So the coalition government looks like it will be standing up to the protests about bringing forward the gender equalisation of the state pension age to Nov 2018 from 2020. Good for them if they stand firm.
Just to recap, the old Labour Government wanted to equalise the state pension age to 65 in 2020, with an increase to 66 for both genders in 2026. Because the UK has run out of money the coalition government brought forward the 65 equalisation date to November 2018 and 66 in 2020. See the Chancellor's decision.
Since that decision the usual panopoly of women's groups, special interest groups and 'equality' groups have come out of the woodwork (dominating and today's headlines) decrying the decision.
Two interconnected thoughts.
One used throughout this site's commentary on the issue has been the fact that no one including AGE UK, SAGA or the oxymoronically named 'equality' groups, has said "isn't it great that 70 years of sexual discrimination against men is ending" - this after men were told to retire later than women in 1948.
The other is how men are sidelined and not even thought to deserve a voice or comment.
One of the arguments made about the unfairness to women is the fact they little time to prepare for this change in the bringing forward of retirement dates. This also applies to men in terms of moving the state pension age forward to 66 in 2020. No one mentions this - not even groups like Saga or AGE UK but they have a membership made up of thousands of men.
There is now a glaring lack of a loud coherent umbrella voice speaking up for male equality. Yesterday, some came out on the anti-father rant by Cameron but we shouldn't have to rely on Erin Pizzey. Today, there is no one speaking up for men on both how it effects them and also on the 70 years of discrimination issue. Often the only place this is expressed is in the comments section.
We need to organise guys but in a sensible umbrella balanced way and not in anti-feminist ranty way where the Palace is stormed and we succumb to the medium term downfall of many men's organisations which is a combination of ego, watsed time spent attacking feminism and people wanting to use organisations for their own ends.
The time is now nigh.
Posted by Skimmington
I agree some sort of better organisation of men's interests needs to be implemented.
Users' comments on news sites for Cameron's 'feckless fathers' rant and today's pensions debate show that the majority of the public do support genuine equality. It really is just a minority of Feminazi inspired politicians and interest groups that actually have their voices heard in parliament.
Posted by: JH | Monday, 20 June 2011 at 23:06
Worth reading the EDM seeing exactly which MPs are opposed to pension's equality. Typically you won't see politicians who have high profile roles signing EDMs but it's still useful to see who supports inequality (or perhaps who lacks a backbone andhas been bullied into signing it). Anyway here's the list of the guilty:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/commons/early-day-motions/edm-detail1/?session=2010-11&edmnumber=1402
Obviously it's mostly Labour MPs supporting inequality but it's very disappointing to see so many Lib Dems on there, not to mention a high percentage of the MPs from the minor parties (yes the Green's and SNP are always sexist, but Plaid aren't always).
Anyway thanks for posting some good news.
Posted by: John Kimble | Tuesday, 21 June 2011 at 03:14
If they go ahead with the scrapping of women's prisons then I will either leave the country or become extremely political. That would be the straw that broke this donkey's back.
Personally, as I have said before, I think we should have been banner-waving a long time ago. Apathy is men's biggest enemy here. Well, anyway, if something comes of it you can count me in.
Posted by: Jon | Tuesday, 21 June 2011 at 20:27
John Kimble, just checked out the EDM list... staggering Labour bias; only 2 Tory names and even the Lib-dems massively overwhelmed by Labour names. I never realised the threshold towards this kind of idiocy was so easily defined by party lines. I expected a bias, but not THIS much. Or is their a bigger element of some folks towing the coalition line here?
Posted by: Jon | Tuesday, 21 June 2011 at 21:55
Jon you need to bear in mind that Labour have quite a lot more MPs than the Lib Dems (and certainly a great deal more MPs than the minor parties.).
Therefore any "staggering" bias isn't actually that bad on this occasion and I've seen far, far greater division in terms of misandry being restricted to Labour.
In particular the issue of protecting vicitms of false rape accusations comes to mind, if you want to see just how much Labour hates men this is a fairly poor example. For genuine division along party lines and to see Labour's contempt for men see the names/parties on this Early Day Motion:
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2010-11/105
Posted by: John Kimble | Tuesday, 21 June 2011 at 22:46
JK, Wow. Just, wow. That one's a keeper. Thanks.
Posted by: Jon | Tuesday, 21 June 2011 at 22:52