred to by CRSM consists more of giving up reading or listening to the tirade of misandric abuse, than to giving up trying to live a normal life. My experience is very much like yours – I learned at an early age how destructive females can be, but also learned at a later age that men and women can be immensely strong together when they complement and support one another. The most important people in my life right now are my mother, wife and three daughters; all of whom understand how the game works, and none of whom has ever needed or had any truck with feminism.

    • ‘No man can sit down and withhold his hands from the warfare against wrong and get peace from his acquiescence.’ Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924)

      “The average man is a coward.” Mark Twain (1835-1910)

    • Only gutless, indifferent, fearful cowards remain silent “In dangerous times!”

      These men are the reason we suffer so badly today. They are the bane of our existence and for my part, I find it highly objectionable to even refer to them as men.

      In dangerous times of old, they were the times when the ‘true men’ of each society, would all stand in unison and using one voice, denounce the perceived threat very loudly issuing a threat of their own, followed closely with a clenched fist.

      Today, these pathetic, gutless, weasels who claim to be men, are nothing but effeminate manginas. Too afraid of losing any form of approval from women.

      These men, will allow the world to annihilate itself, because they are that weak!

      Are you one of these individuals Bernard from Bucks?

      EDIT: Oh and for the record. The exact same above in my comment applies to all women too. In days of old, all women would stand by their men and issue the same threat with a clenched fist and be prepared to fight and die to protect their homes and their children.
      Not today though. Women are as pathetic and as weak as dust. They are blown away in the wind, because they have swallowed the feminist vomit.

  2. Thanks Kathy, interesting article. ‘The silence of the males’ is indeed a problem, but more men are finding their voices, and many will be attending the fourth International Conference on Men’s Issues http://icmi18.wordpress.com, to be held in London next July.

    Tomorrow morning in Westminster Hall, 9:30 – 11:00, I look forward to witnessing the third consecutive annual debate on men’s issues, in recognition of International Men’s Day, which this year falls on a Sunday (19 November, as always). Jeremy Lefroy (C, Stafford) will be leading the debate, but hopefully the estimable Philip Davies (C, Shipley), who led the first such debate in 2015 – despite the odious Jess Phillips (L, Birmingham Yardley) imperiously demanding that the Backbench Business Committee refuse his application – will be contributing too.

    I don’t think anyone could accuse my political party, Justice for Men & Boys http://j4mb.org.uk, of being silent.Only an hour ago we published a link to a 2016 newspaper article about Annabelle Fuller, Nigel Farage’s alleged former mistress. At the age of 34 she referred to her drunk 30-year-old self as a ‘young girl’ in relation to having drinks with a Tory MP, whose marriage ended after his arrest. The piece is here https://j4mb.org.uk/2017/11/13/more-on-annabelle-fuller-nigel-farages-alleged-former-mistress/.

  3. Ah Godless are become the British and with their inate ‘puritanical streak’ goes thus, in order for you to be deemed clean and pure by those who ‘count in society’ you have to show how much more puritanical you can be, that sad excuse of a male form, the likes of Jonathan Friesland [correct spelling?] – are, become far worse than the original perceived ‘sin’.

    Furthermore, when members of other extremist puritanical cults join on the bandwagon of faux outrage – the momentum is very difficult to bring to a stop.

    As I’ve said, this is no witch hunt but it is, a hunt pursued by the witches of perpetual umbrage and cultural Marxist coven of PC. And the pooh stirrer’s in chief are the labour party, the silence from the opposite benches only begets obeisance and derived of a sort of Stockholm syndrome.

  4. Good article Kathy. Men will not speak up. The best thing all men can do is have this conversation with the women closest to them
    Let’s remember though that surveys show women get unhappier as every year goes by. Despite all this feminist claptrap us blokes are happier. I’m the seventies men were unhappier but our levels have stayed the same while women’s drop and drop.
    Teenage and young women are recording levels of anxiety never seen before. Their self confidence is plummeting.
    Only women can change this. They need to stand up to the facist feminist minority.
    Many brilliant women like the creators and contributors of this site are already doing this, but we need more.

  5. Our little corner of Twitter is not political: as such. We look at Birds, Wild Flowers &c. But almost invariably, the only Newspaper quoted is The Guardian, any references to Brexit are negative and the only Political Parties people will claim allegiance to are the Labour Party (even with Mr Corbyn &c. in control) and the Green (we want out of NATO &c.) Party. I’m sure that many of us read other Newspapers (I do), want out of the EU (I do) and are in dread of a Labour Government (I am) but somehow it’s best just to say nothing!

    • You should try to politely challenge their assumptions and maybe suggest a ‘no politics’ rule when/if people get upset. That would be far better than the lefties in the group being allowed to make the assumption that their politics is normal and yours is not.

  6. “Is it their innate chivalry? Do they not like contradicting women? Or are they genuinely scared?”

    Yes Kathy, I believe it is all three.

    The battle of the sexes is an extremely complicated picture, but I think our behaviour is rooted in the fact that we are still primitive creatures obeying primitive laws of survival. The world is essentially gynocentric: it has to be, since it is women who produce the babies, and men are ultimately expendable.

    This is why women have such power over men, albeit far less visible than the more obvious physical advantages that men have over women. What else is civilisation, other than a set of rules designed to control the more dangerous aspects of masculinity, and to give women access to everything they want but that they could never achieve on their own? I have described civilisation as man’s greatest, but most unappreciated, gift to women. I still see no reason to withdraw that comment.

