Friday, September 28, 2012

What would Deveny advise women to do?

The news here in Australia has been dominated by a murder and abduction case in inner-city Melbourne. A beautiful woman, Jill Meagher, who migrated from Ireland and who married a local man, had been drinking till the early hours of the morning with work colleagues. When she decided to leave, one of the men offered to walk her home but she declined. Walking home alone she was raped and murdered. The alleged perpetrator was arrested, in part, because of evidence from CCTV cameras.

It's a desperately sad thing to read about and I couldn't help but think about the moment she turned down the offer of a male friend to walk her home.

Catherine Deveny, a radical leftist writer, has an interesting connection to this case. She believes that she was attacked by the same man earlier this year, having recognised him on the CCTV footage. She has also pondered the moment that Jill Meagher turned down the offer of being walked home, but from a very different perspective to mine:
Like all of us I am deeply disturbed by the disappearance of Jill Meagher. It's very close to home on many levels. The thing in the report that really resonated is as she left the bar her male work colleague asked if he could walk her home. She said no. Repeatedly.

Which would have been pretty much what I would have said. Actually my response would have been more like, “F... off. Walk me home? Like you could protect me. I walk these streets all the time. Thanks sunshine. I grew up in Reservoir. I can look after myself.”

...You cannot rely on 'a man walking you home'. Nor should you want to. Your city sister. Walk wherever you like.

Not good advice. Catherine Deveny obviously doesn't like the idea that a woman might turn to a male friend for physical protection. She would rather women make a point about their independence by putting their lives at risk. It's not prudent and the idea that Catherine Deveny could defend herself against a criminal thug better than a man could (because she grew up in Reservoir) is delusional.

And Catherine Deveny is not the only feminist commenting on the murder. Megan Clement claimed that such violence was part of the efforts of men as a class to subordinate women:
What’s the most likely cause of death, disability or illness if you’re female, aged 15-44 and living in Victoria? Intimate partner violence.

...And fear itself is powerful. That is why violence against women works so well. Because often it is our fear of what could happen that constrains us. The UN describes gender-based violence as a "social mechanism by which women are forced into a subordinate position compared with men”. We are subordinated because we have experienced violence; even if we haven’t, we are subordinated because we know that we might.

This is FTP - feminist patriarchy theory: the idea that men as a class use violence against women to uphold male privilege and to keep women oppressed.

But the facts don't fit what Megan Clement is claiming. First, it's not true (by a long way) that intimate partner violence is the leading cause of death for young women. That has been shown by a statistician to be a rogue statistic (a false statistic that is circulated to the point that it is believed, without evidence, to be true).

Second, the man accused of murdering Jill Meagher is not your average suburban husband [note: I can't say anything more here until the trial is over.]

The feminist analysis is not only wrong, but it unfairly maligns the average father and husband because of the acts of criminals who break, rather than enforce, traditional social norms.

22 comments:

  1. Women who decline male protection and are consequently killed are best removed from the gene pool anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Is this the same Deveny I heard on the ABC saying how a man she believes to be Bayley tried to accost her and pull her off her bike?

    Was her comment about refusing a man's offer of protection on the way home made before or after her encounter with Bayley?

    For her sake, I hope it was before.

    Luzu

    ReplyDelete
  3. " First, it's not true (by a long way) that intimate partner violence is the leading cause of death for young women. "

    Eric Holder made the same comment a while back.

    http://mjperry.blogspot.in/2011/02/challenge-to-attorney-general-correct.html

    She mentioned UN defining gender-based violence as if that lends some authority to the claim. It is in all probability even more corrupted by feminist hijinks.

    A world profile on women, using selected economic and social indicators, reveals that women constitute one half of the world population and one third of the official labour force; perform nearly two-thirds of work hours; but according to some estimates receive only one-tenth of the world income and possess less than one-hundredth of world property.

    http://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2011/03/15/stop-that-feminist-viral-statistic-meme/

    Christina Hoff Sommers wrote a long article about CEDAW

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mr. Richardson,

    Radical autonomy = self-annihilation.

    These "feminists" are goading females into self-annihilating situations in the name of "radical autonomy."

    And "radical autonomy" is where the idea of "nondiscrimination" as the liberal's "highest value" becomes the overlying mechanism precipitating "final liberation," i.e., self-annihilation.

    The surest path to self-annihilation (absolute and total liberation... radical autonomy) is indiscriminate thought and action, i.e., total indiscriminateness.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh for goodness sake! That Deveny is a freaking retard. Jill Meagher has disappeared and she is till going on about shunning the protection of men.

    Well, Catherine, it looks like Jill did take your advice and now she's dead.

    And I will read more carefully in future. Sorry, just so very wound up over this death.

