The Rights Of Man

AMFORTAS PODCASTS AND VIDEOS TO SHARE #1

This week this site was contacted by Amfortas a male rights activist who works with colleagues across the globe on producing podcasts and videos on a wide range of male discrimination issues.

Therer are plenty to listen to so will put four to five up every weekend. I hope you enjoy listening to them though they just make you angrier.

 Stolen generation Pt.1.

A professional analysis of the Family Court’s ‘Bible’ that justifies the ‘ least detrimental alternatives’ to the traditional family. "We have a generation of fathers who are shell-shocked, heartbroken". It was Adolph Hitler who first said that people will take any reduction to their freedom if you tell them it is in the best interests of the children. Could we not have a non-detrimental alternative, Amfortas asks.

Stolen Generation Pt.2

The Family Court brings about the detrimental conditions that lead to a delinquent culture of fatherlessness in children. The ‘most deserving parent’ is chosen on genitalia. Professionals make judgements that cause parental alienation syndrome. A juggernaut is driven over Magna Carta. An equal society is replaced by a superior class of people.

Give a Dog a Bad Name. Pt.1.

The mass media is anti-male

by commercial design. Comprehensive study data shows the depth of disrespect for men. Even ‘Old-school’ feminists are appalled at the damage being done to men. The media is ‘Wrong, both factually and morally", says MRA Amfortas. Government pays for an agitprop war on men’s reputation to frighten women. At what cost?

Give a dog a Bad Name. Pt.2.

Women have unconsciously adopted a habit of disrespecting men. "Men are feeling profoundly disappointed, disillusioned and disgusted" and are withdrawing their support and protection of women. Society, and women in particular, are losing a valuable resource needed for its healthy continuance. The Love of men. Is this what women want?

HEROIC VICTORY IN MIDDLESBROUGH, HARTLEPOOL AND SOUTH TYNESIDE - BUT WHY DID THEY HAVE TO FIGHT

This week, 300 heroic men won a test case at an employment tribunal in the North Eastern councils they work (Middlesbrough, Hartlepool and SouthTyneside). This has implications for 12,000 men across the UK.

The case was based on the fact that men and women working for these three councils had previously taken a case against these councils where they were not given bonuses for similar graded jobs to jobs mainly carried out by men (such as gardeners and refuse collectors).

However, whilst these women were rightly awarded a financial settlement or received tribunal awards after winning their case, the three council's employing these men refused to make payments to the men or change their terms and conditions. Pure unadulterated discrimination.

That meant they continued to receive not only less than other men, but also less than the women.

The men then lodged sex discrimination cases in addition to their equal pay claims. The tribunal upheld this, but the council's scandalously appealed, and lost.

The situation is well set out in the BBC and Teesside Gazette.

This test case, was a landmark victory for these men not just because of the decision but also because of what the Judge and lawyers said about it on the BBC:-

 Mr Justice Underhill said: "It would be surprising and unsatisfactory if the [Equal Pay] Act offered no remedy to men in a situation like the present. The case where men and women do the same job but receive different rates of pay is the paradigm of the kind of situation which the Act was intended to prevent, how would it seem if the roles were reversed and the 'piggyback' claimants were not men but women?"

Lawyers involved, from the Cloister Chambers, have described it as a landmark ruling which will have a bearing on many other cases, and could cost councils hundreds of millions of pounds.

After the ruling, Yvette Genn, a barrister who specialises in equal pay law with the chambers Cloisters, said: “This is an important decision as it demonstrates that equal pay laws can be applied not only by women who compare themselves with men, but also by men who are comparing themselves with better paid men.

“Even though women historically have received lower pay than their male counterparts, it is too often forgotten that the law applies equally to men as it does to women.”

It crucially shows that equalities legislation can be used by men and with decent legal teams they can win. The Judge alludes to the hypocrisy of discrimination against men because he is basically saying if it was the other way round, then there would be no dispute and that he would not have to make a decision as it would unlikely to have to go to court for a settlement to be reached. A sound judge.

The key issue though is why did the councils not pay up in the first place when the women won their case and why did the three council's could automatically assume that it was OK for them to pay just the women concerned and not automatically extend it to these 300 men.

They did so, because firstly they felt they could get away with it but importantly because they felt these men did not matter because they were men. These three councils clearly do not believe in equality and it is shameful that public authorities feel that it is right and proper to discriminate against them.

What about the male councillors on these local authorities, what did they do about this, did they think it was OK that male workers working for them were discriminated against?

These men are heroes whilst the male councillors and male senior executives who appealed this decision have behaved disgracefully, they are traitors.

