A PR trick invented in the 90's in terms of political discourse and much loved by Clinton and Blair was triangulation.
This is where you take two different issues (or groups of voters) and find a way of enabling both issues to conjoin. Blair did it by convincing Labour's traditional voters and disillusioned Tory voters that he was on both of their sides at the same time. He won three elections on the back of it!
The relevance here is the use of triangulation by anti-male campaigners. A classic example is in this piece of utterly biased and sexist research from Houston that appeared in the Daily Mail. The issue raised by the 'researchers' is that:
Women who work are more likely to be abused by male partners than women who don't, a study has found.
Here we see the triangulation of domestic abuse and working women. The whole aim of the research is to demonise men so that working women fear having successful careers and a husband/partner. The issue is compounded when the research does not seem to look at whether a man is more likley to be a victim if he and his wife/partner have successful careers, just the women.
On other domestic abuse news, we see an article in the Daily Telegraph about the effect of the recession of domestic abuse (19% rise over three years) where while the NCDV's comments are gender neutral the picture and comments from Refuge are obviously not. The journalist takes the easy option to portray men as the perpetrators when I suspect any increase is actually committed by men and women (and of course - more men are committing suicide because of the recession).
Yvette Cooper a few weeks ago 'forgot' that male victims exist and Rahila Gupta in the Guardian does not believe there is such a thing as a male victim. The article is written as if it is straight from a set text on a typical men-hating gender studies course.
Fortunately, more grassroots organisations are ignoring this and providing services based on reality - as can be seen in Redcar.
Posted by Skimmington