I can't really think of where to post this, but I do feel it is an important item for our community and others.

For those not in the UK, there is a weekly discussion program called Question Time on the BBC. The format is that a small number, usually 4 or 5 prominent political types are invited to form a panel and field questions on current issues from an invited audience.

All very non-threatening for the political establishment really. Though occasionally, an interesting point does emerge. (usually about once a year, which sums up how interesting it generally is).

However, last night, 10 June, there was a broadcast which featured, among others, Germain Greer. She is what many are now calling, a second phase feminist. She rose to prominence in the late 60s and early 70s with enormously boring polemical works such as The Female Eunuch, where she made a number of isolated claims, including, 'Most women would be surprised to discover just how much men hate them'.

Anyway, on QT last night, there was a discussion on why, everyone else, apart from those with an opinion, should hold themselves responsible for the sexualisation of little girls. The other contributors were kinda predictable.

But when it came to Germain Greer, she referred to,

QuoteLittle girls learn to flirt with their fathers. You know, kiss daddy good night and that sort of business.

If you can see this broadcast, The topic begins at about  18 mins. After a brief introduction, Greer is the first contributor. She makes the above statement at 19.55.

After some predictable contributions from others, at 28.47, a member of the audience takes Greer to task over this point. She attempts to shield herself even seeking a defensive position from the program presenter.

I think this is an important matter that I do hope, all those interested in our society will take note of. Greer, unlike many other (Second Phase) feminists has been rather careful putting her more extreme views in writing. Shelia Jefferies has wirtten about the racial insignificance of non-western females. Many others have and continue to subscribe to the notion that all men are rapists, but now Greer has made a very public statement accusing fathers of seeking to sexually abuse their daughters.

It's a shame that it is almost impossible to save long term recordings of these broadcasts.

What is perhaps equally significant is how, practially no-one has had the integrity or the guts to stand up and object to this disting woman's rants. That she is still treated as some sort of legitmate thinker, instead of a sponsor for racism, child sexual abuse, social breakdown and personal ambition.

BBC iPlayer - Question Time: 09/06/2011

I wouldn't go as far as to say she accused fathers of seeking to sexually abuse their daughters. That's a bit of a leap to infer that from what she actually said. But certainly it was a very... unwise thing for her to say, and she provided no cogent argument, or further explanation either way when questioned on it, other than to say it depends whether children are taught to flirt with their father. When the guy asks who would teach them to do that, she doesn't answer other than the vague "There are all kinds of ways of kissing your children". After that she simply deflects it away and changes tack by talking about something else.

I can't watch this video. I don't get why foreign videos on the internet are censored. >.>

A lot of the second wave feminists have said stupid things.
Sometimes they have recanted these things over time.
I'm sorry to say, but our greatest hope is for them to all die out.

*Gloria Steinem has a checkered past in regards to transsexualism but more recently wrote the intro to:
Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity (2007) - Julia Serano * Amazon * WorldCat

I think it has been widely known that Greer has a massive IQ and no intelligence.

She runs her life by trying to be confrontational about matters but invariably makes herself look stupid. She does in this video/interview as well. In a time when we need to encourage men to socialise with their children, and for male teachers to be able to teach and be role models without being confronted by child abuse claims this sort of report doesn't help.

Children need love from their parents. It changes during their development. For example my friend brought her babe to work and I had not seen her for 3 weeks, she has just turned 1 yr old. She was upset and crying when I picked her up, 3 weeks ago it was all giggles and kisses.  It is a well known stage in baby development hat around 12 months the babe becomes intolerant to people they do not meet daily. No doubt Germaine could write a whole thesis of crap on that, that she (the babe) is rejecting 'men' crap. She is undergoing normal child hood development.

I really love these experts.


Cindy

 

Greer wrote a couple of interesting and thought provoking books once.  A long time ago.

She is always ready to criticise her homeland, but has lived in the UK and Italy for something like 30 years so has had plenty of practice at drawing conclusions on the basis of no evidence.
Similar to her criticisms of marriage, on the basis of her's, which she admits lasted all of a couple of weeks.
Karen.

I think there's a point (but probably not the one she was making) - which is that children are encouraged to flirt, and it's not just girls - little girls and boys up to a certain age get some weird affirmation for being coy and flirty with stranger adults, in cafés for example. I have no idea why this happens, but it always freaks me out when I witness it, which is disturbingly often.

And for the record, there's a difference between that behaviour and simple friendliness, which I have no problem with.

Of course fathers and daughters flirt. So do sons and mothers.
We don't see that we do it because it is likely an instinct. We have to teach our children social skills. Flirting is a social skill.
I have noticed that children start flirting around age 3ish. No crime or harm here. The crime or harm would be too not teach our children this social skill that will eventually garner the child a mate to breed with.

Quote from: cynthialee on June 10, 2011, 09:00:19 AM
Flirting is a social skill.

Many folks here have holes in their social skills portfolio.
I personally would not list flirting as a skill on my résumé.

True that on both the holes as well as it being a pretty critical social skill.

Cynthia has hit on the nail there. Children, all children practice the behaviours they will need to negotiate their way in the world.

I don't have my own children but have been very close to nieces and nephews. I was frequently treated very closely by nieces, especially, but as an adult, I knew this was simply playing and had no significance what so ever. And like almost every adult in existance, I treated it as such.

Children, quite naturally, behave in a close manner. It isn't sexual.

I'm reminded of an analogy of the receptionist who greets visitors warmly and shows a genuine interest in them. It's her job. If a complete stranger behaved that way, we might think they were comming onto us. It's context. The receptionist, children. We act within context.

What it does suggest is that Greer and her like are indeed, high IQ but no intelegence.

My concern in the case of the likes of Greer is how her statement, which one father corrently described as 'Outragious', was received by the others on the panel. A variety of political types, representing all political opinions, yet not one showed any emotion.

That tends to underline a point I and others have made that the likes of Greer are given too much credability.

Sincere apologies to those in the US. It is indeed unacceptable, not to mention, pointless and undemocratic, to censor such net access from those in the US and elsewhere. There are certainly no copyright issues, since the BBC are hardly going to try to sell the program later.

Sephirah. With respect, and I do have a lot of respect for you, I think Greer's implication was evident and intended. If this statement had been made, off the cuff, by someone casually, I might have agreed that it was simply a bad choice of words. But Greer doesn't speak casually and this was certainly a well planned statement, made from notes. As all the statements made of QT are and indeed as almost every political type does.

Like you, I did notice the apparent ambiguity. This was equally intended as demonstrate later, when Greer started to lose her cool, somewhat with the program presenter. At 30.20 to 30.50

Quote from: CindyJames on June 10, 2011, 05:22:14 AM
I really love these experts.

The word "expert" has become somewhat of a misnomer in recent decades.  When I hear the word "expert" it usually means that someone has no idea what they are talking about, but they like to use a lot of big and convoluted words.  This is as compared to a layman, who often does not use big words, but also has no idea what he is talking about.  The difference is that the layman is occasionally correct just by pure chance, whereas the expert intentionally spouts nonsense out of pure denial of the truth rather than just simple ignorance of it.

Quote from: ~RoadToTrista~ on June 10, 2011, 04:46:18 AM
I can't watch this video. I don't get why foreign videos on the internet are censored. >.>

Good question. Foreign films are very good and in many ways superior to many American films.

Gennee