Other Media Coverage - The Times, Personnel Today, People Management, Daily Mail

MEN NEED NOT APPLY: HAVE YOUR SAY ON CLAUSES 152 AND 153 IN EQUALITY BILL

By Adrian  Ashby

As part of the passage of the Equality Bill the parliamentary committee looking at the Bill invites evidence and comments. It does this through invited oral evidence sessions and written submissions. This is during June and July. A glance at the invitees for the oral sessions shows a line up of the usual representatives of the equality industry.

However anyone can submit written evidence to the committee. I’m sure few will know about this opportunity. Chapter 2 "Positive Action" should be commented on as it is the first two clauses (152 and 153) that will actually result in discrimination against men in getting jobs or promotions.

I hope readers individually, or through organisations, will make their views known to the committee as they are amending the Bill. The links below tell you how to do this.

Equality and Diversity Forum

Government Equalities Office

These clauses once enacted as currently drafted will effectively mean quotas in employment and promotions.

Editors Note

The Equalities Bill is one of the most anti-male pieces of legislation ever as the intention (even though hundreds of thousands of men are losing their jobs) is to discriminate against men. This has been well documented on the site (1 and 2) . An example of this in practice and with more to come to make this legal.

 

 

 

LEICESTER COUNCIL SHOWS HOW TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST MEN AND BOYS

If it is not women-only hours for swimming baths, women-only courses, awards and everything else, this site has been alerted to the fact that Leicester Council's Highfields Library offers a women-only session on Tuesday's between 1pm and 3pm. In addition, on the same day it offers women-only drop in sessions.

Not only is this in breach of the Sex Discrimination Act, it shows how ignorant Leicester Council is.

A few weeks ago, a report by the Higher Education Policy Institute highlighted the barriers faced by boys in education and that more needed to be done to break these down. In addition, sites like Books for Boys highlight the need to get more boys reading as they are a long way behind girls in English subjects.

So what does Leicester Council do to help boys read, it turfs them out of the library every Tuesday.

This needs a complaint to the Equalities Commission and the Council.

HAPPY FATHERS DAY

To all fathers and all those who love their fathers and all those who understand the contribution they make to families and to this country - a happy Fathers Day to you.

If you see any homes with the curtains firmly closed, they probably work for one of these:-

CAFCASS

CMEC (CSA)

The Fawcett Society

The Equalities Commission

Harriet Harman

Happy for others to be listed!

LEYTON MAN ATTACKS LACK OF HELP FOR MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

This week's Waltham Forest Guardian features an article on David Hyatt who said that not enough was being done to help male victims.

He spoke about the two of the main problems - he was too embarrassed to report it and when in a separate incident, his then ex-partner attacked him on a bus, the police arrested him. The latter is of no surprise.

An all too common experience but that at least are becoming publicised more.

SHOCKING RESEARCH ON THE UK'S PROSTATE POSTCODE LOTTERY

The first rate campaigning group Prostate Cancer - Charter for Action issued a worrying study to coincide with Men's Health Week.

The headline statistic showed that at least 96 of

England

’s 529 parliamentary constituencies (1 in 6) have a death rate from prostate cancer more than 25% above the

England

average (25 deaths per 100,000 population) with men in Tottenham almost five times more likely to die of prostate cancer than men in South East Cambridgeshire.

 

The charity is calling for:-

• Fewer men are diagnosed with prostate cancer once it has already spread

• More accurate information is made available to all patients

• The provision of clinical nurse specialists is increased

What is also appalling is the way, as revealed by the group, that the NHS (paid by us humble taxpayers) in many areas is refusing to implement the prostate care guidance by NICE who have control on what treatments and guidance should be available.

 

The two key issues really are that firstly this release was issued at the same time as the Cancer Research story that said men having a stiff upper lip is harming their health, whilst this, in many way smore important story/scandal only received good coverage in the Daily Telegraph. The reason seems to be that because the Cancer Research story showed men in a negative light, it got good coverage. Because the Prostate story was about the failure of the state, Government and the NHS to help men, it was not as important/not newsworthy enough/who cares?

 

Secondly, even with the political support the Charter group have, nothing seems to be changing with regard to helping men avoid this terrible disease that claims 10,000 lives per year. The hue and cry would be (rightly) deafening if the Government and NHS were dragging their heels on such an issue if it affected women, but because men are the disposable unimportant sex, silence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY THE GENDER PAY GAP IS NOT AS SIMPLE AS WOMEN BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST

By Adrian Ashby 

 

The row over the misuse of the Office of  National Statistics information highlights the dishonesty in the whole policy with regard to the “Gender Pay Gap”. Constantly presented as about women paid less than men for the same work it generates a feeling that women are treated unfairly in terms of pay.

 

Yet the Equal Opportunities Commission Reports produced in the early part of this decade identified little difference in pay rates for the same sorts of job. In fact the key factors were identified as time out of work and the popularity of part time work in a comparatively narrow range of occupations.