    In fact civilisation has given women so much power, that I believe we are at the stage where it has started to corrupt them, as power always does.
    Since women have had the vote, with a natural built-in majority, they have used it to transform society, but always to their advantage. The process has inevitably been slow, but we are now starting to see the picture more clearly, after a century of female power through the ballot box. Education, health, welfare, the exponential growth of the nanny state, a whole string of life factors, but all tilted decisively in favour of females. Men still occupy the majority of positions at the top of society, but women have steadily ensured that it is only their type of men – gynocentric to the core – who do so. This is why our male politicians are now such a weak and insipid lot, who collapse in the face of female criticism and bullying. Business leaders and others are following suit. The drive is on to replace them altogether with women who do not even need to pretend to believe in equality or fairness.

    Women are ruthlessly applying the weapons nature has given them: their sexual allure, the innate sense of chivalry in men, and their acid tongues. But these are now accompanied by the cognitive dissonance that is the hallmark of the feminist onslaught on masculinity; the very masculinity that in fact holds civilisation together and keeps the whole ship afloat, but has been denigrated to the point that more and more men are simply turning away in disgust – along with increasing numbers of women too.

    The one hope is that the version of masculinity that is being held up to ridicule by the metropolitan elite and is being pierced by a thousand darts, neither represents nor reflects the male population as a whole. One day that fact may eventually sink into the empty heads of the chattering classes who claim to speak for the rest of us. And into the equally empty heads of the huge numbers of people of both sexes who continually grant power to these destroyers.

    • Generally bang on, although I would highlight that the primitive laws of survival reward one thing, and one thing only: Pass on your values to the next generation.

      How many of the ‘Women in power’ are doing that ?

      The Progressive Harridans will lose to the Conservative Woman every time.

      Decent men don’t need to say anything: it is a female discussion we don’t and can’t understand, and best advised to steer clear, by making excuses to leave the conversation and crack on with the job in hand.
      I understand this to be one of the many silent promises in the marriage vows.
      Neither the ‘Sex Pest’ men involved or the Victim-hood seeking Harridans jumping on the band-wagon are going to be seen as examples by the next generation.

    • The low point of the referendum campaign was to see the debate team featuring Amber (Head Girl) Rudd, Angela Eagle (token Lesbian), and Nicola Sturgeon (wee Jimmie Crankie). In full flight, all I could hear was a screeching noise, not edifying at all.

      • I remeber listening to The World At One before the last election. They had one woman from each party, and Martha Kearney snootily told us they were going to show the nation how women could debate sensibly and like adults, unlike men.

        After three minutes they were all shouting at the same time. Kearny could only just be heard above the others shouting at them all to shut up.


    • “Nature has given women so much power that the law has very wisely given them little.” Dr Johnson, out of date now, of course. I can’t remember where I came across this quotation; it may even have been on this blog, in which case I apologize.

      • Mr. Bumble on the legal status of wives: “If the law supposes [that a husband controls his wife in all matters], the law is a ass.”

  7. I loathe this “me to” screaming that turns out was 10, 20 or even 30 years earlier. Any man whose hands wander with me never ever wants to do it again but I would never dream of whining about it. I give more than I get and he never complains!

  8. In these upside down, Marxist-like times, the men have taken to the hills.

    A shame really – families were the basis of such goodness in the world.

    • Which is why they had to be destroyed. Can’t have a successful liberal/socialist utopia while the old patriarchal family structures remain undisturbed, can we?

  9. Kathy as usual your article hits the nail on the head.The male of the species is having a bad time of it and its getting worse. Sure there are predatory men around – there have always been and always will be and there many predatory women as well. Look in any newspaper and there are always pictures of half naked women showing of their surgically enhanced assets hoping to catch the eye of some rich man they can reel in. Many meet their partners in the work place. I did – afterall that is where you spend most of your time so naturally the workplace is where a lot of banter goes on and particularly the office parties when a bit of hands on activity can sometimes occur, only to be regretted the following day in many cases! Most of it is harmless, colleagues letting their hair down and having a laugh. I have always preferred to work alongside men more than women and this latest witch hunt wouldnt make me change my mind either!

    • My elder daughter always preferred to work with men. Not that she was after a man, she’s happily married, but because she couldn’t stand all the female gossip and back-biting. Her view of females at work is that they are probably more predatory than the males!

    • Women aren’t going to stand up for the men until/unless the men first start standing up for themselves.

      • Exactly. So many men are turning into utter saps. It’s not uncommon now to hear a man putting himself down wrt his wife or girlfriend. “Oh, she deals with that. She’s more intelligent than me. I don’t understand those things.” when dealing with household finances, shopping or whatever. It’s almost Stockholm syndrome and just as grating as when i’d hear women putting themselves down three decades ago.

  10. “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize”

    If any man criticizes this witch hunt he becomes a misogynist; his past is then searched for transgressions against the poor female gender, which, given how low the standards are for a scandal in public life these days, will inevitably be found. Cue arrests, death threats, sackings, the public humiliation of having what a pervert you are discussed in front of your family or friends, etc etc. Why would any wealthy and successful man jeopardize themselves like this by going public, anymore then all these successful actresses did after Harvey Weinstein allegedly molested them?

