This response is to the last part of your essay, in regard to how the community should deal with men who are known sex offenders. You reminded me that one of the central questions of the Feminist movement is (or should be restored as?) - what do women do about deviant male sexuality? How do we keep society in general conscious of it, its pernicious consequences (for individuals, families, whole communities) and how do women mobilise effectively to ensure sufficient resources from the State are allocated to monitoring and minimising it?
Well you embarrass me because I've taken part in this. However they really didn't look capable or competent. A DEI target of 30% female agents is definitely going to lower the bar. One of the kindest comments I read is that these women have been lied to and gaslit by being told they have met the physical standards for this job. In all similar cases (military, police) standards have had to be lowered to allow women to make the cut. I have daughters and I want them to be able to do whatever they want in a world free of sexism. But there are some jobs where physical capacity and hormonal aggression are critical to the job. I will support my daughters going into the military if they want to but not into front line combat roles. A small number of roles, very small, women in those roles are going to risk getting hurt or dead and getting others hurt or dead. It really isn't that different from excluding biological males from women's sports. I have heard professionals say that there absolutely are women who can be fully capable in this role, hugely effective and deadly when needed to be. However they are at the absolute upper extreme of female physical capability. There is never any chance that 30% of USSS agents - that would be around a thousand women - will reach that level, even ignoring other agencies and forces who would compete to have those women. The three women we see in the video are clearly not at that level. They can't even maintain position in the crowd when protecting the Escalade, due solely to strength/body mass. I actually feel horribly sad for those three women. I imagine if they were my daughters. They have been lied to, sold a lie, lived it, and are now being humiliated. The failure is in no way theirs. The likelihood they will be made official scapegoats is very high. Unofficially they already are.
"This more than any other tweet indicates how close the misogyny on the right meets the left in a horseshoe kiss.". Wonderful metaphor! Women are almost surrounded.
I don't know why you are so quick to diminish this article - because it touches on a central issue of the GC movement (and related woke-resistance ones): how far to roll things back and the very real existence of the alt-right relishing the opportunity to roll things WAYback. Its clear there are bad-actors hoping to get the opportunity for white terror to follow the current red one.
Pointing out persons' glaring incompetence on their job is neither misogyny nor mockery. It's perfectly OK for an English actor of any class to criticize how the women on Trump's security team handled their weapons. You don't even have to be a weapons or security expert to rate (F) them. You just have to have a functioning eye in your head. "Women’s rights are now what is called wokeness." On the contrary. Wokeness seeks to eradicate women and women's rights from law and society, at which it's been very successful.
"Overly emotional." Your response begs the question of what you'd consider "emotional."
If critiquing the response to criticism of the women on Trum's team: "…what we have seen is the women in the security detail of… Trump be targeted and mocked.… What emerged though, was open mockery and misrepresentation of the women who were hurled into the centre of Trumps [sic], clearly inadequate security operation" was not your "core points," what were your core points?
I was just being cheeky and provocative because you so glaringly missed my point in your eagerness to lick the boots of terrible men. My point is the misogyny that Walsh and Fox so obviously bathe in for pleasure. You may think mocking individuals who are in high pressure situations with instructions to go back to the kitchen is part of reasonable critique but I just think that makes you a person I’m not interested in having any discourse with.
Core to the job description is having the statute to not only hold your place in a jostling crowd, but to be physically large enough to do a good job blocking a bullet.
The overweight USSS agent was an embarrassment. She took three attempts before she could successfully holster her firearm. She projected an aura of panic and fear, the exact opposite of what the job requires. The picture of her cowering behind the podium while the rest of the secret service protect the (former) President should have her out looking for a new job already.
The incompetence of the protection plan lays at the feet of the feet of the lead agent onsite and all the way up the chain of command. There are rumors the 3 female agents were not agents but were DHS investigators that were tasked with this rally due to a personnel shortage. None of those surrounding Trump, male or female, were responsible for the complete screw up of whoever was in charge. If we find out the lead agent was a male, then I assume we have a substantive question of male competence. The noise surrounding the females next to Trump are of complete irrelevance to an armed 20-yr-old climbing on a roof and spraying a crowd.
This response is to the last part of your essay, in regard to how the community should deal with men who are known sex offenders. You reminded me that one of the central questions of the Feminist movement is (or should be restored as?) - what do women do about deviant male sexuality? How do we keep society in general conscious of it, its pernicious consequences (for individuals, families, whole communities) and how do women mobilise effectively to ensure sufficient resources from the State are allocated to monitoring and minimising it?
