I did my MSc in Philosophy of the Social Sciences, specialising in Moral and Political Philosophy, from 2001 to 2002. I had the time of my life because of my fellow students, who were international, politicised, hungry and sharp. Political philosophy made me a better writer and thinker. I had 2 male tutors and 1 woman. I sampled one class with another male tutor who went for drinks with his students afterwards and let slip that while he is married to a fellow (female) academic, she additionally does 100% of the childcare, looking after their 11 year old son while he enjoys himself and helps his career taking up prestige jobs all over the world. In the Moral and Political Philosophy module we studied 0 works by women. In History of Economic Ideas module we studied 0 works by women. In Philosophy of the Social Sciences module we had an anthology/reader collating multiple works, 10% of which were by women. We studied 0 of the women's works. The class in each of these modules was around 75% female.
In the last few days the LSE's men's rugby club have distributed a leaflet describing women as mingers, trollops and slags and encouraging male cronies who want to be admitted to the club to "pull a sloppy bird." In the same leaflet they verbally attack their female counterparts in the women's rugby club in homophobic terms, describing them as "beast-like women" who are only interested in sport because they want to socialise with male athletes. The Guardian has been following this story and quotes Nona Buckley-Irvine, general secretary of LSE students’ union, who points out that "Not one person within the club was willing to take personal responsibility for the booklets."
In a further investigation by the The Guardian it has emerged that this womanhaters' club has a history of extreme racism and sexual exploitation of women through the renting of strippers. The same piece contains a form in which anyone who has experienced or witnessed "negative culture" in "British universities' sports' clubs" - what a fantastic euphemism to minimise men's clubs' endemic misogyny, racism and sexual exploitation - can provide testimonies, pseudonymously if necessary.
So, those are the students. They hate women and gather up all the words they can think of to express this, for their own satisfaction. Despite hating women they also want to make sexual use of us - or perhaps the usage is part of the hatred. Those women who cannot be sexually used but have sporting prowess which may challenge that of the men are not slags, mingers or trollops but beasts with petty motivations: they play sport simply to emulate and be close to men.
The LSE's academic are worse: they have no words for women whatsoever, do not think that we should exist as intellects, theorists or speakers and do not want women to talk about important things, although they may gather submissively in an audience and pay to hear men talk. On Thursday 13th November the LSE is hosting an event about "The Fight Against Radical Islam." Three white men - Mark Hoffman, Kurt Barling and Toby Dodge - and one non white man, Harun Khan, will be talking about it. There are no women. The LSE Ideas series of lectures on China and the rest of the world on 7th October and 22nd October feature 4 men and 0 women. The 4th November event on the property market since the financial crash features 4 men and 0 women.
Three events. Three huge topics. 12 men. 0 women.
LSE, what do you think you're doing?
Want to know about other antiwoman discriminators? These are my reports on....
In the last few days the LSE's men's rugby club have distributed a leaflet describing women as mingers, trollops and slags and encouraging male cronies who want to be admitted to the club to "pull a sloppy bird." In the same leaflet they verbally attack their female counterparts in the women's rugby club in homophobic terms, describing them as "beast-like women" who are only interested in sport because they want to socialise with male athletes. The Guardian has been following this story and quotes Nona Buckley-Irvine, general secretary of LSE students’ union, who points out that "Not one person within the club was willing to take personal responsibility for the booklets."
In a further investigation by the The Guardian it has emerged that this womanhaters' club has a history of extreme racism and sexual exploitation of women through the renting of strippers. The same piece contains a form in which anyone who has experienced or witnessed "negative culture" in "British universities' sports' clubs" - what a fantastic euphemism to minimise men's clubs' endemic misogyny, racism and sexual exploitation - can provide testimonies, pseudonymously if necessary.
So, those are the students. They hate women and gather up all the words they can think of to express this, for their own satisfaction. Despite hating women they also want to make sexual use of us - or perhaps the usage is part of the hatred. Those women who cannot be sexually used but have sporting prowess which may challenge that of the men are not slags, mingers or trollops but beasts with petty motivations: they play sport simply to emulate and be close to men.
The LSE's academic are worse: they have no words for women whatsoever, do not think that we should exist as intellects, theorists or speakers and do not want women to talk about important things, although they may gather submissively in an audience and pay to hear men talk. On Thursday 13th November the LSE is hosting an event about "The Fight Against Radical Islam." Three white men - Mark Hoffman, Kurt Barling and Toby Dodge - and one non white man, Harun Khan, will be talking about it. There are no women. The LSE Ideas series of lectures on China and the rest of the world on 7th October and 22nd October feature 4 men and 0 women. The 4th November event on the property market since the financial crash features 4 men and 0 women.
Three events. Three huge topics. 12 men. 0 women.
LSE, what do you think you're doing?
Want to know about other antiwoman discriminators? These are my reports on....