‘Feminazi’ Lawyer Uses Publicity To Attack Male Judge And Leverage For Positive Discrimination

BBC Newsnight

On the back of her newly found fame, so-called ‘feminazi’ lawyer Charlotte Proudman has attacked a leading Supreme Court judge as “sexist” and demanded positive discrimination and special treatment for women in a column for The Guardian, as “only quotas can challenge male privilege.”

Proudman is the barrister and social justice warrior who hit the headlines a couple of weeks ago when she attempted to destroy the career of a fellow lawyer who paid her a modest compliment on a social networking site.


The day after the story broke, Breitbart London’s James Delingpole predicted as much:

“This whole affair – it seems to me – could be interpreted as the latest very calculated, very cynical move by a ferociously ambitious young woman who has spent the last three years assiduously building up her media career and now wants to take her profile up to the next level.”

And right on cue, The Guardian has made all of her dreams come true with the column and a follow up news article. Proundman is the news nowadays.

Females now make up 62.3 per cent of law undergraduates, and 54.5 per cent of postgrad students. However, as is the pattern in other professions, such as medicine and politics, they constitute fewer of top positions (25 per cent of judges) because they make different decisions – choosing to work fewer hours and taking time out to have children.

In an interview on Tuesday, Supreme Court judge Jonathan Sumption argued against rushing to force more women into senior judicial positions, as doing so will put off talented male candidates and destroy the delicate balance of the legal system.

He conceded that, “the lack of diversity is a significant problem, but” he said, “it isn’t the only one. It takes time. You’ve got to be patient… It will happen naturally. But in the history of a society like ours, 50 years is a very short time.”

Backing up his point by adding: “Eighty-five per cent of newly appointed judges in France are women because the men stay away. Eighty-five per cent women is just as bad as 85% men,” he said.

Proudman didn’t just disagree with Sumption, but accused him of “sexism,” “male privilege” and discrimination. Sumption’s comments “encapsulate his deepest fears that power vested in the old boys’ network could come under siege,” she wrote.

“Recognising and challenging institutional sexism needs to be combined with a genuine commitment to equal representation,” she argued. Adding: “…Men who are white, upper and middle class, and heterosexual have always enjoyed a privileged status in the profession – and continue to do so.”

Proudman revealed her true intentions in a blog post back in February, writing: “I am a feminist and I do not strive for equality.” Her publicity stunt paid off, and now she’s using the platform given to her by The Guardian to spread the ideology of discrimination and division she so favours.


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.