Latest from UKIP Daily

War on Women or War on Men?

Photo by quinn.anya

While we are still waiting for something, anything, to come out of UKIP’s Top Level to tell us what has been going on, what is being done, where we actually stand, who is doing what – anyone who’s been reading the comment posts here knows full well the daily litany of justified complaints – let’s look at something which has had the British MSM (UKIP Daily, while not part of the MSM (chance would be a fine thing!), has also published letters on this theme) in full swing for the last few weeks:

Sex! Sex Scandal! Sex Pests! MPs behaving ‘inappropriately’! Groping! Hand-on-Knee! A veritable War on Women!

I’ll not recapitulate the various interpretations of why ‘we’ are being told now of deeds done 5, ten or more years ago – do read Felicia Catto’s Open Letter – but want to pick up one observation made by Kathy Gyngell in her article titled ‘The final front in the war on men’:

“Today’s sexless sex scandal isn’t about ‘morals’ any more than it is about sex. It is about gender, power and control. Pure and simple. […] This is not about marital constancy, responsibility or commitment, or any of the things that affect children and their sanity. It is not even about respect, but about domination, power and control of men by women, which will deepen the gulf that already exists between the sexes. […] it’s not casual sex or under-age sex exploitation that’s exercising Parliament’s new sisterhood alliance, […] The point is there is no moral compass at play here. This is the final front in the feminists’ war on men and they are not disguising it.”

Just so – and this war, on the stage of British Politics, has produced its first casualty. The Welsh Labour Minister in the Welsh Assembly Government, Carl Sargeant, has killed himself. According to this report, he was suspended on Friday while away on holidays, after allegations by three women. He was not told who they were, nor what they had accused him of. The Welsh Labour Government were told over the weekend that he was distraught, but according to the report none of the caring Labour colleagues told him what exactly his crime was. Now he’s dead. Crocodile tears from across the political spectrum and ‘normal business’ at the Welsh Assembly being interrupted for the rest of this week…

It is sad and indeed horrendous, but will our feminist politicians, from Ms Rudd at the Home Office to Ms Davidson in the Scottish Assembly to Andrea Leadsom and Jess Phillips on the Opposition benches, pause for a moment in their desire to ‘detoxify’ the horrible male MPs and their toxic ‘male culture’? I very much doubt it.

Some journalists have pointed out that this whole ‘Pestminster’ affair has apparently abolished our tenet of “innocent until proven guilty”. The accusations, first by female journalists who at least outed themselves as ‘victims’, albeit years after the event, have now become anonymous, the content of their accusations being kept secret. While it would be understandable if these accusations were kept out of the MSM it is totally unacceptable that the accused is not been told what he has been accused of. “Witch Hunt” is indeed a good comparison.

But why is this suddenly described as a ‘War on Men’? Because that’s what it is, and it has been going on for years, under the radar. On the surface, i.e. in the establishment media, men had to declare their anti-toxic-male, feminist-supportive stance, openly or in the way they reported, for example, the various ‘outcries’ against rape. Rape cases were reported gleefully and at length but not where the female accusers were shown to have made things up so that the cases were thrown out by the judge with ‘no case to answer’.

That is the tip of the iceberg. This war begins much earlier, in our schools where boys are being brainwashed into feminine behaviour because their boyish behaviour does not please the female teachers. These boys are not yet anywhere near power, and in order to keep them out our cousins in the USA are showing us the way. In colleges, for years, lecturers and teachers have had a policy called ‘progressive stacking’, which means that they call on white male students last. Read about this here, but sit down before you do.

Then there’s the dirty secret reported year on year: male suicides – see here and here and here, for example – and no-one really knows why, unless it’s the facile reason ‘because they’re not females’.

This is the silent war which has been ongoing for years, which has not been talked about except once a year when statistics come out. This is the silent war which has now entered Parliament through the unholy ‘sisterhood’ of wimmin-in-power who can suddenly ‘reach across the political divide’.

