Media stories for the last month have run hot with stories about brave women and Twitter posts of women in combat uniform.
Except there are comparatively few Ukrainian bullets from women. The government made sure of that by forcing every male aged 18 to 60 to defend the country while women were given leave to flee.
After decades of feminists demanding equal treatment of women, including the right for women to serve through to the front line in the armed forces, that demand seems to be quite forgotten.
One lone male voice on TikTok called out the feminist silence; he attracted a wave of criticism and his video was removed.
Social media ran hot with dozens of articles calling out the man “for his ignorance and misogyny.”
But he’s right—the Ukraine crisis has exposed the glaring hypocrisy of feminism today, where feminists talk about equality but happily exploit old-fashioned chivalry, that demands only men are disposable.
“Women are too valuable to be in combat,” said Caspar Weinberger, the U.S. secretary of defense, back in the 1980s, a time when military leaders were still allowed to say such things.
Now feminists sit silent as Ukraine forces their entire adult male population to defend their country, while the valuable women are safeguarded.
Traditionally this has been justified using the evolutionary argument—that the size of the next generation is constrained by the number of fertile females and a species can tolerate the loss of males more easily than the loss of females.
No one dares point out how that hardly applies to all those 40-something single women past childbearing age that we watched scrambling to get on those crowded trains out of the county.
The other arguments for offering women special protection just don’t hold water anymore. The active role played by women in the military puts paid to traditional arguments about women’s lack of strength—and gender-based strength is not as critical when facing most modern weaponry.
Let’s face it—whilst no one would quarrel with the need to protect children and arguably their mothers, the view of women as a protected class is simply a legacy of traditional, chivalrous thinking which is far too useful for feminists to discard.
So they have their cake and eat it, taking every possible opportunity to pretend that this isn’t all about exploiting men by claiming women suffer too—perhaps even more than men.
Warren Farrell, in “The Myth of Male Power,” mentions an article in Parade magazine about the 40 million Russian/Soviet men who were killed between 1914 and 1945. The article was titled, “Short End of the Stick,” referring not to the men dying but to the women stuck with factory and street-cleaner positions due to the loss of so many men.
As the horrific Ukraine situation continues, social media is running hot with messages talking about the plight of women, often barely mentioning men.
Others? Presumably, that includes pesky, unmentionable men—like men too old to fight.
I was shocked to hear the truth behind the coverage of the kidnapping of the 200 schoolgirls by Boko Haram, the Nigerian Islamist group. Remember all the glitterati lining up to protest this event?
She writes: “In our demand for equality here in Britain, we women have for decades tried to emasculate men, to stamp out the warrior and demand they get in touch with their feminine side. Yet we have been so, so misguided.
“What arrogance for us feminists to insist they should emote more. Try telling that to poor Serhii as he cradles his dead son. Let’s hope that one good to come from this terrible war will be that in the West we finally embrace the goodness, inherent decency, and courage in men.”
A rare and touching insight amidst the blinkered coverage of men’s role in this dreadful unfolding tragedy.
And I couldn’t resist a wry smile at a meme saying, “When barbarians are at the gate, suddenly masculinity is no longer toxic.”