Politics, Security
comments 75

After Cologne, Feminism is Dead

If German history in general is short on laughs (even Schopenhauer’s explanation of the psychology of humour in The World As Will and Representation is unrelentingly miserable) the period 1933 to 1945 is emphatically joyless. Though one of the few tragi-comic chapters in the horror story of Nazism concerns a strange little organization called the Association of German National Jews. They were a pro-National Socialist Jewish group whose membership not only welcomed Hitler’s accession but actively promoted the self-eradication of Jewish identity and its absorption into the new, heroic, master-culture represented by the Nazis (it was said of them, tongue only partly in cheek, that their motto was “down with us”). In 1935, predictably and forcibly, the group was disbanded. Whereas Stalin had his useful idiots, for Hitler there could be no useful Jews.

With the above in mind, Marx needs revision. History repeats itself: First as farce, then as tragedy. No longer the unofficial motto of a handful of obscure pre-war self-hating Jews, Down With Us has latterly been adopted (or so it seems) as an official article of policy by the German government itself. Here is a country whose improvident approach to Near Eastern immigration these past few months is quite literally threatening its future as a liberal, progressive, democratically-viable European nation-state. It wouldn’t take an especially imaginative political cartoonist to show Frau Merkel as Frankenstein- throwing levers and blowing fuses as she botches an attempt to graft a million (and counting) Muslim refugees onto the body politic of an increasingly mutilated society. In politics as in cheap Gothic literature, such experiments breed monsters.

Some of us are old enough to remember when refugees consisted almost entirely (and by definition) of the most vulnerable members of any given country in crisis: Women, children, the elderly, and so forth. Today, on the other hand, most of the Muslims arriving in Europe from the Near East seem to be young men of fighting age: Young men whose views regarding Jews, gays, and of course women are completely at odds with Europe’s liberal tradition as it’s evolved these past few centuries; a liberal tradition which Germany, for obvious reasons, has sought to reify in its approach to domestic and international affairs ever since the end of the war. But thanks in no small measure to mass Muslim immigration, antisemitism in its most predatory incarnation is once again the norm on German streets, while misogyny is more or less accepted, even expected. It is to choke on the irony of it all. In the name of a long-cherished tradition of tolerance, Germany is becoming savagely intolerant: Totally unsafe for Jews who dare to display their Judaism in public, and increasingly unsafe for women who dare even to go out in public at all after nightfall (or use a swimming pool; or attend a carnival; or do pretty much anything short of redacting their identity behind a hijab and never leaving the house again).

The details of what exactly went on in Cologne and other German cities on New Year’s Eve 2015 are too horrible and by now too well-known to merit repetition. What deserves to be iterated and reiterated by way of a cautionary tale is the story of the shameful reaction of the German authorities (both local and national) to an unprecedented outbreak of mass sexual truancy among highly organized sections of the migrant community: A reaction which went through textbook stages of denial, cover-up, and, eventually, victim-blaming (in the immediate aftermath of the assaults, the [female] Mayor of Cologne sprang into action with a set of guidelines for women on how best to behave in public so as not to inflame the migrant libido). Lie back and think of multiculturalism, German women were effectively being told.

Then came the equally wearily predictable warnings of what we were to understand was the real problem here: Not Muslim misogyny, but Islamophobia. Ralf Jaeger, Minister of the Interior for North Rhine-Westphalia, famously drew moral symmetry between the sexual assaults and the reaction of the commentariat: “What happens on right-wing platforms and in chatrooms is at least as awful as the acts of those assaulting the women” he said. And this wasn’t just a German issue. We now know that law-enforcement authorities throughout Europe have been conniving for some time in similarly clumsy attempts to neutralize news of the scale of the violence (particularly sexual violence against women) at large within certain sections of newly-arrived migrant communities. Across Europe, citizens are being asked by their own governments to accept that complicity in a conspiracy of silence is the highest form of tolerance. Fortunately, most people aren’t buying into it. Sadly, however, some people are: And, oddly enough, not a few of them are women.