This drove the EOC to support “flexible working” and encouragement for young women to consider other occupational choices.  

 

Of course at that point the debate becomes about the issues for mothers (and fathers) rather than all women. As there was found to be little “gap” for childless women partnered or not.

The other issue is then what drives the choices of occupation made by men and women?

 

The Office of National Statistics has published regional figures. There are some interesting patterns.

For instance the pay “gap”is very small in regions that have suffered the collapse of  “men’s” occupations (mining, heavy manufacturing etc.). In those same areas, such as Wales or Northern Ireland the more prominent role for public sector employment (mainly female) means that as the recession hits private industry the “gap” is getting  very small indeed.

A feature rarely commented on is that men are also more concentrated in low earning occupations working full time hours. This matches with the figures that part time men are paid less than part time women.

 

The men are much more likely to be in low skilled P/T work while the figure for women includes the many professional women who choose to work part time, for instance the new GP contract precipitated a dramatic increase in female doctors working part time.

 

In general women are concentrated in the public sector and have a narrower distribution of pay rates. There are of course men at the heady heights of the now discredited banking industry but many more in “dirty” jobs that pay little. In other words there is a much wider distribution. Portering, cleansing, labouring, delivering and so on tend to be both low paid and invisible but also men’s work.

 

Though the fact that full time male workers statistically work ten more hours per week than women is often taken to indicate preferences of men in management or professions. However a more accurate analysis of statistics  would note that this is more often a reflection of low paid workers keen to earn more through overtime.

 

Of course the reality for most people is that choices and trade offs have to be made. Often these are made by couples and families. The patterns frequently change over the life courses of both men and women. Occupational segregation is an issue though the statistics show that the “female” occupations have been becoming more female over the same time many “male” occupations have become less male, so here again it isn’t a simple issue. 

THE HIDDEN TOLL ON MEN

By ADRIAN ASHBY

Coincidentally published at the start of Men’s Health Week. Cancer Research UK published the results of the most comprehensive research into the risks and treatment of all major cancers. The results shocked the researchers themselves. Men are 70% more likely to die of cancers that are not sex specific (and 40% more likely if all cancers are included).

Health services have only recently started to even consider the need to direct efforts towards men. Though such research indicates that many lives would be saved if the Government and NHS made an effort to address men’s needs there is little in the way of  action.

Men are more likely to contract all forms of cancer (apart from those specific to sex) and very much more likely to die in all apart from Melanoma.

One big issue for men is that the vast majority are at work when the NHS and all its programmes are in full function. Few services are available out of standard working hours.

If the Government and the NHS were truly concerned about this issue, they would open surgeries up on a Saturday, but they largely do not. If the issue was the other way round, of course they would.

 

Media Coverage - Daily Mail, Express, Telegraph,BBC

HARMAN IS CAUGHT AGAIN DELIBERATELY DISTORTING THE TRUTH - GENDER PAY GAP

In Orwellian/New Labour/PC industry double-speak the mantra is 'if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.' Never more so, when it comes to perpetuating untruths by the Marxist anti-male feminists who continue to tell untruths about how discriminated against women are vis a vis men.

This site has already highlighted on three occasions this year, where such myths have been destroyed by the media, professors or statisticians (Recession and Depression, Recession and Jobs, Domestic Violence), now this time it is the deliberate misuse of the statistics on the Gender Pay Gap.

Sir Michael Scholar who heads up the UK's independent Statistical Authority gave Harriet Harman an official warning last week after he had previously protested about the her misuse of the gender pay gap statistics.

He said her office had been warned that including part-time workers in her calculations could be misleading but pressed ahead. They claimed that women were paid 23 per cent less, but Sir Michael says 12.8 per cent would be a more accurate figure.

Her and her acolytes in the Government, the laughably named Equalities Commission and the Fawcett Society do not care about the misuse of this or any other statistics so long as it positions women in a unfavourable light with regard to men.

The reason is that it acts as the lever to get more support for women at the cost of men and this can be seen by the Equalities Bill. That is the reality of the lies they use, they are not casual lies, they are lies used to justify more discrimination against men and more special treatment for women. Their lies trun into public policy.

What is so terrible about this propaganda war is that often the media just accepts what they say (though they are now being questioned more) but also that they won't accept the truth.

Harman and her acolytes continued to use this statistic in full knowledge that they should not. In addition, even when this latest issue was uncovered, the anti-male Equalities Commission (taxpayer funded and of course, they are public officials) said the statistical watchdog was wrong. They said "women representing over three-quarters of the part-time workforce, we believe this figure gives the fullest picture of the country's gender pay gap."

It proves that they are willing to peddle untruths so long as they can claim more victories in their war on men.

Coverage is here:- Daily Mail with readers comments, BBC, Mark Easton BBC, Independent, Daily Telegraph