    Luzu

    ReplyDelete
  6. That Deveny is a freaking retard. --Luzu

    I know this was said with incredulous jest, but please consider its effect. This thinking takes away the "agency" of these radical autonomists. This female "preaching" her self-annihilating ways to the mass of female is either grotesquely fanatical, outright evil or both. There is no room for a "freaking retard" in these manners. Her beliefs effect many females in the most deleterious way and there is no reason to release her from the responsibility of her self-annihilating words.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Feminists are the ones that are causing other feminists to get wiped out.

    Think about it, traditionalists believe that there are actual differences that our sex gives us; for instance my size and muscle mass, 6'1" broad shoulders, keep me safe from being beat up because there's not that many people that would try taking me on since I look intimidating, but say a female 5'6" and only 130 lbs is seen as easy pickin's to some scumbag looking for the easiest target.


    By saying that women should not allow men to escort them to their car or home, they are giving women the false sense of security and leading them to their death and then blaming men for oppressing them through violence, and by oppressing them with "the fear of violence." Feminists hate the fact that criminals look for the easiest target with the most valuables, some drunk woman will probably have been wearing jewels because women LOVE showing off in business attire.

    I'm so glad that I'm engaged to another southern born American traditional, it's so great to realize every day with blogs like this how God blessed me with a common sense loving gal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon, above, you've reminded me that I should have made the point that many women do show prudence in these matters.

    My wife won't go to isolated areas as she doesn't feel safe. She doesn't pretend that she'd be good in a fight.

    I respect her good sense in this.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Women who decline male protection and are consequently killed are best removed from the gene pool anyway.

    Anon, I think that's too harsh. Let's face it: the trend within Western culture is to deny the masculine protector role within society. At an official level, it's being erased.

    That's probably particularly true in those inner northern suburbs, where people like to think of themselves as politically avant garde.

    You have to be willing to resist the official trend to maintain the older traditions. Even I feel this times. I dropped off a female work colleage at home late at night recently (after we returned from an excursion); I waited to make sure she was safely inside before I drove off, but I felt very self-conscious doing so - I was aware that I might be thought old-fashioned. But I'm stubborn and willing to be thought so. Perhaps other people aren't.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fair point about not calling Deveney a 'retard'...but sorry, its true, she is. Heres the basic and sad facts. This unfortuante young lady has been killed and raped by the lowest form of animal. This could have potentially been avoided if she had accepted the offer to be walked home. This is not to say she was stupid for refusing the offer and being self reliant,she had every right to reasonably expect she could safely walk the streets, but the simple truth is that she probably wouldve been left alone if she had ANY company, and particularly that of a man. Deveneys usual pointless and desperate femme-o-nazi rantings fly in the face of simple good wisdom. On top of this they have, tragically, proved themselves to be self-evidently incorrect.
    The REAL part about this that gets me is that the old 'stand up for the sisterhood' preaching Ms Deveney has since come out and said that she was harrassed by a man who tried to drag her off her bike. hmmm...do we not think it mightve been in the best interests of protecting women to report this to the police BEFORE someone went missing Catherine? Or is your precious uber-feminist pride so great that you would rather risk the lives of other women by keeping your mouth shut the only time you REALLY should actually have opened it? Or did it only matter once you saw a chance to get your head in front of a camera and carry-on? Too busy worrying about the welfare of people from the otherside of the world and not your own again? ....Im sorry that in all this the fact that an innocent woman has been assaulted and killed seems to take a back seat, but believe me, its that fact that makes me so angry in the context of the silly way Catherine Deveney conducted (and continues to conduct) herself. A sad sad spotlight hunter...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tragic story. So avoidable. You might want to ensure the word "alleged" is before every accusation, as per the warning below.

    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/trial-by-social-media-worry-in-meagher-case-20120928-26pe4.html

    http://www.facebook.com/victoriapolice
    Victoria Police
    6 hours ago
    To all our Facebook followers. PLEASE remember that it is inappropriate to post speculation or comments about matters before the courts. We ask you to refrain from posting anything on social media which could jeopardise or endanger the presumption of innocence, as this has the very high potential to interfere with the administration of justice.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I know you've quoted two different commentators, but I'm struck by two failures of logic in what I take to be a shared feminist worldview. (1) If violence against women is part of a male conspiracy to force women into a subordinate position, then why do so many men seem to be trying to protect women from other men? Is the conspiracy really so subtle that the rapist in the alley and man walking her home are in cahoots? (2) Don't these women understand that spunk and courage have very little to do with physical power? Courage is a means to control fear, but it cannot control the object of that fear!

    Actually, I shouldn't use the word courage here. A person who imagines that courage protects them from danger , and not simply from fear, is rash, not courageous.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ideologee, thanks, I've further modified the post.

