D.C. McAllister of the Federalist uses a recent J.K. Rowling Twitter rant as the basis for a column exposing a common double standard among liberals.
J.K. Rowling lost it on Twitter when she unloaded on a guy who called U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May a whore. While I initially cheered her on, the fist-pumping quickly stopped when her tirade devolved into a politicized feminist screed. …
… While I think Rowling and others who react to name-calling mean well, their case for civility is undermined by their own political philosophy, ethical propositions, and hypocritical feminist ideology. Rowling makes it clear that she’s a liberal who has high expectations of liberal men. For her, liberalism is synonymous with treating women with respect.
The implication here is that other political views are inherently disrespectful to women: To be liberal is to be pro-woman. To be anything else is to be anti-woman. This is why conservatives are dismissed as misogynists, stigmatized by a false label, before they even open their mouths. They’re not liberals, so they must hate women—so the narrative goes, and Rowling, a preeminent storyteller, does well advancing it.
In truth, liberalism is not pro-woman. As Rowling and the rest of us have observed on numerous occasions, liberal men can be just as abusive to women as any can other men. This is true for politicians, businessmen, entertainers, teachers, or store clerks. Anyone who denies this is simply lying to herself. Just consider the behavior of Anthony Weiner, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and any number of rappers. Liberalism is no pathway to sanctification.
