Miranda Devine

May 21, 2009 ...

You always know when zealotry creeps into a story there is another agenda at work - and that is that the Johns case is a beachhead in the war against masculinity, waged by those who think the only difference between men and women is cultural.

This notion of a socially constructed "gender" has been the central idea of the women's studies movement since it began in the 1960s, with its aim to produce an androgynous utopia. But the culture has changed and there are still men who refuse to act like women - damn them - even if they do have smooth, hairless chests.

-----------------------
Miranda Devine

April 22, 2007 ...

Even the fallout from the recent Sonny Bill Williams-Candice Falzon tryst in the men's toilets at the Clovelly Hotel spilled over onto Mason, because he had been drinking with his teammate earlier. In fact it was Mason's girlfriend who bundled Williams into a cab after finding him collapsed. (As an aside, what kind of pervert put a mobile phone camera under the toilet door to snap a picture of the couple, which is now there for all to see on the internet?)

--------------
Gus: good aside Miranda... But why did you not  mention It was a professional newspaper's website that showed the picture on the internet - for all to see - and why did you not mention that the person who took the shot (quite fuzzy and low resolution mind you) got paid heaps of money for it by the newspaper? What kind of newspaper publish this, is more the question? What kind of gutter journalist justifies that kind of reporting?

I have the feeling, every-time Miranda opens her bile-full ink-pot against feminism, it's to announce to the world that feminists want to destroy MANkind. A war against masculinity???? No. Has Miranda ever understood the idea of equal rights, while maintaining the notion of gender differences? I believe not.

For years, Miranda seems to have misunderstood - and spruiked her, possibly deliberate, misunderstanding of - feminism, as I know feminism directly from the women of the 60s and 70s who fought for equal rights, in which expression of masculinity/manhood by men has never been a sin - if it is not inhibiting the rights of women ... And as long as men do the dishes equally ... But some smart female feminists tell me that Miranda is actually a closet feminist, only eager to stir the possum...

Some women need protection against some of MANhood's perverse actions, including lower pay packet and glass ceilings - and even if at first a woman is "willing" for a bit of fun in the hay with one or two fellows... when it's six or more without consent, it becomes a sorry "gang-bang". The woman is often defenseless and possibly completely blotto, oblivious to what's happening in such situation... Some men do have understanding of the harm they could cause. Many men are gentlemen... Some men do have little idea of the traumas they can cause, such as in a "gang bang with a naive 19-year-old woman, who in the ensuing years became so distressed about her degradation she tried to kill herself." There could have been alcohol involved and everyone knows that alcohol lowers the general protection barriers of the self.

For MANkind to take advantage of WOMENkind in this way is not smart. And as M. Johns was married at the time, it was as his wife told A Current Affair (good name for a bit on the side?) "his only sin was against me..." or was it? A view a bit limited in scope... The question is several fold.

First, is group sex necessary for men to perform sport, or is it just part of the "reward" as "the warriors' dessert"...? In less enlightened times (?), group rape was a part of war against the women of the vanquished. Sure sport can be a bit like war, and politics can be a bit like war too: in some political circles, politician men are bloodied with acts that are either illegal or unsavory enough, to ruin their career should the truth come out, although in the case of Bill Clinton, it did not do enough damage. More damage was done by him lying about it...

Second. Was this the only time such event occurred? Are there any "other" women involved? When the question is asked around rugby league circles, eyebrows are raised with a hint of glee and the negative nodding of the head indicates a sub-layer of culture that is not up to what is expected from "role" models. One has to realize that these "role" models are paid huge moneys, even compared to a basic plumber. Sure we've got to account for the hard knocks and bruises but the sponsors who pay their wages expect their brand names to be associated with feel-good macho instead of ending up waddling in a sexy mud. Not a great look.

Third. Feminism is not deriding men who open doors or stand back for women. Miranda's exposé of feminism is sexist and patronizing... Miranda seems to have never met with some of the great feminists, men and women. Of course as she mentions in her intro, she is "mother of two junior rugby forwards, the wife of a former prop and daughter of a one-time flanker..." Certainly a good rugby mum/wife, who may never have tried to rise to the top of the herd and may not mind being kept in her position by a system run by men, for men, outside her family circle.

Unless she is privileged to be accepted equally for the woman she is. Good luck to you. Other women have to fight hard for equality and feminism is their only platform of support.

And men can be men without having to act like dorks.