If the response of European governments to the continent-wide crisis figureheaded by Cologne was by turns disappointing and disgusting, the response of the feminist left was soul-crushingly depressing- a thesaurus of hypocrisies which went beyond self-parody, untethered itself from rational thought, and proceeded to float around the comment pages and the Twitter feeds like a rogue blimp.

It might seem invidious to draw attention to the unintentionally hysterical (in both senses of the term) remarks of just one feminist commentator when there are so many others to choose from, but there was something about the events in Cologne that seemed to send Laurie Penny stark raving mad. From her Harvard redoubt- with the depth and breadth of the Atlantic Ocean between her and reality- the true, ideological nature of the crisis facing Europe suddenly became terribly clear. In a New Statesman piece with the urgent title “After Cologne We Can’t Let The Bigots Steal Feminism”, we learned from Laurie that the whole sorry situation wasn’t about the myopic stupidity of governments importing (and importing wholesale) a hyper-masculine, misogynistic, patriarchal, unassimilable culture into Europe; instead it was about “the theft of feminist rhetoric by imperialism and racism.”

Laurie also reminded those of us who thought we were appalled by events in Cologne that we’re not really appalled by events in Cologne: We’re only pretending to be appalled by events in Cologne so that we can indulge in a spot of good old-fashioned Muslim-bashing. “White supremacist patriarchy only concerns itself with women’s safety when rape and sexual assault can be pinned on cultural outsiders” she thundered, while also speculating (in curiously feverish language) that not a few white people who claim to be opposed to Islamic sexual violence are secretly turned on by the idea of savage brown men doing unspeakable things to helpless white women. To be fair, and in the same article, Laurie graciously concludes (doubtless after long and hard consideration) that rape is never excusable — not even when the perpetrators “are really angry and disenfranchised” (which sounds a bit like an excuse to me).

We could go on. We could mention Deborah Orr in the Guardian, who somehow managed to link events in Cologne to the historical failings of European (and British) criminal justice systems; or Gaby Hinsliff (also, coincidentally enough, in the Guardian) who contrasted the “expensive smartphones” of the assaulted German women with the miserable lives of “young male migrants…scraping by at the bottom of Europe’s social and economic food chain” (query: what’s the Arabic for “with that iPhone she was asking for it”?). Suffice to say that to endure the Krakatoa-like eruption of cognitive dissonance from the feminist left in the aftermath of the obscenity of Cologne was to have a whole new dimension of unpleasantness added to what was an already thoroughly unpleasant ordeal: A bit like being hectored by One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest’s Nurse Ratched during a particularly difficult colonoscopy. We really could have done without it.

As a general point, it really is astonishing the extent to which the feminist left (in fact, the left in general) is prepared to veto entire chapters of its own otherwise Inquisitorially-enforced ideology in the interests of maintaining 100% solidarity with Islam — the most ruthlessly misogynistic force in the world today. The same people who see and hear rape culture literally everywhere (on University campuses, in wolf-whistles, on saucy t-shirts worn by rocket scientists, etc) somehow suddenly can’t see or hear it at all when it involves feral mobs of migrants assaulting women en masse in public in major European cities. Amid a miasma of double standards and self-contradictory froth, what’s clear is that the left is only opposed to evils like misogyny, homophobia, and racism inasmuch as they can be bundled into a knout and wielded without mercy to give white, western, man a damn good thrashing.

Ever since the rise of Islamism in place of Communism as the chief ideological antipode of western values, the left has sunk lower and lower into moral insolvency in its pathological urge to aid, abet, and excuse the actions of the enemies of tolerance. Until recently, the more recklessly optimistic among us thought there might be a turning point. Perhaps after Paris January 2015, or after Paris November 2015, or after Cologne, or after [insert any given Islamist transgression against basic decency here]… perhaps then we would witness some sort of renaissance of sanity, a resurrection of reason, when the left would rediscover its social justice-based roots and surprise us with outright condemnation of the horror, with no plea of mitigation.

