Feminists win again

WELL OUR MIDDLE CLASS feminists have got their way once more. From 2017, perhaps the most original mind of all time will have to vacate his place on the £10 note in order to make way for the most shallow.

           

            Jane Austen is set to replace Charles Darwin. George Gissing referred  to Austen's contribution to literature, as nothing more than 'village gossip': and as my well read brother said, on hearing the news. 'She wrote six novels with the same plot'. I however, am not as well read as my brother, but after reading Pride and Prejudice, I never went near another Austen novel, although I have watched adaptations of her novels on television…and my brother was right - it was like watching BBC repeats.

           

           Pride and Prejudice infuriated me. I wanted to strangle Mrs Beckett and shake the bones of her weak and insipid husband until they lay in a pile, crushed at my feet. As for the arrogant Darcy, he was right in his opinion of the Becket family, but his infatuation with Elizabeth Beckett allowed his feelings to get the better of his rational and wholly objective analysis of the Beckett family auction, where the matriarch wielded the auctioneers hammer.

            

           Austen was no writer of significance and has only been seen as such by modern feminists whose sense of literature seems only to encompass what George Orwell once described as shop-girl literature. Austen was no George Elliot, or Emily and Charlotte Bronte; all of whom were more worthy of a place on a £10 note than this earliest example of  Mills and Boon 'literature'.

TO REMOVE DARWIN from a bank note to replace him with such an insignificant personage as Austen could only have been accomplished at a time when sexism is treated in much the same way as treason in the Elizabethan age.

            

            The Bank of England has kow-towed to middle class feminism. But the middle class feminists are as ignorant of literature as a chimpanzee tearing up the works of Shakespeare. There were far more worthy women authors than the wretched Austen to merit a place on a bank note.

            

            It has also been pointed to the feminist tribe that one of their own, the Queen, has her head has a permanent place on ALL bank notes of whatever denomination. But the middle class feminists are not royalist by nature and therefore see the queen's presence as inadmissible. So what about another great woman who recovered the countries fortunes? What about Margaret Thatcher? She at least deserves a presence on a bank note before Austen - but feminists do not even regard her as a woman - so she has also been declared inadmissible.

            

            The appointment of Jane Austen as a suitable replacement for Charles Darwin on the £10 note is nothing more than political correctness without any literary merit; and the administrators of the Bank of England, like every other public institution, has bowed down to middle class feminism; fearful of being regarded as sexist.

           

             Sexism, racism, homophobia and Islamaphobia, have all become the modern replacement for traitor, and anyone in a position, like the new Governor of the Bank Of England, to go against such a brew so early in his appointment would not be thought a clever move in such times.