I note that such female solidarity was and still is emphatically lacking when it comes to the victims, in the true sense of the word, of rapes, in the true sense of the word, by “Asians”. I note that Political Correctness has poisoned not just public discourse but actual thought processes to such an extent that victim is no longer = ‘victim’; that “crime” is now actually a crime or not, depending on the skin colour and status of the – anonymously – accused, and that all those infected by PC – be they MPs or journalists – are now so bereft of common sense that we can see it without magnifying glasses.

We Kippers know about being smeared with PC-condoned smears. No need to list them: you all know them! We know about sticks-and-stones. So here’s my proposal, since we still don’t know what our Top Team think we should do next: let’s take a stand against the PC-induced War on Men!

Being called a toxic anti-feminist surely is no worse than being called a racist. Before you say Brexit is more important: we can multi-task better than the wimmin in Parliament, Government Education, Judiciary and MSM. And Brexit is to do with the War on Men because guess where all the feminist legislation comes from, guess where the scrapping of one of our finest legal achievements, the Presumption of Innocence, comes from: Brussels!

Photo by quinn.anya

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Vivian Evans (240 Articles)
Vivian is a UKIP patron, Vice Chair of UKIP Cardiff and Editor in Chief of UKIP Daily

42 Comments on War on Women or War on Men?

  1. What IS Henry doing.

    In this case just say it’s idiotic.

  2. What IS Henry doing

  3. Viv. Thank you for shining your bright light on this.

    I found this link. It’s women telling us they really like being women and how they prefer men who like being men.

    A refreshing change from what we usually hear.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=popTnBYEOo0

  4. Islam is misogynist, and yet it is disproportionately women who convert to it in the UK. Why would a free-born woman want to subject herself to it? I am baffled by this phenomenon. Any explanations?

    Family courts dole out injustices. I have direct experience of this – a female judge refused to uphold her own court order when my ex wife blatantly broke it. At that point I realised that it was hopeless and walked away. This followed years of me taking my ex back to court whenever she found spurious excuses to stop the contact. I have had no contact with my son for six years, and will probably never see him again. It is heartbreaking.

    • Some people are seduced by total ideologies which do the thinking for them. For some, working out an identity is too hard, too uncertain and psychologically they long for certainty and to be free of effort. Islam provides a solution for them, one determined by Allah. Embrace Islam and no longer do they have think for themselves.

      I can’t be certain but I suspect it must be something like that.

    • A woman who marries a Muslim man is assumed by default to convert to Islam. If a non-Muslim man wanted to marry a Muslim woman, her family wouldn’t allow it, and if she went ahead anyway, they would probably never speak to her again.

      The financial rape of fathers on divorce and the bias against men in the family courts is not by accident. It is all part of the cultural Marxist plan. Men now think, “Why on Earth would I want to marry, have children and expose myself to a 50% chance of divorce, after which I will have 70-80% of my life savings taken off me?”. This is to get white birth rates down and destroy the family. Muslims who use Sharia courts instead are unaffected.

      • The divorce judgements are not ‘part of the cultural Marxist plan’ . This is paranoia. Financial settlements are , without children involved and for ‘mature’ marriages, awarded at 50% of assets for each person unless there are rare extenuating circumstances. Of course when children are involved and when (normally) the woman gets custody (either by consent or by judgement) then allowances are made for the children. So if you divorce with 2 children, say of 3 and 5 years old it is quite likely (and quite fair) for the majority of assets to be awarded to the parent with custody. That may or may not involve the parent with custody keeping the married home, but certainly not always. Marxism has nothing to do with it. In the case of a suspected ‘golddigger’ case, judges are INCREASINGLY aware that the ‘golddigger ( of either sex ) may have applied premeditation, and marriages in these cases are often not considered ‘mature’ until about 7 years have past ( although this is down to the judge ) . The judge might well in these cases allow the aggrieved party to retain more than his or her 50% share. There is no ‘secret plot’ to get white birth rates down , or destroy the family. Sharia courts have NO pre-emptive authority over English & Welsh or Scottish law.