We must now accept that this turning point will never come; indeed, that for the European liberal left in general, and for the feminist left in particular, a point of no return has been reached. Axiom: After Cologne, feminism is dead. Europe must now focus on the more important issue of women’s rights.


Phillip Mark McGough is a UK-based writer, lawyer and blogger for the Huffington Post and the Jerusalem Post. Follow him on Twitter:  @PMMcGough


  1. Pingback: Feminism is dead, long love women’s rights « Peter Risdon

  2. Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Sentences (#38)

  3. Dermot Peel says

    “most of the Muslims arriving in Europe from the Near East seem to be young men of fighting age:”…. According to UNHCR the actual percentage of (specifically) male Syrian refugees (age 18-59) is 21.4%. Sorry. Damn facts keep getting in the way of a good rant.

    • The number you’re quoting is for the Syrians registering at camps in Syria, not the economic migrants arrivingin europe

    • The numbers that they cite, are whatever numbers that work best to fulfill their agenda. They can say that only 25% of them are fighting aged men, but when every picture you see of them is full of young adult men, w/ few women, children, or elderly, what are you gonna believe? When you have 5 million people fleeing from 500,000 extremists, something cannot be right. They are not refugees. They are Muslims, w/ intentions to spread Islam across the globe. Ghaddafi predicted that Islam would conquer Europe, w/o firing a single shot. And because Political Correctness has become more important than the security of the people in your country, it is gonna be that easy.

    • The percentage isn’t important considering we’re dealing with millions of people here. Whatever the numbers are it was enough for incidents of assault sprees by large groups of men to occur. A smaller percentage of young men should be even more alarming because it means that a higher percentage of those men are predisposed to commit these sorts of crimes.

    • Peter says

      You look at the “damn facts” before posting further comments: you are quoting the % of young male Syrian refugees/total refugees. The % of males as a whole is *much higher* (c. 75%) and the article is absolutely correct to state that the majority of refugees are able bodied young men. Many of them (Moroccans to give one example) are simply opportunists who are not fleeing conflict in their own country. Thank you Phillip McGough for telling it like it is: we need more commentary like your article to rebutt the whitewashers, handwringers and apologists and to expose the fantasy world inhabited by nutcases like Laurie Penny.

    • Tee Time says

      And New Year’s Eve in Colone was generally peaceful, according to the authorities. And Santa Claus will ride the Easter Bunny to the Unicorn’s tea party. The authorities are lying about everything related to the refugees, and have already admitted it.

    • Loelle says

      If you’re going to quote the UNHCR Dermot Peel, at least get it right. The UNHCR figure of 21.5% of Syrian refugees being males aged 18-59 refers to the total number of refugees (4,604,061). Three quarters of that total are to be found in refugee camps in Turkey and Jordan. The other one million have gone to Europe. Of those refugees, most are males aged 18-59 (“of fighting age”). Fittingly, 21.5% of 4,604,061 is 989,873, or near as dammit to one million. http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php

    • You should probably spend some time looking into the figures you post before you try to use them to refute an argument. Those numbers come from the Syrian refugees in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. We’re talking about the refugees entering Europe. Nice try.

  4. Pingback: Sentences (#38) | Neoreactive

    • Russell Dummerth says

      What is the importance of that? North Africa is predominantly Muslim, with many of the same misogynistic, aggressive, and repressive values as Muslims elsewhere. Jihadism is a global problem. Islamic values clashing with Western, liberal values is a global problem. And until we, as a civilization regonize this and stand against it, Islamism will continue to creep into and grow within our free societies.

  5. brendafromflatbush says

    Recipe for pouring nourishing oxygen on the flames of racist, far-right hatred in Europe: Sit back and do the stuff above. This article is an important wake-up call.

