TAKING ON THE BBC'S FEMINIST BIAS (AND WINNING)

Readers may have recently seen the BBC article of the disproportionate impact suicide has on men, and I expect many were as confused by their coverage as I was. Although the article seemed to imply that thing had got worse for men, it also prominently stated that the rate of male suicide was "more than double" that of females.

Anyone with even a passing interest in such issues surely knows by now that men commit suicide at at least three times the rate of females in the vast majority of countries, with such contrasts especially common in reasonably "developed" countries. Therefore upon reading the article, one assumes the situation in the UK has much improved for men or that women have started committing suicide in much larger numbers than previously.

Hidden deeper in the article are the actual suicide figures for males and females, 4,552 men and 1,493 women, meaning the correct statement is "more than treble". The clear implication of the BBC using the statement "more than double" is that the quantity in question is NOT three times the rate, nor even approaching it, never mind more than this. Thus the BBC clearly downplayed the plight of men and misled viwers on the scale of the gender gaps in suicide rates.

In fairness to the BBC I contacted their correspondent Clive Coleman about his article, and it was fixed within two hours of my complaint. The excellent Newsniffer site shows us the history of the changes  regrettably, Clive didn't bother to thank me for helping tackle BBC bias, nor apologise, nor even acknowledge my complaint (other than fixing the article), thus I'm exposing the history what occurred here for all to see. This is far from the first time I've successfully complained about BBC's gender feminist bias in an article, for example their horrific smear of Dominic Raab was even more disturbing case.

I strongly encourage others to contact BBC staff directly about their bias when possible, the format for email address is [email protected]

Update - it's all worth noting that it's also misleading for the BBC to focus the begining of the article and gender differences on the raw figures for suicide, it's the suicide rate that is the key. There are almost 1.4 million more females than males aged 15+ in the UK (partly due to so many men killing themsleves), so whilst the raw figures for males are barely more than three times that of females, the actual rate is more comfortably exceeds three fold due to the female deaths being spread over a significantly larger population.

by John Kimble

Comments

[Paul]

Or to summarise, they made a cock-up and got their maths wrong. Then when you pointed it out they corrected it. This is hardly evidence of feminist bias. This post displays the sort of paranoia evident in the most loathsome variety of hardline feminism where any mistake, however trivial, is yet another manifestation of patriarchal oppression.

[Paul F.]

Well done, John Kimble! Perhaps as you say people should be encouraged to complain more frequently if they want something done (although many who have written to the BBC re: bias will know it's not always a fruitful process).

I do believe though that I once heard Theresa May on 'Any Questions' saying that you only needed literally seven complaints and the BBC is obliged according to its own internal rules to launch an inquiry into something.

May be a useful route to go down in addition.

Did manage to catch a snatch of Mike B. on Daily Politics. Congratulations Mike thought you kept calm and came across really well in the end.

[Groan]

Paul I think it is that there is an insititutional view that treats issues differently. So for instance there is a tendency to highlight women as victims in news coverage (and children more so) while accepting male victimisation as a sort of norm. This trend was identified 40 years ago as male "disposability". Suicide is one area where the "gendered" nature of the stats is very clear indeed yet it gets lost in reporting and policy. I agree this may not be feminist bias but a continuation of a deep social norm to down play any indication of "weakness" in males either individually or as a group. I,m afraid health is shot through with this tendency. For instance "man Flu" often reported as men getting sicker or complaining more. In fact neither is true, men tend to be more resilient both in terms of symptoms and complaining or time off, facts known for decades with health professional circles but not what gets trotted out by reporters. In effect we say any illness or complaining from men is too much! Then wonder why men don't seek help on any number of health issues. Suicide is just the most stark and tragic of this trend.

[John Kimble]

"Or to summarise, they made a cock-up and got their maths wrong. Then when you pointed it out they corrected it."

Well do you think they'd ever downplay anything where females were the victims? Even if they did then no doubt a gender feminist staff member would order it to be changed within about 5 nanoseconds instead of the 8 hours it took here.