  5. It has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of it. But has everything to do with destroying the white heterosexual male.
    Dividing of the sexes and the promotion of homosexuality in the classroom.
    It is the destruction of “Christendom” and the women in power in western Europe are facilitating it.Go against nature and you will have “chaos”.
    We are fullsteam ahead in a handcart to hell.

    Christendom is the offspring of the Christian family, and the foundation of the Christian family is the sacrament of matrimony, The spring of all domestic and public morals.
    The anti Christian societies are opposed to the principle of home. When they have destroyed the hearth, the morality of society will perish.

    • Not so. Divorce rates vary enormously along national and cultural lines independent of religion. The divorce rates in predominantly Roman Catholic and culturally ‘very religious’ Spain and Portugal , – are MUCH higher, for example than either the UK or the United States. Over 70% of all marriages in Portugal fail. About 60% in Spain.
      Across Europe, marriage is increasingly a fragile institution, but the ‘destruction ‘ of the traditional nuclear family is NOT facilitated by ‘ the women in power in western Europe’ In Germany, for example, which has Frau Merkel- the most powerful woman in the World in charge- divorce rates are in steep decline, against the European norms. In fact there is NO correlation whatsoever between ‘women in power’ or ‘the destruction of Christendom’ – at all. This is unfair to women. The perceived decline in marriage as an institution is probably more closely linked to educational and financial factors.

      • I didn’t mean women per say,it’s the one’s who have socialist,communist leanings and have bought into the globalist narrative that seem to be in positions of power throughout western Europe.May (feminist)it seems to me these women are deliberately put there. Not to mention Sweden,who in their haste are embracing a multi culti utopia,regardless of the consequences.

        The destruction of nuclear family has been brought about by socialism,feminism,Marxism etc.Pounding into the heads of students that family is obsolete and whites are racists.
        Being a mother is a burden,not a gift.
        No incentives to start families from government ever. If you want to preserve your
        nation,civilization, culture,governments should encourage marriage,children. family is the foundation of any nation it is what culture is built on.
        Poland are doing just that promoting marriage,children to their kinsmen,which is great to see will secure their future homeland.Our people should be doing the same having as many white kids as possible.Without strong family values then a society,race will be doomed,which is the plan all along. .

  6. Some very interesting points made in this article, but I’ll just start by stating that I am unlucky enough to have Jess Phillips as my local MP, and am only too fully aware of her ‘pro-women’ feminist stance, you only have to browse through the articles on her website https://jessphillips.net/ to get a feel for that.
    But something has just occurred to me as you mention about the ‘femininising’ of boys and men; this whole ‘transgender’ business that is very much in vogue at the moment, has anyone noticed that all the ‘high-profile’ ones appearing in the media are men that have become women? I don’t recall any media exposure being given to those who have ‘switched’ in the other direction?
    There was a segment on This Week a couple of years ago, on the subject of ‘masculinity’ featuring some gay ‘artist’, a very effeminate fella called Scottee (no, I’d never heard of him either). As Michael Portillo dismissed what he was claiming as ‘rubbish’, Scottee then had your typical hissy-fit that you expect from the brain-washed liberal left youth that can’t bear to have their opinions challenged.
    So is all this transgender gender-fluidity nonsense being imposed on our kids at school an act to make everyone become feminine?

    • Yes, now you mention it, Stuart: the transgender celebs we hear about are all boys/men into girls/women. Even rather burly looking sports-whatever are suddenly ‘female’.
      It might be that the thorough feminisation of society is the goal, but how that will chime with the simultaneous islamification which’ll see all the transgendered together with the female snowflakes and the rest of us, sadly, in burqas – that I don’t know. I don’t think Ms Jess Phillips is capable of explaining that. Perhaps the (male) MP she so obviously adores (JRM) would be able to – not that she’d listen.

