Sunday, November 1, 2020
Home Laura Perrins Laura Perrins: The great Lothario Boris makes an unconvincing feminist

Laura Perrins: The great Lothario Boris makes an unconvincing feminist

-

Does anyone know how intersectional Boris Johnson’s feminism is? He forgot to tell us on Wednesday when he announced at the Foreign Office that ‘the happiest, most prosperous, most successful societies are feminist societies.’ That is what always pops into your head when you think of feminists, non? Goodness what a chipper bunch they are.

Boris announced that female education was a panacea for so many of the economic problems of the developing world. If we get the education of girls right then it increases the productivity of the nation, stabilises birth rates and improves infant mortality and health.

This is all true, but it is a pretty instrumental reason to educate girls. I think the reason we should educate girls is because they are of equal dignity and worth to males and it is the morally right thing to do. I also noticed Boris relied heavily on notes for this – surely these truths should be self evident that you should not need notes to remind you of this universal moral truth.

Anyway, Boris also said that total equality between men and women was a revolutionary idea – which is true. But this has little to do with modern day feminism and everything to do with the concept of equality of condition.

There is a big difference between equality of outcome, which is what the elite feminists want and is a Marxist concept that cannot occur if you respect liberty and small government. Equality of condition, on the other hand, is a pillar of freedom and liberty in a democratic society. That is why it does not exist in Islamic countries, for instance.

To watch a politician say we should educate girls because of feminism is pretty galling. The missionaries and nuns were educating girls a long, long time before the feminists came along. And they continue to do so. On the other hand, today’s feminists can only bang on about ‘intersectional feminism’ and the evils of the patriarchy.

As I said I am not too sure how intersectional Boris’s feminism is – but he was pretty clear that here in the UK we should ‘practise what we preach.’ Boris should understand that under this dogma the straight, white, privileged, privately educated male is most definitely at the bottom of the heap. He, in fact, is the great oppressor of the hierarchy of victims in the leftist victim league table.

I would also like to know if this means Boris is going to be taking away our hoop earrings? Yes, you heard that right. Apparently, apparently, white women who wear hoop earrings are oppressors.

“If you didn’t create the culture as a coping mechanism for marginalisation, take off those hoops, if your feminism isn’t intersectional take off those hoops, if you try to wear mi cultura [my culture] when the creators can no longer afford it, take off those hoops . . . if you can’t pronounce my name or spell it . . . take off those hoops . . . I use ‘those’ instead of ‘yours’ because hoops were never ‘yours’ to begin with.”

This is the latest hot issue for the feminists – hoop earring appropriation. They obviously do not have any idea of property rights either. If I bought said hoops, they are mine. Deal with it.

In the feminist intersectional mayhem, cultural appropriation of the hoop earring is just as bad as cultural imperialism. Cultural imperialism, for the oikes out there, is where countries- especially Western countries – try to export their values and impose them on other countries. I am trying to think of one such value – oh say the education of girls and the equality of condition of women.

Trying to improve the condition of women and girls in the developing world is most definitely a form of cultural imperialism and therefore anathema to the feminists. Someone might want to inform Boris of this, and how self-defeating his support of feminism is.

Finally, another boo-boo in the feminist world is when men take any joy at all in pleasuring their partner. I really feel duty bound to mention this when we are talking about the great Lothario Boris. Someone needs to keep him updated. In this piece titled “Why Guys Get Turned on When You Orgasm — and Why That’s a Bad Thing”, we are told about some “fairly frightening conclusions from research findings, namely that when women’s orgasms begin to serve as a masculinity achievement for male partners, the orgasms cease to be about women’s liberation or sexual pleasure.”

Honestly, you could not make it up. So as one Pope may have said at some point, you can do it, just don’t enjoy it.

You might want to rethink that feminism Boris. You have been warned.

- Advertisement -

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We receive no independent funding and depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.

Laura Perrinshttps://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-editors/
Laura is Co-Editor of The Conservative Woman

Sign up for The ConWom News

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.


Follow us!

Share this post