The Rights Of Man

SEASON'S GREETINGS

Season's greetings to all our readers and a happy new year. 2013 has seen a significant increase in the attention given to men's issues, with all sorts of things we've been discussing for years finally entering th mainstream. 2013 saw the launch of a political party for men and boys and issues such as male rape victims finally appeared in the news. In particular, I found it heartening to see the increased attention given to male genital mutilation, with some extremely clever protesting by intactivists this year and even support from countries in Scandanavia and the Council of Europe.

On the other hand, many things stayed the same, with feminists smearing and attempting to silence men's equality groups on university campuses, not just in Canada but here in the UK too. We also saw politicans once again largely ignoring men's issues, and of course there was plenty of misandry and nonsense from Lynne Featherstone as usual. Sadly, 2013 also saw the suicide of Earl Silverman and our thoughts go out at this tiem of year to his family and so many other men in his position.

The work of this blog gets mutiple mentions in A Voice for Men's review of 2013, so be sure to give it a read:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

 

Skimmington did mention he may we away for a few months so I'm sure everyone will join me in hoping he returns soon in the new year.

 

by John Kimble

ANNOUNCING HEQUAL - AN EXCITING NEW EQUALITY CAMPAIGN

Hi everyone, apologies for the lack of posts recently from Skimmington and myself, I'm sure he'd appreciate some contributions from readers to help keep the site going if anyone can help out.

You'll be pleased to know that I've been keeping myself busy and can now proudly now announce a new equality campaign called "HEqual"

Launched on International Men's Day, HEqual aims to really make a difference in standing against sexism and genuine discrimination.

By “genuine” discrimination we mean anything that is indisputably unfair and causes real harm. While certain feminist groups supposedly campaigning for equality are concerned with men’s seating positions on public transport, or forcing them to sit down when urinating, we’ll be taking on the other less important issues that appear to have slipped their minds, such as say gaining recognition for hundreds of thousands of male victims of domestic violence.

Rather than covering news, discussion and debate, HEqual is going to be totally focused on activism, exposing discrimination and ultimately on defeating it. Everything written on the site will be there for a purpose, and I can promise some really interesting projects on the horizon so you're going to want to stay tuned.

You can find out more about at Hequal.wordpress.com

Be sure to read about our first victory in forcing Cancer Research UK to finally recognise Male Cancer.

Twitter users can follow us on @HEqual_UK and please and if you haven't followed The Rights of Man by now then you should add @RightsofManUK too.

 

by John Kimble

ROLLING STORY LIST

As set out in the previous post, if you have a link to a story that would help regular readers with keeping up to date with the latest news, please add to the comments section.

Posted by Skimmington

LACK OF ACTIVITY UPDATE

Hi everyone, I am really sorry for the lack of activity lately, mainly work and partly other important things to arrange. This may well continue for the next few months.

In the next post, I will set it up so those with news stories they want to share can do so via the comments section. I will look at these everyday so will acept as soon as possible.

There are also the other sites on the left that are of great interest.

Sorry about this and I hope things will resume soon.

Posted by Skimmington

MUMSNET POLL SPELLS DISASTER FOR MEN AND BOYS

This week the news (Guardian, Telegraph, Daily Mail 1, Daily Mail 2) has been grim for men as Mumsnet, the website for metropolitan elite middle class 'yummy mummy' brigade, ran an opinion poll this week that showed how the party's were faring on the so-called "women's vote".

• The Conservatives trail by 13 points among female voters (three times higher than among men)
• Women nevertheless prefer Cameron (43%) to Miliband (34%)
• Six out of 10 women who backed the Lib Dems in 2010 are no longer supporters
• Fewer than half polled believe any of the three main party leaders are interested in women's concerns 

So what does this mean - well of course it means more discrimination against men.

The natural reaction for any politician will be to attract votes where they are weak so that means more female-friendly policies. In a true age of equality that should not matter per se as for example, family friendly policies are also of benefit to fathers and sons.

However, we are not in an era of equality and modern day feminists as we know are not interested in equality, they want supremacy. Modern day feminists are not modern day women - however, they pretend they are and they are the ones who are the metropolitan elite who dominate our public bodies, pressure groups and have the ear of the politicians.

So their reaction will not be family-friendly policies but more misandry. More women-only shortlists/quotas in politics, more quotas on boardrooms, more women-only leadership/training courses etc, more funding for female health problems (not a problem per se but where is the investment in men's health).

In addition, it means none of the areas where men suffer inequality (health, domestic abuse, depression, family law, education, employment) will be touched. This is despite the fact that women on the whole like men so want them to succeed and not face inequality either - especially women with sons etc. You can see how this translates when the Home Secretary cannot bring herself to say that men are victims of domestic abuse too.