    Change, when it comes, will have to come from all the nobody-men who speak out about their experiences with female sexual abuse, harassment, rape etc etc. Basically the same pattern that feminism followed to get to its current position. Then perhaps we will see the likes of Jess Philips being hoisted up on their own petard and condemned for their language by the Gender Sensitivity Police. As a free speech campaigner, its not a scene which I relish, but it is better than the current one sided walloping that men get in this country for the crime of being born with a penis and heterosexual sex drive.

    • Just to say, I’ve always found your comments over on Sp!ked insightful and well-written, so it’s nice to see you posting here too.

      • Many thanks, I’ll try not to let it get to my head. I don’t agree with everything here (I’m an atheist who voted Remain for one thing…) but this site is what would have been a mainstream view social conservative point twenty years ago. Today’s SJWs might think its healthy to squeeze everyone who disagrees with them out of the public square, but we have the centenary of the (misnamed) October Revolution to remind us what happens when you go down that route…

  11. Countless men and women have been far from silent. Ms Gyngell seems deaf to voices other than in the media that she considers count. But the ownership and control of those media is narrow. They don’t allow dissident opinions to be expressed.

  12. i agree now is the time for male mps to legislate their droit de seigneur over all women who enter the palace of westminster

  13. Third wave feminism appears to have got what it wanted, then. We as men have indeed given up and are letting them get on with it. So be it. Just so long as they dont complain about “where have all the real men gone” too loudly

  14. I’m not sure that men are silent but if they weren’t would you be able to hear them?

    We live in the age of social media in which people can choose to only listen to people like them and people who agree with them. We live in the age of 24 hour TV, radio and online news in which the airtime is filled with the same “talking heads” saying the same things about the same issues over and over and over again. We live in the age of self-pity in which claiming victimhood is so important that in last year’s US presidential election the candidates of both main parties were trying to do it.

    If people don’t want to hear men they can shut them out by only listening to women. If the media don’t want men to be heard they can shut them out by not inviting them to speak or write. Even if people hear men that doesn’t mean that they listen to them, as shown by the fact that some people objected to men being on a recent edition of Newsnight which discussed “The Problem With Men”.

    Given how polarised, aggressive and dishonest way public debate on many issues (and especially issues relating to gender) has become can you blame anyone (and especially men) for deciding to remain silent? Besides, many people have got more important things to do than argue with people they have never met and would never want to meet.

  15. “an appalling crisis of male confidence”
    Does anyone notice how these witch hunts never extend to Muslim immigrants?
    If your answer is yes then why do you reckon this is?
    Are Muslim men as white as the driven snow?
    Or do liberal bullies just know better than to pick on any group of men that clearly do NOT suffer from “an appalling crisis of male confidence”?

  16. The problem with these accusations is that they are impossible to disprove.
    Just like the cries of “racist” it is impossible to prove you are not a racist or a sex pest or abuser.
    That’s why it is called a witch hunt. They used to cast the poor old hag in the river. If she floated she was a witch and was killed. If she drowned then she obviously wasn’t a witch. Either way she was done for.
    Strangely, most men just ignore most of the feminist screeching going on. I don’t really recognise the world they live in.

  17. A couple of points Kathy which may help to answer your main question of why men are not speaking out..

    1) “across-the-board character assassination” of men has been going on for much longer than the Weinstein outing.

    2) We tried speaking out against it and we have been hounded, derided, and assassinated further so now we just ignore it and go our own way.

    But thanks for raising the issue.

    • Nobody will raise their head above the trench, as an aside, no women did 100 years ago I’d wager. You cannot argue with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

      • Like George Bernard Shaw said about the nonsensicality of wrestling pigs– you’ll just get filthy dirty, and the pig will enjoy it.

    • I see it has well over 200,000 views and over 5,000 comments – all within a day of its release. Hardly a sign of men being “silent”.

  18. I still can’t get over the revolting hypocrisy of commentators who swoon at the thought of ‘hands on knees’, but resolutely shut their eyes and turned their backs on multiple rapes on young English girls by Muslims in Rotherham, Rochdale, etc. etc.

    • Indeed, where is the Feminazi outrage at grooming and FGM? Is there no social traction to be gained there, no chance for virtue signalling? Do they really care at all about the injustices they perceive? Where were they all last year even?

      • There is no outrage, because there are no pale stale middle class males doing it. They’re the only targets of interest. I’ve long held the view that it long ago ceased to be about emancipation and became all out emasculation. I see nothing to change that, frankly.

      • You can call me a cynic but the reason why there has been no feminist outrage at Muslim grooming gangs is because there’s no money in it.

        Feminism has gone from being a political movement to being a publishing genre. Most of the money in feminist publishing comes from The Guardian (which publishes many articles by feminist writers every day) and book publishers with other former broadsheet newspapers, women’s magazines and websites being smaller contributors and the blogosphere and social media being where feminists can post their outrage freely but for free. The Guardian will publish and pay feminists who are outraged about a joke told by Sir Tim Hunt, manspreading or Thomas The Tank Engine. However, if a feminist is outraged about the mass rape of underage girls by Muslim men The Guardian is far less willing to publish that because it challenges the narratives that it wants to promote. Indeed, The Guardian’s response to the problem of Muslim grooming gangs has been to deny, divert and downplay:





        If any feminists were outraged about the mass rape of underage girls by Muslim men but The Guardian wasn’t willing to publish their articles expressing their outrage they could have taken their articles elsewhere or published them online or spoken on TV and radio about the issue but very few feminists did. The silence of the sisterhood about Rotherham, Rochdale or any of the other places where the mass rape of underage girls by Muslim men has happened is shameful. However, if the reason for that silence is to do with money that’s even more shameful.

