Make December blue for boys

Boys in Australian schools are presently being subjected to a cruel program of radical re-education. The program aims to rid them of the idea that they are different from the girls around them. It is to reprogram them so that think no differently from girls.

The difference is typically the thought that boys are more suitable to some tasks in society than girls, those tasks usually requiring strength and agility. Or worse, the thought that boys are more suitable to leadership roles than girls. Less repugnant is the belief that boys’ preference for recreational activities or hobbies or other such things is generally different from that of girls.

Whatever the degree of repugnance, the maintenance of such differences is in the last resort a malignant part of the illegitimate segregation that bourgeois capitalist society has placed on its members. The idea that boys are different or superior in some respects to girls is, according to the Marxists who created and run the campaign, the justification for boys thinking that they can do violence to girls at will. That segregation and the way boys think must be destroyed. The masculine violent-inducing manner of thinking must be eradicated.

There is a great deal of boring Marxist scribbling that is designed to prove the claim that boys’ idea of difference is the source of violence to girls and ultimately leads to domestic violence.

Now we men can engage in argument with feminists/Marxists and point out that there is no necessary logical connection between violence to women and a male thinking that he is different from females. Nor does the empirical evidence support the claim that a boy merely thinking as a boy will lead to and justify violence to women.

For nearly a thousand years in Western Civilization, up to the 1960s, the ideals of chivalry prevailed to a greater or lesser extent in most men. Central to those ideals was respect for women. Until then, men who beat women were considered despicable cowards and were likely to draw the intervention of other men. It was only after the Marxist culture-destroying student rebellion of the 1960s that attitudes changed and domestic violence spiked.

As I say, we can run those arguments. But what’s the point? We men will never convince the feminist/Marxists. We will never dissuade them from running their furious misandrist campaigns. It is a waste of words. So what can we do when some feminist gets up a campaign of cruelty and persecution at Christmas time to persuade parents to buy dolls and other such girls’ toys for their sons? The mad idea is that in giving girl things to a boy you are going to force him to think like a girl and thus rid him of his innate masculine tendency to violence. Here we entering the realm of incoherence of terminology.

Speaking as a boy with terrific memories of Christmas and the presents I received, I know there could nothing more devastating for boy than to receive a Barbie doll in his Christmas stocking.

So to counter this feminist program of cruelty to boys, we men must make an extra effort during December each year to give an example and to tutor the males under our care in what it means to be a man. The ancient code of chivalry is often summarised in these prescriptions: protect the weak, pay your debts and keep your promises. A respectable male shows fairness, courage, strength of purpose and, above all, self-control. Second, we must seek out at least one present for our sons that screams of maleness. And wrap it in blue paper.

Let’s make December blue for boys.

Gerard Wilson