The jury sided with pop singer Taylor Swift in her civil assault case against a Colorado disc jockey. But feminists were conspicuously absent, failing to rally around Swift.
Katie Glass, writing in the (London) Spectator, argues hat the failure to support Swift in her hour of need reveals feminism's "guilty secret:" feminists say that women deserve other women's support merely on the basis of gender. But they only mean some women:
The idea women have a moral duty to support other women regardless of whether what they say is credible is, of course, absurd. Women – who are not homogeneous – are as capable as men of being shits, of lying, conniving, and being manipulative. Surely to believe otherwise is sexist.
Even feminists know this. The truth is the sisterhood, while declaring that women must support one another, has long been happy to freeze out or ignore women who don’t uphold their beliefs. Usually ladies who are right-leaning. Hence many feminists – while campaigning for more women in power – would certainly not celebrate the political prominence of Margaret Thatcher, Sarah Palin, Marie Le Pen or even Theresa May. In the same way Women In Journalism does not see fit to revel in Katie Hopkins’ (controversial) success as a female columnist.
Now, once again, Swift’s case reveals feminism’s guilty secret: that it does not support All Women but only those it approves of. And while this might shatter the gender-centric logic of feminism itself, ultimately it’s an approach that, to my mind, seems a lot more reasonable.
Swift refused to publicly support Hillary Clinton or turn up at the anti-Trump women's march.