        • Fascinating to read those Guardian articles knowing what we know now. I wonder if the writers are now ashamed of what they wrote? – well, we know the answer.

          • Are they ashamed of what they wrote? Probably not because in the eyes of some people a racist is bad as a rapist, if not worse. That’s why the Cologne attacks were denied and downplayed and the conviction of the “Grim Sleeper” (the serial killer Lonnie David Franklin Jr who killed at least ten women in Los Angeles over a period of at least twenty-two years) received very little coverage and comment compared to Harvey Weinstein.

            If you’re going to write for the newspaper which believes that “Comment is free, but facts are sacred” you’ve got to know what you’re allowed and not allowed to say.

  19. Men must resist the the use of aggressive leftist terminology to label and silence them. Happily, this is at last happening with the term “racist” which has become so devalued that it has lost its force and is recognised as nothing more than a leftist trope to shut down opposing views. Because of this, new terminology such as “Islamophobia” is being recognised and called out much earlier for what it is – an oppressive new-speak aimed at controlling thought as well as speech. In fact, it is incumbent on us all, not just men, to resist all the leftist dogma designed demonise the majority and to repress freedom of expression.

  20. Well as you report some men have tried to oppose this witch hunt. I think in a way Conservative Woman knows the answer really. As so often reported the vast majority when surveyed express very conservative values in general. And even the middle class who may virtue signal on gay rights actually live their lives fairly conservatively. It should be no surprise to see men “caught” for rather Victorian crimes of being over familiar. Indeed Mrs May weighed in with G&S outrage, more daughter of the Manse than feminist. Nothing is more traditional than polititians in trouble with past lovers, spurned ingénues or caught mistresses. The new bit is the extension to knee holding and childish notes (on House of Commons paper!). Easily forgotten is the Victorian intention to police men’s behaviour, its ineffectiveness with the rich and powerful is what gets remembered.
    No there is here an unholy alliance between the long tradition of catching men out by the “conservative” (because of course women are not sinners and are the custodians of morals in the home and society, TCW has expressed this view often) and the new girls on the block who elevate this to a mission to catch all men (cleverly including knee touching etc. as “Rape”).
    Of course men are used to being “responsible” and punished, the infractions here can be so small as to include all men. They are used too, to playing the game of being the “gent” responsible for all interactions with women and held accountable. Of “doing the right thing”. Conservative women are right that undermining this responsible role undermines women’s safety and security. Hence it is that its your sisters you need to talk to really. For it is you all that chip away at conservative masculinity. And sometime I wonder if the sistahood isn’t doing men a favour, for as another commenter points out its women not men who are getting unhappier. After all had not so many millions of men felt it their duty to protect their “womenfolk” perhaps we’d not need to remember the dead ones.

    • “….its women not men who are getting unhappier” The incredible number of male suicides, the increasingly poor results of male students, those who`ve had their children legally kidnapped by their mothers empowered by the laws and institutions who are enduring a pain beyond any other in this life and having to pay their attackers for the privilage as well as losing their jobs and reputations in many cases etc.., etc…, etc…, would seem to disagree with this statement.

      • Well I totally agree many men have cause to be unhappy. However, as has been reported here , in general surveys it appears over the years it is women who have ,on average, seen happiness reduce. I think the answer may be something similar to the patterns of mental health. Women make up the vast majority of those with chronic low level anxiety or depressive disorders (what my colleagues called “the walking worried”) and a minority of those with acute mental distress. The latter are of course mainly male and a fraction of the overall numbers of those being treated.
        This suggests to me that generally the qualities of stoicism and resilience means that men generally are better equipped to overcome many minor problems in a way women aren’t (in my working life women would struggle with minor responsibilities and have time off for “upset” (latterly called “stress” about pets or broken appliances or surprising credit card bills). “Having it all” exposes women to he responsibilities historically done by men, I have often been irritated by colleagues’ fishing for praise for being independent and having a mortgage on their own while I supported a family of five and paid a mortgage.
        Or perhaps men, on average, simply have lower expectations of what happiness is?

        • Groan wrote:

          Or perhaps men, on average, simply have lower expectations of what happiness is?

          Or perhaps it’s simply that we are rational adults with our feet on the ground and our heads not in the clouds, whereas women live in la lah bing bong land, to use a phrase my wife likes.

  21. Feminists may have taken over the ship, but the ship is called the “Titanic” and there is a large iceberg lurking unseen in the darkness ahead.
    We tend to think that there is some sort of inevitability about “Progress” , that the factors that led to the advance of technology, the increase in prosperity

  22. Its not an ‘appalling crisis of confidence’ its more the same response as the famous Low cartoon from WW2: Very Well, Alone!

    Men have no desire to fight women, or indeed feminists, anyone who knows anything about men will realise that all the majority want is a quiet life. If someone comes disturbing that quiet life, most will just retreat to some other space.A few will take up the cudgels but most men are pacifists at heart. Armies have to train men to be killers, it doesn’t come naturally to most.

    So men will retreat to solitary lives, which by and large they are perfectly capable of living quite contentedly. They will eschew females, only interacting where absolutely necessary, and always maintaining a defensive barrier when they have to. Modern sexual mores will mean sex is still freely available and as technology develops I suspect they will increasingly choose automated versions of sex over the real thing.