      • Viv, there was a case recently of a ‘pregnant man’ and the more recent case of the FCO insisting that the words ‘pregnant women’ in a UN document should be replaced with ‘pregnant persons’.

        The fact that a recent TV propaganda programme concerned the ‘gender’ identification of primary schoolchildren who were all English in which the ‘expert’ was a mam of colour, rather suggests that what we are seeing is yet another attack by the enemy within intended to cause demoralisation amongst white people, exclusively. I believe that we in UKIP should not only be campaigning for the removal of all thoughtcrime laws from the statute book so that we can start to point a few fingers with impunity but also for an all embracing treason law that not only proscribes acting for a foregn power but also proscribes all attempts to undermine us from within.

        • I couldn’t agree more with your campaign proposals for UKIP!
          Btw – did you know that the german Supreme Court has ruled that all German passports must now allow people to choose between male, female and ‘third’ gender?

    • Actually that should have read ‘on This Week a couple of weeks ago’ 😮

  7. There clearly is a difference of scale and degree between the activities of Hollywood producers with their casting couches and cases of poor social etiquette in Westminster and to conflate the two is to imply that there is nothing distinctly different between the former and the latter. i.e. it is men in general sexually exploiting women and women in general fighting back: this a smokescreen to mitigate the vile behaviour of some vile men and the extreme vunerability of young actresses anxious to progress their careers in a highly competitive profession.

    Does all this relate to feminism? Feminism is an attack on the patriachical family; it is an encouragement to women to compete with men in the workplace in order not to become dependent on men and raise families; it is an encouragement to European people to die out through a failure to reproduce. In fact in significant fields of endeavour, women are not the equals of men on average which is why the educational system has been shifted away from mathematical-based science and difficult competitive examinations to subjects where verbal ability is paramount and methods of assessment more congenial to women, resulting in a majority of women at university and fewer men studying what men excel at: this of course is all deliberate.

    • In all ‘fields of endeavour’ such as mathematics , physics and the liberal arts women ARE the equals of men.
      There is no empirical evidence that you can show me that will prove otherwise.
      In terms of physical differences, a 5 foot 2 inch female firefighter cannot lift a 6 foot 3 in Mr Bav up a ladder, but neither can I have a baby.
      I wrote a history paper called ‘ She’s So Damned Hot! ‘, which you might find somewhere on the internet. Using examples and statistics from WWII it posits the absolute truth that even in heavy engineering and construction work, let alone physics and science the only difference between men and women’s perceived abilities were constructs of a patriarchal tendency (then) to keep women ‘in their place’ through traditional role play and convention . The US Govt. had to reverse that, or lose the bloody war! It did reverse that, and did win the war. Of course after the war – and until recently- women have been ‘put in their place’ again, by men.
      Men and women ( I do not recognise any other gender, on a purely biological matter of fact ) are quite essential for the progression of humanity, in equal measure. Best we all get along …..

  8. The targets for this, as always are the white British heterosexual male. This is more of a feminist empowerment witch-hunt in the workplace, not an actual equality issue or to stop harassment.

    Once again another unfortunate import from the USA to GB; offices in the USA became so bad, males colleagues were terrified of harassment complaints. Male employees would even stop asking female co-workers for dates, for fear of being misconstrued as harassment.

    Notice most of the claims are against males, does this mean males are never sexually harassed? I doubt it, more than likely it isn’t reported.

