The Rights Of Man

MEDIA FAILS TO CALL A SPADE A SPADE WHEN IT COMES TO SEXISM AGAINST MEN

As I pen this piece the top story on the BBC news website is about a Salford teenager who's been quoted £33,000 to insure his Vauxhall Corsa. This case came to light as a result of an earlier Daily Express article citing a different male teen, Daniel Grey, quoted £24,000 to insure his eleven year old Volvo.

Less wealthy young men faced with such an exorbitant cost of motoring either are priced off our roads or are forced to break the law, either by pretending the car belongs to their parents or by having no insurance whatsoever. And of course if they get caught uninsured or are found to have lied then any future premium rise once again creating a vicious circle of higher costs upon higher costs not to mention criminal convictions. Not only has ever media report on the matter failed to illustrate the above hardships endured by young men but they also fail to mention that such pricing is sexist and to become illegal. The media is so often keen to link even remotely related stories yet this golden rule doesn't' ever appear to apply stories about discrimination against men even when there is blatant sexism which has been proven illegal at the highest possible level. Just imagine if female or ethnic minorities had been the victims here, there'd be numerous piece int eh Guardian and articles full of over the top quotes from misandricc Labour Party MPs or Fawcett Society gender feminists. The only half decent coverage is from the Daily Mail who do at least note that young men are being "priced off the roads".

Talking of the Fawcett Societys it's incredibly blinkered of feminists to complain about women receiving a few percent less in wages compared to men (for entirely different work of course) without looking at other types of income/expenditure related sexism. For Jake Redshaw to drive to his part time job in a warehouse he's looking at spending £5,700 in insurance (the lowest price) even before he's thought about road tax, fuel or maintenance (or buying a vehicle). If Daniel is lucky enough to have a job then he fairs even worse facing a minimum payment of £12,00 for insurance.

Below are the remaining articles covering all the coverage of the story. Not one mentions sexism, the wider consequences of such pricing or even what the prices might have been for a female driver. In fact the only mention of gender is a quote for Jake's mother telling us what a risk young male drivers are as if they're all part of some homogenous group all equally incapable of driving safely.

Daily Express

Manchester Evening News

Daily Mirror

SCOUTS ASSOCIATION RIGHTLY ON THE WARPATH ABOUT CUTS

The Scouts Association  did a grand job last week of highlighting the impact the current Government;s cuts are having because of the increase in rents they are now facing from local councils. They have set up a website Don't Raise Our Rents and I would urge everyone to sign it. Another group not prepared to stand by and let boys/men be shut down.

This is not the place to discuss government cuts from a party political perspective but it seems clear from the campaign that local councils (as distinct from national government but connected nonetheless) have no feel for the importance of scouting, the impact it has in providing organised discipline for boys and the opportunity for gaining skills and learning the importance of teamwork and camaraderie.

When so mucc  being taken away from boys so they are left with a feminised education system that fails them, a family court system that shuts out their fathers and the constant bombardment of boys/men = bad, girls/women = good, the scouting movement gives them shelter and some hope.

Girls are also welcome to the scouting movement (it's not Cancer Research's Race for Life!) which of course is a good thing and something I am sure rankles with the feminist fundamentalists.

We need an increase in the scouting movement especially in inner cities but it seems that local councils are not interested about continuing to support them. How can the government on one hand say it believes in the Big Society and then see the Scouts Movement decimated in such a way.

A conspiracy theorist (which I am) would suggest that because the Scouting Movement is largely made up of boys, and as we all know they are the disposable sex, this is why it is happening. Councils would think twice if they aware undermining the Guides movement.

Posted by Skimmington

Media coverage - PA, Guardian, BBC, Daily Mail

ARTICLES UPDATE

Sorry everyone...very hard to keep up at the moment. Here are a few must read articles for one or reason or other...

Daily Mirror - Saving the men who live in fear  (Louise Baty)

Evening Standard - I hate to say it but we need a quota to put girls on top (Chris Blackhurst)

Daily Mail - Judge launches stinging attack on Wren as fellow soldier she accused of rape is cleared (Tamara Cohen). Note everyone how the woman remains nameless but the two innocent men are named, forever having their names publicly available but she remains anonymous. That's equality in Britain today!

Daily Mail - Sexism is dead, say Most British Women (Steve Doughty). More analysis to come at a later date.

Daily Mail - Teacher who had sex with schoolboy is spared jail (no byline)

Straight Statistics - Standard recycles out of date figures on domestic homicides (Nigel Hawkes)

Daily Mail - How Facebook is turning women into stalkers (no byline)

Men's Network - Mens Mental Health Week

Dads on the Air (Oz) - Erin Pizzey interview

The Guardian - Where are the women directors? (Kerry Fox) - Spot John Kimble's comment

The Guardian - When Women are victims of growth (Jane Martinson)

The Telegraph - Another 'horrible' case for you Mr Loughton (Christopher Brooker) - child abduction by the state.

