Commission for Equality and Human Rights

Government 'Equalities' Office

Members of Parliament

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

« GOVERNMENT WILL PAY £25,000 IF YOU CUT OFF YOUR PENIS | Main | GOVERNMENT MUST NOT BACKSLIDE OVER RAPE ANONYMITY »

Friday, 25 June 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John Kimble

Very good piece.

A politician in New Zealand took the issue to their human rights commission and got nowhere either.

Bit disappointed by the lack of coverage of the story - strangely, the BBC seem to have gone crazy over it for a change, yet the rest of the UK media has totally ignored it, (despite the fact it's attracting interest internationally).

Here are links to further BBC articles on the issue:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10182869.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10404478.stm

John Kimble

Other good news is that Mr Fischer was originally planning to donate the money to the NSPCC but changed his mind and instead chose the far less hysterical and superior charity Kidscape instead

amfortas

Having established this precedent - an admission of fault in a single case - let us hope that more men come forward and make a similar complaint.

May I also suggest that any lawyer who happens across this article or this case has the nous to start a class action and search out a whole plane-load of such discriminated against men.

'Tis pity that Mirko didn't put the money in a fighting fund.

Groan

A small but important victory. A very good point about the NSPCC. The truth is that such abuse is rare in stable families and concentrated in areas and chaotic families. There is a tendency for some big charities to talk up the issue to support funding drives. Hence the foolish bans. Having written to the ehrc I don't really expect much. The pensions issue is another that men should protest. Trom covered this well in the exelent election pieces.Write to mps and respond to the consultation.

Pierce Harlan

I suspect that this might signal the beginning of the end of that policy. BA has opened the door to paying out claims every time it does this. Perhaps BA needs to be asked, what effect this policy has on our children? How does a mother explain to a son, or a daughter for that matter, that father isn't allowed to sit next to an unaccompanied child because men can't be trusted? The twisted message this sends can't be justified.

And does the policy suggest that women aren't abusers? Wow!

Ayami Tyndall

Thanks for keeping these updates coming. This is a great sign. We are finally seeing men beginning to stand up for their rights.

Your post inspired me to do a piece about this on one of my own blogs:
http://armchairchauvinist.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/misandrists-on-a-plane/

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Twitter

Blog powered by Typepad

Reading List