    Women will have to suffer the consequences of their actions, namely loneliness and lack of what they want more than men, children and families,and eventually, god knows when, they will collectively decide they’ve screwed up royally and start the process of stepping back from the precipice. There’s nothing men can do to facilitate that process, it has to be a female led one.

  23. I’m heartened by the sight of conservative women standing alongside conservative men to resist this leftist totalitarianism. Together, we’ll defeat it, as we always do.

  24. Men are taught by their mothers from birth to kowtow to the female, no matter how capricious (woman’s prerogative apparently). The societal pressure is enormous. This has always been the seat of women’s power. Feminists couldn’t be more wrong about the balance of power.

    • Men are taught by their mothers from birth to kowtow to the female

      That only works if you get rid of the fathers.

      Oh, hang on a minute, hmmmm …

  25. The psychopathology of London does not influence large tracts of Britain, fortunately, about women or anything else. Unfortunately, newspaperdom is concentrated in ‘The Great Wen’ and seems increasingly to be populated by snivelling, politically correct children. Out here in the provinces the pinches of salt with which we take ‘the news’ will shortly require a truck to transport a person’s weekly supply.

    While we’re being politically incorrect, has anyone else noticed how the advertising industry has gone completely overboard about ‘diversity’. In TV ads it now seems to employ about 50% actors from amongst people of colour and, delightful people as I’m sure they are, it’s just a fact that outside of the major cities minorities are just that, minorities. So I for one ignore TV advertisements with even greater resolution than I used to.

  26. The other thing that bothers me about this article is where are the women? Why aren’t more women in politics denouncing this witch hunt. Flimsy accusations just to get some one sacked so they can take their place? The silence of women is deafening over all of this.

    • Well much less so than from the men – apart from Laura and me on this site and in the Daily Mail there’s been Joanna Williams and Ella Whelan on Spiked Online and in Spectator, Melissa Kite, Celia Walden, Jennifer Selway, The Express, Clare Foges I think and Ann Robinson – in fact the list of sensible women goes on … but it is the Guadianistas who seem to hold the political sway

      • and respect to you all, but none of you are in the same position as men who merely have to make a casual remark to loose their career – ref a certain Noble Laureate. This silencing of men is part of a long program of terror and intimidation

      • Are you conflating ‘holding the political sway’ with the empty echo chamber that modern media and twitter has become?

        We are simply getting on with our lives and, funnily enough, without hitting on every woman that crosses our paths.

  27. See Guido Fawkes on Emma Dent Coad today. She called black Conservative candidate Shaun Bailey a token ghetto boy. Now, this is clearly racist. But if it had been a white Labour man saying this of a black Tory woman, it would have been raised as sexism too. This is the hypocrisy of the Inquisition; Based on the blunt theory of power relations, racism and sexism only go one way.

  28. I daresay there is a degree of white knighting going on and a degree of guilt by association which has allowed many a totalitarian state to come about.
    This will occupy the minds of the political and metropolitan elite for a while, meanwhile the vast majority of the population will carry on being sexist, racist and politically incorrect to each other as they always are and likely always will be.

  29. From a recent comment to an on-line post: “”In the field of Science in Canada a new rule has been put in place stopping people from criticising women’s work as it is seen as sexist….”

    So, science henceforth will be what a female scientist decides it to be, and no criticism will be allowed. Look out, everybody, for all future Nobel prizewinners, to be female.

  30. Excellent article, this site is breath of fresh air.

    I’ve been incensed by the these highly corrosive attacks tarring ALL men with the same brush by scores of feminists, liberals, apologists and ultra-left but more dismayed by the largely absent response by men of influence, although this hasn’t been helped by was is an apparent bias by sections of the media and arguably the BBC, last week’s Question Time being an example, the topic of Carl Seargant featured last on the agenda but was prematurely interrupted as they had ran out of time; that poor bloke’s life extinguished and his reputation with it.

    The feminist indoctrination starts early, my 11 year old son returned from school some weeks ago saying his then female teacher was leaving to teach in an all-girls school, apparently she delightedly announced to the class the prospect of not having to deal with the male of the species any more. One of the pupils complained asking “Miss, aren’t you being sexist?”, to which the response was affirmative but more crucially was deemed acceptable by the teacher.

    The majority of men are not predatory Weinsteins but conscientious, treating women with utmost respect and wouldn’t entertain the idea of overtly flirting or even being tactile, so when you have the likes of Jess Phillips, Harman, Leadsom, Soubry repeatedly disparaging men, in general, which infers all are guilty inevitably boils my blood. My daughter was watching one of these women ranting on TV, who said something on the lines of “it’s when men get to a certain age”, naturally my daughter asked me “Is that true Dad?”. Before I could deliver a measured reply I had to exit the house to settle my disgust and anger.

    Thankfully this agenda this doesn’t resonate with women of common sense, the majority. However the negative upshot of all this is misandry nonsense is that it is going to prove more damaging to women than men long term. Men in business as well as politics will now assess the new risks of hiring a twenty something female and not bother, and who can blame them and as for dating….

    The conflation issues seem to not to cut it with the feminazis, nor do the facts or particularly evidence. The trial by media and social media is laughable. For example, accusations of rape must be referred to law enforcement, no debate, it is a serious offence that warrants thorough investigation and perpetrators should be brought to justice, why therefore in the case of a labour activist it would appear one such allegation is being handled internally by the party?

    Keep up the good work TCW.

    • “why therefore in the case of a labour activist it would appear one such allegation is being handled internally by the party?…”

      My guess is that the party KNOWS no rape was committed.

