As anyone who frequents the digital pages of the UK’s world famous “left wing” newsrag will have noticed over the last few years, the Guardian has become increasingly feminist and anti-male, if you’ll pardon the redundancy. This, after all, is the rag that employs Jessica Valenti, a shit-stain on the frilled panties of “journalism” who un-ironically complains about women wrapping most of the Christmas presents in one article then turns around and pens another in which she, equally un-ironically, calls for men to be paid less than women.
This male-bashing spree seems to have started under the stewardship of some white knighting male pussy, a pussy who is about to step down and leave the bowl of cream in the hands of some woman called Katharine Viner, who will officially take over on the first of June, a day that may well mark the Jezebel-ing of The Guardian. Given the age of misandry that we live in, we can probably make the safe assumption that any woman taking over a “left wing” publication is probably some sort of feminist dirtbag, but since I have nothing better to do today I decided I would seek out evidence to either support or demolish said assumption.
Most of what is available on this woman and her views on feminism is more than a decade old and may or may not be valid evidence for what she thinks nowadays, but you work with what you have. Some of this old work includes this piece from 2002 in which, while making some valid points about W’s use of feminist cant as an excuse to kill as many A-rabs as he possibly can, she wrote this…
“Where next? China because of its anti-girl one-child policy? India because of widow-burning outrages? Britain because of its criminally low rape conviction rate?”
See what she did there? First two are the kind of thing any reasonable person would find disgusting, but the third is a typical Western feminist complaint – one about due process and such inconveniences. Let’s just take the alleged victim’s word for it, shall we? She also finishes off the article with…
“No wonder it’s being used as a reason for bombing women and children too.”
Apparently, no men are being bombed in the name of this faux-feminism. Disposable and invisible, as usual.
Also, in 2005, she bemoaned the death of Andrea Dworkin, one of the most rabid of modern feminists, a woman whose work would have been at home in Mein Kampf if only she had gone on about Jews instead of men. But instead of focusing on the real reason Dworkin was so reviled she focuses on the fact that Dworkin looked like a fatter, uglier, less humpy version of the Charles Laughton Quasimodo! Yes, that’s why we make fun of her hideousness, because it’s her external ugliness that we actually hate about her. It certainly can’t be that the attacks on her looks are motivated by a hatred of her inner vileness. No, of course not. She also takes at face value Dworkin’s claims she was raped in 1999. Never mind that Dworkin was at the peak of hideousness at the time, that she did not file charges, that she never provided any actual evidence. What matters is a woman’s word – no matter how suspect that woman is.
But it can, and no doubt will, be argued that a decade is a long time and she may have changed her ways since then. Given how rarely people change – really, deep down change – I think it more likely that she still holds the same views and that if she didn’t she would probably have been fired, not promoted, by something as feminist as The Guardian. Unfortunately, it seems she has been too busy working behind the scenes to do much writing, but there are a few clues as to whether or not she has become less rabid. The first of these is her Candidate’s Statement in which she goes on about how…
“Themed roles would help us tell a coherent international story: correspondents for water, fossil fuels, women’s rights…”
Looks to me like feminist code for “Let’s give even more attention to women’s issues than we already do.” She also states that the Guardian should “build a fulfilled, diverse team,” again the kind of thing that is often code for “more women.”
But what really makes this little piggy think we are in for an even more feminist version of the rag isn’t the defense of Dworkin or the little hints here and there. It seems that Viner is quite keen on Twitter, which is not only an indication that she may be an idiot, but which also provides us with good evidence that she is still an A Grade feminist asshole – who else would refer to Jessica Valenti as “fabulous”?
Well, that’s pretty much all I need to know. Coming soon to a pseudo leftist website near you, an Editor In Chief who thinks Jessica “I Bathe In Male Tears” Valenti is “fabulous.” Brace yourselves, boys, for what will almost certainly be an even more feminist, gynocentric, anti-male Guardian.
