I finished this interesting book by Steve Moxon last night and have posted a review on Amazon - which has not yet appeared. Overall I thought it was well written though the last few chapters were light on references and heavy on his own opinions. I have no problem with pornography as such though I must admit I didn't like his attitude that all pornography - including child pornography - is harmless. According to him punishing people for possessing child pornography is tantamount to punishing them for 'thought crime'. He seems to have missed the point that such photographs show children being abused and that a crime has to be committed in order to produce the pictures in the first place. Recent court cases have shown how child abuse can happen anywhere at any time.
I didn't like his attitude to sexual harassment laws either. He seems to be saying that normal banter between co-workers is what's ending up in the courts and people ought to grow a thicker skin and just put up with it. I have never had any problems myself dealing with unwanted attentions or offensive language at work and I must say the vast majority of men seem to have no problem in knowing where to draw the line. The legal cases I've read about are mainly where people have expressed dislike of what was going on and attempted to stop it and no one's paid any attention and just carried on.
His whole theory is that men have always been disadvantaged in Western society and women have been pampered and mollycoddled and still expect to be treated better than men. This is not the feminism I grew up with - which was that there needs to be equal opportunities for both sexes in all areas of life. I don't want - and never have wanted - special treatment. Like many male commentators he equates feminism with lesbianism and thinks the word patriarchy is a term of abuse instead of being simply a description of the society in which we live.
As I say an interesting read but giving certain women derogatory nicknames does not serve to enhance his argument, whatever he thinks.
I didn't like his attitude to sexual harassment laws either. He seems to be saying that normal banter between co-workers is what's ending up in the courts and people ought to grow a thicker skin and just put up with it. I have never had any problems myself dealing with unwanted attentions or offensive language at work and I must say the vast majority of men seem to have no problem in knowing where to draw the line. The legal cases I've read about are mainly where people have expressed dislike of what was going on and attempted to stop it and no one's paid any attention and just carried on.
His whole theory is that men have always been disadvantaged in Western society and women have been pampered and mollycoddled and still expect to be treated better than men. This is not the feminism I grew up with - which was that there needs to be equal opportunities for both sexes in all areas of life. I don't want - and never have wanted - special treatment. Like many male commentators he equates feminism with lesbianism and thinks the word patriarchy is a term of abuse instead of being simply a description of the society in which we live.
As I say an interesting read but giving certain women derogatory nicknames does not serve to enhance his argument, whatever he thinks.
No comments:
Post a Comment