    JMSmith, good points.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Deveny has bravado, not courage. When faced with danger she is the kind who collapses in a blubbering heap, and she knows it so talks big in the hopes that it will work as a talisman of protection.

    Women who decline male protection and are consequently killed are best removed from the gene pool anyway

    We might not like the way anonymous said it but she was removed all the same. She may yet serve as a negative example for others, which Denehy in her folly is doing her best to foil.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anon said, "she had every right to reasonably expect she could safely walk the streets"

    NO SHE DIDN'T.

    What's wrong with you??? When has it ever been true, in the history of the world, that a woman in a short skirt and FMPs can walk, unaccompanied, from a bar at almost two o'clock in the morning and not be accosted, or worse?

    Never, that's when. Anything else is just feminist lies.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Let's face it: the trend within Western culture is to deny the masculine protector role within society. At an official level, it's being erased.

    If officialdom and culture promote suicidal behavior, that does not alter the fact that stupid people are best removed from the gene pool.

    You have to be willing to resist the official trend to maintain the older traditions.

    It's not up to you (the man) though. It is up to the woman to decide she wants protection. If she declines, then... she is best removed from the gene pool.

    Not your fault if she is. Hers alone.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Curiously, the more frothing the feminazi, the more eager it is to turn to big, burly, White men with guns to impose her will on others by proxy -- a feudal champion as it were.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This sort of horrific crime, of which Ms. Meagher was victim, is rare:

    Unless I'm mistaken, most women, however stupid or ignorant they otherwise are, still possess the modicum of common sense required to refrain from drinking heavily in public places and afterwards walking home alone in the dark of night.

    Don't their parents, or husbands, warn them against such reckless behavior?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Very sad that this happened, however I can see no reason for a married woman, or for that matter any woman staying up drinking all night with strange men. Just another example of the ongoing decomposition of the carcass of Australian & other western societies.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This is very, very sad. Her family grieves. Her family suffered at the mention of how she was tortured and killed. We cannot imagine how the hell she went through before she died. For many this seems to be the occasion for some to resort to commentary in some social agenda, but in truth it is very very sad. My sister died of exposure on a mountain top, one of the tallest in the Chugach range, one of the highest peaks in the US. She was climbing with two other climbers, and died alone when the force of the wind and snowstorm separated the hikers for more than a day, and the coroner's report was death from hypothermia, exposure.

    The important thing in this story is that the woman died alone without anyone who cared for her with her at the time.

    A woman could have accompanied her home or offered her a ride. She could have walked home with a mastiff. She could have called a taxi. She could have taken a motorcycle. She could have called her husband. Any number of scenarios, but instead someone took advantage of the fact that she was alone.

    Sometimes people want to walk alone. Sometimes people have walked alone many times without need for extra caution.

    Sometimes the sixth senses of people are impaired and ordinary cautions are not taken.

    But this woman was violated as if she was a thing to use and thrown away.

    This is so very sad.

    ReplyDelete
  21. lepaysisI write as a Christian woman from Northern Ireland. I'm truly sorry to read of the murder of this woman. However, I believe it was wrong for her to be drinking (thereby losing her inhibitions and acquiring a false sense of security) and if she had not been with work colleagues when she should have been with her husband,she might be alive today. Such work parties are often the places where adultery begins or continues and I believe there is moral danger there. This woman sadly placed herself in moral and, later, physical danger. Her husband bears some responsibility for her ever being in that place without him.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hi...Im the 'Anon' that gokart-mozart replied to an earlier post with...
    "Anon said, "she had every right to reasonably expect she could safely walk the streets"

    NO SHE DIDN'T.

    What's wrong with you??? When has it ever been true, in the history of the world, that a woman in a short skirt and FMPs can walk, unaccompanied, from a bar at almost two o'clock in the morning and not be accosted, or worse?

    Never, that's when. Anything else is just feminist lies."

    Sorry there buddy, I think we might see eye to eye on quite a few points about this sad situation, particular our opinions on the stupid way Catherine Deveny put and continues to put lives at risk, but I gotta take you to task on that one. In a civilised society, everyone should be able to REASONABLY expect to walk home through a city without a freaking maniac animal grabbing, raping and then killing them. That's why we call ourselves a Civilised Society. Dont bring up the short skirt thing mate...read about rape. Its about POWER, not sex. Poor girl couldve been wearing a hessian sack and the guy probably wouldve had a go at her. Saying that indicates that, in some way, she invited it with her attire...and thats just bullshit. Not to mention offensive as it in some way seems to lessen the TOTAL responsibility of this man (if you can call him that). However, I dont disagree with you that it never hurts to err on the side of caution if you can. After all...the world is not always populated by nice, civilised people. Talk to me anytime about dangerous ranters like catherine Deveney though and Im sure we'll have much in common :)

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.