Skip to Content

Coffee House

No, Simon Schama, people worried about gang rape and FGM aren’t ‘obsessed with sex’

4 April 2016

6:30 PM

4 April 2016

6:30 PM

Hardly anything is less likely to keep people reading than to mention an exciting evening in Toronto.  But stick with me.

Because last Friday night in Toronto there was a debate (organised by the Munk debates, which can be watched in full here) on the great migration crisis which pitted Louise Arbour and Simon Schama against Nigel Farage and Mark Steyn.  Regular readers will know my views of Simon Schama on this matter, so I was looking forward to watching this exchange in the hope of seeing him get what in technical debate-speak is known as his ‘arse handed to him on a plate’. And sure enough it came, courtesy of my fellow free-speecher, Mark Steyn – one of the few people around who knows free speech isn’t just something you talk about, but something you do.


Anyhow – the whole debate is worth watching, and the turn-around in audience attitudes by the end is a great tribute to the work of Farage and Steyn.  But the most electrifying moment of all comes when Mark responds to a nasty little piece of work from his opponents.  These days whenever a man – especially a ‘white’ man – speaks out about gang-rape, female genital mutilation or some other modern European tradition, you can be sure that the next liberal woman to stand up will respond in a very particular way.  This Louise Arbour does.  Like so many other women of her type, she tries to insinuate that any concern shown by a man over gang-rape is entirely feigned and that this whitey male bigot couldn’t possibly really care about girls in his home city having their clitorises cut off, or women being gang-raped.  What they are really doing, insinuates the liberal ‘feminist’ woman, is using these facts to ‘bash’ immigrants.  Just one apparent intent and certain result of this insinuation is to stop men speaking out against such new ‘traditions’.  And since ‘feminists’ don’t like to raise these issues themselves, it means that nobody does raise them.  And so, year after year, such crimes happen more and more, with less and less responsible opposition.

Another common insinuation – better described as a low gag – comes this time courtesy of Simon Schama.  This trick pretends that any male opponent concerned about the mass-rape of women is in fact just ‘obsessed with sex’.  It suggests that these people don’t in fact care about women being raped across the continent, but just don’t get enough nookie themselves and mention the mass-rape and genital mutilation only to get off on it in some weird way.  Again, the only imaginable result of such insinuations is that most men – wanting to avoid being publicly denounced by leading ‘liberals’ as some kind of sexual freak – will keep quiet about the rape of women or children in their community.  If Arbour and Schama wonder where their sly shutting-down of honest concern leads then there are at least 1,400 girls in the Rotherham area who they could speak to, just for starters.

Anyway, watching this debate, and watching Arbour and Schama try these tricks on Steyn and Farage, I was (like a lot of viewers, I’m sure) champing at the bit.  So what a thing of beauty it was to see Steyn’s riposte to all this.  It begins at 38:25.  That’s where Steyn begins by congratulating Schama and Arbour for getting ‘such big laughs on gang-rape’.  It grows from there.  Schama’s face at the end of it is a true portrait of liberal posturing at the moment of moral deflation.  Perhaps someone could frame it and donate it to the nation?

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close