    • Rubin says

      wrong! im from one of these 3rd world nations and I can honestly say that you are one of the many reason Europe is at the state it is today. Why do you think thousands of well educated liberal people from these nations are fleeing them, its because Islamism and modern culture can not coexist, dont worry about me just take a look at the rapes and the assaults done by these people have committed after they came to Europe after Merkal lowered the bar and let the hordes of radicals enter and ruin. if anything this is a backlash against this policy and rightfully so.

      • True Muslims cannot integrate into Western culture, because Sharia Law is supposed to be above any government’s laws. Christians do not have that problem, cuz Christ said to obey the laws of the land.

  6. Viriya says

    Knights Templar is an anachronism.

    What we’re seeing is vigilante/nationalist groups popping up all over the place: “Dusseldorf is watching,” “Sons of Odin,” “Nordisk Ungdom,” “PEGIDA,” etc. Of course they are mocked and slandered by the very people they are trying to protect, but the vaccuum from the fecklessness of the police and criminal complicity of the state must be filled somehow.

    They are the men Europe needs, not the ones it deserves.

  7. Kharn says

    Why are the left always so concerned about the right?

    Its not members of the right that are currently raping their way across the planet or trying to convert your kids and you to the death cult ideology called islam.

    • It’s virtue signalling. What better way to show how much of a good and tolerant person you are than bashing people with different political opinions.

    • the article was about a response to a very weird sex attack – never seen before in Germany – and although it attacked the left leaning feminist journos, its not about Left or Right at its heart. Of course people can be horrible to each other in any culture. But if you can imagine going down to watch the fireworks with your son for a bit of rapey rapey with the boys, ur probably not European. Well – Italian, maybe (Joke!). Seriously – these posts attacking “The Right” and “White Men” are so so boring – especially since the article is about a white female american and brown arab & north african political economic migrants.

  8. The final sentence of this article , “important issue of women’s rights”. The view that women’s rights are a separate category of human rights based on the differences at the time of birth is the view point of Islamists. Islamists and their interpretation of Sharia law define different rights for male and female. In the area of sexual behavior, the rights of the male enable sexual abuse of females. The other Abrahamic religions also have factions that make similar interpretations of biblical and Talmudic writings to justify abuse toward women. While the author describes situations that result from such beliefs as attributable to Islamists, his final sentence calls for the establishment of an islamist style of rights based on birth categorization as Islamists follow. Feminism calls for equality of human rights between humans without regard to classifications determined by birth. Calling for a focus on “women’s rights” instead of the application of human rights makes this article a defense of Islamism and the abuse of women based on religious(or other) belief.

    • Simon Briscoe says

      You’re absolutely right. This article is clearly and unmistakably a defence of Islamism.

    • Goos: “Feminism calls for equality of human rights between humans without regard to classifications determined by birth.”

      That’s nonsense. Your theoretical version of feminism may do so. (Call it humanism, then.) Actual feminism focuses on the disadvantages of women, with the occasional defense that this will also remove the disadvantages of men. I haven’t seen a great push along the lines of “hey, girls, let’s figure out where we have advantages over men, and let’s go do away with them!”. Feminism can still make sense, in an adversarial system, where it’s opposed by something that represents male interests. But then it certainly doesn’t act regardless of classifications. If anything it’s an incarnation of “individualistic communism”. The process is class warfare, at the end of which all individuals are liberated. (Reinforce class in order to overcome class.) Allegedly, and hopefully, liberated. It’s Engels and Marx. Just with impurities, and severe contradictions. Among them are the focus on the class of women [note the problem of “intersectionality” — funny, belonging to several classes], the enjoyment of – and wish to – maintain the advantages of a system of market competition and free association (for feminists), alongside no fixed concept of human nature. Very easily corrupted.