      • This is a reply to the original comment which appeared to be closed down, no doubt a vile misandrist feminist fembot was the culprit and doesn`t like seeing the truth. Just wanted to say that i agree with everything you stated and that unless all men come together and women who arent eveil misandrists we will never influence the institutions to stop with their evil agenda against men and women and we will continue to see these crazy feminists in government and elswhere harming us all. We must have them removed.

  31. The title of this article should be “The silence of men”. I find the over use of the word “male” when you mean men to be offensive.

    I am not a male, I am a man.

    • Normally I’d agree. The overuse of the word ‘male’ and ‘female’ when describing men and women is dehumanizing and makes us all sound like laboratory experiments, but in this article’s case I think it’s used as a literary device. Think of Fava beans and a nice Chianti. Fff-fff-fff-fff etc. ‘The silence of the mens’ doesn’t quite cut it!

    • Timmy wrote:

      I find the over use of the word “male” when you mean men to be offensive.

      I applaud your attack on gynocentrism and have voted up your comment, however, I would observe that those non females who are silent are not men, they are males. Men are speaking out without fear of female displeasure.

  32. “Where’s their protest? Will they not speak out even in self defence?”

    What’s the point? The charges have already been laid out, and on the basis of having a Y-chromosome, the perpetrators have been found guilty.

    If anyone is wondering about the reason for the silence, consider it just another aspect of males withdrawing their investment from a society that, on the whole, hates them – and in which it is ill-advised to invest according to any sane cost-benefit analysis. The signs of male investment in a society tend to be marriage and parenthood – both of these indicators are in decline on average. Why should males defend themselves in a society in which they clearly cannot invest?

    • “Why bother?” many will say. Worse, “why protest?, it is already been said to be a sign of guilt” still more will assert. I would ask the most pertinent question though, what does this say about how men see women in today’s world. I would ask, if you cannot speak, if your concerns do not matter, if you believe women will not hear, what is it saying of your experience with women? When a woman accosts a man, is there a willingness to hear him? Is there an audience? Are we willing to allow her to be accused decades later? If not why not?

      I dare say, the reason is that a growing group of men believe women do not actually care by and large.

      • I would venture that this is related to hypergamy and female mate selection patterns. I have heard it said that 80% of females are competing for 20% of males, while the remaining 80% of men don’t even register on their radar. A lot of us in that 80% have long ago realized that we are often tolerated at best, or viewed as an annoyance that needs to be driven away; At least until the pipes burst, or the sewer backs up, or the power lines go down.

        • The issue is that the 20% are also increasingly understanding that it is not really a concern for them in any of the behavior. Their space and their sensibilities are not respected either. I would note, that young men like my nephew who has had many women clearly eager to get him to commit, keeps moving along, because he has not seen a responsible, respectful, and real concern for his well being expressed. They are extremely interested in him, yet it is clear he does not see them truly being concerned about his well being, but rather seeking a father figure along with being something that turns their crank; That is in hypergamy there is oft still objectification, that makes the wise deeply suspicious. I have met a number of young men like this, where girls are in effect chasing them, but they are not convinced that it truly love and commitment on offer.

  33. Great article, Kathy

    How about starting a #metoo campaign for men i.e. so men who have never harassed anyone can declare their human decency and integrity? The problem here is the lack of science and humanity fuelled by an emotional and political agenda. The idea of generalising from a small sample of damaged men to the whole gender is very bad science and very inhumane, but in today’s political climate of fear, it goes relatively unchallenged – you are spot on!

    • How many men can claim that they were always perfect gentlemen in ever single encounter with a girl at school, or a disco or a pub? If a hand on the knee or an attempt to kiss a girl which was not immediately welcomed counts as sexual harassment then very few men can claim that they have never at some stage in their lives, usually in their teens, or perhaps in their early 20s, been guilty of sexual harassment.

      Of Course teenage girls aren’t always angels either but bad behaviour by them is regarded as a sign of “liberation.” It sometimes feels as if feminists think that women and girls have rights but no responsibilities whereas men and boys have responsibilities but no rights.

      • As I see it, the goal seems to be to demonize all male sexuality and sexual agency. And given the slippery, ever more all encompassing definitions of sexual harassment being peddled these days, it may work. Always remember the very strong, very direct link between feminism and lesbian separatism. Man hating has a long and respected tradition in the halls of feminist academe.

        • Its a pity that the said movements ( feminism and lesbian separatists) are not willing to condemn their own groups for the high percentage of IPV ( lesbians have the highest percentage rate of IPV among all the various relationship groups).

    • I have managed to challenge her many times on perspective, because she thinks she speak for women, muslims and muslim women… in short she doesn’t

      I call her the unelected leader of the community(mr Khan of sparkhill) and that her experience of islamic life is so sheltered because she has never lived overseas .. in an islamic society( I’ve lived in three such countries)

      Even overseas muslims laugh at the naive ( and sometimes young) muslims of the UK( especially those come from a particular racial background)

  34. I just wonder where these witch hunts will all lead in the end and what kind of country we will inhabit. I’m torn between imagining one or other of two extremes: a totalitarian police state in which every word we speak is monitored and our lives, including the way in which we bring up and educate our children, is completely controlled by the government; or, on the other hand, a totally chaotic society in which the family unit has been completely destroyed and we scavenge for scarce resources while resisting attacks from one or other victim group claiming special rights over everyone else.