Well you embarrass me because I've taken part in this. However they really didn't look capable or competent. A DEI target of 30% female agents is definitely going to lower the bar. One of the kindest comments I read is that these women have been lied to and gaslit by being told they have met the physical standards for this job. In all similar cases (military, police) standards have had to be lowered to allow women to make the cut. I have daughters and I want them to be able to do whatever they want in a world free of sexism. But there are some jobs where physical capacity and hormonal aggression are critical to the job. I will support my daughters going into the military if they want to but not into front line combat roles. A small number of roles, very small, women in those roles are going to risk getting hurt or dead and getting others hurt or dead. It really isn't that different from excluding biological males from women's sports. I have heard professionals say that there absolutely are women who can be fully capable in this role, hugely effective and deadly when needed to be. However they are at the absolute upper extreme of female physical capability. There is never any chance that 30% of USSS agents - that would be around a thousand women - will reach that level, even ignoring other agencies and forces who would compete to have those women. The three women we see in the video are clearly not at that level. They can't even maintain position in the crowd when protecting the Escalade, due solely to strength/body mass. I actually feel horribly sad for those three women. I imagine if they were my daughters. They have been lied to, sold a lie, lived it, and are now being humiliated. The failure is in no way theirs. The likelihood they will be made official scapegoats is very high. Unofficially they already are.
I don’t object to critique. The misogyny I could do without.
"This more than any other tweet indicates how close the misogyny on the right meets the left in a horseshoe kiss.". Wonderful metaphor! Women are almost surrounded.
The correct response to misogynistic statements is “why don’t you go to war and die like a real man” I suppose; “instead of play-acting MIB”
I don't know why you are so quick to diminish this article - because it touches on a central issue of the GC movement (and related woke-resistance ones): how far to roll things back and the very real existence of the alt-right relishing the opportunity to roll things WAYback. Its clear there are bad-actors hoping to get the opportunity for white terror to follow the current red one.
I'm embarrassed to admit I just discovered Jane Clare Jones, a UK philosopher who's been GC since before it was cool. She shares EW's concerns in this article about much the same thing: https://janeclarejones.com/2024/07/28/tommy-robinson-far-right-populism-and-gender-criticism/
How-far to reverse the woke policies; and how-to without enabling the right to coopt the process?
Pointing out persons' glaring incompetence on their job is neither misogyny nor mockery. It's perfectly OK for an English actor of any class to criticize how the women on Trump's security team handled their weapons. You don't even have to be a weapons or security expert to rate (F) them. You just have to have a functioning eye in your head. "Women’s rights are now what is called wokeness." On the contrary. Wokeness seeks to eradicate women and women's rights from law and society, at which it's been very successful.
Your response seems overly emotional and doesn’t address my core points
"Overly emotional." Your response begs the question of what you'd consider "emotional."
If critiquing the response to criticism of the women on Trum's team: "…what we have seen is the women in the security detail of… Trump be targeted and mocked.… What emerged though, was open mockery and misrepresentation of the women who were hurled into the centre of Trumps [sic], clearly inadequate security operation" was not your "core points," what were your core points?
I was just being cheeky and provocative because you so glaringly missed my point in your eagerness to lick the boots of terrible men. My point is the misogyny that Walsh and Fox so obviously bathe in for pleasure. You may think mocking individuals who are in high pressure situations with instructions to go back to the kitchen is part of reasonable critique but I just think that makes you a person I’m not interested in having any discourse with.
Women will not listen to reason and have to be scorned and ridiculed out of taking mens jobs. You may not be like that, but most are.
You seem dumb. I’m sure most men are not like that but…
I’m a woman
Well that doesn’t play out well for our team the does it 😩. Most women obviously are too smart to make such a stupid statement.
You’re not smart enough to address my assertion and resorted to insults. It’s embarrassing.
I’m a woman, I’m incapable of reason. It’s not my fault.
Core to the job description is having the statute to not only hold your place in a jostling crowd, but to be physically large enough to do a good job blocking a bullet.
The overweight USSS agent was an embarrassment. She took three attempts before she could successfully holster her firearm. She projected an aura of panic and fear, the exact opposite of what the job requires. The picture of her cowering behind the podium while the rest of the secret service protect the (former) President should have her out looking for a new job already.
Men and women being subject to objective criticism is not the topic of my essay. I’m not sure why you are even commenting
You have reading and comprehension issues. I am sure these have nothing to do with your sex.
The incompetence of the protection plan lays at the feet of the feet of the lead agent onsite and all the way up the chain of command. There are rumors the 3 female agents were not agents but were DHS investigators that were tasked with this rally due to a personnel shortage. None of those surrounding Trump, male or female, were responsible for the complete screw up of whoever was in charge. If we find out the lead agent was a male, then I assume we have a substantive question of male competence. The noise surrounding the females next to Trump are of complete irrelevance to an armed 20-yr-old climbing on a roof and spraying a crowd.