The Rights Of Man

MORE NEEDED TO MAKE SURE DOMESTIC ABUSE EQUALITY BECOMES A REALITY

Monday saw a post about how the media forget male victims exist and not helped by the government who often forget that men are victims too (Sonia Poulton wrote a great piece righting that wrong). The problem with the government is while their policies are gender neutral they are often not explained that way (including by them) and they certainly not applied that way.

A case in point (and pointed out by a kind reader) was this pathetic suspended sentence of a woman who attacked a man with a golf club and was not sent to jail. If the genders were reversed does anyone really believe this is all a man would have got?

The government though has announced that it will be launching this week a fund to help male victims (see question 4) at least it is some recognition bar giving the Men's Advice Line (run by the awful Respect) money for its helpline.

The issue is that small initiatives are welcome and so is a gender neutral policy but more, much more, has to be done to make sure the support and recognition is happening on the ground. Pathetic and sexist sentences are one such example of how discrimination remains rife in domestic abuse.

Posted by Skimmington

UPDATE FROM TOM MARTIN - COURT DATE ANNOUNCED FOR VALENTINE'S DAY

PRESS RELEASE: December 4^th, 2011

 Court date for man's £50,000 lawsuit against 'male-blaming' gender studies degrees at LSE

 A former student of the London School of Economics (LSE), who has filed a lawsuit claiming all five of its gender studies Masters degrees “exaggerate women's issues and recommend blaming men to justify ignoring men's issues”, will make his case at the Central London County Court, a hearing date now set for February 14^th, 2012.

 As reported by The Evening Standard , The Guardian (here and here), Forbes Magazine, The West End Extra, A Voice for Men, Men's Matters, and dozens of blogs and vlogs, Tom Martin's case has garnered a lot of public support, his legal fighting fund receiving £3055 in donations from ninety people in eight countries to date, but Martin says he now needs more donations, “Clerical errors by the court have caused a three month delay, so I now need a few thousand pounds more to continue devoting all my time in preparation for winning the case.”

 Director of LSE's Gender Institute, Dr Anne Phillips, told LSE's student union newspaper The Beaver “I find it almost surreal when [LSE's] Gender Institute is portrayed as representing 'women good, men bad'”, but Martin's website documents his method and analysis of texts in the opening compulsory unit for all gender degrees at LSE as evidence of “systematic male-blaming bias”, and argues the contract students enter explicitly rules out sex-discriminatory learning materials.

 LSE's defence now argue key texts are not compulsory learning materials, only “recommended”. Martin claims key texts are indeed compulsory, students explicitly told to read them in preparation for further discussion in seminars. LSE also argue texts are available for both women and men to read so therefore do not directly discriminate.

 Further, they argue a focus on women in gender studies is expected, claiming any bias or discrimination against men “plainly justifiable”. Martin says the prospectus did not warn of any discrimination or bias, nor seek to justify it.

 In a 2011 book (p10), Dr Clare Hemmings, senior gender lecturer at LSE, admits when “women's studies” became “gender studies” programmes, it signalled a rejection of biased, exaggerated female victim-hood perspectives in favour of greater inclusion, accuracy, and fairness for the field, but that subsequently, nothing changed. In 2008, Hemmings wrote that replacing the prefix “women's” with “gender” was a good way to ensure continued public funding and support.

 Another of LSE's key gender texts recommends ignoring men's studies in favour of “Critical Studies on Men (CSM)". According to various reports, many educational programmes around the world are similarly critical, from kindergarden up.

  Research shows negative stereotypes on men effect focus, performance, and health. With 59% of university degrees going to women and 41% to men, the gap widening, Martin hopes his lawsuit will encourage educationalists to improve their stories. He appears in a Youtube exposé, finding some LSE students justify bias against men, by citing discrimination issues they say women face, one student exclaiming “There's no discrimination against men!” her outburst replayed in slow motion then freezing as a 160 item A to Z list of discrimination issues scrolls by.

 Commenting on the February 14th court hearing date, Martin says “I think LSE's Gender Institute is planning an extra special Valentine's Day massacre for men's issues as usual, but people would prefer to see these gender studies industry representatives publicly renew their vows to gender equality, and make a serious effort to pick up the £50,000 tab too - loose change for LSE maybe, but not for the more than 900 other gender studies and women's studies departments worldwide who can avoid similar payouts by dropping the man-hatred, and incorporating men's equality debates without further deceit, delay, or excuse. Gender-developmental progress is much more attainable when considering both women's and men's issues. Equality is a two way street.”

 The university's press office can be contacted here. Tom Martin can be contacted here.

