Hypocrisy is not unique to Feminists, but
it fits in well with the female attitude to language as an activity
that is pleasurable in its own right -- rather than being dedicated
to the communication of information. This attitude is reflected in idle
chit-chat, on the oral side of language, and in literature, on the written
side. Both chit-chat and literature are more typically female than male
activities.
Early on in my Law studies, an overhead transparency was projected
onto the front of a lecture hall, where we students were awaiting the
start of a lecture in a compulsory course. It said something like:
You are invited to meet Justice Glazebrook
at (a particular time)
on (a particular day)
in (a particular room).
She will give an address on the topic of
"Women Lawyers ...."
WOMEN IN LAW
After seeing this a few times in more than one compulsory lecture,
I became incensed at the hypocrisy (and discrimination -- see below)
that it involved. The invitation, though ostensibly including both the
males and the females in the hall, was obviously only for the benefit
of the females -- which you could only determine once you go to the
bottom line, which indicated that the organisers were a Feminist organisation.
This instance of hypocrisy and discrimination was not unique, as I
found when I read the May 2005 edition of Council Brief, the
organ of the Wellington District Law Society. Under the heading "NEWS",
it published the following article of approximately 180 words:
Renowned domestic violence
prosecutor to speak at WWLA AGM
The Wellington Women Lawyers Association Committee is delighted
to have secured Alana Bowman, former deputy city attorney, special
assistant to the city attorney office of the Los Angeles city
attorney, to speak at this year's AGM.
...
Anyone who would like to attend but who does not
receive and invitation by email or post should contact Clare
Stanley: clarestanley@tdsl.co.nz .
The reason why I say that discrimination is involved, as well as hypocrisy,
is that the activities that go on at these events are detrimental to
the interests of men. Advice from a female Appeal Court judge to female
Law students (when no equivalent advice is given to male students) certainly
has the potential to disadvantage male lawyers in their careers. And
Alana Bowman is famous for treating Domestic Violence in an oppressive,
discriminatory, and sexist way as being principally something that men
do to women -- see http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
for the research facts.)
I emailed Clare Stanley, asking for an invitation, since I hadn't received
one, and she replied as follows:
I am sorry, but the AGM is for women lawyers, or women
associated with the law (such as legal executives or law students),
as that is what the membership WWLA consists of. My apologies
if this was unclear from the invitation. In any event, we are
considering cancelling the event, due to poor response.
The purpose of this hypocrisy is to obscure the
fact that discrimination is taking place. Male lawyers don't see the
need to counter activism by Feminist lawyers, and this hypocritical
double-talk serves to prevent the constant repetition of anti-male discrimination
from reaching a level that would make them sit up and take notice.
