A kindly soul has sent over the text from the latest newsletter from the Government 'Equalities' Office (taxpayer funded remember with 100 staff!) which says:
Following the closure of the Women's National Commission, GEO has developed a new approach to enable women and women's organisations to interact more closely and directly with government. As part of this, GEO will be holding a briefing event for UK NGO's on Wednesday 19th January prior to the UN Commission on the Status of Women 55th Session.
The GEO will also be sending regular updates to partner women's organisations, with the first one later this month, and publishing a dedicated web page as part of our engagement activity. There will also be an outreach programme to discuss key issues with government ministers.
As argued at the turn of the year, this government is no better than the anti-male Labour government of the past and this simply adds further proof.
The issue is not so much that the government is having a dialogue with groups representing women and making a big deal about it - it is the fact that they are having no similar dialogue (and making a big deal out of it ) with men's groups.
It is not as if the government could have an issue with mainstream groups like: Families Need Fathers, The ManKind Initiative, Mankind Counselling, The Men's Health Forum, The Men's Network, False Allegations Support Organisation, CALM, The Prostate Cancer Society and many many more. They even help fund some of them!
This site keeps reiterating that this government, just like the last, has no real interest in addressing issues that negatively affect men (and boys) and is guilty of a form of covert institutional sexual and gender discrimination against men. It is because rather than saying it is not interested in male issues, it just ignores them, turns a blind eye and hopes no one will notice.
Here it says it will speak to women's groups but has no interest in speaking to men's group. How is that equality from the Government Equalities Office?
It is another case of discrimination by omission just like the fact that men get a half hearted sentence (and only Caribbean boys at that) in its gender equality strategy.
Posted by Skimmington
Good analysis, this really sums up the problems we face so well. One slight note of caution though - do we know for sure there is no equivalent for men's groups though?
Highly unlikely it exists given the track record of the coalition so far on equality issues, but you never know there might be something hidden away.
Posted by: John Kimble | Friday, 14 January 2011 at 02:37
Even *if* there is something hidden away... why would it be hidden away? Why not show support and true equality?
Posted by: Karl | Friday, 14 January 2011 at 12:08
If they did say they were looking to speak top men’s groups they would probably claim they are speaking to god awful Coalition of Men and boys (www.comab.org) - a closed shop coalition made up of groups hand picked by Harman for their acquiescence.
This post shows why http://therightsofman.typepad.co.uk/the_rights_of_man/2009/10/in-2007-a-group-called-the-mens-coalition-was-set-up-by-a-number-of-public-funded-organisations-purporting-to-speak-up-for-me.html#comments
Posted by: Skimmington | Friday, 14 January 2011 at 19:27
Yes that's what I was thinking. I suppose pretending to liaise with men using such groups is basically as bad as doing nothing anyway.
Posted by: John Kimble | Saturday, 15 January 2011 at 05:34
The Coalition's new equalities strategy does specifically state that it will “listen to and involve the public and partners in the development of policy” – excellent – “through a new strategy for engaging with women and women’s organisations” – BUT NOT MEN AND MEN’S ORGANISATIONS!!!!!!
It is up to us as men and men's groups to come together and have a united voice and demand that the Government engages with us
Posted by: Glen Poole | Sunday, 16 January 2011 at 22:03
Yes indeed. As pointed out there a groups the EO and the EHRC could engage with, the fact they don't speaks volumes. Yet a reading of the Eqality Act indicates they should. They should look at data and consult widely rather than simply ignore half the population. In recent years the collation of data showing women and men (instead of people) has at least given more ammunition to groups highlighting those discriminations and harms men experience. I suppose the fight goes on.
Posted by: Groan | Tuesday, 18 January 2011 at 20:14