Commission for Equality and Human Rights

Government 'Equalities' Office

Members of Parliament

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

« NEWS UPDATE | Main | MEN TELL THEIR STORIES - FALSE ALLEGATIONS AND DOMESTIC ABUSE »

Monday, 23 January 2012

Comments

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

Mike Buchanan

A very important post - thanks for this. Quite apart from relative appliucation numbers there is, of course, the issue of acceptances numbers, which have long been distorted by gender balance initiatives in a number of fields.

Let's take medicine. Because of gender balance initiative in medical training, women outnumber men 2:1 in getting into medical school. This has been going on for some years and by 2013 50% of GPs will be women. One result is a marked deterioration in the GP service. Why? Because compared to male GPs, female GPs:

- are less willing to work weekends or evenings
- are more likely to work part-time, whether or not because of family responsibilities
- are more likely to leave the profession altogether (this is true for other professions too)
- take lengthy maternity leave

The results are predictable. Who are the losers?

- many more people need to undergo expensive training to make up for the artificial 'shortfall', so the long-suffering taxpayer has to pay yet more
- people (men AND women, remember) get an inferior GP service
- men who would get university places on the basis of merit fail to do so

The only 'winners' are the women who would not get these university places on the grounds of merit. Given that GPs now routinely earn over £100k p.a. I imagine these women must be big supporters of The Fawcett Society.

'Losers' must outnumber 'winners' by thousands to one. And this is a democracy?

This is a high-profile 'successful' gender balance initiative. What would a failed one look like?

Why are men (and women, come to that) not rioting on the streets at this state-sponsored madness? It's about damned time we did.

Have a nice week...

Mike Buchanan
www.lpspublishing.co.uk
http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com

GroaN

Thanks for highlighting this. I have to say the truth of what Mike says was seen when the GPs negotiated a new contract in the last decade. Suddenly there was a marked increase in part time work and an end to home visits weekend services etc. Almost on every front this is a Mancession with young men squeezed hardest.

John Kimble

I wonder how on earth Cambridge manages to justify all their sexist all-female colleges (one of which even bans male staff!).

I'm not in favour of any of this gender apartheid rubbish, but if we really must have a single sex or highly targeted college then the first on the list must surely be one for working class males?

Jackson

merit is the only solution, women wins the compilations on merits. if boys can compete the wommens on merit then the solution is there, apart from quota system.

MBA Dissertation

it's good to see this information in your post, i was looking the same but there was not any proper resource, thanx now i have the link which i was looking for my research.

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