So can I just say there’s no shortage of f---ing irony in the fact that August’s march is being organised by a woman? Sydney Watson describes herself as a “conservative political commentator”. News Limited describes her as a “pro-gun, anti-feminist, half-American Donald Trump supporter”. I would probably more succinctly describe her as an idiot, but horses for courses I suppose. Still, what else do you call someone who thinks “the fight for women’s rights is harming the fight for men’s rights”? It’s okay, Sydney, I’m sure this will net you the job on Sky you’re clearly angling for (sorry, Daisy). The event page for March For Men states, “From the schoolyard to the office, Australians have been repeatedly reminded how undesirable it is to be a man. After weeks of attacks from the media, from politicians and from interest groups – enough is definitely enough!” Gosh, can you imagine having to suffer weeks of "attacks" from the media? Can you just imagine what it must feel like to have the bloody media writing articles about things that have actually happened, things that involve women being raped, beaten, murdered and stolen from the people they love? It must feel awful! Weeks of it! How can anyone let this injustice stand?

Listen, sarcasm aside, men do have problems. Masculinity is in a state of crisis. Men are harmed by the world they live in. But none of that is because of feminism or the battle for women’s rights. Men suffer because of the patriarchy, not because women have started shouting back against victim-blaming again or told men to close their legs on public transport. It’s the patriarchy and toxic ideals of masculinity that hurt men, and part of this toxicity is in always seeking to shift blame onto the women that men have historically been told they have dominion over. We are constantly lectured to about this supposed goodness of men, how 99.9999 per cent of them are "wonderful" and how they deeply love the women in their lives (how generous of them, by the way). But, if that’s true, why do so many of them choose to respond to reports of horrific violence against women – violence that is gendered, often sexual and sometimes fatal – with the insistence that their feelings be taken into account when reporting it? Why do aspirational "Official Women" like Sydney Watson find it so much more galling and offensive to have men’s behaviour highlighted to them than they do the fact that so many women suffer at their hands? And why do they feel so much more passionately about reasserting their authority than they do commit to working with feminism and its goals to change behaviours that are harmful? Behaviours that don't just affect women, but that also see violence being perpetrated between men: boys being punched and killed on city streets, say, or assaulted on football fields. In June, a 22-year-old woman was raped and murdered while walking home from work. A man desecrated her memorial site and justified it as "an attack on feminism".