CRANFIELD AND CABLE'S HYPOCRISY OVER EQUALITY

The hypocrisy of this anti-male government knows no bounds as can be seen on their silence on one issue and their campaigning on another - all on the same day. Sexism by omission in its purest form.

This week more evidence was shown about the lack of boys going into university and that the trebling of tuition fees was putting them off from going to university. This feeds through to even fewer men going into professions and the decline of men continues into a downward spiral.

David Willetts raised this in January but has done nothing practical about it. Raise an issue and then forget about it - all for a headline.

The Independent Commission for Fees'  report set out this week stated:

The gap between working class boys and girls going to university widened in the first year of the new tuition fees regime, a new analysis of UCAS data by the Independent Commission on Fees shows today.

And while the fall in acceptances did not have any disproportionate impact on less privileged areas of England overall, young male acceptances from these areas declined over two years while young female acceptances increased.

Women are now a third more likely to enter higher education than men and the gender gap seems to have widened since 2010.

Among UK residents, 134,097 women aged 19 and under were accepted to English universities in 2012 compared with 110,630 young men. This represents a decline since 2010 of 2.6% for girls and 4.0% for boys, and a 5.9% decline for girls and a 7.5% decline for boys since 2011.

There were a few mentions in the Guardian, Independenet and Daily Mirror

Yet on the same day, Business Secretary Vince Cable issues another edict to demand that equality goes out of the window and that companies must put more women on boards, no matter if they are not the best people for the job. Discrimination against men if they are the better candidates does not count - gender is everything. Aided and abetted by organisations such as the Cranfield School of Management, an organisation that is happy to do the government's bidding for some free publicity.

If Cable, Cranfield and the government really believed in equality, they would be raising the concerns about the lack of boys going to university as much as the board issue. But because the university issue is about boys they are not interested.

Surely the Cranfield School of Management should be concerned about the lack of numbers of boys going to into management and the professions at a a graduate age. They are not - again - because they dance to the government's tune but are also blinkered by political correctness not to be bothered.

Posted by Skimmignton

Ps - here is a great post from Groan earlier on this week:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/apr/10/tuition-fee-rise-poorer-boys

This is an interesting report. Once again showing males losing out in education. I can’t find the reference but there was some research done early in the life of student loans here in the UK . One basic point was that young men took more seriously the weight of the debt. Because they expected to be solely responsible for repayment in future.

Whereas females expected more help from family and future partners in paying for the loans. In
other words the females generally expected to be able to share their responsibilities either presently or in the future. This is of course a likely scenario and a realistic expectation generally in a society still organised generally on a “one and a half” pay contribution to couple’s finances.

This reminded me then of the much more extensive debates and research in the USA. There it is quite clear a number of gendered issues assist female access to HE and FE.

1.    Greater financial support for females from families.

2.    More likely to have financial support and gifts from partners (cars being common).

3.    Deliberate behaviour to partner with “successful” males able to support them. There is extensive
research on US universities as a site for females seeking good prospects for
partnership and marriage.

4.    Expectations of future earnings of husbands and their responsibility for funding their
wive’s debts.

I suspect the more extensive research in the US reflects their more open discussion of money.   

Comments

[Mike Buchanan]

The government is no longer asserting that putting more women onto corporate boards will improve corporate performance, as we reported yesterday (link below). That's a major change from even 12 months ago. Yet the initiative to drive more women onto boards continues unabated.

http://c4mb.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/women-on-boards-latest-annual-report/

Mike Buchanan

CAMPAIGN FOR MERIT IN BUSINESS
http://c4mb.wordpress.com

[John, Cambridge]

Yeah well the anger is out there but unless MRAs can get together and channel it properly it aint gonna amount to a hill of beans. Sorry but that's just the goddam truth.

[Mike Buchanan]

John, I agree, and that's PRECISELY why I recently established a political party. I invite you - and other commenters on TROM - to 'get together' with us, and 'channel it properly'.