Posted by Skimmington

 

 

WHY NO CALL FOR GENDER QUOTAS TO FIGHT THE RADIATION AT FUKUSHIMA?

Watching the story unfold of those brave 180 men (Fukushima 50) fighting the leaks at the nuclear power station in Japan, I suddenly realised that I have no seen calls from the UN Women's Committee, the UK Government's Minister for Women or Harman, the Fawcett Society, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, The Guardian etc about the lack of women involved.

Where is the call to impose a gender quota or an 'A' List or positive action? 

Where is the PR campaign about this awful discrimination at the nuclear plant because there are no women amongst the '50' (all reports say they are only men, so please do not complain if a few are female)?

Many of us would not want women there but we are not allowed to say that. However the silence of the feminist fundamentalists shows not only do they not want women there either but it also highlights their hypocrisy because according to their orthodoxy they should be calling for equality and quotas. 

Society as a whole recognises that men do these types of job and that is the way of nature. Society also recognises that those who do these types of job get paid more. Normal men and women call that fair, feminist fundamentalists call it discrimination. 

The silence of the feminist fundamentalists shows they want gender quotas when it suits them, when it doesn't, they say nothing.

Let's all ensure our thoughts are with those brave men and their families.

Posted by Skimmington  

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY SHOULD BE RENAMED "INTERNATIONAL MEN BASHING DAY"

Every year when International Women's Day comes around in theory it should be a day of celebration of the achievement of women and the qualities they bring to us all. Similar to Mother's day (and Father's Day of course) men and women from across the UK should be encouraged to raise a toast to women. Instead, you are left with the acrid stench of anti-male hatred and discrimination.

The reality is that the day is increasingly hijacked (I am not sure whether it was ever thus) by Marxist feminists and others who hate men. It is not a celebration of women it is used to bash men, to say that all the barriers that women face are down to sexist men and if women ruled the world, the planet would be perfect.  It is used to campaign for more rights for women over men - it is not about equality.

Organisations like the Government, Women's Aid, Fawcett Society and the Guardian (of course) plan their PR around campaigns and adverts all with an underlying anti-male bias. It is not always in your face but you are left in doubt what the underlying message is: Women = good, men = bad.

For men, Tuesday was a day to keep your head bowed as you read every newspaper and watched the TV or listened to the radio knowing that your female colleagues at work, mothers at the school gates and  female friends will be seeing, watching and hearing the same. It really is uncomfortable.

You wonder what goes through their minds when you interact with them. Is it the normal "Hi, how's things" or do they really want to say "Hi, you fascist misogynist who's stopping me advancing in my career, ia a sex pest and thinks I should be at home with the kids and the kitchen." That's what the anti-male feminists want them to think.

As it was the centenary this year, there was more of this than usual and of course, with International Men's Day due for 19th November this year, it will be interesting to see what level of attention that receives from the same organisations. Silence, I expect but that is equality for you.

Posted by Skimmington

 

Some of the low lights of this year's campaign include:

Guardian - Women only day, Manifesto for 21st century feminism, Why feminism must not lose its bite, How rapidly things change

Government and the Labour Party: the shockingly anti-male Yvette Cooper

The Equalities Commission who do nothing to support equality for men

Oxfam ad - very anti-male (why would a man donate to them after reading this)

James Bond ad (and Daily Mail)- even says women get paid less for doing same job as men. That is not true, completely unproven. This is run by a new umbrella organisation called EQUALS.

Telegraph - Women are only equals for one day per year 

House of Lords

And a great post on Quiet Riot Girl

ARTICLES UPDATE

Just a quick update on some recent and varied articles of interest on male equality issues. Health warning - some may make your blood boil!

Channel 5 News - Shocking rise in male victims of domestic violence

The Sun - Dads in despair (Antonella Lazzeri)

Daily Telegraph - It's babies not discrimination that hold women back (Jemima Lewis)

Daily Telegraph - Mother's horror as court takes children after 15 minutes hearing (Nick Britten)

Office for National Statistics - Suicide statistics show three times as many men still commit suicide than women

Daily Mail - Jailed the solidiers cheating wife who made false rape claim

The Guardian - What is the nicest thing a man can do for a woman - shout at a bigot (Suzanne Moore)

The Independent - Men blew it (Janet Street-Porter)

Daily Mail - Escape from your husband and duck your duties as a mother (Daniel Bates)

 

THE DISGRACE THAT BRITISH MEN HAVE TO RELY ON EUROPEAN JUSTICE FOR EQUALITY

One of the many conclusions coming from today's European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgment on making sure insurance is gender-neutral shows that men have to rely on unelected judges in Europe to get equality.The other is the silence from the self-named 'equality' Industry.

