KneeGate –Gender Inequality the Diversity Industry and DRINK
In my article “KneeGate – A Scandal or a Deliberate Distraction?” I commented on hypocrisy over the issues at stake and how the torrent of trivial complaints emerging poses a risk to those who have actually been subjected to serious assaults. I am pleased to see a number of commentators have picked up on this theme.
Let’s face it. “He TRIED to kiss me” is neither a plausible accusation nor a demonstration of any actual assault. What is meant by “he lunged at me“? When someone thinks a kiss is appropriate they move towards the person they are going to kiss. Is that a lunge or is the description, actually, hyperbole? Quite clearly an ambitious journalist who has, never become a household name, has no motive for such an overstatement. (Yeah! Right!)
And so to Europe!
Was Herr Juncker guilty of assault when he kissed innumerable leading politicians in full view of cameras? Have any of the recipients, of a clearly unwanted form of contact, complained? I should have been revolted had he kissed me and it crosses the boundaries of proper behaviour, even now, in British society. For most of us: personal close contact with a total stranger is taboo. Continentals have looser standards. It is another example of why we do not belong to Europe. We are a separate and very distinct archipelago near to Europe with our own more proper standards.
British Traditional Behaviour
I was brought up in the 1950s/1960s. At that time a stranger, business contact or professional adviser was required, by traditional rules of conduct, to address another by surname accompanied by a title. The title would be Mr. Mrs or Miss. It might be Dr, Professor, Councillor, Councillor Mrs/Miss, etc. The feminists objected to Mrs or Miss which were titles traditionally awarded to protect married women from unwanted attention. The title “Ms” was invented. This meant the marital status of the woman was hidden and those using it were no longer able to demonstrate their badge of fidelity and thereby appeared to invite unwarranted attention. Fortunately most women refuse to use “Ms”.
My late mother was a feminist. She believed and taught that everything men ever did was wrong. She hated men with a passion. We were not allowed to cheer a boys’ team in any contest. We must cheer the girls!
Mom had a reason for her hatred but it derived from her misinterpretation of events when she was a girl. Her elder brothers had been able to continue with their education until 18. She had to leave school when she was 16.
The Effect of History
The cause was the economic circumstances prevailing. Her father lost his job with a major trades union. It was the year of the Great Depression. She interpreted the circumstances to inequality handed out by her parents and gender discrimination. Instead she was the victim of an unprecedented set of economic circumstances.
Two world wars, that each wiped out almost a whole generation of young men, put progress to a halt. Prevailing standards of behaviour remained stuck in 1910. 1910 was, effectively, 1890 since the effects of the Victorian strictness and hypocrisy remained “de rigueur” long after the death of Queen Victoria. Time, in many ways, had stood still, in the United Kingdom. 1950 might as well have been 1850. Most of us had older parents with a very Victorian outlook!
Those designing and developing Computerised systems found themselves in a quandary. How could systems be designed to cater for the “sensitivity” surrounding the use of titles? Most opted for the simple solution of replacing the title with the first of the familiar (Christian for most of us) name. Some, like I, had the foresight to anticipate this could cause offence in more cases than the misuse of title. My systems provided for an acknowledgement that the first name is not necessarily the “known” name.
So a level of familiarity crept into formal correspondence. I was taught and I believe that formal correspondence should be addressed to the formal name. Familiar names are reserved to close friends and family. The formal name comprises: Title, Full Initials, Surname. When a company or stranger telephones me they should refer to me as “Mr. Holland”. When they telephone a woman they should address the woman as Miss unless they have been informed she is a Mrs. If I receive a telephone call from a company and I am addressed by my first name I know that is unsolicited nuisance correspondence. I will tell the caller exactly what to do and where to put their call and in no uncertain terms!
Before I venture into the controversy of gender confusion I need to set out some facts. Nature has no strict boundaries anywhere. There are never swings from black to white. Nature moves through shades of grey.
Gender is no exception. Around 0.5% of those born have identifiable characteristics that mean their gender cannot be determined at birth. Traditionally they are defined as “male”. Recent research has revealed there are actual physical differences between the brains of gay men and straight men.
Not less than 5% of the population are gay. Nothing has changed since the Kinsey reports and the conclusions probably understated the proportions since stigma and discrimination did and still would hinder the collection of reliable figures. Indeed closer scrutiny suggests his figures were significantly affected by prejudice given the differences between married and unmarried people contained within them. Kinsey indicates that high proportion of humans, in common with other mammals, are bisexual to a greater or lesser degree.
Those uncertain of their sexuality will tend to over-react to any challenges to it and seek to “prove” themselves up to the standards of the accepted and oppressive “norm”. The latent homosexual is the one who prates on the evils of homosexuality. Those who are self-assured and confident of their sexuality tend to be laid back and tolerant.
Conflicts Caused by The Diversity Industry
The root cause of the present scandal(s) is the pre-occupation with conformity to an artificial set of supposed equal standards coupled with a legacy of oppressive and unwarranted rules of conformity. Men, still, are required to demonstrate their “heterosexuality” by regular evidence of their attempts to propagate their genes. The bawdry behaviour of the office party or indeed a drunken heap of power crazed men and women in the House of Commons is merely one aspect of this. This is evidence of the conflicted attitudes created by the “diversity” industry.
Traditionally the man is expected to take the lead. Women conformed to this tradition but now want to have control of the tap while still expecting the man to indicate to them how desirable they are or rather “some” men! Unsuitable potential “mates” must curb their expression and be silent. Women, some women, want the biological drives that stimulate the man’s activities to be disregarded in rules of conduct but their own biological drives must be an absolute priority. That way lies extinction of the human race.
All this proves how inappropriate it is for the law to be trundled into such areas. We all know politicians and civil servants are past masters at muddle and confusion. In the area of equality they have created an absolute disaster. I fought for equality for my kind. I never fought for artificial standards that curb natural behaviour. I wanted protection from those who caused harm to me and to anyone else. I want to know who the hate merchants are and depriving them of the right to have their say means they are hidden from view and therefore a greater threat. Allowing them to use the excuse of my sexuality to justify violence towards me was unacceptable.
Sticks and Stones
Harm is caused where actual physical hurt is delivered. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me. I answer to myself. My opinion of me is the only opinion that counts. Others may take me or leave me. It is time everyone learned this lesson. It is the lesson that growing up, as an illegal being and suffering untold physical and emotional attacks, taught me.
The overwhelming majority of the incidents that have been revealed in this KneeGate scandal are trivial and make the accusers look ridiculous. I sense these allegations are an attempt to move up the power gradient and should be seen as nothing more. “Hell hath no fury……..!” I am appalled that the odd very serious allegation will be consumed by this welter of false accusations and end up being disregarded. This trivialisation of potentially serious matters is something the power hierarchy of the Establishment (media, press, Government and its administration) is responsible for. The unwarranted trashing of numerous reputations is a disgrace and a distraction.
Time to Grow up, Be Sober and Do Your Job
It is time MPs grew up and began to be serious about their standards of conduct. The rules of the playground do not apply. This is grown up stuff. The first step is the stop the sale of alcohol in their place of work. It is a sacking offence for Local Government officers to have drink on the premises. The same rule should apply to Civil Servants and elected representatives. It is illegal to drive a motor car while under the influence of drink. So too, voting for legislation should be illegal when drunken.
With the removal of a popular form of self-medication designed to stifle inhibitions there might be better behaviour and we might see more sense applied to the legislative process. The blame for the present farce may be firmly placed at the door of the “diversity” industry and its attempts to create ludicrous and unenforceable rules to complex interpersonal relationships.