  9. Pingback: Feminism and Islam: Cognitive dissonance | The Stebbing-Heuer Project

  10. Gavin Hirschhausen says

    Definition = Calling evil good in the name of love. The road of co-dependance is paved with misery. Islam and the Western ideology of the left will at best be a co-dependance relationship. Feminists have for decades urged their sisters to awake from their co-dependant relationships with the males that see themselves as more powerful than their other halves.
    Cologne simply demonstrated that seeing male and females as equals has a very, very long way to go.
    So, what should be done?. I don’t hear any practical solutions being bandied around. What does history tell us?.

  11. The few feminists who say anything about Cologne frame it as an example of patriarchal oppression, of which *all* men are guilty, and demand that the state protect all women against all men, as if the state were some recently-discovered third sex.

    John Glubb wrote:

    “An increase in the influence of women in public life has often been associated with national decline. The later Romans complained that, although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab Empire, the women demanding admission to the professions hitherto monopolized by men.

    “Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist movement collapsed.”

  12. Frank says

    > Some of us are old enough to remember when refugees consisted almost entirely (and by definition) of the most vulnerable members of any given country in crisis: Women, children, the elderly, and so forth.

    Can you think of an example of any war in history where more women died than men? Any at all?

  13. Pingback: Kurznachrichten vom 19.01.2015 | Geschlechterallerlei

  14. Pingback: After Cologne, Feminism Is Dead | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  15. infowarrior1 says

    Feminism will only die when sex realism returns and sex egalitarianism is debunked and discredited.

    And the sign of its demise would be the return of Patriarchy more stronger than ever before prior.

    • Feminism is dead – less than 1 in 7 women want it, and the social justice warriors lately have been baying about how “telling” it is that the suffragettes were white!? Women’s rights are important, and men need to reclaim their place as being responsible for women ie by never assaulting them, . This is the stark difference between digi-feminists and women who want equal pay and equal rights who actualy realise that we are biologically different and embrace it – as people, not as a sex. Hate it if you must, but we are the same species, and the roles we are given are pretty specific. Men have forgotten how to be men, to dominate without hurting, to show emotion – all sorts of reasons – and the muslims from the middle east will not allow women to travel through their countries, and I am amazed that people like Merkel are playing such a dangerous game.

  16. infowarrior1 says

    ”Europe must now focus on the more important issue of women’s rights.”

    Which means feminism has not gone away. Since that’s what the 1st wave of feminism fought for especially votes for women and the associated rights alongside it.

    Only its later iterations are discredited.

  17. This article clearly illustrates how under the guise of right-wing fear-mongering and hatred towards refugees and migrants the old-fashioned hatred towards women still flourishes splendidly. Why else would one attack ‘feminists’ who are completely right to point out that the vast majority of offences such as sexual assault, rapes and domestic abuse are committed by perpetrators in the direct social environment fo their victims, i.e. ex’es, ‘boyfriends’, ‘dates’, fathers, uncles, you name it … and that the influx of refugees adds very little to that.
    Sure mysogeny among immigrants and refugees needs to be confronted just as much as among people already residents of a country. But let’s not kid ourselves into believing that western countries like Germany, Netherlands, the UK or the US could attribute the level of violence against women in their countries to immigrants or refugees. Oh no … the ‘native’ populations is perfectly capable of committing those crimes in large numbers without any ‘foreign influence’. But hey … if you are a right-wing bigot like this author why worry about that?

    • read the article again: “The same people who see and hear rape culture literally everywhere (on University campuses, in wolf-whistles, on saucy t-shirts worn by rocket scientists, etc) somehow suddenly can’t see or hear it at all when it involves feral mobs of migrants assaulting women en masse in public in major European cities”. Recognise yourself here at all?

    • LostInThePlantation says

      Nobody has claimed that the behaviour of migrants excuses existing rapes – you leftards are so utterly reliant on projecting idiotic opinions onto your adversaries to make yourselves seem credible.

      The right is simply pointing out that an increase in rape is to be expected when you admit hundreds of thousands of people with very different views on women’s rights into Europe, and simultaneously skew the male/female sex ratio for people under 40.