While on balance the decision means there will be equality for men in terms of paying for car insurance (there could even be a cut) and there could be a loss in terms of pension annuities, at least gender equality is being applied.

Without getting into the argument about whether the ECJ should be interfering in UK affairs (that and giving prisoners the vote - an ECHR decision - are arguments for other sites) the clearest argument that the doom mongers, the insurers and others have not been able to answer is the fact that insurers cannot discriminate against race so why can they with gender? There is no answer from them.

Also what can be seen from the many comments in the debates at the end of media articles is the growing ferment of anger men have towards the place in modern society as second class citizens. You can read their joy in the comments sections of newspapers and the BBC about the fact that it proves equality applies to them and allows them to cock a snook to the equalities industry that loathes them so much.

It is also a defeat for the anti-male lobby, like this and the last government, the Guardian/BBC, the Fawcett Society, the Equalities Commission and others like them that who believe women should enjoy special privilege, are untouchable and equality can only be on their terms.

This Cake and Eat It Brigade want equality but only so long as women can keep their perks and extra entitlements like cheaper insurance and early retirement.

Coming back to my opening piece - if the judges had made a pro-women judgment then Theresa May (Minister for Women), Lynne Featherstone (Equalities Minister), Harman/Flint, Equalities Commission etc would have been singing from the rooftops. As it is seen as a pro-man judgment, there is complete silence. Such unsurprising hypocrisy.

The second point is that it is shameful that men have to go through to ECJ on Strasbourg to obtain equality.

The only reason men now have free bus passes, winter fuel allowance etc at the same age as a women is because of the ECJ and the work of Parity. The same is the case for the coming equality in state pension age, a discrimination that men will have suffered for 70 years by the time there is equality in 2018. And now we have equality on insurance.

The shameful fact is that in Britain, men can rely only on European judges to fight their corner for equality. All because British politicians are too weak, too anti-male and too afraid of the anti-male special favours feminist lobby.

Posted by Skimmington 

Media coverage - BBC, Conservative Home, FT, Guardian#1, Daily Mail , Guardian#2,

DOUBLE DEFEAT FOR MEN ON RAPE ALLEGATIONS

One the areas that where the police and the Crown Prosecution Service have both been unequivocal has been prosecuting women who falsely accuse men of raping them.

For those falsely accused men it destroys them and families and also damages the cases of women who have been raped. These recent cases (Nicola Osborne and Jemima Knights) show how this remains the case and remember the government's own report (where it infamously u-turned on anonymity for rape defendants) said 8-10% of allegations were false and 61 women were convicted in 2010 for false allegations and 7 prosecutions failed.

Earlier this month the Crown Prosecution Service launched a consultation on false allegations of rape and domestic violence to ensure that women are not prosecuted when they retracted the allegation based on fear (the cause celebre is where a woman had her sentence for a false allegation rightly quashed).

While the press release and consultation make it clear that there is no intention to water down prosecutions for false accusations, you cannot help but feel this is a fig-leaf for more discrimination against men and boys (just like believers in the positive discrimination clauses of the Equality Act always state that it can mean more male primary school teachers).

It has been clear and clearly identified by the brilliant False Rape Society website who have identified the growing trend from the Guardian and organisations like Women Against Rape complaining about false rape prosecutions because they believe there is no such thing as a false allegation and that no women should ever be prosecuted for false rape allegations. Normally based on the doe-eyed naive view that all women-are-good-all-men-are-bad-no-smoke-without-fire world view attitude.

When do you ever hear organisations supporting raped women attack those women for making false accusations which damages the women these organisations rightly support?

The anti-male feminist tactics are clear on the rape issue. In their first victory when the government u-turned on the anonymity issue, they cited the evil rapist Warboys where because he had been named and pictured when accused, more women came forward. This time, they are using this case in the same way where a woman was being wrongly being prosecuted for a false allegation when there were clear reasons which the CPS should have taken into account. Because of their mistake, they let the whole anti-male feminists brigade to use it as an issue to continually beat them up on it.

The victims of this again will be those men and boys falsely accused of rape.

Firstly, there are strong enough rules and also the application of 'common-sense'  and the 'reasonable' test mean that if an allegation is retracted but there are extenuating circumstances like being bullied, then the CPS should be sensible enough not to prosecute. You do not need new rules, just people with brains.

Secondly, by putting pressure on the police and Crown Prosecution Service not to prosecute and making it harder to do so, means they will be more reluctant to do so. It is more hassle, the political pressure from on high will mean some cases will now be dropped when they should not be. It is the same when the police automatically arrest the man in domestic abuse cases when both are making accusations (or of course they arrest the man anyway).