    Its ironic because the majority of workplace incidents involves bullying, not sexual harassment. Some research shows, occurrences of bullying are four times that of sexual harassment. The majority of workplace bullies are female, and the majority of their victims are also female…but that folks does not fit the feminist narrative…

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2594713/More-half-women-say-bullied-work-And-female-bosses-blame.html

  9. I cannot fathom a feminista’s mindset. For example, the 500,000 strong Women’s March on Washington on January 21st was ‘about women refusing to be erased from political discussion.’ They seemed to think it unfair that Hillary Clinton had not been elected. There had never been a woman POTUS and they wanted one. There was no interest in or awareness of her policies,no concern that Saudi Arabia heavily funds the Clinton Foundation, no concern that she is proud that she has trashed women’s lives. For example, there is an audio recording from 1982 on which she discusses being the criminal defence attorney in Arkansas of a 42 year old man who raped a 12 year old girl. ‘… Yeah, I got him off. So what? Who cares? We got the evidence thrown out, so he walked. I mean, sure, we knew he did it but it didn’t matter.’Half a million women wore their pussyhats to show their support for Hillary at that ….and many other rallies since. I am totally baffled. If anyone can shed some light please do.

    • These ‘facts’ regarding Hillary Clinton ARE NOT TRUE. She NEVER said…. ‘… Yeah, I got him off. So what? Who cares? We got the evidence thrown out, so he walked.
      These are the facts—-
      In 2014, the Washington Free Beacon published the audio of an interview that Arkansas reporter Roy Reed conducted with Clinton in the 1980s. In the interview, Clinton recalls some unusual details of the rape case, and she can be heard laughing in three instances, beginning with a joke she makes about the accuracy of polygraphs.
      Clinton: Of course he claimed he didn’t. All this stuff. He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs. [laughs]

      At another point, Clinton said the prosecutor balked at turning over evidence, forcing her to go to the judge to obtain it.
      Clinton: So I got an order to see the evidence and the prosecutor didn’t want me to see the evidence. I had to go to Maupin Cummings and convince Maupin that yes indeed I had a right to see the evidence [laughs] before it was presented.

      Clinton then said that the evidence she obtained was a pair of the accused’s underwear with a hole in it. Clinton told Reed that investigators had cut out a piece of the underwear and sent the sample to a crime lab to be tested, and the only evidence that remained was the underwear with a hole in it.
      Clinton took the remaining evidence to a forensic expert in Brooklyn, New York, and the expert told her that the material on the underwear wasn’t enough to test. “He said, you know, ‘You can’t prove anything,’” Clinton recalled the expert telling her.
      Clinton: I wrote all that stuff and I handed it to Mahlon Gibson, and I said, “Well this guy’s ready to come up from New York to prevent this miscarriage of justice.” [laughs]

  10. Well said Vivian! I have been saying for days now that the UKIP wires have “gone dead”! Where is everyone? Does Henry Bolton still exist or has he “left the room”? I have tried to find the UKIP website – without success!

    Regarding your excellent piece on “feminism” and “Wimmin-in-Parliament” (and elsewhere), only this morning my husband and I were discussing this extreme reversion to sanctimony. It’s as if, all of a sudden, there has come a complete and absolute mental breakdown amongst the products of the “liberal, swinging sixties” offspring. All these poor little defenceless snowflakes who can’t mix it with men without calling on the “sexual red card” for protection! I worked all my life in male dominated environments. I learned to ride out the “banter” and avoid any situations that might become contentious! I laughed at their poor humour and kept my own self respect.

    This Country is being damnably governed! Once, we could have relied upon UKIP for some outspoken comment on the shambles that the LibLabCon were (and still are) perpetrating. Now, we have nothing but silence from the newest elected leader, while Nigel Farage maintains a lone voice commentary on LBC!

    Where isUKIP?