The Munset poll therefore will lead to more special treatment for women and the failure of men's inequality issues to be focussed upon. Plus of course probably a dose of traditional men bashing "all men are bastards" schtick with male politicians flogging themselves like Opus Dei converts.

The Mumsnet poll is a disaster for men and boys. They will be punished because not enough women are supporting David Cameron.

Posted by Skimmington

 

NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BURKAS, VEILS OR NIQAB's AND MALE CIRCUMCISION

There has been much hoo-haa today about the issue of burkas and veils and the human/religious rights versus security and female oppression aspects.

Home Office Minister Jeremy Browne MP (Lib Dem) opened the issue up. Sarah Wollaston MP (Conservative) who now seems to be the new feminist flag waver for the Conservatives chipped in with: "Feminists should be allowed to say that they find the niqab deeply offensive  without being accused of being bigoted or islamophobic."

What is striking of course is the lack of debate on male circumcision when the issue and principles are the same. This is a breach of children's human rights as they have no say in it and also is a sign of male oppression if they have no choice.

Why are there no politicians speaking out about how men/boys are oppressed with having bits of them cut off for religious reasons?

Is it because they are scared of the Jewish/Muslim lobby, is it because it affects men so no one is bothered and they are  not worthy of human rights.

If people state that veils/burkas are a sign of female oppression and have no place in the UK in 2013, then the same arguments apply to circumcision. Why don't Clegg, Browne and Wollaston talk about that?

Posted by Skimmington

 

Update (17 Sep 2013): An article from Ally Fogg on circumcision and chief Lib Dem man-hater (my words not his) Featherstone! 

 

 

SEX-SELECTION ABORTION - WHY THE SILENCE ON THE GENDER OF ONE OF THE DOCTORS

I am really sorry for the lack of posts lately - work is crazy and remember to look at the sites on the left for the latest news (certainly Peter Lloyd's has caught the eye lately on the sad torment that Michael Le Vell endured and the politically correct driven case by the CPS). If he sues the CPS he should give the money to FASO!

One issue in recent weeks that shows the double standards in British life which by default shows the discrimination and automatic negative assumptions that men face is the recent issue over the requests to abort two children because they were the wrong sex. The Telegraph has an overview of articles following the CPS decision not to prosecute the two doctors who had considered the abortions based on gender.

The two issues here are that it seems to have gone unnoticed that one of the doctors was female (Dr Prabha Sivaraman)  and also that the Telegraph chose in their story to use girls as the alleged babies to be aborted - it would have been better/equal to see what would happen if it was one boy and one girl then we could see any difference to the reactions especially as the Telegraph know it happens to boys and girls. Perhaps they felt if it was to be boys to be aborted it would be met with indifference from the world of the politically correct.

The comments from Helen Wollaston MP shows the hypocrisy of the situation:  "I'm not anti-abortion, but selective abortion of girls harms women & reinforces misogynist attitudes. Why isn't that issue public interest?" One of the doctors who seemed content to carry out the abortions was a women so how can that be misogyny!

This is typical of the intellectual torture that the politically correct go through when the person found guilty of a crime against one their politically correct victims groups turns to be a member of a victim group themselves.  It is why for years they turned a bling eye to forced marriage and even now they focus only on the role of the men not the women in the household. 

It is much the same in the circumcision/FGM debate. When this nurse killed a baby (more here and here) when she circumcised him based on religion and not medical grounds. It seemed the nurse was above public criticism because she was a woman. If a male doctor had a killed a girl he was circumcising, it would be front page!

Posted by Skimmington

LATEST MEN'S MATTERS

Sorry things have been quiet lately, been working late  and hence why I always suggest look on the sites on the left for news.

Anyway, James Williams' excellent Men's Matters has a feature on homelessness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MG5SH9QYGDo&feature=youtu.be

Some articles on the research that James mentions can be found via the site here: Broadway , St Mungo's

Posted by Skimmington

ALL WOMEN SHORTLISTS UPDATE: ANTI-DEMOCRATIC, ANTI-EQUALITY, MISANDRIC AND LABOUR HYPOCRISY

One of the most invidious things about the discriminatory onslaught that men in the UK have to face is the introduction of all-women shortlists, quotas and special training sessions that female wannabe politicians receive, while their male equivalents do not.

In addition, it is an issue that still baffles me that apart from this site, no one else in the men’s equality movement seems remotely interested in, despite the fact that it means men are banned (in Labour's case) from standing for Parliament solely because they are men and also that all-women shortlists are at the vanguard of where our society is moving.

All-women shortlists have opened up the acceptability of gender quotas on boards and other institutions – it is inevitability of making one thing acceptable thereby allowing more similar things acceptable.

This site researched the issue a couple of years ago.