Thirdly, there will be less chance of justice for those men and boys who were accused. At least if there name was in the papers, those who had made a false allegations would have their reputations damaged as well and be prosecuted and on occasion jailed. There will be fewer examples of this now.

This will be a further victory for the anti-male feminists on this issue within six months.

First they succeed in stopping men accused of rape from remaining anonymous unless found guilty. Now they have succeeded in making it harder for women who make false allegations to be prosecuted.

The Government says it is consulting but it did so on the anonymity issue and did not take any notice of those wanting anonymity so it won't do now for those groups asking them not to water down existing law and procedures.

Posted by Skimmington

Postscript - The False Rape Society is absolutely brilliant on this subject and please read these posts:

FRS#1, FRS#2, FRS#3

 

THE END OF MERITOCRACY AND EQUALITY FOR MEN IN BRITAIN'S WORKPLACES

The publication this week of Lord Davies of Abersoch's government backed report on getting more women into British boardrooms means the end of meritocracy and equality in Britain's Boardroom. An issue this site has been covering for some time. No longer will talent, qulaifictaions or dedication matter, your gender is all that counts.

If you are a man - your only chance of getting onto a board is if the female quota has been fulfilled. If it has not you can be the best business person in the world, but you still won't get on. That is the end of meritocracy and equality for men in the Britain's companies.

The report states that UK listed companies in the FTSE 100 should be aiming for a minimum of 25% female board member representation by 2015. Davies recommends that FTSE 350 companies should be setting their own, challenging targets and expects that many will achieve a much higher figure than this minimum. 

The explicit threat is that if the recommendations are not met British companies will be forced to do it and have quotas like those in Norway (40% of boards have to be women).

The issues it raises are clear - as stated there will be no such as meritocracy, gender is all that matters. Secondly, it is clear this government is as anti-male as the last one and is doing all it can to undermine and attack men.

This boardroom issue is basically another tactic to berate and undermine men to ensure they remain viewed by the metropolitan elite as second class citizens who are to be blamed for everything.

The report is very explicit in saying that the reason there are not as many women on a board as men is down to discrimination by men. But there is no evidence of this, and reports like those by Catherine Hakim  and the Institute of Leadership and Management (covered in the Daily Mail) have clearly shown that not all capable women want to be on the board. Some because they haven't got the drive, some want to stay at home and bring up a family, some  make other lifestyle choices and some just do not want all the hassle that comes with it.

Davies and others complain of Groupthink but all the clamour to support this is Groupthink of the worst kind. If you don't agree you are cast to the margins. Plus there is no evidence to suggest that more gender balanced boards are more successful.

Many very successful women also work in the public sector which is not affected by this. Theresa May  (Minister for Women) spins by saying that 51% of the population are women therefore implying that this should be reflected on boards in the private sector. But twice as many women (40%) work in the public sector than men so one of the reason there are less women on private sector boards is actually because they employ fewer. There is less of a pool to choose from. 

This fact is worth looking into more because it has not been taken into account because it does not play to the distorted picture Davies, May and others are spinning.

With the Government bringing in the measures of the last Government to ensure there is discrimination in getting a job (section 159 of the Equality Act 2010 which the government had campaigned against when in opposition) and now ensuring talented men will hit a quota ceiling there is no equality for men at either end of the job scale.

With educational standards far behind those of girls, men being stopped from getting into work or getting to the top and with young men now earning less than girls all because the government and the state actively discriminate men and boys, it is now clear:

British men are second class citizens by Order of the Government

Posted by Skimmington 

Media Coverage - BBC#1, BBC#2, Daily Mail#1, FT#1, Guardian #1, Guardian #2, FT#2 (Catherine Hakim quote), Independent#1, FT#3, Daily Mail#2 

ARTICLE UPDATE

Here are a few articles that have not been covered so far but may be of interest.

The Guardian - Welfare Reform Bill will trap women in their violent hell (Lisa Ansell)

The Observer - Review threatens companies with disclosure over number of women they interview (Andrew Clark) plus UK lags behind Nordic nations.

Daily Telegraph - Young women face £1,000 increase in car insurance (David Williams)

The Guardian - Paying the price for equality (Rupert Jones)

Daily Mail - One in three female offenders are thugs (Sarah Harris)

Warminster TImes - £80 fine for false rape claim 

Aberdeen Press and Journal - False rape claim woman faces jail

NPR (USA) - Love doesn't have to hurt (Michel Martin) About an appalling Pepsi Superbowl advert 

BBC Berkshire - Woman cautioned over false rape claim

Daily Mail - Female Chaplain sentenced over false rape claim 

The Independent - Boardroom quotas (Margareta Pagano)

Daily Telegraph - Lady golfers unhappy about law to end sex discrimination (Adam Lusher) 

Posted by Skimmington