EQUAL TREATMENT BOOK - THE MOST ANTI-MALE ANTI-EQUALITY BOOK IN BRITISH JUDICIAL HISTORY?

The one thing those of us cling on to when fighting the battle against the war on men is that we are equal before the law.

Now we know that is not the case where all sorts of positive discrimination clauses kick in, the bias of CAFCASS and magistrates and judges of fathers in the family courts and how male victims of domestic abuse are still treated poorly. However, it is still something to cling on to.

Sometimes, the game is up and there is no escape from the unbridled anti-male society we live and this now goes right to the heart of the British Justice system.

As revealed by the Daily Mail (also read comments), the English and Welsh judiciary have produced guidance that discirmates against men. The guidance laughably called the Equal Treatment Bench Book sets out how judges should deal with those that come before them. It says:

 "Its aim is to inform, assist and guide, to generate thought and discussion and, ultimately, to enable all judges to deal confidently, sensitively and fairly with all those who appear before them."

It was published in April 2010 before the new Coalition Government took over. It has the fingerprints of Harman, Baird and Flint stamped all over it.

The section on gender equality is unbelievably biased, it is almost as though men do not exist and where they do, they are so superior to women that only women need support and men do not. In all my years beavering away in this area, there has never been a more nasty, one-sided, anti-male document produced by any part of the state than this.

There is no mention of the problems that boys have with education, suicide, unemployment, teh denial of equal/shared parenting etc. It is the most classic example of anti-male bias by omission.

It does not explicitly say that men should not be treated as second class citizens, but by hardly including men anywhere in the document and calling for special treatment for women, then by definition it is anti-male. Anti-male by omission.  

On the issue of sentencing (6-11 to 6-13)  it makes clear that women should be given special treatment and that judges should bear in mind the problems that female prisoners have. That's fine, but no mention of male prisoners. Women can be shown leniency because of the factors that affect them, but men cannot.

ON the issue of domestic abuse (6.1.7), men are relegated to a footnote - second class victims as the ManKind Initiative said in the Daily Mail. They laughable anti-male authors of this report even use one-sided statistics from End Violence Against Women when they do not even use the British Crime Survey figures produced from the Home Office (see ManKind document), another part of Government. They know no shame.

If men cannot now rely on equal justice, equal treatment and equal recognition from the judiciary then there is no hope for equality for men at all. This is the most anti-male biased document probably ever. 

Posted by Skimmington

Comments

[John Kimble]

It's also worth noting how the document neglects to mention the existing female sentencing discount and the extent to which female criminals even escape arrest (female paedophiles, female committing domestic violence etc).

I'm all for letting out a good few male and female criminals who've committed petty offences. Instead we should replace them with reverse rapists, those committing domestic abuse and those abusing children (an offence mostly committed by females)

[Groan]

You are quite right to point out that this, along with other reports and guidances ignores data from gov. agencies. Oddly many feminists have pointed out that the favourable sentencing of women reflects views from the "bench" that men are accountable for their actions but women are victims of circumstances and illnesses. Of course these views effectively mean that women are treated as adult "minors" inherently not able to be responsible adults. This guidance simply reinforces this essentially sexist view. Man face an unlikely alliance of old fashioned views about the"far sex" and gender feminists both seeking privilege for women rather than fairness. The latter years of Nulab had more of this stuff partly because the y faced more and more data contradicted their view. I hope the coalition has the gumption to use latest research and data and dump such nonsense.

[Bob]

That document really makes one's blood boil. Not a word about the spate of false accusations be cry rapists, domestic violence against men and countless other issues they have clearly deliberately missed-out.

Thank goodness Labour are out. The Tories have succumbed to the anti-male sexism but reading that just reminds me of how bad Labour are.

One day people will look back and read that and wonder in amazement how they got away with it.

[amfortas]

The title of the 'guidance' is pure Orwell. Equal Treatment indeed. The Ministry of Truth would have put up posters.

[paul parmenter]

Don't be in any doubt about what this smelly little document actually represents. Do you see, it is nothing less than the abject surrender of feminism? They have fled the battlefield with their tails between their legs. Hoisted the white flag. Abdicated, abandoned, given up. The veneer has been stripped away to reveal the nasty, spiteful and deceitful face underneath. The face of a coward and a liar.

There is no longer any pretence whatsoever about "equality". This document has given up any attempt to maintain that sham. Instead it has fallen back on the ugly truth at the dark heart of feminism: that it is all about special treatment for women. Privilege, blatant discrimination, inequality, all to be indulged in for the purpose of letting females off the hook and for no other reason than that they possess a vagina. This is feminism showing its true colours: women taking care of their own sex and attempting to excuse themselves from the punishment they so willingly dish out to people who are different from themselves.

The true colour of feminism: a big streak of bright yellow.