Alice Williams, male-basher
This article, ‘Things I’d do if I wasn’t afraid of appearing masculine’ by Australian intellectual lightweight Alice Williams is a piece of destructive, sarcastic male bashing. We sent the following response but we don’t expect any reasoned reply. Why the NZ Herald would choose this rubbish from what must be a vast array of good, newsworthy and socially responsible articles on offer from around the world is difficult to understand, but can only reflect the editors’ wish to promote feminist ideology, to cause harm to men and to damage social cohesion. Note also that the NZ Herald did not provide any facility for readers to respond; this has become a common ploy by the Herald to ensure that critics of feminist b.s. are given no opportunity to be heard.
Our reply sent through Ms Williams’ own web page was as follows:
This article is full of appalling male-bashing and perpetuation of female-victim myths. Note that in the Reddit blog that you say inspired your article the male bloggers were mostly respectful of women and the feminine behaviours those men wanted to feel able to emulate. Yet you take the opportunity to indulge in discriminatory, stereotyping nonsense that amounts to hate speech, for example portraying ‘masculinity’ as lack of contribution at social gatherings, interrupting people, showing poor manners, taking up unjustified space on public transport, abdicating family responsibilities for a mid-life crisis, and being paid more for the same job. All of these insinuations are fallacious. You also imply that somehow it’s someone else’s fault that that you choose to wear designer jeans, wear make-up, wear a shirt or bra or communicate non-assertively or indirectly. They’re not, save perhaps going shirtless in some public contexts, which also applies to men albeit somewhat less restrictively than for women. We can anticipate your outraged response when we publish an article about men feeling able to take their female partners’ pre-existing assets when abandoning them, feeling justified in controlling the relationship between their children and separated mother, feeling entitled to claim constant victim status on spurious grounds, feeling able to deny the other parent any say over the fate of the foetus the men contribute to making, feeling able to stand aside and let women go to the frontline in dangerous situations, feeling entitled to spread myths about gender issues and history and to claim ‘unsafe space’ when anyone dares to challenge the b.s., and so forth.
Yep, the NZ Herald has certainly fallen since the days that Michael Horton owned it. 90% of its content is tabloid gossip. Alice Williams is a pathetic example of a scorned female who wishes to appear as an intellectual but lacks the ability to use critical thinking with a logical approach to her subject. That would take effort…much easier to use lower lying fruit. Her style is similar to the Herald’s so no surprise that they give her a platform.
Louise Nicolas, the Herald Editor and Alice Williams went into a pub…..The barman asked “What’s your pleasure guys?” Louise Snapped, “Don’t you dare try to seduce me., can’t you see I am a clean upstanding woman capable of providing an immaculate conception?” The Editor demanded that the barman make a succinct statement that he could use in a large column showing how barman are using their power to seduce women by plying them with booze. Alice screamed “You F***ing C**t when I am being served by a man I expect some f***ing respect you piece of shit. “You address me as Madam!” The barman turned and served someone else.
Comment by triassic — Sun 15th January 2017 @ 5:52 pm
Interesting article. It has some good observations.
However, in my opinion, there is as much value or more, in the issues that she left out. I would have thought that men are more gender policed than women? Also, I would guess that the gender policing is done more by women and employers, than by men in general?
So, it does seem misleading to present only a woman’s take on this issue.
Good that these topics are being discussed and lets hope that further discussion can bring a wider perspective?
Just for background, I had always thought that men having freedom to take our shirts off was always a man’s freedom. A few years ago, a NZ Herald article pointed out that this freedom resulted from some men baring their chests in a park in New York, about 1920. Despite much consternation and heated discussion, the genie couldn’t be put back in the bottle and the idea spread widely. So men’s freedom on that issue is surprisingly recent. I see that as a signal that we should re-evaluate many of these practices and prohibitions without further delay or prejudice.
Curiously, some women have vied to obtain the same freedoms. Protests have seen them baring their hairy chests too. Although most were not prosecuted, the idea hasn’t spread in the same way that it did for men, not yet anyway. I suspect that it has been women’s reticence that has held it back, more than men’s. The unfairness is way down my list of things to worry about.
Prissiness is a waste of being alive and boring too, no matter who does it.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 15th January 2017 @ 6:40 pm
I used to buy the Herald.
I now make a point of not buying it.
Guys, let’s reduce their sales by at least half, by not buying it.
Comment by simon grant — Sun 15th January 2017 @ 8:29 pm
Typical feminist lie.
Earn more money
Laugh when someone offered me a fraction of my co-worker’s salary.