Speaking frankly, I've had far too many statements of 'support' from people (on TROM and elsewhere) who won't support us financially, or in any other way. How do they think they're 'supporting' us? By tapping out an email? Wow, that's going to reverse the carnage wrought by feminism over the past 30+ years... All these people are doing is wasting our time. Recently a man on the minimum wage donated a week's wages. Now THAT sort of commitment will move mountains. I get very fed up with professional people who say they're big supporters, and when I ask them for even £20.00 they say they'll 'think about it'.

I'm working 70+ hours pw for an annual income of £0.00, and if enough people don't get behind us in the next two years to enable us to fight seats in the 2015 general election effectively, I'm going to retire from the MHRM. I shall then wish good luck to whoever follows me, and do other (less stressful) things with my life.

Donations to our party can be made here:

http://j4mb.wordpress.com/donate/

Thank you for your support.

Have a good weekend.

Mike Buchanan

JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
(and the women who love them)

http://j4mb.wordpress.com

[Mike Buchanan]

My last comment (above) now seems to me rather gloomy. Whatever happens in 2015 I plan to continue to lead J4MB until at least the 2020 general election and maybe beyond. But it would be good to make a strong showing in 2015, and that will take effort and resources, including money.

We had the party's first AGM today, and someone suggested asking people to donate sums monthly by DD. We have 24 months until the next general election, so just £20pcm would almost finance one deposit (£500), or make a valuable contribution to campaign funds. If anyone feels able to make a monthly donation - however small - could they please email me at [email protected]? Thank you.

JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
(and the women who love them)

http://j4mb.wordpress.com

[barryb]

After seeing the news just now and "Mothers marching for justice in benefit cuts I laughed and though isn't that f***g typical...

When fathers protest it is for the most basic human right's they are denied, to see their kids...

when women/mothers march it is for more hand-outs from Daddy state so they can continue denying the father his rights...

Well I was going to say that until Mike started on about donations again :-)

[barryb]

So Mike, what you are saying is your fight and faith is only as good as the income and donations?

I have been fighting for fathers rights and the MRM for 13 years on a personal level and helping others and not received a penny or asked for one. It has cost me everything including much of my health, but I am still going, just. I have however seen people asking for money before who have basically robbed vulnerable men who needed help. Fabian profiteer gits like Matt O'Connor for example. So don't be surprised that the harder core of men who would have assisted financially won't now, you can thank the likes of him and his Hag career wannabe politician father denying,wife. That's not to say you would do that but some before have. She is yet another woman infiltrating and using men's rights for their own hypergamy. We have a lot of them sliding into the MRM right now, how stupid some are not to realise that some of them are playing the game, trying to use it....and anyone who attaches to them as hard as some MRM and mens groups currently do, will receive the mistrust and suspicion of many men in the MRM/MGTOW and beyond and rightly so.

This is before we even consider the fact that the men you are appealing to have nearly all be bankrupted or robbed blind by family courts and lawyers and lost everything in time of austerity on top.

[Mike Buchanan]

Barry, of course I'm not saying that. But one of the many reasons the MRM has had so little impact worldwide is that it hasn't had any political presence. That's what I and my supporters are trying to change, by targeting marginals held by the incumbent party / parties. Our objective is that the 'men's vote' will in time stop parties from serving more than one term in office, and then men's human rights will be on the public 'radar' far more than currently.

None of us could be accused of being Fabians, and none earns a penny from any of our activities, so nobody could accuse us of being 'profiteers'. Political campaigns cost money to run (as well as £500 per deposit at general elections).

Donations won't turn the clock back, and eliminate past injustices. They'll help reduce / eliminate future injustices, so it's a question of men helping their fellow men. It's a question of brotherhood.

[Elvira]

Maybe men are just more realistic about the academic abilities and don't want to waste an insane amount money on a useless degree if they cannot make the cut for a STEM course.

Or maybe they can just do the math and realise that even a well paid STEM degree doesn't pay it's way under the current conditions.

What indicator I would look for here is what kind of men make it into the STEM courses nowadays, not how many are failing to sign up for Media Studies.

