The Rights Of Man

REJOICE AS THE EQUALITIES COMMISSION IS TO SUFFER MASSIVE CUTS

The London Evening Standard reported that the resolutely anti-male Equalities and Human Rights Commission is going to see its budget cut from £60 million down to £22.5 million and its 460 staff halved.

As reported previously with the scrapping of the Women's National Commission, this is good news.

The Equalities Commission which supposedly is there as a government quango to ensure there is equality between men and woman (and other groups) is completely and utterly anti-male. They constantly campaign on the mythical gender pay gap, want discrimination against men to ensure there are more women in politics (abig supporters of gender quotas / all women-shortlists) as well as ensuring there is no support for men in terms of education, domestic abuse, pensions, health and unemployment.

They never run campaigns or information about discrimination against men but they are sign up to every campiagn going if it attacks men. They are proud of it!

The cuts are important because it should mean it is less pro-women and anti male because it employs less anti-male people and cannot run as many campaigns. In a rational political era, one that is not infested with anti-male feminists, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission could have been a vehicle of change for men. Unfortunately those who run it and mainly those who work for it, dislike men intensely. We are better off without it.

Posted by Skimmington

SEXIST HARMAN AT IT AGAIN - QUESTION TIME

In a classic reverse the genders issue - Harman calls for 'dreary men' not to replace Question Time presenter David Dimbleby. This rampant 'loose women' double standard sexism show how much Harman hates men. Remember, she was the one who laughably said that if Lehman Brothers was run by women it would not have gone bust. Harman is not interested in meritocracy. 

If Dimbleby had said (and he has not said he is going) that he does not want to be replaced by dreary women - he'd be hung

Posted by Skimmington

THE NEW RAAB TEST OF EQUALITY FOR MEN

Some of the fallout from the comments about Dominic Raab is the exposure of the hypocrisy applied to both genders and also the antipathy so many anti-male radical feminists have towards men. This they use under of cloak of equality though are silent when that equality is meant to apply to men. This is why Mr Raab's intervention was so vital and why the points he raised were so correct.

The points he raised have also seem to make men angrier and to challenge more the hypocrisy you see from the political elite. This can be seen in the comments sections of the newspapers when they run stories.

Three examples can be seen in the following:

Giles Coren wrote a superb piece in the Daily Mail comparing the attitudes of the former Sky presenters with those from Loose Women (357 comments in the piece as well) and Jo Brand's dead men 'joke'.

So why have ITV not sacked the 'Loose Women' or why is not even raised as a serious issue. It's because it is socially acceptable when the genders are reversed. In New Zealand, there seems to be a different attitude.

The second piece was an opinion piece in the Guardian - this time about cuts to women's services like domestic violence centres. One key point of course is the fact there are no articles on cuts affecting men's services funded by the state is because there is hardly anything to cut.

However, putting to one side, the comments section are worthy of note especially the first comment where the post says "I'm glad I'm able to get in early with a comment, before the usual barrage of misogyny descends on this article."

The comment shows the strength of antipathy (as do others) towards men (and women) who put posts up on the basis of "what about men". Not only is there an attempt to shut them off from commentating on this but also its because feminists like this do not want to hear about the plight of men or care about the fact that equality applies to men as well.

The last article was on domestic abuse and it will be a point on a later post but the Guardian again ran a story about domestic violence cuts in Devon. The editor of the Society section, Patrick Butler, looks at in detail at the cuts and then says the immortal line "removing support for thousands of vulnerable women, and, as it happens, a few men too". It's like male victims are also-rans (it is rare for such services to exist to be cut), a piece of straw blowing in the public sector. This is how the elite view male victims, a strange beast to be prodded in a cage on a few occasions. Again there are plenty of posts in the comments section on this.

One of the outcomes of Dominic Raab's great intervention is that it has effectively set out a code or benchmark or test where everyone is now able to compare  an anti-male feminist diatribe, or an initiative which ignores men (discrimination by omission) or a male discriminatory policy against what Mr Raab said.

We can measure the articles on the basis of what he said (we have been saying it for years of course) about anti-male discrimination and the need for proper equality. All these articles failed or highlight failures that did not meet the Raab equality test.

Posted by Skimmington