    In the second scenario, this insane obsession with equality will inevitably result in even more inequality.

  35. It’s the ultimate divorce fantasy — claim huge damages from a man without even needing to sign the Registry first.

  36. If Corbyn’s Islamo/Nazi Labour Party succeeds in turning the UK into an Islamic State then women are going to really find out what it is to live in a male dominated society, where women remain silent and do as they are told including being sex slaves.

    • Except that the Labour Party plan is to have a female dominated society in which men remain silent and do as they are told. (He said, a short while ago, that a future Labour government would run the country for the benefit of women.)

  37. The irony that feminism, proporting to be working for equality, acts through discrimination insisting on characterising ‘men’ and ‘women’ and alloting privalege based on such sexual discrimination. Fundamentally it is an ideology of fascism which demonises one sex, particularly using this lie of male privalege (in the same way fascists believe Jews are running the world). Interestingly feminists talk about the white males dominating executive boards, but not about the white males that are homeless, suffering higher unemployment than women, suffering less access to health care and funding, suffering lower education standards (87000 more women than men graduated last year in the UK, yet funding is still preferentially given to women). Indeed, although women were paid less in the past for the same work, women under 30 now earn more than men of the same age range. Child custody is given to women in 96% of cases, yet women as well as being given the priority in child care there is an expectation that they are given priority in high profile jobs too. Even on remembrance Sunday, when we think those that died in the 1st world war (when men had it easy) 757 thousand men died 0.7 thousand women (657) died.

    It is time feminists stopped their disgraceful level of discrimination.

  38. Men are not silent.

    Kathy refers only to male MPs, who run on fear of losing their positions by upsetting women, the majority of voters; and male commentators in the MSM, who largely get and keep their jobs by toeing the PC line, or who simply don’t write on these social subjects which are dominated by women. But wherever feminist journalists permit responses from their readership, they regularly get slated – by large numbers of predominantly male commentators. Much as this site seems to attract far more comments from men than women.

    Men also have plenty to say on various other sites, and there are many articles and videos out there that speak out for men and have been demolishing the PC brigade for many years. The only point is that these opinions, no matter how sensible, logical and demonstrably correct (often backed up by solid evidence), simply don’t have any traction and are routinely ignored by the mainstream. If nobody is listening, it can easily give the appearance that nobody is speaking.

        • Mike Buchanan wrote:

          And feminist MPs – Harriet Harman, Jess Phillips, so many more.

          And our virtually useless joke of a prime minister. None of them could have been returned to parliament without the votes of a considerable number of males (I cannot bring myself to describe them a s men).

          • Ah yes. Theresa ‘this is what a feminist looks like’ May, who gets stratospheric majorities in Maidenhead, where I worked for 10 years after leaving Uni. Too depressing for words.

  39. How long before the whole thing comes full circle and feminists begin demanding a regime of ‘no sex before marriage’? Maybe they’ll all adopt the burkha …

    It doesn’t seem to have occurred to any of these somewhat hysterical women that this campaign, in conflating the trivial with the serious and in portraying women exclusively as helpless victims, somewhat undermines their claim to equality in every other sphere.

    • Well they aren’t really interested in the “spheres” outside the comfort of office or home are they? I think we have to be honest here that modern feminism is mainly about securing cushy jobs telling other people what to do. No real notion of any actual “doing” themselves. More and more much of the “popular” feminism does indeed look like an attempt to climb back onto the Victorian “pedestal” reserved for the upper middle class. A pedestal made a bit less boring in this incarnation by the opportunity for a career in something Air Conditioned (flexible of course).

      • Exactly this. The talk always seems to be about having an important sounding job, but not what it actually involves. ‘Careers’, ‘Boardrooms’ etc. What exactly is so great about sitting on a board anyway? (I tried it once too – took me ages to get the splinters out. I thenkyou)

      • Yes, one never sees any campaigns to get women into dirty, smelly, dangerous and hard graft careers, even though they can be well remunerated, and rarely in these days of mechanisation requiring of brute physical strength. Its always ‘professional’ careers in nice warm offices that are the targets for female advancement.
        And equally one never sees any admission that a field is over dominated by women – teaching for example, or the entire NHS (over 70% female employees). Odd that……….

  40. Perhaps we women should start a counter movement. I could give you a list as long as my arm as to why I prefer working in male dominated environments. (Although according to the feminist movement that will be down to internalised misogyny)

    • Agreed. Women should launch ‘Women Against Feminism’ political parties. We launched J4MB in 2013, only two people needed, fee £150.00.

  41. I expect that the media remains quiet because of the unwritten rule that sexual impropriety only applies to politicians, those in the movie industry in fact anybody other than media people.

  42. Great points, but men do complain and it falls on deaf ears. As an old time MRA leader and current MGTOW, I have complained many times, and suffered job loss and more for it. Just a couple weeks ago my current employer put up a sexist poster in the lobby on every floor. When I complained that it was sexist because it portrays men as the primary if not sole perpetrators of IPV and DV, my complaint was dismissed out of hand. While I sympathize with the Men’s Rights Movement, years ago I came to the realization that because women comprise the majority of voters, things will change only when women demand it, and that won’t happen until men go on strike, John Galt style. Hence, MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way.

