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