The Rights Of Man

MEN'S HOUR REVIEW

Having flagged up and now listened to Men's Hour, I would give it 4/10.

The show was self deprecating which can be OK if done properly but kept using Women's Hour and women as a reference point (even having the presenter of Women's Hour) which it should not have done. It just did not take it itself serious enough.

Also the presenter did not have enough energy. It also didn't really tackle enough topic and issues that men face. It had former Home Secretary Alan Johnson on and his life story was interesting but he needed to be asked about men's issues and how men's issue were not taken seriously by Government.

It is a missed opportunity but maybe it will improve.

Comments please.

Posted by Skimmington

Other reviews - BBC, Independent, Telegraph, The Guardian

A moan from Jan Moir (Daily Mail) before

RAPE ANONYMITY: ANOTHER FOUR DESTROYED MEN

This site commented some time ago before the issue of giving anonymity was raised by the Coalition Government that there seemed to be an epidemic of false accusations of rape against men. An issue that can be seen by the constant stories that keep flowing of women being prosecuted for it.

Another one today, this time Leyla Ibrahim was sent to prison for three years for it even going to the trouble of ripping her own clothes (she'll serve 18 months at most).

Now I know that Caroline Flint MP, Harriet Harman MP, Fiona MacTaggart MP, Maria Eagle MP, Louise Bagshawe MP, the Fawcett Society, Women's Aid and all those others who do not believe in equality of justice won't read it or care but this line is simply devastating from the BBC report :

'One man described his ordeal in detention as "torture" while another attempted self harm, the court heard.'  Four men in total were questioned.

Wrose, the Daily Mail reported:

"Another said he was 'devastated' by the harrowing experience and had been unable to eat or sleep, with one suspect complaining: 'We were treated like s*** and not a stint of an apology.'

"A senior police source said the four were still 'really struggling', adding: 'One of them has even had to move out of the area."

Part of the reason they were devastated in such a way is not just is not just because they were accused, it is because they would be named and that the mud would stick forever and their lives ruined.

To those who do not believe the law should be changed, these men are just collateral damage. And in a brilliant article by the False Rape Society, there is a clear reason why. It is supposedly payback time.

Posted by Skimmington

Note: Try not to get too angry when you read Barbara Ellen's comments (2nd story) on the anonymity issue in the Guardian.

RAPE ANONYMITY DEBATE HEATS UP AND A FEW MORE VOICES EMERGE

At the weekend, the site highlighted how a few male MP's had publicly supported the Coalition Government's proposals to support anonymity for rape defendants, even though the way the Parliament debate had been covered by the media you would have thought that no MP had supported it (Sky, Daily Mail, Independent, Guardian and Telegraph). Talking about dancing to one tune.

However, a few more have emerged, Jason Duncan who was a victim of a false accusation was interviewed and Mark Brooks from the ManKind Initiative was on Radio 5 on Saturday night (1 hour 42 in).

Posted by Skimmington

MINISTER FOR MEN MANIFESTO AND PRIORITIES: 2010 UPDATE

In a post  three years ago, this site published what it thought the 12 key priorities for a Minister for Men should be, a position that has never been created by the British Government, even though it has had a Minister for Women since 1997 and also a Women's National Commission since 1969. There has been much debate on this site about the need for a Minister for Men.

Whilst there has been some mixed results from the new Coalition Government and the Liberal Democrats published a Manifesto for men at the General Election, there is now a need to update or reiterate what the priorities should be.

It would therefore be useful that before publishing updated priorities for a Minister for Men, if ever there a positionw as created, this site would be grateful for any ideas, in addition, to those covered previously.

There is no need for explanation just a line or two on any suggestion.

Posted by Skimmington

Hattip - John Kimble

COALITION POLICY UNCLEAR ON RAPE ANONYMITY BUT SOME MP'S SPEAK UP FOR EQUALITY

As previously flagged up, on Thursday Parliament spent the afternoon discussing the issue of rape anonymity for defendants, a major and important matter.

The debate was five hours long and thorough and is available to read on Hansard, it is well worth it if you have the time.

What was unclear was whether the Government is proposing to give anonymity until charge or until conviction. They are going to undertake some further research but it just seemed unclear.

What was gladdening though that despite all the usual "we don't care about men who are falsely accused" nonsense from both Labour and many Conservative MP's, there at last were some men who stood up to be counted. Aidan Burley MP and Rehman Chishti MP both spoke in favour and Rehman actually used a case from his constituency to explain his position.

PARLIAMENT DEBATES RAPE ANONYMITY

Tomorrow, Parliament discusses the issue of making rape defendants anonymous unless convicted, an important issue for male equality and an issue covered on this site at length. It looks like starting at about 11.30am

The debate will be able to be viewed live on Parliament TV.

This is the test to see whether the Coalition Government believes that equality also applies to men.

It will be the first test to see whether it will stand firm against the hysteria of the anti-male vested inestres that infest our country. If it fails, it will never stand up to them again and another Government will have let men down.

Comments on the debate welcome on the site please.

Posted by Skimmington

YVETTE COOPER'S BUDGET REPORT IS RIDICULOUS AND ANTI-MALE

Unless you are single or gay, society has men and women who live together in partnership or married and often with children. Not according to new Yvette Cooper MP, former Government Minister par excellence.  

This week, she published a report (it cannot be found online not even on her official website so its  veracity cannot be interrogated) which was covered fulsomely and without challenge in the Guardian on Monday. In the report it states that women will bear the brunt of the proposed budget cuts by a ratio of 75% to 25%.

This was based on the freezing of the children's allowance, changing pension allowances, capital gain tax changes and others. The list that is not given by Cooper contends that as 94% of recipients of children's benefit are women, its freezing means the benefits affects women to the tune of £913 million compared to £62 million for men.