      Cretins like Laurie Penny then try deflect attention away from the underlying issue by refocusing criticism on European men as if that solves anything at all. It’s nothing less than fiddling for applause while torches are set to Rome.

      The only pleasure this all gives me, is that it looks increasingly likely that within my lifetime, your ilk will have a very direct and terminal encounter with the reality you worked so hard to create.

      You’re simply too stupid to see that there’s absolutely no place for you in the coming world, whichever way it swings.

      • goatron says

        LostInThePlantation that last line was *the* best smackdown I’ve ever seen on the internet. So harsh and so, so true. Thanks for making me smile.

    • You’re a liar. The most likely source of sexual assault to young women is mom’s new boyfriend, not Dad or Uncle Joey. Yes, women are more vulnerable to those they know IN AN UNSTABLE AND CHOTIC SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT. The solution to this, of course, is to create stable an orderly social environments.

      I suggest you read up on the Herkeimer Effect.

  18. Dan K says

    The first thing we need to do is eliminate the morons in our own camp.
    Frankly, I would take more joy in that.

  19. Wombat says

    At some stage I suspect men are going to say “you frigging feminists can choose between me as I am, or Alaways Bin Rapin as he is, or you can defend yourselves, presumably with placards and hashtags.”

    This is inevitably the issue, yes? They demand to be protected from us, by us. Who else do they call when a drunken ex boyfriend is bashing on their door at 2am? You think they want a 5’2″ female police officer to respond?

    So the women of Europe can put their money where their mouth is. Don’t want the patriarchy? Go take your bloody chances with Alaways Bin Rapin, and if you survive you’re welcome to come crawling back, as long as you’ve learned a thing or two.

  20. McGough: ‘instead it was about “the theft of feminist rhetoric by imperialism and racism.”’ Interesting. This should be considered in detail. I suspect rhetoric matches doctrine, which means that feminism has things in common with imperialism and racism. It’s worthwhile to go deeper than this article does, and, by examining its instances of contradiction and conflict, to determine what the essence of feminism is. I’m pretty sure that it’s incoherent on a fairly abstract level, one of principles and premises.

    Another thing that is overlooked is the reaction of men. It’s quite possible that most Western – German – men are acting hypo-masculine. I’ve come across no piece of reading that examines men’s reaction to the transgressions in Cologne; nothing about any fights – man against man – there. In related matters, I have seen it mentioned that (contemporary) Christianity is not a religion suited to times of (physical) conflict; “hypo”, compared to other religions.

  21. Pingback: Understanding the Caliphate Curve | IowaDawg Blogging Stuff

  22. Pingback: Attacks On Women In Cologne Highlight Double Standard of Multiculturalism

  23. The article mentions some expected and failed points of no return. No, the real point of no return for the left were the massive crimes of Stalin. The left has no moral compass whatsoever.

  24. Pingback: Attacks on Women In Cologne Highlight Double Standard Of Multiculturalism | PA Pundits - International

  25. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2015/01/20 | Free Northerner

  26. Pingback: Watercooler 1/19/2016 Open Thread: NBC Debate Nixed, Smiley is Frowning, Trump is Like Nixon?

  27. Pingback: Attacks on Women in Cologne Highlight Double Standard of Multiculturalism | Truly Right View

  28. Political Correctness is a brainwashing technique based on Marxist Critical Theory

    It is a system of cyclical logic that once adopted by the user never allows for another approach, and the end-game is that the assigned antagonist always embodies hatred, racism, or oppression.

    They become intellectually trapped, because in order to see and realize when they err, they would have to empathize and entertain their assigned antagonists point of view…this causes great cognitive dissonance due to contradicting their previously assigned value of the antagonist and so is rejected or avoided.

    The remaining cognitive dissonance is alleviated by the religious cult-like belief that they are on the ” right ” or ” good ” side of every issue, always battling racists, bigots, and oppressors. Like religious zealots they assume moral authority and claim to have ” more knowledge ” than the average folk.