I would like to point out to all the brainwashed people who believe this propaganda.
It’s a lie.
Women earn less, because they work less.
And don’t do jobs were they are likely to die.
It is true that under 35 males get paid less per hour for the same job, experience and qualification.
Take that feminist psychopaths.
Have a mid-life crisis
2/3 of marriages are ended by women.
Correct me if I’m wrong feminists.
10 to 15% of women walk off abandoning there children.
With the men too scared to ask for child support just in case the women returns.
Helped by some Judge they will get primary care of the kids if they do.
“He was mean to me so I ran away. Now I’m confident and have women refuges support. I’m OK now.”
Let my thighs relax on public transport
The alternate is handbaging.
Or shopping baging, generally due to after expenses child support profits.
PS do women or men have fatter bums. Requiring more space.
Grow a beer gut and genuinely think it’s awesome and funny
MMM
Now that was sexist.
I don’t drink beer.
It’s biological, it’s small but I do have one.
Sorry ladies. Now your turn.
An amazing diet trick.
Women slim and healthy. IE attractive.
Gets into a relationship.
Add 2 years.
Now overweight and unhealthy. IE unattractive.
Man gives up and walks out of relationship.
Women cries.
Add 6 months.
Women slim and healthy. IE attractive.
Gets into relationship.
Repeat process until women lies about being on pill.
Gets pregnant.
Victim trapped.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 15th January 2017 @ 10:49 pm
DJ Ward.
Great to see your comments back!
Comment by Voices back from the bush — Tue 17th January 2017 @ 6:20 pm
Here is another one.
From the man hating bigot club searching globally for articles.
Also the Herald.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11784353
“Your husband was pestering you for sex eight weeks post-delivery? I don’t know how you can stand sleeping in the same room as him.”
Well 8 weeks might be a bit early if there were stitches. But even then there’s a few other options other than sex that men like as well. Now that you have your baby you no longer need to con him into thinking he is wanted. Leave me alone your purpose in life is over for me as far as intimacy is concerned. Go back to work and bring me back my money you owe me for having my child.
“You make the child care arrangements and plan all your daughter’s activities? I’d be so resentful.”
That’s what mums do, and do well. Especially stay at home mums. It’s part of the contract. The father is to busy working earning the money to pay for all those things. Does she want the child to go without. Does she want the male to make decisions the she will denigrate him for making anyway.
“Parenting solo can also be lonely. My son’s father and I have a friendly, if casual, relationship. We dated briefly and broke up amicably, just weeks before I discovered I was pregnant (a joyous surprise to me, a less welcome one for him).”
IE she stitched him up.
Found a good target male that suited her.
Probably got a good income and never wanted kids.
How can. No contraception plus sex equals pregnancy be a suprise?
She is taking us for fools.
She is just your typical female sex offender.
I’ve seen many friends make peace with dramatically inequitable divisions of labor in their marriages.
You mean he slaves his life away at work but that doesn’t count.
Men invented washing machines, dishwashers, and dryers for a reason, etc etc.
“made all the worse because they share a home and a bed – and despair over their partner’s approach to parenting.”
There it is.
Men will never be good enough for this women.
Pity.
One day her son will become a man.
And hate her for not giving him a father in his life.
Kisses and cuddles now though.
“I’ve listened to many female friends talk about how uninterested in sex they were, post-baby,”
That’s how female sex offenders think.
The sperm donors job is over.
Now go back to work.
I need the child support money.
While your there pay some taxes too.
Someone needs to pay for the DPB.
I don’t need your sympathy.
Just your sperm and money.
Otherwise piss of with your horrible man body.
Good on the Herald.
While the Human Rights Commision is awake at the wheel of HMNZS Misandry.
The volunteer crew are working weekdays making newspapers.
Comment by DJ Ward — Wed 18th January 2017 @ 7:49 pm
DJ Ward @6: Good comments about another example of indirect male bashing. Has anyone noticed that feminist denigration of men has become more indirect lately? Sarcastic, snide comments that assume (‘beg the question of’) men’s various forms of badness, inadequacy and undeserved privilege don’t need to be supported by evidence or claims that can be checked.
Ms Kohler says she doesn’t need pity. Pity? From her account she deserves prosecution and punishment for dishonesty and the child abuse of depriving her son of a father so that she can keep the joys of parenthood completely for herself.
Comment by Man X Norton — Wed 18th January 2017 @ 10:24 pm
What ideas do people have for ‘Things I’d do if I wasn’t embarrassed to appear feminist’?
