The Rambles of Neil Monnery

Another pointless voice in the vast ocean that is the interweb

Katie Hopkins doesn’t speak for women everywhere. Feminists recoil in terror at her Question Time ramblings.

with 6 comments

Last night whilst watching Question Time my twitter feed just about blew up. What politician had said something to upset everyone? No-one. For once the devil was the fifth panelist who is really there to make everyone else look smart. Step forward Katie Hopkins, former ‘star’ of the Apprentice.

She defended Andy Gray and Richard Keys and said that many women aren’t arguing for equal rights but for special treatment.

Cue head explosions everywhere as I sat back and watched the carnage.

One thing she did say that I definitely agree with is that positive discrimination is not the way forward. In a political sense she was talking about all female shortlists. The best person should get the local party nomination whether they are black or white, Christian or Muslim, male or female – gender simply should not come into the equation.

As a broad notion I am against positive discrimination full stop but I can see in exceptional circumstances, i.e. South Africa after 1990 that it has a place. All male lists would be sexist in a local party did that but all women lists are fine and dandy. That doesn’t sit right with me. I know many feminists who believe that they deserve special treatment to make up for decades in inequality but is that fair?

If ITV commissioned a show called ‘Loose Men’ it would firstly be rubbish but secondly it would be derided in the media and amongst women. Men have to deal with the fact that Loose Women is allowed to exist but they can’t have it the other way.

Even at younger ages girls are allowed to join the scouts but boys aren’t allowed to join the guides. Now I know it’s unlikely many boys would want to but still it is inequality against men. There is a female only insurer out there – Sheilas Wheels – and having a look over their website it does seem as though men are not allowed insurance from this company. Imagine what would happen if someone set up a bloke’s only insurance company, I suspect they might get a fair bit of bad publicity for being sexist.

Going back to Katie Hopkins for a minute – the most common point I read on twitter last night was that she didn’t speak for them. Many women pleading with her to stop talking as there she was the official mouthpiece for women everywhere and they needed everyone to know she didn’t speak for them. Well duh. Of course she doesn’t speak for everyone. Did I feel the need last week to say that because I’m male George Galloway doesn’t speak for me? I do not believe I did. Whatever you think of Miss Hopkins she is allowed her opinion – and that is all it is –her opinion – she doesn’t speak for women everywhere and everyone knows this.

Look I know sexism exists and in the grand scheme of things it is far worse for women than men. I know this and I accept this but it is a two-way street to some degree. However it seems as though many women – and certainly the feminists that I know – think that sexism against men is fair but that sexism against women is not. This belief to me is unfair. Because the white man enslaved the black man for centuries should the black man enslave the white man for a few centuries as payback? This is essentially the same argument that feminists put forward for why sexism is allowed one way but not the other.

We are all allowed opinions folks but one person never speaks for another unless you ask them to. Remember that.

Featured on Liberal Democrat Voice

I hope you enjoyed this blog post. Please leave any comments or contact me directly via the E-Mail Me link on the Right Hand Nav. You can stay in touch with the blog following me on Twitter or by liking the blog on Facebook. Please share this content via the Social Media links below if you think anyone else would enjoy reading.

Written by neilmonnery

January 28th, 2011 at 3:53 pm

Posted in Politics

Tagged with ,

6 Responses to 'Katie Hopkins doesn’t speak for women everywhere. Feminists recoil in terror at her Question Time ramblings.'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Katie Hopkins doesn’t speak for women everywhere. Feminists recoil in terror at her Question Time ramblings.'.

  1. There is a male version of Loose Women, its called TopGear. Of course it doesnt “represent” Men, why should it ? Why shoud Ms Hopkins Represent Women or Feminists ? Its as much as I can do to Represent myself & thats on a good day.

    paul barker

    28 Jan 11 at 4:55 pm

  2. […] Katie Hopkins doesn’t speak for women everywhere. Feminists recoil in terror at her Question Time … on The Rambles of Neil Monnery. “We are all allowed opinions folks but one person never […]

  3. This woman’s intellectual capacity is clearly limited to the musings of the daily mail.

    She completely missed the point regarding the sexism issue, which was that women (in male dominated fields) are written off before they even get the chance to prove themselves. I’m not even sure she’s qualified to comment on this. Has she ever worked in a male dominated industry, like football or physics related industries such as engineering? Business management is not a male dominated industry, getting into the boardroom may be, but the industry isn’t.

    As for her complaints about women wanting “special treatment”, I seem to remember that, prior to the Apprentice, she married her boss (after having an affair with him). Hard to believe that she didn’t get special treatment in the circumstances. Pot calling the kettle black.

    I cringed throughout Question Time every time Katie Hopkins opened her mouth. This woman doesn’t have a clue.

    P.S. I’m not a feminist.

    Equality is not a bad thing if you can live up to it

    4 Feb 11 at 9:47 pm

  4. Oh and I agree with you about positive discrimination. It’s also demeaning to the person who has been the ‘recipient’ of positive discrimination, because they may well have been the best person for the job but the achievement is watered down and perceived as less valuable as a result.

    Incidentally, excluding things like all women shortlists for the moment, in the real world there is no positive discrimination. Technically, positive discrimination means that (for example) if you have a male and a female candidate who are both equally qualified and experienced, then the female candidate should be given the job; however it is extremely rare for two people to be identical in this respect. There is also A LOT of room for presuming or forming an opinion that one candidate is better suited to a post.

    Now in the world of politics and all women shortlists, the matter is a different one. However, without being disrespectful to MPs, the job does not exactly require one to be a genius. The best person for the job is the person who is best able and most passionate about representing the constituents in their area. I do find it hard to believe, based on the largely male Houses of Parliament, that men are the ones who are selected as being the most passionate and able to represent their constituents. Engaging with constituents and empathising with their needs would in any other profession be female dominated.

    I don’t believe that women are any less passionate or caring about those who live in their own communities. So why are there so few female MPs?

    You have to admit that the old boys network does have an impact. All female shortlists are not the answer but there does need to be some way of ensuring we elect (or get the chance to elect) the best people for the job regardless of their gender.

    Equality is not a bad thing if you can live up to it

    4 Feb 11 at 10:15 pm

  5. Hello.This article was extremely fascinating, particularly since I was searching for thoughts on this issue last Sunday.

    Pat

    18 Nov 11 at 1:56 am

  6. I just wanted someone to see this written down… Katie Hopkins is an utterly deplorable woman. I truely believe she is a close relation to satan himself. She has broken up two marriages for her own gain, she truely believes you can judge a child by their first name…a child for goodness sakes! This woman needs to be taken off of the television and out of the media entirely her moral fabric is laughable. She is entitled to her opinions same as everyone else, however her opinions should be heard from inside a padded box. This woman discusts me she is a vile human being.

    Lee

    5 Jul 13 at 1:08 am

Leave a Reply