    Religions have made up transgressions against their gods, and PC has made up transgressions against their ideal society.

    It is the same type of system used by cults, utilizing the cyclical intellectual trap described by Kafka in ” The Trial “.

  29. Pingback: The European Apocalypse Part III: The Two-Faced Vultures | The Vengeful Messiah

  30. Robert What? says

    I was with you up until “now it’s time to focus on women’s rights”. That’s exactly what the feminists say they are doing. What does that even mean? What “rights” does the average man have that the average woman does not. Probably the other way around.

    But one thing is clear: after the deafening silence of the feminists after Cologne, after Rotherham, feminism is now officially dead.

  31. Pingback: Link: After Cologne, feminism is dead | Philosophies of a Disenchanted Scholar

  32. Pingback: Attacks on Women in Europe Highlight Double Standard of Multiculturalism | The Conservative Papers

  33. Pingback: More Than a Whiff of Cologne « Attack the System

  34. Pingback: The Wakening of another Beast - Zeteo 3:16

  35. another_anon says

    Uh, sorry, no. If Bill Clinton didn’t kill feminism in the US, this won’t do it either.

    • goatron says

      Feminism will be relevant forever, this is it’s trick. It simply toggles back and forth between its direction as needed, because it has no rules and cannot be defined. It will oscillate forever between chasing puritanism and chasing sexual liberation. I should say “mostly chasing” because it actually chases both at the same time, but the majority swings to whatever will keep feminism relevant. It’s only true goal is self-perpetuation.

    • goatron says

      Your evidence that the article blames all muslims is to quote the bit that notes who progressives blame for racism/misogyny? That quote has literally nothing to do with muslim men or women.

      You forgot to add “the people who committed the assaults” on the list of those who have failed here, seemingly for the sole purpose of making this author out to be “the worst of the lot.” this apologia is really getting old.

      • goatron says

        Sorry for the double-post. I meant to respond to jjj. Can someone delete this and the above? Again, sorry

  36. Everyone have failed:
    – governments don’t know how to deal with the problem and everyone is afraid to do anything that could be perceived as a wrong approach,
    – feminists don’t know how to answer the problem and still be on message they are on already,
    – people are fearful or outright racist of the other and are protesting immigrants fleeing the war (Poland would be a good example).
    But the worst person in this whole mess is the journalist who can’t wait to shift the blame from the white man to the “Horrible Muslim” (‘what’s clear is that the left is only opposed to evils like misogyny, homophobia, and racism inasmuch as they can be bundled into a knout and wielded without mercy to give white, western, man a damn good thrashing’).
    Punish the perpetrators of crimes, don’t call the whole culture criminals. (I myself as vengeful as the next guy, so sterilization is not out of the question for me – maybe its better that I am not involved in the law making process). Deport them if convicted for serious crimes (why should I pay for them being imprisoned). But stop using labels. Last I have checked one is innocent till proven guilty. And screaming Islam is a rape culture is judging before the fact. We should prevent rape, not rape committed by a certain nationality or religion. Myself I am for letting individuals prove themselves with their actions and those actions being taken into account, nothing else.
    Also as a reminder for everyone christianity is 650 years older than islam but we have allowed women to vote in the last century and in America right now girls are being suspended from school for wearing too short skirts (5 inches above the knee is the limit so if your ruler says 4 ask them to raise their hands and get the result you are looking for), so get of your high horse please. Most of you have similar ideas about decency as the people you are complaining about (would be nice if you’d realize this). The difference is that you don’t cover ‘your women’ head-to-toe because you like to drool staring at the cleavage while calling them sluts. In case you don’t (I’m so merciful I will give you benefit of the doubt) explain to me please why shirtless men are treated differently than shirtless women. Or is all the outrage about covering faces/heads of the women? Time to open your eyes and realize you
    For anyone thinking white men are over the rape, some stats:
    and please read about the relations between victims and their rapists first before pointing to specific groups.