Er... wait a minute, just because the women is the main recipient of children's benefit (only one parent can be nominated to receive it) are not men who share the family home with their female partner and children not affected then?

Also she says because of the freezing or lower increases in pension allowances, women will suffer more then men. That's because women live longer and have a far longer post retirement period of life than men. No mention of that.

She also complains that this also does not taken into account any cuts in public sector jobs. Of course, a cut in a public sector job where a woman is employed won't also affect her male partner or husband!

She honestly thinkls that women and men do not share their lives together.

Yvette Cooper of course was a part of the same Government that said women were the biggest losers from the recession and the financial crisis despite all the official figures (here and here) produced by their own Government showed that it was in fact men.

What continues to amaze (but not surprise) is the brass neck of it all. There are so many in Parliament like Cooper, Harman, Flint and Baird (oops sorry just remembered she lost her seat!!) who want to outdo each other in standing up for women by slagging off men and simply just making things up.

Misandry is alive and well in Parliament still.

Posted by Skimmington

   

ANOTHER FALSE RAPE ACCUSATION AND DOUBLE STANDARDS REVEALED IN CLIVE BISHOP CASE

As the campaign continues on whether to deny equality in justice by granting anonymity to defendents in rape cases and the fear that the Colaition Govenment will backslide under the weight of hysteria from their anti-male feminist opponents, this site will publish immediately each time it comes across a story about a false accusation.

Today, the papers reported the story of Temitope Adenugba who was sent to prison for 18 months for falsely accusing a male cleaner of raping her. The poor chap was named. Silence from Caroline Flint.

Then we see the case of Clive Bishop where the weasely Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority appealed against his claim for compensation following being faslely accused of rape (link). Could you imagine the outcry if the genders were reversed?

However, this research by the False Rape Society is significant.

Posted by Skimmington

WILL RADIO 5 LIVE'S MEN'S HOUR SUPPORT OR PATRONISE MEN?

On the face of it, after decades of discrimination by the BBC, they are running a series of six programmes called Men's Hour, having run a Women's Hour on Radio 4 for over 60 years. It will be on BBC Radio 5 from 18th July 2010.

This follows their generally excellent Fatherhood Season (still available here) and also their programmes on the family courts (here). The latest programme on the treatment of fathers as caricatures certainly chimes with the essence of this article by Danuta Kean in the Daily Mail about how society and the media does it all it can to demonise men, a theme pathetically and discriminatory used by Frank Field, the Coalition Government's new Pensions Czar. Field was rightly condemned by the Fatherhood Institute and Jon Davies at Families Need Fathers.

The announcement of Men's Hour does not bode well on the BBC's own web-site as it declares that "BBC Radio 5 plans Women's Hour for Men". Men second already, not equal. On Radio 4 last Friday (41 minutes in) tehre was a short debate and it allowed Lynne Franks, "feminist", free rein to lambast the whole concept. She stated that when she first heard about it she thought someone was having a laugh and that it was a a joke. She also said it was a ridiculous idea.

The interview, instead about talking the issue, just turned into a situationw which allowed Lynne Franks to slag off men.

Putting that to one side, having listened to the interview and also seeing coverage where the presenter Tim Samuels described the show as the cheeky little brother to Women's Hour, where men can "emote" and a show which has Louie Spence as a weekly guest, there is a concern that the programme won't take the issues facing men seriously. Women's Hour takes women's issues seriously.

If subjects such as the rape anonymity, pension age, unemployment, domestic violence, suicide, men's health and the family courts are not tackled and discussed seriously then the programme will have failed and will never be commissioned again. 

The jury is of course out until the programmes are broadcast but this opportunity cannot be missed but to be taken seriously, it must take men seriously.

Posted by Skimmington

Note: story was also covered in the Daily Mail, The Independent, Telegraph, Telegraph 2

Note 2: The latest Men's Matters show by James Williams on Express FM is here (third way down).

Hattip - Jon 

UPDATE ON THE BRITISH AIRWAYS AND ITS SEXIST POLICY

The site commented last week on hero Mirko Fischer and it was gladdening to see that Libby Purves, columnist for the Times agree (no link available as The Times now has a paywall) explaining how it demeaned men everywhere. As did Rosie Murray-West in the Telegraph.

A reader wrote to British Airways last week stating that they would hear from his solicitor if they tried to move him in the same way they tried with Mr Fischer. He has asked that the reply is published which proves that British Airways are having to review it but also shows the contorted and convoluted way they try and defend the undefendable.

 British Airways

I am sorry you are dissatisfied with our seating policy for unaccompanied minors.  We carry tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors every year and take great pride in the service that we provide to them and their parents.  We have offered this service on all flights for many years for children aged between five and 11 years old, who are travelling alone.

Parents look to us to ensure the welfare of their children when they are travelling unaccompanied, who can be as young as 5 years old.  Given that some of these flights last up to 13 hours and are overnight, we take the responsibility of caring for these children, whose safety and security has been entrusted to us, extremely seriously.

There is a specific seating department, which oversees the booking and places the child in an appropriate seat.  To minimise risk to the child, whenever possible we do not seat unaccompanied minors beside adult male passengers.  On some services, this will be in a specially created Unaccompanied Minors zone within a short distance of the cabin crew in the galley. 

This procedure is not meant to cause offence to our male passengers, nor is it meant to imply that all men are a danger to children.  It is there as a precaution in the best interests of the welfare of our young passengers flying alone and will also protect male passengers from being the subject of false accusations.  However following recent court action taken by one of our passengers, this policy is currently under review.

Please be assured customer feedback such as yours is important to us.  We do hope that despite your current sentiments, you will give us an early opportunity to better serve you next time you travel with us.

Best regards

British Airways Customer Relations

Posted by Skimmington