 

MEN-HATING TO GO ON NATIONAL CURRICULM

Wherever you turn there are legions of anti-male feminists coming out of the woodwork demonising men and calling for special favours for women and girls.

Dr Helen Wight, president of the Girls' Schools Association  (there is no Boys' Schools Association that I can find) said (Standard and Telegraph) that girls should be taught about sexism because men secretly think their place in the home and only play lip service to equality. She has a son and a husband I wonder how they feel having a mother who sneers at them?

The problem is that people like Dr Wright think it is OK to come out with this nonsense and no commentators have the nerve to challenge them. This is someone who has influence and she wants to turn every girl at school into people who hate men because they think all boys and men hate and sneer at them.

When will this sexist man-hating nonsense end?

Posted by Skimmington

PS If she wants to teach girls about sexism, this site may be a good start!

 

 

 

VICTORY FOR MCCARTHYITE FEMINISTS ON SPORTS PERSONALITY OF THE YEAR AWARDS

Each and every day, the McCarthyite feminists dig up a new issue that has nothing to do with sexism or discrimination but that does not stop them using it as a as a weapon to beat men with.

It is all part of a ploy to keep banging on about sexism to enable more special treatment and favours to be given to girls and women over men and boys.

It is pure McCarthyism because there is no kernel of truth in it yet but any chink of glimmer that it could be is then used to the maximum. McCarthy did it in the 1950's with any supposedly 'leftist' view meaning someone was a communist and there is no difference with his McCarthyite sisters who see any glimmer of discrimination where none exist as a ruse to attack men.

Basically the Sports Personality of the Year award did not shortlist any women in the ten strong shortlist and this was based on a number of national, regional and sports magazines.

This mean there was a storm of protest. Chief McCarthyite Harriet Harman waded in as did Taekwondo world champion Sarah Stevenson, Tanni Grey-Thompson, Chrissie Wellington (who wants a boycott) as well as others.

The problem is that there is no proof of sexism, it can be argued that some people, who happen to be women, should have been included because their sporting success was better than some of the men on the list but this does not prove sexism. There may be other men who should be on the list but they weren’t included either. It doesn’t help though to have Nuts and Z00 on the panel but if you had women's magazines then they would be just as bad at picking form their own gender if Nuts and Zoo were only to pick men.

Ex rugby-player, Brian Moore, says there is no sexism as does Rebecca Adlington who in my personal opinion should have been on the list because that is based on merit not her gender.

The BBC though kowtowed and have said they will be now having a review which means now that there will in all likelihood be gender quotas and guaranteed number of slots for women no matter whether they should be there or not. This means, just like it does with the political and boardroom quotas in place in the UK that some men who should be on the list will not be because of their gender.

The real issue is that as the BBC will be reviewing the procedure, effectively the McCarthyite feminists have won. They saw a anti-female conspiracy by men when no such conspiracy existed, yet they got their own way.

Another day to day example of how Britain’s institutions are scared stiff of the Mccarthyite feminists and how they feel the best option is to give in and discriminate against men.

Posted by Skimmington

OFFICIAL SILENCE ON GENDER PAY GAP FOR YOUNG MEN

Really sorry everyone for a lack of recent posts - work.

Last week, the Office of National Statistics  published the latest gender pay gap figures. The median gap is now 9.1% and helped by women's wages increasing by 1.9% as opposed to 0.9% for men. The gap for part-time workers favours women (-4.3%).

A subject well covered for years on this site.

Anlaysing the figures more deeply there is clear evidence of the way the figures are manipulated half truths and myths are spread by organisations such as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, the Guardian and the Fawcett Society  as well as government equalities department and a number of MP's.

Figures on Page 19 show that men between 22 and 29 earn 3.6% less than women an issue that has been a trend for some time now and is clearly due to the educational underachievement and the continuation, despite the clear evidence now, of the need for positive discrimination for women. The gap which starts the other way we all now is done to lifestyle choice where many men as part of the family unit decide to take time off work to bring up their children.

The key thing is the policy response. As well as the continuation of the positive discrimination courses and training for women when they are already doing better than men under 29, is the fact that the usual suspects mentioned before, ignore the fact that younger women earn more than younger men. It is almost as though this figure does not exist. They continue therefore to call for more special treatment for women but also do not even mention the boys figure and therefore are not prepared to do anything about it.

As we know the cause is a function of boys underachievement, so you would expect there to be a positive policy response to this but instead there is silence. This silence is discriminatory and other example of the discrimination men face in Britain.