    For the author who is UK-based and a lawyer in case of TL;DR:
    Treat everyone individually.
    Benefit of the doubt first.
    Hang them, its the only language they understand second.

    • goatron says

      Your evidence that the article blames all muslims is to quote the bit that notes who progressives blame for racism/misogyny? That quote has literally nothing to do with muslim men or women.

      You forgot to add “the people who committed the assaults” on the list of those who have failed here, seemingly for the sole purpose of making this author out to be “the worst of the lot.” this apologia is really getting old.

  37. Pingback: Radical Feminism & Islamo-rapists: A New Level Of Progressive Hypocrisy

  38. I have been reading and writing about this issue for 39 1/2 years. I can promise you, this is one of the best written editorials on the topic that I have ever read. There are 6.4 billion people on this earth who need to read this editorial—really read it—but more than that, need to absorb what it says.

  39. “What happens on right-wing platforms and in chatrooms is at least as awful as the acts of those assaulting the women”

    It’s hard to get one’s head around just how insane that statement is. (The subtext of, “and possibly even more awful” is just the icing on the cake.)

    And as is increasingly being noted, the rich irony of it is that the dreary inexorability of such boilerplate loopiness is precisely what’s driving public opinion Rightwards. Were the Leftoid establishment to take charge of the narrative in a nuanced but REALISTIC way, the hairy-arsed lumpenproles would be relatively quiescent; instead, they are increasingly incandescent.

    All the poor dears want to know, after all, is that someone is on the case. Had the response to Cologne been fair but firm, nuanced but sharp and clear, they might still grumble and say bad things about Muslims in chatrooms, but they would not be organizing and marching to the same extent as they are now increasingly are.

  40. Pingback: Guardian Feminist: Muslim Rapists are the Real Victims in Cologne

  41. Since feminism refuses to protect women against rape, FGM, the forced marriage of child brides, and religious instructions on wife beating, feminism is and should be dead to us. It has not place in civilized society just as Sharia law is not compatible with the west.

  42. a lefty amongst you says

    “Today, on the other hand, most of the Muslims arriving in Europe from the Near East seem to be young men of fighting age”

    Based on what?


    UNHCR’s data show that 50.5 percent of refugees are women. Females age 18 to 59 make up 23.9 percent of the refugees, while males in that age group make up 21.8 percent.

    Even younger males — age 12 to 17 — represent 6.5 percent of refugees, while females that age are 6.1 percent. The majority of refugees — 51.1 percent — are under age 17, including 38.5 percent who are younger than 12 years old. These numbers were as of Sept. 6.

    We have seen a different set of UNHCR numbers cited on a few conservative websites — figures for refugees and migrants who have tried to enter Europe by crossing the Mediterranean Sea. There have been more than 400,000 such “sea arrivals” in 2015, and 51 percent are Syrian. The rest have come mainly from nine other countries. Most of these refugees and migrants have been men — 72 percent — but these are not figures on Syrian refugees or even solely the 200,000-some Syrians who have been willing to take some type of boat to reach Europe by sea.”

  43. Pingback: Gloria, Bernie, and the perils of identity politics | Beyond the bonds of love

    I want to say thank you to Dr savior for the good thing he has done for me,Though am not sure if this is the best forum
    to show my joy and happiness for what he has
    done for me but i can’t hide my happiness and my Joy so i have to share it with people, my marriage got crashed about two
    years ago and i tried all i could within my
    power but to no avail. i saw post and testimonial about the good things Dr,savior has been doing so i decided to give it
    a try. though he is always a busy man but
    when he responded back to my email, he gave me 48 hours for my marriage to be restored really just like he said my
    marriage was restored since then I am happy and i am
    living happily i am so grateful to Dr savior you can always email him here: {dr.saviour12@gmail.com}

Leave a Reply