For the May 2015 elections, having changed the law over ten years ago to get round their employment tribunal defeat, Labour has continued to build on their previous support for all-women shortlists.  And as repeated before, no man should vote for Labour in these particular seats (see end).

Before March 2013, they had banned men from being candidates in 22 seats (see list one below) for the 2015 election and following consultations, they had decided to ban men from being candidates in a further 39 (see tranche 1 of those declared to pick from all women shortlists in the
future). This means men will be banned in 61 seats, compared to 58 in 2010.

Just a point for the Justice for Men and Boys party but an angle for choosing any new candidates may be to put them up in seats where Labour have chosen from an all-women shortlist as there is a clear hook to say that men were banned from being their candidate.

This theme of modern-day anti-male radical feminism can be seen in this article in the Guardian.
Of 18 open contests, 17 winners were men so the response is one that there must be some form of discrimination and that women must be given special treatment and more all –women shortlists introduced.

Of course, the results above do not take into account the fact that because men have been banned in so many of the seats before these selections, that the good quality women will have bagged an all women shortlist seat, so for the open seats, then men in the frame will be of very high
quality. Obviously that is too logical for Labour’s anti-male brigade to process.

As for the Conservatives, with their Women2 Win set up, they are still giving special treatment to women who want to be Conservative MP’s including special training sessions in September on how to become selected.

As for the Lib Dems, they are concerned about 66% of their members oppose all women shortlists. At least they are still sticking to equality and liberalism.

The key thing is that banning people (in this case men) from seeking public office because of a particular characteristic is a sign of a totalitarian state and not a democratic one. It is of the utmost hypocrisy of Labour to champion equal suffrage earlier this year while at the same time, 100 years later, they are banning people from standing for public office under their banner solely because of their gender. The Pankhurss must be trining in their graves.

Posted by Skimmington

(1) Parliamentary seats where Labour have already banned men from being their Parliamentary candidate:

Thurrock

Carlisle

Lincoln

Northampton North

Hastings & Rye

Worcester

Warwick & Leamington

South Swindon

Stevenage

Norwich North

Great Yarmouth

High Peak

Peterborough

Harlow

Redcar

Dover

Stafford

Redditch

Reading West

Tamworth

Cambridge

Bristol West

 (2) Seats where Labour intend to ban men from being their Parliamentary candidate:

Ealing Central & Acton

Enfield North

Harrow East

Hornsey & Wood Green

Lewisham Deptford

Stockton South

Weaver Vale

Wirral West

Brighton Kemptown

Brighton Pavilion

Kingswood

Aberconwy

Cardiff Central

Cardiff North

Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire

Birmingham Yardley

Dudley South

Halesowen & Rowley Regis

Nuneaton

 

Erewash

Croydon Central

Hampstead and Kilburn

Burnley

Lancaster & Fleetwood

Morecambe & Lunesdale

South Ribble

Argyll & Bute

Rugby

Brigg & Goole

Colne Valley

Dewsbury

CAMPAIGN AGAINST BIASED WEBSITE LEGAL AID ADVICE AGAINST HUSBANDS AND FATHERS BY THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE SUCCEEDS

Marilyn Stowe, ITV's This Morning's legal expert, revealed that the Ministry of Justice's legal aid family matters guidance on its website was only aimed at female victims and that only a father's responsibilities could be removed. They have now changed it.

Originally, it said:

• If you are a victim of domestic violence and are divorcing or separating from an abusive partner
    You can get legal aid to help with the divorce or things such as child contact or how to share money or property, but you will need to give your solicitor some evidence that you have been a victim of domestic violence by your partner or husband.

 

• When a child is at risk of abuse from a partner
    You can get legal aid to help with issues such as child contact or removal of a father’s  parental responsibility, but you must be able to give your solicitor some evidence that child abuse has taken place.

Now, it says:

• If you are a victim of domestic violence and are divorcing or separating from an abusive partner
    You can get legal aid to help with the divorce or things such as child contact or how to share money or property, but you will need to give your solicitor some evidence that you have been a victim of domestic violence by your partner.  The word husband has gone.

 

• When a child is at risk of abuse from a partner
    You can get legal aid to help with issues such as child contact or removal of a father’s or mother's parental responsibility, but you must be able to give your solicitor some evidence that child abuse has taken place. The word mother's has been inserted.

 I am not sure who complained or whether some civil servant saw the error of their misandric ways but at least it has been changed.

The problem of course is that it should not have been there in the first place and was probably there for months until a Dicky Souray (a twitter correspondent of Marilyn's saw it). Many male victims with children may not have felt the rules applied to them - being misled by government.

It shows that misandry and bias is deep seated and a cultural norm within the Ministry of Justice, and the person responsible is probably disappointed they been found out. It should not take complaints to get this changed, it should be fair and equal from the start.

Posted by Skimmington