Have we gone back in time?

I've been paying attention to one of the feminist writers in the Guardian lately. It's like being back in the 70s and 80s when you could tell the distaste in some mouths when they utter the word men.

A few weeks ago there was a column about sexist men demeaning women by the way they use their name.

Like most things men call women when they want to diminish them, "Jessie" (rather than Jessica) is meant to remind me that no matter what I accomplish – the number of books written, articles published, speeches given – I'm still "just a girl". But it's the overly-familiar infantilization that really makes my skin crawl. Very creepy Uncle Chester.
As it turns out, it's not just me. Behind every female with an opinion is a man with a sneering nickname for her.
Sophia Wallace, a photographer and feminist artist, tells me, "In professional contexts, I suddenly become 'Sophie' with people who have an issue with me. Usually they think I have exhibited too much leadership and are trying to bring me down."
When I asked Rebecca Traister, a senior editor at the New Republic and author of Big Girls Don't Cry: The Election That Changed Everything for American Women, about men calling her something other than her name, she responded: "Becky, Becky, Becky." Slate's Amanda Hess gets "Mandy". The Guardian's own Jill Filipovic told me, "Male commenters pretty regularly call me 'Jillly' when they're trying to be condescending."

Now I read this and I thought but women do the same to men too and men to men, women to women.

Of course men are far more likely to be in positions of power over women and there's obviously something wrong in that. But what she's describing is those in power demeaning their subordinates. It's not sexist men. It's not even sexist, if it's negative and all people do it regardless of their sex.

Today, in a column about naming and shaming alleged rapists - those who have not even been through a legal process let alone having been convicted - she was in favour of what amounts to opening the door to vigilantism. Let alone dismissing innocent until found guilty.

The men should have been subject to the law courts not some internal university finding of 'responsibility' allowing the writer to say they were allegedly guilty.

I decided to check back over previous columns. Does this make me a stalker?

Anyway, in a column called Feminists aren't 'man-haters' – we just don't like men who are sexist and in answer to a made up question "Why don't you just say 'I don't like men' and get it over with?"
She says

I don't like men who are sexist. I find that males who think of themselves as above me because of gender are generally unlikeable fellows. (And, for whatever strange reason, are usually terrible spellers, too.) I don't like men who call women they don't know "sweetie", "honey" or cutesy nicknames – it's obnoxious and condescending. I don't like men who harass women on the street, making comments about their bodies or telling them to smile. I don't like men who control women in relationships, abuse them or hurt them sexually. I don't like men who use the social and political power they have to further discrimination against women in a desperate bid to maintain their status.

Of course, to be a journalist, she'll have had a very good education. She should really be above that dig at those less fortunate.

But all of those things are not exclusive to men and their behaviour to women. I've experienced or witnessed all of those things from women towards men.

It's just bad behaviour. By focusing exclusively on bad behaviour only when it comes from one sex really makes it appear as if she is singling out men.

Germaine Greer was never like this.