The Equalities and Human Rights Commission does not mention it and the Home Office in this quote from the Press Association still welcome it and want to challenge gender stereotypes for girls even though girls are earning more than boys!! The unions do not care about men either bearing in mind Brendan Barber's quote. The Government's Equalities Department don't care they are used to it.

The only real analysis of this comes in the Telegrpah which predicts that women's pay will overtake men's by 2020 which will be true and the Daily Mail covers this as the main issue. Jill Kirby makes the point that Dr Catherine Hakim has often made -

A family expert and author of The Price of Parenthood, Kirby said "the pay gap between the sexes had ‘nothing to do with discrimination’. It is the fact that women become less committed to the workplace at the point in their lives when they have children. They want to spend more time with their children, and regard lower pay as a trade-off for family time. The pay gap we should be worrying about is the one that shows young men in their 20s falling behind."

Another issue is the fact that considering men who work longer and in more dangerous jobs which comes with a premium (an issue the anti-male feminists never mention), then if this was taken out it would be expect the overall gap would be even smaller overall and larger at the 22-29 age level.

What can be seen is that the betrayal of an education system not suited to boys has now fed through to pay and the silence of those who supposedly believe in equality is sickeningly quiet.

Posted by Skimmington

INTERNATIONAL MEN'S DAY LETTER - MEDIA NOT INTERESTED

I hope men and women are all enjoying International Men's Day (went out for lunch with my father) today.

Earlier this week this site reported that the Men's Network who are the UK coordinators for International Men's Day had put together a letterfor the Equalities Minister (Lynne Featherstone) which was eventually signed by 80 organisations and a press release sent.

Going through the 280 comments on a thoughtful article  in the Guardian's Comment is Free section by Ally Fogg (plus Glen Poole's contributions throughout), MarkBrooks70 reveals that no one has been interested in the letter or the press release:

"Not one journalist has called and it has been sent to a number (including the Guardian) today. Hopefully there will be something in the papers tomorrow."

So what media coverage has there been given to the letter. Well, none. The above does not count as it is an article and didn't over the letter (Mr Fogg will not have known about it) and while Cllr Peter Davies in Wales makes a great point and Preston FM has a whole day, the media's silence is deafening.

For International Women's Day in March there were endless articles and the Guardian even banned men from its Comment is Free section but this is not reciprocated by the media.

The fact that 80 charities supporting male issues and run by women and men were actually prepared to put their names to such a balanced and well written letter is a news story - yet why are the media not interested. Such is their hypocrisy and double standards, if "Women's charities" had written the letter about women's issues it would have been on the front page and all over the BBC's news bulletins. The Fawcett Society get a nice feature about their march in The Guardian

As can be seen by the number of events and days in the UK celebrating today (including a number of colleges again), there is starting to be a lot of momentum about today. It is a great pity that the media are not interested but shows the barriers that need to be broken down.

Once again, enjoy today.

Posted by Skimmington   

THE ENDING OF BLIND AND EQUAL JUSTICE FOR MEN CONTINUES

In today's anti-male Britain, we have laws and organisations wanting to end equality of opportunity for men and women.

We have all three political parties colluding to discriminate and make it harder for a man than a women to be a politician, a range of organisations and politicians doing the same for boardrooms and the same for stopping men and women from being paid depending on their contribution to a company (gender pay gap).

We also now that with the destruction of equality in education - boys are falling way behind girls at school and no one gives a hoot.

Justice though is meant to be blind as we have pointed out before some groups like the Women's Justice Taskforce do not want women to go to prison but are not bothered about how many men go there. They are happy and popping the champagne corks when people like Maria Topp get a suspended sentence. 

At the other end of the scale, with far more women becoming solicitors and barristers than men, we will soon have more female judges  etc. Not a problem if they are there on merit and are not men-haters.

But yesterday someone called Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury actually waded in and said he wanted to sexually discriminate against men by making it harder for them to be judges yet making it easier for women to be judges. Merit is not up for discussion and does not count. Just like the political world and just like now in the boardroom.

He wants to use the anti-male Section 159 of the Equalities Act, probably the most pernicious anti-male piece on the statute books, to promote women over men.

So at one end we have no equality in prison sentences and now there is a call for no equality in those making the decisions to send people to prison. From every direction, equality of men is disappearing from Britain's justice system.

Posted by Skimmington  

Media coverage (quite a lot on this so some of the main ones) - Press Association, Daily Mail (Donal Blaney), Daily Mail, Daily Mail (Quentin Letts)

 

CELEBRATING INTERNATIONAL MEN'S DAY IN THE UK ON SATURDAY

With International Men's Day soon upon us, it is so good to see the increasing momentum being given and help so much by Glen Poole and his team at The Men's Network who coordinate the day in the UK.

