This feminist omniscience about what is appropriate for individual women betrays a grandiose conceit that cares nothing for the well-being of women and everything for an ideology.

“Darts is the sport in which small missiles are thrown at a circular dartboard fixed to a wall.” According to Wikipedia, it’s a British game- like archery but without the bow. Walk-on girls are a traditional accompaniment to the main event, escorting players to the stage, looking pretty and infusing some glamour into the proceedings. As of the 27th January 2018, the Professional Darts Corporation have banned the practice after pressure from I.T.V. (commercial television network in the U.K.) and various authoritarian do-gooders, including the world number one player Michael van Gerwen (“Not that there is criticism, but darts is ready for a next step.”) and The Women’s Sport Trust (“We applaud the Proffessional Darts Coroporatin moving with the times and deciding to no longer use walk-on-girls. Motor racing, boxing and cycling… your move.”). Darts girls themselves are launching defensive manoeuvres. One explained to BBC radio that she believes her rights “are being taken away” and another took to Twitter to lament that “this has just got out of hand… We choose to work because we want to.” Whilst a petition is marching its way steadily past  its target of 25,000, which it will undoubtedly surpass by a great margin.

This is a #MeToo moment of feminist aggression into a non-feminist sector where a vocal minority dictates what choices other women are allowed to make. It is reprehensible. Feminist, Meghan Tyler notoriously ponificated “No, feminism is not about choice” and critiqued “the notion that “choice” should be the ultimate arbiter of women’s freedom.” And here we have the proof. This feminist omniscience about what is appropriate for individual women betrays a grandiose conceit that cares nothing for the well-being of women and everything for an ideology. What moral superiority lies in feminism to warrant this authoritarian level of control over societies? Feminists are human just like everybody else, subject to moral failings, and apparently vicious jealousy… The feminist disdain for women who make the ‘wrong choices’ is the clearest, most prominent and accepted form I can think of, of misogyny in our society. Judgemental phrases like “sacks of flesh” are being used by feminists to describe the walk-on girls amid claims that other girls will be put off competing in the game as they’ll see their only possible role being providing decoration. Purlease.

At the same time as women like Vida Mohaved are going missing under-arrest for removing their hijabs in Iran, the best that we can do for our women is remove their choice to live autonomously and fabulously? By all accounts these women are loved and cherished at their place of work. So, they land these gigs and appeal to the mainly male fan-base largely due to their beauty- they keep their jobs and their fans based on their personalities, something it’s reasonable to assume that most feminists would find impossible to relate to. Our civilisation rocks in large part because our women are free.

Once, the push for civil liberties was a project of the pro-feminist left. Now, non-feminist “conservatism is the conservation of liberal values” (Bill Whittle) and mans the front line of women’s emancipation. Is it any wonder that Donald Trump has just confirmed that he’s “not a feminist… that would be, maybe, going too far” and Ivanka has distanced herself from the movement. We’re at the forefront of a rising cultural tide and feminism is thrashing about in the water going through death throes. The establishment is always behind the general population and feminism still holds significant power and influence but its days are numbered, it’s losing the culture war  and women will be liberated from it.

Non-feminism: the radical notion that walk-on girls are people too.

Tags

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *