The Rights Of Man

A SHARD OF LIGHT ONTO THE GENDER PAY GAP

Passing through London a week ago, I went pass the Shard building which looks amazing and it is is still not finished. As I looked up, I could still see some cranes perched at the very top working way. As Wikipedia said:

"The Shard's steel structure was topped out on 30 March 2012, when its 66-metre (217 ft), 500-tonne spire was winched into place. The steel structure thus reached a height of 308.5 metres (1,012 ft). The final 516 panes of glass were added shortly after, topping the tower out at its full height of 309.6 metres (1,016 ft)."

I have no evidence but I would bet my house on it, that those crane-drivers were men. I bet my house becauseif they were women it would be in the papers. That would be no problem per se and there is no problem with women being crane drivers but the Shard crane drivers show why there is a gender pay gap (for women over 30 only of remember).

Those men risking life and limb to be prepared to be 1,000 ft up a building will be rightly paid a lot of money (well I hope they are). A lot of money they probably bring home to their wife and kids (including daughters) so both men and women in that family unit benefit.

But the BBC, Guardian, Fawcett Society, the three main political parties and all those other groups instead of recognising that some men get paid well becuase of the dangerous jobs and anti-social hours many of them endure - they believe the gender pay gap is down to discrimination in the workplace.

This is the terrible lie repeated over and over again, without a shred of evidence, that says men get paid more than women for doing the same job, at the same company, with the same skill, the same experience and the same contribution to the bottom line. It is a terrible lie because it deminses men and in particular "male bosses" and is a ruse to claim special treatment for women over men - although this damages female partners, daughters, sisters and mothers of men.

Whenever you read about the coming new rules about the gender pay gap or hear anybody at work talking about it - mention the Shard crane drivers - and ask them how many women would do that job and ask them why those men who do it should not be paid well.

Posted by Skimmington

Editors note- There were a few articles on the Gender Pay Gap and some were truly awful. Anna Bird in the Guardian  was pretty well shot down by many in the comments section and again more and more people are having the balls to challenge this nonsense.

This poor article in the Standard repeats this myth "in the US, women’s salaries are around 77 per cent of men’s when they do similar jobs."

   

PROWESS 2.0 - PEDDLING MISANDRY

One of the uglier sides of 'girl power' is not female emancipation but the ugly twisted men-hating behaviour which is designed to show how superior women are over men. In employment terms this can also come together in a gang or 'pack' mentality where women form aggressive anti-male groups which more discriminatory as those men they allege are the cause of anything that gets in their way.

You cansee this at work where you have 'women-only' training courses, fast-streams and management courses - all discrimination against men.

Employment is a good example and as this site has regularly reported, women-only start up funds are discriminatory because a man is denied access to this capital solely because of his gender. And of course, if he has a wife/girlfriends, sister or daughter they are then discriminated against too - by their own sisterhood. There is now a Home office funded (through the laughably named 'Equalities Department' ) Women's Business Council.

In this vein I came across this form of misandry and anti-male 'pack' mentaility in its purest form.

Prowess 2.0 (Women in Business)  - the UK online centre for women in business. "It’s where you’ll find top-quality information and online resources for women who’re starting or growing businesses, plus links to women's business networks and  local business support."

 First example is a story by Erica Watson about the ten top tips for female entrepreneurs. The story starts with this anti-male, pro-women misandry, which has no factual basis at all:

"Women in business are more likely to succeed in getting grants than men are.  Lots of us have been brought up to be more careful about preparation.  Just think about school kids and homework: the girls tend to make the greater effort.  The good girl grounding is paying-off in more grants for women in business,  but even so, it is tougher than ever to get a business grant of any type."

Erica Watson pops up again with a piece on Feminomics -with her"short sharp Prezi turns the man-made economic crisis on its head.  How did macho values create the mess and what’s the feminomic alternative?"

That old feminist corker where there is no proof that the crisis is down to men - if they say the banking crash was a man made problem then the public sector deficits were a female made creation as it has led to the massive expansion in the public sector which is female dominated. Both are irrelevant and were nothing to do with gender.

When there are 1.5 million men and 1.1 unemployed women though - it is clear that Prowess 2.0 is a site prepared to make anti-male statements with no foundation - all in the name of equality and the sisterhood.

Posted by Skimmington 

NEWS UPDATE

Sorry, been a long Jubilee weekend (why don't the radical feminists hold up the Queen as a totem of 'girl power'  - is it because she is good at her job and just gets on with it without crying out for special treatment at the expense of men?) so here is a few to go on with. Will be looking at the boardroom issue in the next few days.

 Daily Mail - Men are the grimier sex (Tamara Cohen)

Daily Mail - STD fears as 70% of single women have unprotected sex  (Graham Smith) and the day before it was  sexually transmiotted disease the fault of men. Good spot by Ian about consistency.

Fighting Feminism (Mike Buchanan) - A small but important victory but then it looks like being snatched away.

Economic and Social Research Council - UK children need more male befrienders

Institute for Economic Affairs - The gender diversity delusion (Mike Buchanan) - Mike recommends reading the comments section.

Safer Lancashire - County Councillor David Smith pitifully and wrongly tries to justify why a publicity campaign on domestic abuse does not include men as well as women. 

Daily Mail - Dame Butler Sloss admits women have been chosen to be judges on the basis of their gender (Jack Doyle) - The cat is out of the bag just as it was here - proof that discrimination is now taking place against men in the boardroom and in the legal profession. But then Erica Rackley comes along in The Guardian stating that Butler-Sloss' comments are unhelpful - obviously because it uneermines the case for special treatment. Rackley has a book coming out - obviously will be a  diatribe calling for special treatment for women and therefore discimination against men.

BBC News - Are men really more unfaithful than women (Fiona Woods) Another myth busted

The Guardian - The men who do women's work (Kevin Powell)

As one commenter says about his statements that have no evidence behind them:

And as these males enter female-dominated occupations, sexism and gender privilege follow: men even earn more than women in these once-taboo fields for males."Wow. Any statistics on this one that anyone is aware of?"

The silence of domestic violence - new website about a man's experience of DV and the family courts.

Thank you all to those who sent links over.

Posted by Skimmington

 

 

 

NEWS UPDATE

A list of recent articles and thanks again to those who have emailed them in:

Abused to the Accused website

Daily Mail - Women are happier and less stressed than overworked men (Graham Smith)

Daily Mail - Britain's generations of mummies' boys and daddies' girls (Martin Robinson) - The article says "Not wanting to settle down or marry is the other main cause, especially among men"- you can thank men-hating Cafcass and the biased family courts for that.

Daily Mail - NHS remove 'Dad' from pregnancy handbook (Sophie Borland)

The Independent - The future's not Orange (Robert Dex) - The future should look bleak for this 'celebrated'  women-only award but we all know there will be queues of organisations wanting to pick this up.

BBC Radio 5 - Men's Hour is back on

Spotify - Violence, Terror, Coercion, LOL - Idiots not taking the Coronation Street story seriously and well done to ManKind Initiative for having their phone number on at the end of the programme.

New Statesman - Don't jusge a book by its press: Second Sexism (Ally Fogg) - Ally Fogg is always worth reading and the comments are a 'delight' to read!

New Statesman - Why is male unemployment not an issue? (Alex Hern)

Irish Health - Male circumsicion is an assault: The campaign is growing

Posted by Skimmington

NEWS UPDATE

A few recent ones and thank you to those who have sent them in.

The Guardian - The Second Sexism is just victim-envy (Suzanne Moore)

Daily Mail - Who cares if men are stuck in the glass cellar (Liz Jones)

Daily Telegraph - Number of men working part-time dopubles as they cannot find full-time work (TUC): Full TUC report. The TUC to me, is severely compromised and inconsistent in talking about this issue as it is constantly banging on about women's rights. Only the day before it issued this report, it said the Equalities Commission had to equality proof the government's policies on behalf of women - which what it really mean was women needed special treatment over men.

You Tube - James Williams' interview with Dr Peter Ball of Norm-UK

You Tube -  VW pro-father ad

New Statesmen - The Men's Rights Zeitgeist (Rhiannon and Holly)

Men;s Network - National conference early bird tickets on sale

Daily Mail - Tasered twice and stabbed husband 17 times (Paul Bentley): What are the odds that if the genders were revered, the husband would go to prison?

The Observer - Cannes 2012, Why no female directors (Vanessa Thorpe): This is a classic case of victimhood without evidence. Where is the evidence that a film directed by a women should be in the top 22 list but is not because of discrimination. There is no evidence so to claim discrimination is just another request for special treatment and the end of equality.

Posted by Skimmington

WILL WE GET A WHITE WIDOWS CAMPAIGN IN BRITAIN?

One of the greatest casualties of economic downturns and recessions is the increase in depression due to financial hardship and the loss and/or lack of jobs and crumbling businesses.

This can lead to serious mental illness and sadly, to suicide. And this directly affects men more than women (more three times as many men commit suicide - 4,231 men and 1,377 women in 2010), though every suicide is a tragedy for those individuals and their families.

In Italy, there is a movement called The White Widows, those wives and partners of Italian men who have committed suicide due to the recession. This movement is putting the issue on the map so it is being openly discussed unlike in Britain, where male suicide is only a fringe issue when it comes to public policy and social recognition. Despite the best efforts of CALM, the Men's Health Forum and others, it is still a fringe issue. Why?

Partly, it is to do with anti-male anti-equality feminists who want to shut out any debate about the issue and all other male issues. The Fawcett Society (who laughably say they believe in equality - pure Orwell) launch lifeboat campaigns based on lies about female unemployment and child benefit, but would never launch a White Widows movement for women who have lost fathers, sons and brothers.

Also, more mainstream magazines and websites (Mumsnet) are so self-absorbed about themselves as are their readers that they never consider men and boys - even though they will have sons, husbands/partners and fathers.

Politicians as ever are cowed and infected by political correctness so don't say anything.

Women are the most powerful voice to ensure there is equality for men - this is why the White Widows campaign has had such an impact in Italy.

It is now time for such a campaign in Britain to highlight the plight of men who commit suicide because of the economic problems they cannot face.

And because the Male Equality Movement and Men and Boys sector believes in equality, we would be happy for a White Widows and Widowers campaign.

Posted by Skimmington

MEN ARE HUMAN TRAFFICKED TOO

Many readers emailed in today to highlight the article in the Guardian based on research by the Salvation Army that:

"Men account for more than two-fifths (41%) of adult victims of human trafficking in England and Wales helped by the Salvation Army, contrary to the public perception that the crime almost exclusively affects women."

The Men's Network's Glen Poole sums it all up here with a cracking commentary about the issue and how the Salvation Army won the contract because of their commitment to hep men and women. Eaves lost out because they were just about women.

What would be good to see is that more publicity is actually made about men trafficked for their labour. This case shows what happens about men as slaves and there was never much an outcry about it. Or this from the BBC. Perhaps we will see more leadership from the government in actually speaking out about it and when they do it is in the terms of that it affects men and women. No more debates and publicity campaigns just about women being trafficked.

The Salvation Army also carry out a lot of good work with homeless men and women and also men and women made homeless due to domestic abuse. This organisation is one that just goes about meeting it objectives to help people.

Posted by Skimmington

SEXISM AGAINST MEN IN BRITAIN'S BOARDROOMS - FOR THE FIRST TIME A PROVEN FACT

Some kind reader sent over a scan of an article in the London Evening Standard (it is not online frustratingly) of an interview with leading fund manager Helena Morrissey and supporter of the 30% club, a group wanting to end meritocracy on British boards - that is, stopping men from being able to compete on an equal basis as women for places on company boards (see here).

There is a telling piece in the article:

"One of our members [of the 30 per cent club] said to us yesterday that they'd just instructed their first vote against a director because the board isn't diverse enough"

This means that a man was not voted against because he lacked the talent, skill, experience and ability to be on the board of whatever the company was - he was voted against solely because he was a man. The first clear example of the sexism against men stalking Britain's boardrooms.

And of course, it was not just him who was sexually discriminated against, it also meant that his (if he has them) wife, girlfriend/partner, daughter, sister and mother were as they would have all benefited from his success in being placed on the board. But this is being done in their name.

This has struck the first blow against mertiocracy in Britain's boardroom - it is proof that the effect of the 30% rule and those who advocate it is not really about equality it is about the end of meritocracy,  for special treatment for women and for sexism against men.

Helena Morriseey is proud of the fact that she has nine children and so she should be, but what would be her view if one of her sons was blocked from being on a board simply because he was her son and not her daughter.

Posted by Skimmington 

MORE PEOPLE START TO QUESTION THE ANTI-MALE RHETORIC AND SPECIAL PLEADING

Last week David Cameron went to Sweden to learn more (and here and here) about to discriminate against men and end meritocracy in British business by ensuring there were quotas in British boardrooms – a subject raised many times on the site.

 As ever, we were in the land of fantasy where he asserted that "case is overwhelming that companies and countries run better if you have men and women working together at the top".

 This is classic Orwellian doublespeak -  tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth. There is no proof that more women in the boardroom leads to a better performing business. If that was the case, shareholders would be making sure there were plenty of women in the boardroom because it means higher dividends. They don't insist on it because they do not care what the gender is of the boardroom they only worry about having the best people there – no matter their gender.

 On a different but albeit more importnat subject, the latest unemployment figures were published. By the end of december 2011, there were 1.548m men unemployed, a rate of 9% - 89,000 more than a year ago. There are 1.123m women unemployed, a rate of 7.7% - 91,000 more than a year ago. All we ever hear is how the recession and the cuts are affecting women more than men.

The reason for raising these two issues is the fact that more and more people are starting to challenge the anti-male feminists and special pleaders who want women to have rights than men. Most are actually women.

Take Cameron's stance on boardroom quotas. Helena Morrissey a top banker said "In the UK it would be difficult for women to feel very much as an equal member of a board or as a senior manager if there was a quota.” Janice Atkinson-Small makes the point that no one is interested. The Institute of  Economic Affairs said "Proposals to force companies to increase the number of women on boards are extremely ill-advised. Imposing a mandatory quota would be yet another irritant to UK firms. Burdensome overregulation of this kind is not a driver of economic growth."

Dominic Raab MP was as sound as ever.

On the question of unemployment, the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development came out and said women had not suffered anymore than men in the recession.

Both groups of people have suddenly found their voice and started to ask the questions that only readers of this site and a hardy bunch of other people have done for the past number of years in Britain.

Every time these assertions come up - the mantra has to be "prove it". Only then will we start to get the truth about the special pleading by special interest men-hating groups for more rights of women over men and also get to the truth that it is men who face the most disadvantage in 21st century Britain.

Posted by Skimmington

WHY DOES THE RATE OF MALE SUICIDE CONTINUE TO BE IGNORED?

A few weeks ago, some friends and I were having a drink and there was someone of a similar age drinking at the bar on his own but was clearly listening to conversations in the hope of being able to join in. So we let him join and spoke about football etc, the things men enjoy talking about. I left quite heartened because loneliness can be a real problem for men whether they are in or out of relationship or in and out of work.Seeing someone just staring into their pint is never a good sign.

Late last month, the latest suicide rates were published and they are disturbing reading. The trend continues that men are three times more likely to commit suicide than women. In 2010 4,231 men took their own lives (17.0 per 100,000) compared to and 1,377 women (5.3 per 100,000). It is an issue the site has raised a number of times (1).

As the Men's Health Forum point out, traditionally the highest age group for men has been 15-44 year old group (currently 16.7 per 100,000) but now it is the 45-74 age group (17.7 per 100,000). The groups are very broad so the Office for National Statistics should refine the groups in the future becuase men (and women) go through a number of life stages between 15-44 and 45-74 so by looking at smaller age ranges will help with conclusions and identifying the reasons why this happens.

The issue of male suicide continues to be an area with little attention especially from policy makers in the government and the health service and the equalities sector. The fact that three times as many men commit suicide than women is a clear inequality but the policy response is limited (not discussed in Parliament) and often the issue is completely ignored. You never hear the Equalities and Human Rights Commission raising it and you never hear of a big government or NHS initiative on this subject. Of course, if three times as many women than men were committing suicide it would always be mentioned. We all wait to see whether the government will actually do anything when it announces the results of its consultation later this year on the subject.

While there are great groups like CALM (a new London helpline and campaign last November) but they need more support and also more policy attention to ensure there are services to help and more awareness campaigns to encourage men to come forward.

In terms of why more men commit suicide, much attention is placed on those with underlying mental health problems but that can be a cop out because it deflects attention from those without those problems. With long-term unemployment for older men being higher than for younger men exacerbated by the recession, it is clear that will be one reason in particular. It also gives the lie that women are the biggest losers of the recession.

There is also the changing role of men and the fact they are becoming second best and are the victims of the aggressive anti-male feminism that rules the UK. The fact that younger men are finding it tough to get on the employment ladder as many traditional male jobs go and the eductaion system continues to blight them.

Silence from policy makers is no longer an option but we all have an individual responsibility to try and ensure we all look after any men we know who we feel are lonely and depressed.

Posted by Skimmington