  11. Viv,
    I’m doing my best by outlining, article by article, my suggested approach to the portfolio I’ve been trusted to move forward. However, I can’t do much more until we have some form of functionality that enables me to communicate with the membership and an administrative base within the party and begin planning the campaign. That must also apply to everyone else. We don’t have a final version of the new logo as yet (The Premier League issue being a classic legacy from past incompetence) so have no letter heading. We cannot even write to anyone until that is resolved.
    We were left with a completely dysfunctional organisation which is being re-built as we speak. Strategy papers are being produced, technology platforms are being created, donors are being reassured by good solid planning proposals, something which has been missing.
    UKIP had to change from the piecemeal operation it was to a robust, functional organisation that uses resources efficiently and in a targeted way. UKIP was broken, and our national standing reflects that. Humpty Dumpty is, indeed, capable of re-assembly but no longer will it be a fragile egg, but an organisation that manages its resources properly that will enable us to work much more effectively than before.
    I understand the impatience being expressed as it comes from several quarters, but certain priorities must be addressed immediately, such as getting back into and remaining in the black. The re-construction will take time, though members will shortly begin to see the manifestation of the changes Henry Bolton (and other candidates to varying degrees) promised to do.
    Currently, we represent an enthusiastic piece of rolling stock, ready to go, but with no wheels. Re-fitting those is a task currently underway.

    • Thank you, David, for this comment – I’m certain many other readers will be very interested as well.
      Of course, all of us moaners and croakers would now like to know why such a statement cannot be made to all members, via an electronic letter which we’d happily also publish here on UKIP Daily …
      It’s the not-knowing, the not-being-told which is so aggravating.

    • “We don’t have a final version of the new logo as yet (The Premier League issue being a classic legacy from past incompetence) so have no letter heading. We cannot even write to anyone until that is resolved.”
      Of course you can write to everyone; just use the “£” logo for the time being. I’m sure no-one will mind. We need to hear from our leaders, and to see leadership in the public arena so that the country knows that UKIP is still alive and kicking.

    • I take on board your explanation but we’ve heard nothing from Henry considering he promised in his leadership campaign to engage more with grass roots members. How quickly he has broken that manifesto pledge.

      I believe Vivian said (on another, recent, thread) that leaders and the powers that be, with a few exceptions, don’t post on here. Well, it’s about time Henry started a new tradition. Start posting regular progress bulletins and UkipDaily would be an excellent place to do it. Or put another way start engaging with members, ex members and potential future members. It wouldn’t hurt him.

      As things stand at the moment I regret wasting my vote on someone who appears to be treating us with total contempt.

  12. PC and this gender war are sub-sets of Cultural Marxism. UKIP needs to put flesh onto the bones of David Kurten’s analysis.

  13. If Farage is so worried about May’s handling of Brexit, why doesn’t he stop carping from the sidelines and become UKIP’s leader again? This would help focus the minds in the Tory party and ensure the Conservatives stop drifting to the Left.

    • We’d have members flocking back in droves.

      • Not this one.

        • Agreed. Nigel is a great man but he did, according to David’s comments, leave us in a mess and certainly far too quickly.
          Personally I like the new logo, don’t want to have to change it again and to have yet another new leader is unthinkable. Henry will do just fine. The deadline for many of will be the May local elections so we can wait a bit longer, though I am with those who want some sort of statement, quick sharp, outlining the way forward.
          We had a by-election at my council recently, We did have a good candidate but there was absolutely no point in standing him, there was nothing we could say about policy and it was clear that even if the Tories stood a badger, they would win easily. We decided to keep our powder dry for 2019 and try and to strangle their badger then.

  14. Michael Fallon was our Defence Secretary ? It seems that he couldn’t even defend himself. In allegations of rape the matter of ‘early complaint’ is of vital importance. In the case of mature women one might argue that it is of prime importance. Had Fallon actually wanted to defend himself he could have easily done so – he could have taken advice from one of the many legal Tory brains resident in the House – maybe even from the QC who, it was found, did precious little for his constituents but in the meantime earned 100’s of thousands in court case fees. A unwanted hand on a knee 5 years ago would not even get past the CPS as being worthy of being taken to Court. It has no sexual connotation whatever and no injury was caused – Fallon would have no case to answer in a court unless the goalposts have been moved so to speak. He’s not even a sex pest – a simple pest maybe. Of course there may well be more serious allegations against him of which we are unaware so he left before he was pushed. We know that his behaviour was in no way serious – if it had been it would have been covered up in that well known Parliamentary way

