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 

Comments

[Jon]

Great post; I have noticed this happening all the time as well. Anyone who criticises a feminist or feminism is, apparently, a misogynist.

The BBC is one of the worst. I posted your link to the newssniffer site as an example of media bias against men, on the PM blog site.

Their response? To not only remove my post but to ban me from BBC message boards for life(!).

My response has been to write them an extremely, ahem, assertive email telling them exactly what I think of them (without the cuss words, however). I also immediately rang TV Licensing and cancelled my TV licence. And told the nice young lady on the phone that I considered TV Licensing to be morally corrupt and I would never let any of their 'representatives' in to snoop around my home. All this happened this morning.

We need to start not only complaining, but voting with our feet here. If you pay the BBC licence fee, you are basically paying a monthly fee to be belittled and insulted, as a man.

I can get that for free on Usenet.

[John Kimble]

Good stuff by why is it Raab's test? Many identified this problem well before he did.

Any sensible person can see blatant sexism when they come across it. Similarity so many people are now fully aware of the hypocrisy and double standards of so many feminists (many of them feminists of ex-feminists themselves).

Jon - glad you enjoyed my News Sniffer research. Thanks for spreading the word, it really does help.

[Jon]

Oops, thanks John; didn't realise it was your research.

Not sure how much contribution it made to 'spreading the word' however, my posts were only up for 12 hours or so before they removed them and banned me, to save their embarrassment.

I'm not convinced about the 'any sensible person' argument, however. A lot of this depends on how much the media has influenced people's thinking in the past. Particularly when talking about 'discrimination by omission'. As an example think of the *types* of stories that are 'sent to print'. Eg there are countless stories about the gender pay gap.

(incidentally I am sure on a purely statistical basis they are correct: men on average earn more than women - what I dispute is the reasons for this)

But anyway - countless stories about the gender pay gap... how many stories are there about 90% of homeless people being male? Very few. And yet this is not immediately obvious from looking at one story. Rather this discrimination manifests itself in what the media decide NOT to cover.

Sorry for the waffle, but my point is that it is the *focus* of the media that is our biggest hurdle, not necessarily specific examples of obvious sexism in particular stories - which organisations like the BBC tend to be far more wary of.

This is why I think the BBC Weekly news quiz was amended as quickly as it was - also probably contributed to my lifetime ban. :)

[John Kimble]

Pleased to see you taking a stand against the BBC though have you considered re-registering under a different name?

The only appropriate response to censorship is to repost to repost the information and add far more too it. Do not be silenced.

[amfortas]

Excellent updates, John and Skimmy.

I have written (emailed) Raab with my support.

You guys are doing a first class job of reporting on this site.

[cheating spouces]

I was very delighted with your topics and opinions that were very much clarifying. I have also read your related links and topics and it provided me with great details.

[cheating partners]

Do concentrate on healing and resist any wish to see punishment delivered to the "cheater." The desires to see someone else hurt will slow, even retard, the healing process. Seeing the "cheater" get their just deserts shouldn't be confused with closure. And a note of caution to the traditionalist view that men cheat more than women, it isn't likely to be so. Men and women are more than likely to be equal in both opportunity and in taking advantage of same.