The difference in suicides rates has been roughly 3:1 for decades now and the maths is incredibly easy given that it's basically 4500 to 1500.

I'm not suggesting it was feminist bias on the part of the author, it's more like institution bias that runs through most of the organisation, leading not just to ignorance of basic facts, but also for any such mistakes to be ignored and left uncorrected.

[Dave]

Another clear result from Mike yesterday on Daily Politics. Well done Mike! I just wished you'd had longer. I have watched it three times and your answers were clear, precise and spot on in terms of factual argument. I don't know what to say other than for God's sake keep trying to make a name for yourself and get that publicity rolling while the momentum is there. You definitely came out on top and I'm sure that Daily Politics slot will generate some keen interest from elsewhere too!

Loved the comment about the cherry picking and lorry drivers. The look on her face was a real picture while her brain scrabbled about trying to retrieve an appropriate answer. Then she came out with the "power" argument. Just like the opening film highlighted, women have to be prepared to muck in and get stuck in with the lads on all walks, not just the nice sunny walk across the top of the hill! If they want true power then, like you say, they can't just cherry-pick the best fruit.

If women want true power, there is no higher form of ultimate power than fighting and winning wars. I don't see women running to the front of the line for that one!

And then there's the fact that the vast, vast majority of women today simply don't want to get into the board room. Most appear quite happy to shun the power in favour of taking the more balanced choices available to them. Most women appear ok with being on the "protected" side of the field where, despite not having the power feminists supposedly crave for, most women relish in accepting privileged treatment from society in general.

Anyway, great contribution from Mike who has the guts to stand up for us by venturing into the world of TV and straightening up some of these facts.

Just tell them you need more time next time, Mike. And when is that two page spread coming? Please tell us when, and which newspaper...

[Dave]

And her trick up her sleeve on this occasion was the accusation that men broke the banking system. A bit like women and single mothers have burst the UK benefits system? Or how discriminatory custodial rights supporting the mother's side have alienated men and created absent fathers, thus resulting in broken families? Or perhaps how male primary school teachers have been pushed out of teaching positions for fear of socially related stigma, thus a breakdown in education standards, particularly for boys?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Keep stuffing things up your sleeve, Mike, you never know when you need them!

[Mike Buchanan]

Paul and Dave, many thanks. I thought Heather Rabbatts was woefully unprepared for any challenging - indeed I learned this from our pre-show chat - and she was a bit frosty afterwards haha. Funny you mention my throwaway 'lorry drivers' remark. Hadn't been planning to make the cherry-picking point, but that remark has got more positive feedback than anything else I said. Rabbatts later called it 'a cheap shot'. I replied, 'Thanks! I've got hundreds of 'em!'

I believe the newspaper piece (sorry, I can't identify the paper) will be out soon. Indeed I had a taxt from the journo yesterday, after the TV appearance, saying it might be in today's edition - but it isn't. As soon as it's out I'll do a blog post, so if you sign up to get auto notifications you'll be among the first to know. Just put your email address in the box in the top right hand corner of http://fightingfeminosm.wordpress.com.

All the best, and thanks again for the positive feedback.

MB

[Mike Buchanan]

Sorry, the URL in my last comment was incorrect. Should have been http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com.

[Groan]

MB Seen it and indeed well done. I do think the point about cherry-picking point is one to build on. The brief flurry in the press about female front line soldiers is a similar example. In that many public comments expect equal treatment includes equal dealing with the nasty/difficult/dangerous stuff. I do believe that the public generally have bought into the idea of equal opportunities and can be sensitive to "favouritism". I think work in general is fertile ground as it is not encumbered by the weight of emotion that clouds issues of parental rights etc. The reports today on Cancer again fertile ground as it is clear there is a huge gender gap to be addresssed here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/29/men-cancer-deaths-greater-women

[Cancer Survival]

hello
how are you
you blog is very great i like this

[Douglas]

Well done.

Ignore the Feminist`s trying to derail your good work. More of us need to keep the BBC aware of their sexism against men, which is rife.