The UK website for Saturday sets out the activities available and as importantly there is a letter signed by over 60 organisiations "inviting the Government to consider placing a greater focus on the issues that men and boys face. We recognise that there are many male voices in parliament, but there are very few male or female voices highlighting the specific needs of men and boys in the UK."

This carries on the theme from the recent conference and is about a range of organisations acting sensibly and rationally together to really start to push the agenda so the government and others start to understand that equality means equality for men too. Let's hope it gets some coverage.

It also shows the strength in numbers of the organisations now supporting men and boys issues. 60 is probably not all but no one can say there are not groups out there. We need more but 60 is a good number.

It is also being done in a non-aggressive rabble-rousing way which makes it far more difficult to dismiss (especially when so many women are actually signing the letter). It is perhaps where former men's movements have failed because they have been too aggressive. Bearing in mind the government consults on strengthening women's voices but doesn't even want to listen to men's at all it makes it even harder to dismiss.

Another comment is about the balance and maturity being displayed especially when you compare it to groups such as the Fawcett Society, Respect UK, Women's Aid, Equalities and Human Rights Commission and the myriad of other groups. There is no sense of women-hating, no sense that women are bad and they should be ignored. There is a clear sense that we need a create a society that it is fair and equal to bother genders. Those organisations mentioned actively agitate to hate and do down men, either directly, or indirectly by pretending they don't exist.

An example of the above can be seen by the Fawcett Society's deliberate decision to hold their Don't Turn Back Time jamboree on the same day as International Men's Day. That is the type of juvenile, immature and pathetic behaviour you would expect from that organisation. We need to rise above their schoolgirl antics.

Let's all celebrate on Saturday - International Men's day. 

Posted by Skimmington

PSjust by Googling I found this on the Guardian in March where they banned men from writing Comment is Free posts for International Women's Day - I bet they won't be making Saturday a men only day on Comment is Free!

SPECIAL PLEAS FROM WOMEN'S GROUPS TO ENSURE MEN ARE KEPT SILENT

As we know the government's equalities department proudly boasts about the fact that it is institutionally sexist against men by even admitting on its website that equality doesn't include men:

"We lead on issues relating to women, sexual orientation and transgender equality matters."

It isn't just the fact that they refuse to deal with inequalities against men, they do not even believe men exist.

It has also boasted that it wants to strengthen women's voices and not even feel men have a voice, a theme the site has raised before and also here. It's equality strategy (page 23) also says it wants to speak to women's groups but no mention of male groups which is why the Men's Network letter is so important. 

Amidst all of the the focus on Norgrove, the government's equalities department slipped out its response to the consultation on "strengthening women's voices in government".  

What is always the most enlightening about these documents is not the government's response but the special treatment pleas from women's groups. Not only do they want to protect the special treatment and positive discrimination they receive they want more - all to ensure they keep men and male issues of inequality out of the picture. The aim is to dominate the whole sphere and stop men's group's from even having the crumbs off the table let alone a place at it.

The most telling paragraph for me is number 31:

A number of organisations supported the proposal from the National Association ofWomen’s Organisations and the Women’s Resource Centre that they be funded by government to develop a UK "women’s hub".

Although not the same, this proposal does chime with the option of consulting consortiums to provide expertise on specific women’s issues, as outlined in the consultation document. The main distinction is that the "women’s hub" would have more independence from government.

More special treatment and more funding, making it even harder to have the voices of men heard. The question would be if the government did fund such a group and then refused to fund a "men's hub" it really is time to go to law.

Posted by Skimmington

FAWCETT SOCIETY AND OTHERS LAUNCH ANOTHER ANTI-MALE CAMPAIGN - WHEN WILL MEDIA LOOK AT THE FACTS

The ridiculous but dangerously credible (in the eyes of the elite) Fawcett Society have launched another plea for special treatment and anti-male measures.

The acting CEO, Anna Bird, who is obviously desperate to get the job states:

“Women have not faced a greater threat to their financial security and rights in living memory. Decades of steady, albeit slow, progress on equality for women is being dismantled, as cuts to women’s jobs and the benefits and services they rely on turn back time on women’s equality."

As seen recently, along with the fact she believes 'family issues' don't include men, the facts just don't stack up yet the Media and other lavish attention on this organisation. Why does no one apart from this site, nail the lies, myths and half truths of the Fawcett Society? You would at least expect the Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph to look at it.

Posted by Skimmington

Media coverage - Daily Mail, The Guardian, The Guardian 2