– Female privilege accounts for public policy wrong-turns, such as the lockdown.
– White men are at the bottom of the intersectional hierarchy of oppression.
– Men are more likely to be addicted to drugs, homeless, in prison and die at work.
In this week’s Spectator, the author argues that the idea of female privilege is a myth and the opposite is in fact true. Men are seen as privileged, but in reality they face more disadvantages than women. Boys perform worse than girls at school, are more likely to be addicted to drugs and alcohol, account for three-quarters of all suicides, and almost ninety percent of the homeless. Men also make up 96.2 percent of Britain’s prison population and are 23 times more likely to die at work than women.
John Tierney, an American journalist, argues that if the patriarchy truly ruled society, the stock father character in television sitcoms would not be the “doofus dad” like Homer Simpson. Women, although still a minority in the chancelleries of Europe, are more confident and morally forthright than male colleagues, thus becoming the key decision-makers. This is likely due to their more risk-averse nature, which makes them less hesitant to jettison hard-won liberties in order to reduce the likelihood of various worst-case scenarios materializing.
As a result, women are seen as the key players in public policy wrong-turns, such as the lockdown and Net Zero. Men are expected to apologize for their ‘privilege’ in front of their more powerful colleagues, yet these ‘privileged’ men are in fact underprivileged in comparison to women.
Overall, the author argues that female privilege is a myth and the opposite is in fact true. Men are seen as privileged, yet they face more disadvantages than women in many areas, such as education, addiction, homelessness, and workplace mortality. Women, on the other hand, have become the key decision-makers in public policy due to their more risk-averse nature.
In this week’s Spectator I’ve written about female privilege and how it accounts for public policy wrong-turns, such as the lockdown and Net Zero. Here’s how it begins:
A few weeks ago I had a crack at coming up with my own sociological ‘law’ and my first effort went as follows: “The more progressive a country is when it comes to sex and gender, the more authoritarian it is when it comes to speech and language.” I was thinking of Ireland which, having legalised abortion in 2018, is about to impose the most draconian speech restrictions in Europe. I now propose a second law: “^Any group described as privileged is in fact marginalised; and any group described as marginalised is in fact privileged.’
A case in point is white men – and in particular cisgendered, heterosexual, able-bodied, middle-class white men – who are now at the bottom of the intersectional hierarchy of oppression in most professions. But to add to their misery, these poor, benighted souls have to pretend they’re at the top of that self-same pyramid if they’re to retain their jobs, apologising for their ‘privilege’ in front of their more powerful black, female, non-binary, gay and disabled colleagues.
Some will think I’m being deliberately provocative, so I’ll reel off some facts and figures to illustrate this point with respect to just two groups: men and women. Their relative status is the exact opposite of how it’s usually described, making it the perfect illustration of Young’s Second Law. Some of the stats about just how underprivileged men are probably won’t come as a surprise. We all know boys fare worse than girls at school, one reason 35,000 fewer 18-year-old boys will go to university this month than 18-year-old girls. We also know that men are more likely to be addicted to drugs and alcohol, account for three-quarters of all suicides and almost 90 per cent of the homeless. But did you know men make up 96.2 per cent of Britain’s prison population and are 23 times more likely to die at work than women? Research carried out by the Future Men charity found that 29 per cent of young men feel ignored, which perhaps isn’t surprising given that we have a minister for women and equalities and a women’s health ambassador, but no minister for men.
The idea that women are the less ‘privileged’ sex is a cliché that men are obliged to trot out if they’re to avoid social ostracisation or worse. But it’s a myth, as the American journalist John Tierney pointed out in a brilliant article in City Journal last week. “If the patriarchy really did rule our society, the stock father character in television sitcoms would not be the “doofus dad” like Homer Simpson,“ he wrote. “Smug misandry has been box-office gold for Barbie, which delights in writing off men as hapless romantic partners, leering jerks, violent buffoons and dim-witted tyrants who ought to let women run the world.”
Unfortunately, they do. I’m not just thinking of the success of politicians like Angela Merkel, Nicola Sturgeon and Jacinda Ardern, but the way in which public life has become feminised over the past 25 years. Women may still be a minority in the chancelleries of Europe – although for how much longer? – yet because they’re so much more confident and morally forthright than their ‘privileged’ male colleagues, they’ve become the key decision-makers. How else to explain the emergence of ‘safety’ as a sacred value in all areas of public policy? Women are, on average, more risk-averse than men, which means they’re less hesitant about jettisoning hard-won liberties to reduce the likelihood of various worst-case scenarios materialising, whether it’s locking us in our homes to ‘protect’ us from a flu-like respiratory virus or forcing us to drive at 20mph to avoid thermogeddon.