How about
– I would march with other men in a ‘slime walk’ wearing gang patches, carrying placards describing women in demeaning terms, displaying our genitals and erections, demanding the right to dress how we wish regardless of the impact on others, and demanding that others be prohibited from commenting, speaking to us, looking at us or treating our bodies as offensive;
– Whenever I was turned down for a job, promotion, tenancy, article acceptance, book publication or art exhibition, whenever I didn’t get a high grade for an assignment, whenever I wasn’t let in a line ahead of women or served at a counter before women who had been waiting longer, and whenever I didn’t get whatever special treatment I wanted, I would blame matriarchy and discrimination against men; (actually, these days that blame would often be quite valid…)
– I would feel entitled to break the law with much less risk of prosecution than my opposite gender would have, and if prosecuted to have much less chance of being convicted, much greater chance of being referred for psychiatric evaluation and having my behaviour thereby excused and/or blamed on some person from the opposite gender, and if convicted to receive a much lighter sentence than would anyone from the opposite gender for the same crime.
Comment by Man X Norton — Fri 20th January 2017 @ 8:28 am
There was an episode of the professionals many years ago. Remember Bodie & Doyle and the Ford Capri….
A man held a female hostage in a shack on the roof of a six story building. (A sky scraper in its day)
He demanded ransom and a helicopter.
She was tied up as he dragged her out of the shack making threats.
Mi5 considered he had the upper hand and had no choice but to meet his demands.
It turned out there was no woman..just his mate dressed up in a dress and high heels.
I’ve spent many hours imagining scenarios similar that would play into and expose the police white night syndrome..
But alas the Mens rights movement has so far been non-violent and protests conducted with dignity and integrity and I intend to continue that way.
But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t plan hard hitting, attention grabbing plots.
Feminists have removed equal oppertunities to fathers and now target children with misandrist campaigns in schools.
An information campaign to let teenage boys know the risks associated with marriage fatherhood would be fair considering the current political climate.
Also a Mens issues questionnaire to all political hopefuls running in this years election would reveal just who sits where about the issues effecting men and boys.
Then perhaps protest outside the offices of those that refuse to answer.
Let’s discuss practical ideas that will bring attention to these issues.
I’m fed up with being a keyboard warrior.
I’m not a great writer anyway.
For me – Its time for boots on the ground.
Comment by Voices back from the bush — Fri 20th January 2017 @ 9:31 am
We just need an occupational health and safety person in our ranks.
They have power even over the police.
IE I know of an example were a police officer pulled over a person to give them a ticket, for about $80.
The passenger was an OSH person and got out his book and wrote out a $200 fine for a not wearing safety gear breach.
Simple the police are legally required to put up signs warning customers of risks.
Send our OSH rep around to all the police stations putting up signs saying.
WARNING sex offenders at work.
They enable birth certificate fraud.
Non consensual conceptions.
Sex with children by women.
Sex by stupefying of men.
Rape (forced sex with men by women)
Forced marriages (many versions, many assisted with COC act)
Indecent assaults (groping etc)
Oxytocin abusers
Other crimes that are not sex crimes but are administered or facilitated in a sexually bigoted manner include.
The domestic violence act were it is overwhelmingly proven that females are more likely to be offenders compared to men.
Actually.
Pretty much all law.
I agree physical action is unavoidable.
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 20th January 2017 @ 11:21 am
In response to one of the male bashing lies in the lead article by Alice Williams.
Specifically men having mid life crisis.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/love-sex/88651778/middleaged-women-are-the-hot-new-cheats
Notice the title is misandrist.
Middle-aged women are the hot new cheats
For us it would be.
Study on scumbag men cheating.
“And a Canadian study by the University of Guelph says that a woman is 2.6 times more likely than a man to stray if she’s unhappy in her marriage.”
260% slutier than men.
“But finally, fiction is catching up: women can and do cheat – and return to their marriage without paying a moral cost.”
That right.
White knights and pussy passes
Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 22nd January 2017 @ 5:05 pm
Man do feminists hate Trump.
There evil hopes and dreams of destroying the world with Hillary over.
How the hell did Stuff allow this to be printed.
It’s an Opinion piece.
Not even titled sick twisted comedy.
It’s her opinion .
IE her version of reality.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/88729156/Rosemary-McLeod-Pity-Melania-trapped-in-Trumps-dark-fairytale.
The list includes:
The hostage crisis continues.
None thought to arrange her rescue.
While a guard of secret service men shielded her from escape to somewhere happy.
Praise of her husband’s unflagging virility and dashing good looks on demand.
