Vermischtes vom 3. Oktober 2015

Emma Watson, die neue Vorzeige-Feministin der Vereinten Nationen, wird derzeit in den sozialen Netzwerken scharf angegangen. Von den dämonisch-monströsen Männerrechtlern vermutlich? I wo – von Feministinnen. Watson hatte nämlich den Fehler begangen in einem Interview zu erklären, dass einige der Anhänger dieser Ideologie, denen sie begegnet sei, Männer waren – und dass Frauen genauso wie Männer daran beteiligt seien, Frauen zu unterdrücken. Die Reaktionen waren vorhersehbar:

One Twitter user wrote: "Emma Watson is a problematic fav. I love her but she needs to educate herself and stop trying to get male approval with her white feminism."

Another person continued: "WHY DOES EMMA WATSON ALWAYS MORE CONCERNED ABOUT MEN, SHE SPENDS ALL HER TIME CATERING TO MALE FEMINISTS."

A third user added: "Emma Watson's views shouldn't be considered feminism, anything that questions black women and seeks male approval is NOT feminism."

In ihrer Rede vor den Vereinten Nationen hatte Watson noch ihrer Bestürzung darüber Ausdruck gegeben, dass Feminismus in unserer Gesellschaft so sehr mit Männerhass verwechselt werde ...

In ihrem Interview mit dem Guardian, inwiefern sie selbst das Opfer von Sexismus geworden sei, erklärte Watson übrigens:

"I have experienced sexism in that I have been directed by male directors 17 times and only twice by women. Of the producers I’ve worked with 13 have been male and only one has been a woman. But I am lucky: I have always insisted on being treated equally and have generally won that equality."

Für männliche Leser dieses Blogs bedeutet das vermutlich: Sie wurden dann Opfer von Sexismus, wenn die meisten Lehrer, die Sie in der Schule hatten, weiblich waren – auch wenn Sie "Glück gehabt" haben sollten und faktisch nie benachteiligt wurden. Galoppierender Irrsinn. Und das ist kein kleines dummes Mädchen – das ist eine Botschafterin der Vereinten Nationen!

Dementsprechend führte das zitierte Statement zu zahllosen Schlagzeilen in Magazinen wie Time, Vogue, Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, Huffington Post sowie diversen Zeitungen, denen zufolge Watson über den Sexismus in Hollywood auspacke.

Dazu passend: Auf Alles Evolution ist heute Thema, wie der unter anderem von Anne Wizorek vertretene Feminismus eine neue religiöse Heilslehre darstellt und mit angeblicher Männerfreundlichkeit gar nichts zu tun hat.

Zu dem, was Anne Wizorek und ihre ideologischen Schwestern angerichtet haben, passt wiederum ein Artikel im britischen Telegraph:

A new book claims that male office workers are now so afraid of being on the receiving end of a sexual harassment case, they are reluctant to mentor, assist, befriend and even hold open doors for female colleagues.

Crushingly, Sex & The Office suggests men now view such ordinary, decent behaviours as "too risky" – and, in what will be a bitter irony for equality campaigners – claims that, as a direct consequence, women are now failing to advance at work.

(...) The book’s author, Kim Elsesser, a research scholar at the University of California, argues that a "sex partition" has sprung up, which impedes women from building the vital network of contacts both within the workplace and socially.

(...) Tellingly, Elsesser adds that companies themselves are contributing to this mess, as they are now so terrified of legal action they send staff on sexual harassment training courses, and are duty-bound to follow up on any allegation, however minor.

Ludicrously, Elsesser cites examples of men who have been dragged in by their HR departments for simply opening a door for a female colleague or complimenting her on a new suit. "Stories like these spread around workplaces, instilling a fear that innocent remarks will be misinterpreted," she says.

No s**t, Sherlock!

Of course, despite the fact that it is men who are getting the rough end of the pineapple here, this is all being painted as Officially Bad For Women, as they are failing to get on.

But how are men meant to react when we’re informed that, despite decades of being told women don’t need or even want men’s help, now they’re falling behind because we’re not helping them?

(...) How sad. And, honestly, who’s got the foggiest clue about where "inappropriate" even begins these days? Holding open a door? Saying, "nice dress?" Smiling? Making eye contact?

By carrying on like this we are nurturing and mollycoddling victimhood and it is having profound impacts. Last month in Britain, "fearless feminist" barrister Charlotte Proudman publicly shamed Alexander Carter-Silk, 57, a senior solicitor, for complimenting her "stunning" LinkedIn profile picture – then claimed it was her career that had been "ruined".

Amid this poisonous smog of mutual mistrust and, increasingly, contempt, is there any wonder men are becoming fearful of female co-workers?

Above all, Sex & The Office is proof, if any were needed, that The Great Workplace Equality Project has spectacularly backfired. Who, precisely, wins if men are terrified of lawsuits and women are falling behind as a consequence?

In this toxic, paranoid environment, women will never be trusted as advisers. They will be frozen out of networks – or, increasingly, create their own women-only networks, which on the surface promise advancement yet deep down increase gender separatism. Would the single-sex workplaces of the 1940s be safer for all?

This is the bed Third Wave feminism has made. Now we all have to lie in it: wide-awake, hearts racing, eyes wide open, waiting for the lawyers to come hammering at our doors.

Is that our collective future – one called "Fear And Loathing In Human Resources?" How can we make this waking nightmare end?

Solange die feministische Hass allein Männern geschadet hat, war die Kritik daran nur schwach. Je offensichtlicher wird, dass sich Frauen damit auch ins eigene Knie schießen, desto lauter wird diese Kritik. Hierzulande lecken Journalisten und Politiker Anne Wizorek & Co. noch die Füße. Mal sehen, wie lange das Gehirn dieser Leute ausgeschaltet bleiben kann.