HARMAN DECLARES WAR ON MEN

In the death throes of this nasty anti-male Labour Government, before they are  unceremoniously booted out, they have officially declared war on men.

After the publication and announcement this week by Harriet Harman (the enemy of men) of the Equalities Bill (Bill - Debate), following on from the abolition of fatherhood (here) , no sane man can ever vote Labour (worse even the Liberal Democrats support it all as well).

It is anti-men in its intent, its action and in it prescription. It is dangerous not just to men but to society as a whole. As Philip Davies MP states, "how can the party that introduced anti-discrimination laws now reintroduce discrimination into the workplace."

There are so many angles to look to at this from, so I will restrict it to just a few.

Langauge

Trawling through the annoucement and the interviews, it is clear, in the politically correct food chain, men are the plankton.

Every example quoted, all the phraseology and all the emotion is based on that men are the masters of the universe and are still subjecting women. It is straight out of the Marxist feminist doctrine that all men are bastards.

Such across the board, sweeping generalisations ignore the fact that we are individuals and our gender is secondary. Not every man receives better pay than every single a woman, not every man has more opportunities in life than a woman. These are dangerous assumptions.

It is very rich that Harman, who went to posh girls-only public school, St Paul's (here)  believes she and the rest of the female population have less opportunity in life than a working class boy from a council estate in her Peckham constituency.

Positive Action

One of the great lies and weasel phrases of the politically correct is the term "positive action".

There is no such thing, it is a phrase used by the politically correct to put a positive gloss on discrimination against men.

By its very nature, positive action means negative action for somebody else. It means that positive action is just plain old discrimination.

Effects on Men

The most concerning part of the proposed Bill is that when faced with people of equal qualifications and equal ability, employers can discriminate. This will be 99.9999 times out of 100 against men.

In the politically atmosphere of language and debate, employers will feel they would have to select/promote a woman and this new law will only to apply to women. There is no why they will discriminate in favour of a man. They would be hung drawn and quartered if they did and if a complaint was made to the supine anti-male Equalities and Human Rioghts Commission, they would support a woman, whatever the evidence. In addition, the way the Bill is being discussed shows that it is aimed at women and not men. Men will be discriminated against on the basis of the gender not on their ability.

Furthermore, in areas where men are under-represented - education, social services, HR for example, do you think that the authorities will actively discriminate in favour of men. No chance.

In addition, the assumption is made that every man has had more advantages in life than every women. How iniqitous would be for a man from the Peckham council estate to have lost out in this politically correct box-ticking to a girl who went to St Pauls.

Effect on Women.

There are two effects:-

Firstly, for talented, qualified women, an air of suspicion already exists that many have got their position solely because they are a woman. For many women, this is completely unfair because it suggests they have not got the talent to succeed. As the BBC's Mark Easton pointed out this week (link) ; women run 700,000 companies; they now sit on 78 of the FTSE-100's boardrooms; they are more female millionaires than male millionaire's between 18-44 (47,000 women / 38,000 men).

The second effect is of course that it ignores the fact that men and women do not live in isolation from each other. If a man loses out to "positive action", then that will have an effect on his daughters, wife/partner, sister, mother and any female friends.

Gender Pay Gap Myth

The main argument used by Harman to justify the Bill is that there is a gender pay gap, 13% overall but 40% for full time workers.

It has been rehearsed many times on this site and elsewhere (link) but the gender pay gap is a lie and a myth. A clear mis-use of statitics by the politiaclly correct to justify their hatred of men. It does not exist for women who are doing the same job, with the same degree of talent, experience working for the same company where they add the same value. It occurs becuase men tend not to take career breaks to bring up children, a choice that many women want. In addition, men take on more dangerous, dirty work so are likely to be paid more for it. 

What has Labour done for men? 

Nothing, of course. If Harman and Labour were interested in helping men, they would have tackled a number of issues such as:-

The biased family court system

The educational underachievement of boys

The fact that three times as many men commit suicide than women

The lack of treatment for male cancers

The lack of support for male domestic abuse victims.

Conclusion

As stated in the beginning, this piece could have flowed for tens of thousand more words.

The foundation stone of the modern United Kingdom has been based on meritiocracy and liberty, where people succeed based on their talents and abilities. Harman and Labour have abandoned this, they want men to be consigned to the dustbin of humanity.

They want all men in chains and this Equalities Bill will mean exactly that.

Links to some of debates on the Equality Bill can be found here:-

Daily Mail 1; Daily Mail 2; Telegraph 1; Telegraph 2; Telegraph 3; Telegraph 4; Telegraph 5; Telegraph 6; BBC; Times

 

Comments

[FalseRapeAcrhivist]

First, good to see you back. Your absence was worrisome.

Second, this Harman nonsense has raised some eyebrows in the U.S. Can you tell us, will her party be in power long enough for this hateful misandry to kick in?

[Nigel]

A lot of noise needs to be made about this. It is positive discrimination and repeatedly should be made of this. Secondly the Women and Work Commission and prior to that a series of Equal Opportunities reports noted that the "pay gap" would shift only if a. Women had short breaks for children and then worked full time. b. Women chose a wider range of jobs and careers. All noted only small variations that were put down to discrimination or other factors. Given that the EOC and the WW Commission were totally PC I,m sure they would have found discrimination if they could. This exposes this as a form of female chauvinism rather than a response to a real problem. It is as you say guaranteed to further close doors to men without the class and connections that priviledged men and now their equally privileged women partners (just look at so many labour ministers)enjoy.

[amfortas]

Guido Fawkes, the Parliamentary Soothslayer is claiming on his blog (order-order) that Wee Gordie Broon is so on the nose with his own party and the electorate that Harriet Harman is a shoo-in for taking over as PM.

The Princess of Lies has been positioning her acolytes for 30 years and you in the UK are about to have Harpy-Unleashed visited upon you.