Note that poor boys' minds get ruined long before they reach grammar school age -- because the teaching effort of state schools at that age are sabotage and not education.

"3. Deliberate behaviour to partner with “successful” males able to support them. There is extensive
research on US universities as a site for females seeking good prospects for
partnership and marriage."

There is nothing wrong with looking for the best mate you can find -- men are picky too and usually, poor girls don't have a chance with the rich boys, because they too have 'standards'. Likewise, you rarely see rich young men with ugly girls. It's just the way the world works, unless you want to sign up to arranged marriage with the Moonies and go for potluck. In fact, one of the main problems with modern life is that people are not picky enough about their partners...

Also, take note that you have a figures for kids that enter university, not the figures for those that *finish* their course...

Put bluntly, B-rated UK universities do not discriminate, because they are in the business of selling as many places as they can to the poor suckers who are willing to part with most of their future earnings for what is in essence a reading list, a party and a few tests that result in a pretty (and often useless) certificate. I've seen people get places with C's and D's -- when it was clear that they would simply not be able to even make the first semester, but, nevermind, the uni got it's £££ and the kid had a 'chance' at middle class life. Equality achieved!

[Groan]

Elvira indeed the world does work in a way far removed from theories cooked up from the left overs of Marxism. However in this country we seem amazingly resistant to discussing these things as they are rather than as PC would have them. The point is that generally young women don't labour under some huge disadvantage and consequently there is no reason To put policy and resources into addressing an imaginary problem. As you rightly point out they have resources a plenty and use them. Indeed the real problem and where policy and maybe resources are needed is way at the beginings of education.

[Elvira]

Groan, the Jesuits were not joking -- Saint Ignatius of Loyola knew what he was talking about when he said:"Give me the boy until he is seven, and I will give you the man."

By that time, the child in ideal circumstances would have had 5 years of one-to-one education and socialisation. Compare that to the current 'effort' of public child education... no contest.

And if you look at kids who survived care homes, the children who take the least damage are just such kids with this kind of foundation.

[barryb]

Points taken Mike but I think you are going to struggle mate, for the reasons I have already made. Lobbying groups less and is more effective IMHO. Maybe I don't know enough about the politics side?

Anyway nice bit of info here I just come across:

How many part time teachers are Male and how many female
Male - 84
Female - 910

How many full time teachers are Male and how many female
Male - 734
Female - 1394

How many teaching assistants are Female and how many are male?
Female - 2192
Male - 75

What has been the cost to the tax payer for teaching assistants in
the last Five years?
I can give you costs for the last 4 years only (we don't hold data
prior to 2009-10). The figures are:

2009-10 £26,871,360
2010-11 £27,452,978
2011-12 £26,927,870
2012-13 £24,877,373

So one UK county alone has had to pay 100 MILLION pounds for teaching assistants in just four years!! Something nobody bloody needs but have now because it is nearly all women in education. Never had bugger all assistants when i went to school and it was mostly all male teachers.

I think the top figures also show the shocking disparity in male vs female teachers.

[Mike Buchanan]

Thanks Barry. Shocking figures indeed.

I honestly don't know how, with limited funds, we could possibly 'lobby' effectively. Feel free to email me at [email protected] if you have any suggestions.

I guess you could call Campaign for Merit in Business http://c4mb.wordpress.com a lobbying group. We have cast-iron evidence to show that increasing female representation on major corporate boards (the government's policy direction) damages corporate financial performance. The number of politicians in DBIS and elsewhere prepared to meet with us in the past 14 months? Nil. Taxpayers' money spent on organisations driving this left-wing social engineering exercise? Huge. It's precisely WHY I launched the party. And donations only started to come in at that point, because people understand the strategy.

[barryb]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2310276/Crime-novels-Martina-Cole-led-woman-falsely-accuse-father-priest-rape.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

....and for every one that makes the paper there is a thousand that don't and are never prosecuted.

So where is her face and name, do you think she will get the Ten years she deserves?