    • have you thought about taking a photo( of the poster) and posting it online next to the employers name?
      You wouldn’t have to say anything that might warrant libel, just I think this is sexist for (employers name) and leave it for everyone else to decide.

      you could in theory( guerrilla style) make up a sticker to put on the poster and challenge it for its sexism, I’m sure any number of people could come up with a polite but sarcastic phrase to label the poster for you( such as quoting ONS including the one that women are the majority abductor of children( 70%), or that the police state that more women are now being arrested for DV than men)

  43. Hello I think the reason is that women have a natural advantage over men. In interpersonal relationships, women have power and men must obey. Feminism’s genius is to convert this female power from interpersonal level to a political level, that’s the meaning of the motto “the personal is political”.

    My analysis makes me very pessimistic : up to now, nothing has arisen to stop this from becoming a total political supremacy of “women” (in reality from the feminist movement, who specializes in doing the conversion of female power from personal to political level).

    So here is my answer to you Kathy : if you want to know why men are not reacting, look into your personal life and the power women hold over men in it. What happens is nothing more, just taken to a higher level.

  44. How do we speak up Kathy? Open our mouths and we lose our jobs, our careers, possibly even our families when the social workers get involved – as you know they are just slavering at the bit to.

    But the resentment is there, building and building, a pressure cooker crushing down on ordinary men – and ordinary women. God help this country when it finally breaks loose, because nothing else will. To paraphrase Powell, like the Roman, i See the rivers running red with blood.

    My only hope is that at least it will be the progressive lefties whose blood stains our country instead of (much more likely) totally innocent people caught up in a mealstrom which they didn’t ask for and couldn’t have stopped.

  45. If the silence of the men lays bare one thing … ‘

    It is that women aren’t listening to what men are saying, or they are feigning deafness. What women have never understood about men is that for men actions speak louder than words so a man has to do something to be heard and what men are doing is what men do best which is actually doing things rather than talking endlessly about what they think someone should be doing, and what men are actually doing is giving up on women because women simply aren’t worth the bother, which I suspect you understand and is why you’ve written this piece. What men are increasingly not doing is listening, which to a man means responding or reacting rather than just making sympathetic noises, to women who use what Americans call ‘shaming language’ to get us to do what they want.

    Fight your own battles Kathy and, if you really want us to think of you as our equal, stop trying to humiliate us into fighting them for you. Gynocentrism can’t help you now: we’ve moved on and you must too, for your sake not ours (we no longer care).

  46. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

    4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

    5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

    6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

    7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

    8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

    9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

    10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

    John 8:3-10

    It is amazing what fear and a guilty conscience can do to a man.

  47. Very well written article, Kathy. I hope your message eventually breaks through, and that ordinary men and women find a voice strong enough to overcome those who seek to destroy our civilization.

  48. What is going to happen with all this is more and more men will be drawn to movements like MGTOW and will stop engaging with women altogether.

    • … which is simply to surrender to the elitist, eugenicist population reduction ideology behind all of this.

  49. It was this clip of Jo Brand’s silencing of Ian Hislop and Quentin Letts that triggered my article in the first place http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2017/11/04/jo-brand-silences-all-male-have-got-news-panel-house-commons/ but which I then I managed to leave out.

    ‘I am the only woman here therefore I am the only one with a right to a view’ Jo asserted. Neither Letts nor Hislop challenged her flakey logic but accepted her reprimand, sat there shamefaced -like embarrassed schoolboys – having relinquished their right to free expression. Astonishing. Or not, as all the comment in this trail explain.

  50. MGTOW (Men Going Their On Way) is freedom for men and gives women what they say they want. The trouble is, for women, they won’t like it but men will.

  51. Men understand that the game is rigged in favour of women so know better than to play the game, but women should realise that if you mistreat a dog it might just bite. When I bite they’ll know about it because there’ll be no point in holding back. I have about as much sympathy or compassion for women as I have for their closest relative, the leech.

  52. Why are so many men silent? It is partly because so many of them are too depressed to bother; partly because so many are working extremely hard not only to house and support themselves but also an ex-wife who divorved him and took his home and children away; but mostly, I fear, it is because they still do not understand what is happening to their collective lives.

    As Antonio Gramsci (one of the founders of thinking that underpins modern feminism) wrote:
    “…socialism [Marxism] will triumph by first capturing the culture by infiltrating schools, universities, churches and the media, by transforming the consciousness of society.”
    The conciousness of society is already so far transformed, so that most people — men and women — still believe that women are hard-done by (and have been for two thousand years).

    In feminist studies (aka women’s studies, aka gender studies) the first term of re-education hammers home the message that ‘The Patriarchy’ exists by lying, so that even statistics showing how women are favoured by society must be a lie. This is a method right out of the teachings of Cultural Marxism and is deployed, albeit in a softer manner, to us all in all walks of life.

    To implement their version of an utopic society, Cultural Marxists must first break apart what we have: foundations like the family, free speech, and liberal education are too strong to allow for state control of children, the abolishment of monogamy and public ownership of all things. Grimsci saw the necessity of crushing the male spirit:
    “What comes to pass does not do so because a few people want it, so much as because the mass of citizens abdicate responsibility and let things be.”

  53. Why? Because men have feelings too.
    Why? Because they are afraid – and it isn’t male to be afraid.
    Why? Because women have sexual power over men.
    Why? Because many women hate men.

    I thought Jo Brand’s demeaning put down of Ian Hislop and Paul Merton on HIGNFY was typical of the problem. They had no answer. They just sat there like dumb animals. Two intelligent men shamed into submission. Her behaviour was deliberate and an act of malice.

Comments are closed.