Heather Mallick’s misandry

Article here. Excerpt:

'Prostitution laws are one rare issue where I’ve essentially no opinion. I have never even thought of visiting a prostitute, let alone amassed the knowledge or committed the time to adequately consider this complex issue. In general, though, I think that such activities debase sexual relations—the proper preserve of committed, emotionally-invested couples—whatever this might imply for its legality. So I’m not here to discuss the bill, but rather to point out Mallick’s heartless characterization of men, which undergirds her belief in punishing johns but not prostitutes: “[It] promotes gender equality,” she writes, “and shifts a legal burden from exploited women directly onto the pathetic men who buy sex.”
...
"[The bill’s] online reactions were almost entirely from men . . . one letter writer saying the law should cater to men without access to “mainstream sexual outlets” like spouses or friends.
...
The “need” to buy women is not a “law of nature,” as he wrote, presumably with a straight face. Me? Arrested? The overall level of male entitlement was striking."

Call me sensitive, but I detect a seething hostility here, which reflects Mallick’s modus operandi of blaming men first, for everything. It is ridiculous to say that prostitution simply amounts to “buying women”, as if prostitutes had no agency and could place no limits on what occurs in the transaction. But the conclusion drawn from her prejudice is actually less concerning than the prejudice itself.'

---
Wikipedia on Heather Mallick here.