A hint of the glamour model she once was.
Leap up on a saddle behind a hero and hang on for dear life to ride to freedom.
Even after the unfortunate chump she married.
With the finesse of a Rumpelstiltskin, the one and only time I have ever related to him.
To return to the crime at hand, the world knows Melania is kept prisoner in the gilded Trump Towers, only allowed out of her cage to take her son to school in the morning, and supervised even then by secret service men watching her every move.
Share the life of a buffoon claiming to be president of the United States.
But more likely Putin, Trump’s beloved brother-from-another-mother.
They are forced to marry unattractive old men with tons of money because no-one else will have them.
…………..
Wow
I can see the humour.
But really leftist feminists are just crazy stupid.
The psycopathic hatred is plain to see.
She should be sentenced to 6 mounts intensive supervision.
Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 26th January 2017 @ 9:41 pm
DJ Ward @ 12: You’re right about feminist hatred of Trump. The feminists and other ‘social justice’ warriors were out in force at Trump’s inauguration as they protested against Trump’s alleged parochialism and intolerance towards those he doesn’t favour. The protesters were demonstrating their intolerance of the election winner because he was not one of them, displaying much the same parochialism and intolerance that they were protesting against. They showed the world how their notion of ‘social justice’ would make the world a better place, by rioting, burning other people’s cars, damaging other people’s property, breaking the windows of shop keepers and physically attacking police and anyone who didn’t appear to be agreeing with them.
Comment by Man X Norton — Fri 27th January 2017 @ 8:19 am
The feminists and their supporing journalists are never shy to misrepresent matters. This article was a case in point. The headline was ‘One of Donald Trump’s first moves in the White House strips women of abortion rights’. Its first sentence was ‘US President Donald Trump yesterday signed an order restricting women across the world’s access to safe abortion’. Both of these statements are dishonest and misleading. What Trump did was to order that US aid would not be provided to organizations anywhere in the world that provide or promote abortion. That doesn’t amount to ‘stripping women of abortion rights’ or ‘restricting’ women’s access to safe abortion. It simply means that US taxpayer funding won’t go to support abortion services or those organizations that provide or promote it. Nothing restricts those organizations from providing and promoting abortion or strips their clients from the right to get abortions; it’s just that those organizations will need to get their money elsewhere. Surely it is your right, and the right of any group you are part of, to choose whether or not to provide financial donations to any organization on the basis of whether that organization does things you approve or disapprove of?
The feminist misrepresentation of the order is like claiming that if you choose not to contribute to some charity that means you are ‘stripping the rights’ of those whom that charity claims to help. We could similarly claim that because feminist groups don’t contribute money to MENZ Issues this means they are ‘stripping’ men men of their rights. That’s a ridiculous and illogical conclusion, but trivia such as rationality and honesty are clearly of no concern to feminists or the feminist press.
Incidentally, Trump’s order is simply a continuation of an established pattern in which incoming Republican presidents routinely do what Trump did in re-establishing what is known as the ‘Mexico City Policy’ (I don’t know why it’s called that) and incoming Democrat presidents rescind it.
Comment by Man X Norton — Fri 27th January 2017 @ 8:27 am
#13. Man X Norton. You can add this to the list …. setting hair on fire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnERQIhsCFc
Comment by golfa — Fri 27th January 2017 @ 9:27 am
#4 pertaining to the amazing diet trick
I’ve made a small mistake.
Sometimes it takes 18 months to get slim agian.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/spotlight/news/article.cfm?c_id=1504095&objectid=11789880
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 27th January 2017 @ 9:27 pm
Wow, men sure are allowed to be hysterical without any shaming. Women on the other hand can’t say a simple thing (such as the things stated in Ms. Williams’ article) without creating this brigade of nasties here.
Comment by Jhon Tallor (Dunlop) — Sat 6th November 2021 @ 10:19 am
The word hysterical.
Can be “ affected by or deriving from wildly uncontrolled emotion “
Or “ relating to or suffering from hysteria “
Hysteria means “ exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement “
Or “an old-fashioned term for a psychological disorder characterized by conversion of psychological stress into physical symptoms (somatization) or a change in self-awareness (such as a fugue state or selective amnesia)”
From one word, now we have many.
Somatization, fugue state, old-fashioned, wildly.
And many subjects.
Exaggerated emotion.
Uncontrollable emotion.
Selective amnesia.
Conversion of psychological stress.
#17 is clearly very wise.
Socrates would agree.
The first sentence.
Is a life of study on its own.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sat 6th November 2021 @ 8:18 pm