  15. Spot on, as always, Viv.

    In related matters, notice how Labour MP Jared O’Mara’s obnoxious comments were initially excused by his colleagues saying that they took place sooo long ago and we all grow up and change, don’t we. That is until his much more recent comments emerged and their case collapsed (but amid the welter of ‘Tory sleaze’ we have heard little more about it – or the alleged rape by another Labour MP – which is another contentious issue: censorship by omission.) Nevertheless there is a kernel of truth there: many right wing commentators admit to being radical socialists in their youth. Some, not all, do change. But my point is that this excuse of time and maturing is never allowed for those on the right. Once nasty always nasty. Not that much of the goings on are even in the range of nasty, just male-female interaction and libidinous humour that was once a staple of British comedy.

    The Ephraim Hardcastle slot in yesterday’s Daily Mail, recounts how the late Tory MP Teresa Gorman took a fancy to a then young Tom Bradby, before he became an ITV news presenter. “She rang a woman colleague of his, saying: ‘Have that boy scrubbed and sent up to my room.’ “

    Ooh, Matron. What would people say now? Actually probably nothing because, yes, she’s a woman.

  16. PC and feminism are destroying women not liberating them as most seem to believe.

    Everywhere you go there are armies of lonely, childless women who don’t realise that they are the political pawns of sadistic man haters and power seekers not winners.

    Endless years sat in an office over a mindless screen, visits to coffee shops and a little retail therapy is not liberation – it’s an empty life for them.

    You also notice the peer group pressure where there are lots of women which generates at least a faint unrecognised hostility to men which they would probably deny.

    The notion of partnership between the sexes is now a near thoughtcrime particularly where heterosexuals are concerned.

  17. There is without doubt a strange attitude in the corridors of power, 70 year olds casually rubbing themselves up against 25 year old girls and so on is not on. I do think it strange however that the ladies concerned don’t seem capable of telling the old letches where to get off at the time of the incident and fail to say anything for years afterwards. If all these allergations are true and the women felt their careers were at risk if the reacted appropriatly at the time, we have a serious problem. Our leaders would be blackmailing people and if they do so over one issue, presumably they do the same over others.

    • You make very good points here Icini.

      Over thirty years ago, when I was a secretary, it was not unusual for managers to lean over one’s shoulder when putting paperwork on one’s desk. On one occasion a manager leaned over my shoulder and the side of his hand brushed against my breast. To this day I am convinced it wasn’t’ intentional.

      However, my immediate reaction was to shout “Get your hand off my tit you dirty old sod”.

      You could have heard a pin drop in that office as people looked up to see what was going on. The manager was very embarrassed and beetroot red. He never leaned over my shoulder again though.

      Regards

      • Good heavens yes, we knew how to deal with gropers and frotters in the ‘old days’. I worked in labs, lots of places where you worked in the dark like the electron microscope rooms. According to my husband ( I married the boss and he never did anything non – consensual) one scientist – allegedly- suggested to a female technician who was working at the electron microscope she ‘try twiddling this knob’ …… 😖

        • Good grief – you must’ve had the wrong type of technician! All ours, male and female, were the uncrowned kings of the labs and woe betide anyone trying it on. Even the handsome, virile, cheeky and charming male students knew that they wouldn’t get away with it. Flirting with lecturers: ok. Technicians? Say good-bye to your project/research …

          • PurplePottymouth // November 8, 2017 at 4:23 pm //

            Nah – this was industry. To be fair I never experienced ‘harassment’ of a sexual nature from anyone there who effectively had power over me ( & that’s where it’s a problem) vile patronising misogyny from a personnel officer yes( oh what sweet revenge a would be novelist can have on Ron Sutton/ Wally Clutton) The scientist who recruited 2 of us at Christian Fellowship for his iffy breast cancer research allegedly chased technicians round the lab & there was the knob story but otherwise pretty anodyne. The consensual stuff was much more interesting

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*