Silent on the Less Easily Mocked

Screen Shot 2015-01-24 at 16.31.44

Near to the end of my examination of the ugly side of ‘gender journalism’ the author of this opinion piece tweeted me to enquire about my interest in ‘men’s rights’.

The answer is not a particularly complex one but neither is it one I that felt inclined to explain in 140 characters.  Besides, I sense that he was more interested in inferring his incredible intellectual instinct by answering his own inane question.

There is nothing I can really say about his ‘opinion piece’ that hasn’t already been said in 100+ comments it generated, so I decided I may as well use this page to answer to give him a proper answer to his inproper question.


Perhaps unsurprisingly, a not uncomplicated multitude of reasons have brought me to a point in my life where I have developed a particular interest in ‘men’s rights’  and sufficient motivation to take the time to blog and tweet on the subject.

From the outset I should declare a self interest and confirm that as the moniker suggests, EYE is indeed a Bloke.  I could bore you with a few exceptions to the general rule but in the grand scheme of things, I don’t feel that I have been particularly disadvantaged because I was born with a dick.  Besides, I try hard to be a glass half full kind of guy and accept that you will always experience a few swings and roundabouts when it comes to life’s outrageous fortunes.

I do have a background and interest in championing the causes of the marganlized, disadvantaged and maligned and this has informed the career and volunteering choices I have made in my life.

As absurd as this next statement will sound to you, my interest in championing unpopular causes has very much informed my current engagement on the issue of ‘men’s rights’.

Over time I’ve had the opportunity to learn about the statutory duties countries throughout the European Union and beyond have imposed on employers and service providers to protect their citizens from very real disadvantage and discrimination arising from general ignorance and personal prejudices.

I’ve had the opportunity to learn more than the average ‘man on a Clapham bus’ about this legislative framework and some of the complexities and contradictions inherent in the concept of equality of opportunity.  For this reason, I hope that I might be in a position to make the occasional competent contribution to conversations about feminism gender equality.

This view has been reinforced by my assessment of the quality of some of what passes as ‘gender journalism’ in the mainstream UK press today.

I’ve already said that my personal experience is not one of disadvantage.  That said, I don’t feel that I have been particularly advantaged because of my sex and, crucially, if there are regular secret meetings where ‘the brotherhood’ collectively consciously collude to subjugate 51% of the population then I have never been invited.

I’ll be amazed if you have read this far so rather than wasting any time expanding on that point I will simply direct you HERE.

Instead I will explain to you why, in my humble subjective opinion, your ‘retort’ to my attempt to point you towards your own comments section was as predictable as it was childish.

It also reflected the two main tactics of self serving career femisinists and women who simply hate and blame men collectively for everything hateful about the world. That is, to simply ignore anything that doesn’t fit with their ‘opinion’ and if that doesn’t work then stoop to passive aggressive ridicule and ad homien attacks.

Given that I stumbled across your path while researching the increasingly prevalent trend of professional feminist clickbait, I guess that I should commend you for trying to get a piece of the action.

Ironically, I came across your article after reading another from the Daily Telegraph ‘Women’s Section’ called: Are Men Natural Born Criminals? Prison Numbers Don’t Lie.

If you’ve read this far, I’d ask you to give it a read and consider how it would have gone down if the Telegraph had swapped ‘Bloke’ for ‘Black’. While you’re at it why not have a think about wether you’d attempt to publish a piece so dismissive of any other societal grouping, especially one citing official statistics showing starkly disproportional levels of suicide, mental illness, homelessness, unemployment, educational underachievement or exclusion and premature death; all the while experiencing daily demonisation and institutional irreverence from the media they pay to consume.

Having taken the time to give you a proper answer to your question, I’m going to leave you with a question of my own.  Are you this rude to all Daily Telegraph readers or is it cause EYEisBloke?



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: