The Age Of The Victim Is Passing

Fr Robert McTeigue, SJ, host of The Catholic Current had me on last week. Show’s title was Can Anyone Afford Feminism?  The answer is no. Today, an expansion of what we discussed.

The French philosopher Henri Bergson, adored by the ladies of his time, participated in the debates on women’s suffrage—an appropriate word, given its root of “rage”. We learn in Herald of the Restless World, by Emily Herring, that Bergson, though he thought the idea of some women casting ballots sound, was against sudden adoption of suffrage. He called it a “dangerous experiment”, and disapproved of “the militant methods of the suffragettes.”

One of the main arguments for suffrage today is, of course, Equality: women are the equals of men. Which, if true, would eliminate the need for Equality arguments, for there would be nothing to mark woman from man. Yet a century ago, Equality was not the religion it became. Differences between the sexes were accepted. And if there are differences, the argument becomes whether those differences make a difference.

Whether differences make a difference depends on the application. Such as voting, or, say, becoming a scientist. Suffragette Marian Cox in 1913 complained science was “entirely based on male, materialistically driven methods.” She wanted more women scientists, who would be guided by “instinct and intuition”, which she claimed, calling on Bergson’s work, were female qualities.

Cox’s was not an Equality-based argument: it was purely utilitarian. It’s utility depended on whether Cox was right that females possessed these qualities, and whether they were as useful to science as she claimed. Not all agreed with here. One man countered:

Women’s “devastating affability” would render them incapable of maintaining the seriousness required for the effective operation of “civic life,” [a British writer said]. The effect of the literary world would be devastating: “Whole shelves emptied of deeply theological and scientific works” would be replenished with more frivolous feminine topics.

Visit any bookstore and you’ll see that this is not too bad, as far as predictions go: women now control 80%+ of the publishing business.

In science, anyway, it became clear Cox was wrong and her detractor right. Women had no difference to offer because they were women, though of course many women made standard contributions to science. Yet there were not nearly enough women scientists to satisfy the growing urge for Equity.

Not every argument for equal participation of women, in all facets of life, was utilitarian. Many were Equality-based. Over time, this became the predominant form. More energy is now spent talking about women in science than women doing science.

The importance is this: though it was realized that arguments like Cox’s were wrong, the desire for Equity remained. And Equality is believed: there are no differences between the sexes, many insist. It was also observed women lagged in equal (or greater) numbers—disparities is the word—in positions of importance. Therefore something had to be holding them back. In positions of non-importance, nobody cared then or cares now, Equality be damned.

Since there were disparities, and Equality was true, something was causing them. And that something was sexism. Women became the first Official Victims.

It is true that some capable women on occasions were denied positions in certain areas, like science because they were women. This is not now true, and hasn’t been for a very long time. It was not even especially true a century ago, not in general.

But that it happened in some cases became the explanation for why women were not the majority (which is defined as Equity). Women were able to say they were Victims of Oppressors, the Oppressors being men employing sexism. Any woman could claim this status, and many still do. All women inherited Victim status because other women had once been discriminated against. And men inherited, by virtue of their biology, the mantle of Oppressor.

Men became guilty of past discrimination, and for any current non-Equity. They carry with them a sort of original sin, just as women carry Victimhood wherever they go, a sort of original blessing.

I have said there is nothing more important than being a Victim. Victims get special treatment, because their shortcomings are not their fault. Their inequities of importance must be redressed, paid for by Oppressors. Have pity on the poor Victim! Victimhood is why quotas for women exist. Individual women need not point to any overt and actual discrimination that happened to them because of their sex. Victimhood exists in them, as an essential quality. Just as being an Oppressor is what makes a man, an ineradicable stain.

Women, I repeat, became the first Victims. They were given the vote, and soon after given entrée into all spheres of life, even the military. They benefited from their Victim status. They saw the good flowing from Victimhood. They then voted to spread the wealth, so to speak, to create other Victims.

The history you know. Certain ethnicities, then some races, became the next big Victim classes. Victimhood was written into law of the land under the name “disparate impact”, a devastating, impossible-to-satisfy condition. Once those in Victim races realized the benefits of Victimhood, like women before them, they helped spread the largess, and new Victims were born.

Foreigners were automatic Victims, especially if they broke the law coming to foreign soil. They wouldn’t have had to turn criminal, you see, if they weren’t Victims. Sexual desires of every imaginable sort became identities, and since each new identity created a minority of practitioners by definition, and all minorities are Victims because they are small in number, all those proclaiming identities became Victims.

Soon there were so many Victims the world began to suffer an Oppressor deficit. Almost anybody could claim Victimhood—and did! But then, like in all stories of unthinking hyper wanton excess, there came that one step too many.

This was the butchering and drugging and browbeating children into believing they were born the “wrong” sex. These poor kids became Victims. And everybody was forced to mouth this lie.

It was too much. Some, not all, but enough, said enough.

People asked, “Is Victimhood enough to be give someone something for nothing, especially since the Victim is not guilty of any discrimination, and I have absolute zero culpability in being an Oppressor? I have never oppressed, and she was never discriminated against. Why should I pay?” The answers became more and more obvious.

Victim status is now peeling back. The butchered kids, added last to the list, are the first to fall off it. Other sexual “orientations” will follow. Pandering to certain races and ethnicities will fade. Indeed, it’s likely the entire thing unravels in reverse order. Gradually, as they say, then suddenly.

Which means it has to end, suddenly, with women not being awarded any special status because they are women.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: \$WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank. BUY ME A COFFEE.