After reading Dr Rankin's assertion that his critics simply didn't like
reading ideas they disagreed with, I went back to reread his previous posts, as
I hadn't noticed that they had any ideas in them. True, we learnt a lot
about Dr Rankin himself: that he is brusque and typically Yorkshire, was
something of a child prodigy, and is a fearless opponent of PC. Well, we
must admire his courage; the Thought Police came to arrest a couple of people in
my street only a few days ago, and they haven't been heard from since. All
the same, the ideas seem a bit thin on the ground. I quote freely from Dr
Rankin's posts:
After all, we are arguing for withdrawal from 'Europe' and reconnection
with the rest of the world, with its rich range of cultures, all of which the
British are more used to, and find easier to accommodate, than our continental
chums.
Some other comments on political correctness, the feminazis,
etc.
There are some sections of the services that remain off-limits to women,
and that is as it should be. The idea of training the fair sex for front
line roles is another example of barbarism and pagan insouciance masquerading
as 'progress'. Emasculation of language is a project dreamed up by
blue-stockinged Sapphists and their male camp-followers, and is part of a more
general tendency towards creating a society of 'victims' pleading for
'rights'. They would have us believe that all our great women novelists
are 'victims' of 'language'. How absurd.
BEWARE THE LINGUISTIC THOUGHT POLICE. BIG SISTER AND LITTLE BROTHER
ARE WATCHING YOU!
This is nothing but ranting, as Andy Sawyer remarks in his intelligent and
sensible post. In fact, Dr Rankin's assertions seem to me to express
nothing but prejudice, memorably defined by Ambrose Bierce as "a vagrant opinion
without visible means of support". Furthermore, the tone is offensive, and
is intended to be offensive. The expression "feminazis", which I believe
is borrowed from Dr Rush Limbaugh (an American "shockjock") is clearly intended
to equate feminism with Nazism. I would very much like to see a reasoned
argument in support of this equation; I would also very much like to see a
unicorn, and I consider the likelihood of the two to be roughly similar.
Regards,
Andrew Dodsworth
Tottenham, London