The Rights Of Man

VERY FEW WOMEN BELIEVE THEY ARE BEING DENIED PROMOTIONS - NEAR PARITY WITH MEN WHICH WON'T LAST LONG

Just before Christmas, one of our regular readers ('Groan') kindly pointed out the findings of the 2009-10 Citizenship Survey which had been sneaked out in the week before Christmas. Produced by the Department for Communities and Local Government, the 123 page report was entitled "Race, Religion and Equalities."

Paragraph 5.57 states "one per cent of people who had looked for work cited gender as a reason for being discriminated against when refused a job; and two per cent of employees cited gender as a factor in being discriminated against regarding a promotion.

"Males and females were equally likely to cite gender as a reason for discrimination in relation to being refused a job (in both cases 1%), while female employees were slightly more likely than male employees to cite gender as a reason for discrimination regarding promotion (2% of females compared with 1% of males)"

The key statitistics from this show three things.

Promotion - boardroom discrimination

Firstly, the anti-male Marxists feminists who bitterly complain against discrimination against women from the gender pay gap to promotion to boards and such like are out of step with what women actually think. Only 2% of women believe they are denied a promotion (1% men) because of their gender and 1% refused for a job because of their gender. 

Organisations like the 30% Club, Fawcett Society, Lynne Featherstone MP, and all the others are wrong when they say it is a disgrace that women are being discriminated against because women themselves do not believe so.

This organisations live in a fantasy world of male hatred where white fat upper middle class men are keeping the 'sisters' in the kitchen and on the shop floor. Women disagree with the 30% Club, Featherstone and everyone else who says it is a scandal.

These groups do not speak for women, they speak for female privilige for (upper) middle class women at the expense of men.

Equality Act

We know the Conservative Government had initial reservations about sections 158 and 159 of the Equality Act (2010) which allows employers to discriminate against people when it comes to training, filling jobs and promotions, however, they ended up putting it into law on 1 April 2011.

It means that while 1% of men and 2% of women claim they are being denied a promotion because of their gender, I would expect this to be reversed over the next five years and that there be a clear gap emerging and perhaps 5% of men claiming they are being denied a promotion because of their gender.

This will not only affect those men themselves but will also affect their wives/girlfriends, daughters, mothers etc, so this discriminations affects women as much as it does the individual man.

Sample Size

Following on from the above, the numbers of 1% and 2% are very small and could be classed as insignificant. Perhaps a lot of that is down to the fact there still remains broadly a gender split in the work roles that men and women undertake. Without wanting to be too broadbrush about it but it is hard for a male car mechanic to say he is being denied a promotion because he is a man when there are so few female mechanics. Likewise, a female primary school teacher may not be able to say she has been denied a promotion when there are so few male primary school teachers.

It means that while the figure on paper looks small, it's signifcance should not be under-estimated.

In conclusion, this report undermines those anti-male Marxist feminists who with every breath they take say that women are discriminated in the workplace, when women themselves say they are not. Secondly, the Equality Act 2010, will I predict, see a gap created where more men feel discrimated than women in work.

It is shame this report was buried but it is essential research nonetheless (thank you to 'Groan' for highlighting it).

Posted by Skimmington 

THE GLASS CEILING DELUSION (new extract) by MIKE BUCHANAN

Mike, who was featured this week, has kindly sent over another extract of the above book.

Download Excerpt from THE GLASS CEILING DELUSION

In summary from Mike - ‘The Equality Act (2010): the triumph of Harriet Harman’. The gender-related aspects of the Act are appallingly biased against men, yet attracted minimal coverage even in papers such as The Daily Telegraph and The Economist. It’s a perfect example of how militant feminists work ‘under the radar’ to pursue their agendas, never with a democratic mandate. You’ll never see details of feminist agendas appear in party manifestos; at best their intentions will be obliquely hidden behind seemingly innocuous terms such as ‘fairness’ and ‘diversity’. What it always amounts to is ‘jobs for the girls’. 

Posted by Skimmington

THE GLASS CEILING DELUSION (Extract) by MIKE BUCHANAN

Last week, the published an article by Mike Buchanan on gender feminism, this week we are publishing the introduction and first chapter of his book - The Glass Ceiling Delusion - perhaps apt bearing in mind today's report on the boardroom.

Download Introduction and first chapter of 'The Glass Ceiling Delusion'

 

NEWS UPDATE

A few from this week:

Lynne Featherstone MP (Minister for 'Equalities') - Women key to economic success: Men clearly are not part of Featherstone's thinking about how we get out of the economic mess we are in.

Lynne Featherstone MP (Minister for 'Equalities') - Women in Business speech: You would think that young men were paid more than women and that more men were entering the professions and that there are more women unemployed than men. But as this is the other way around, Featherstone, must be in the running for the newly crowned man-hating MP of the year does not think so.

The Guardian - Major pension fund may vote against all-male boardrooms (Jill Treanor): Legal and General are a new name in the pantheon of anti-male companies stalking the UK. In favour of gender quotas and being anti-meritocracy, they favour putting people into boardrooms because of their gender not their talent. Not an investment house to have confidence in.

The Observer - Imposing quotas is not as important as cultural change (Catherine Bennett)

The Observer - Women told: your place is on the dole (Katie Allen): We look forward to Katie's piece on men on the dole which is where 1.5 million currently sit.

Daily Mail - Women surgeons who complain about their sexist industry are just making excuses: Always far more powerful when a women says it.

Kent Online - Girl jailed over rape claims (Paul Hooper)

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

GOVERNMENT BELIEVES SUPPORTING MALE ENTREPRENEURS NOT IMPORTANT

So this week started off looking good for men with the first ever Conference for Men and Boys in Brighton and ended terribly with Norgrove's awful report and then the coup de grace was given by Theresa May (she believes in shared parenting as stated on BBC 1's Question Time) when she anniounced setting up an entrepreneurs fund for women and a Women's Business Council with mentors.

"The £700,000 over three year funding will provide 5,000 mentors for new and existing female entrepreneurs as research shows women are only half as likely as men to be engaged in entrepreneurial activity."

This is significant because of course everyone wants a successful economy and everyone be able to use their potential, whether a man or a woman but the genderisation of entrepreneurship is dangerously sexist. While there has been biased funding before and no doubt this continues, entrepreneurship is gender neutral.

We have argued before that this government endorsed sexism means that female entrepreneurs are not taken seriously because they 'only get their capital because they are female' and also it squeezes the opportunities for young male enrtrepreneurs - as if male entrepreneurs are second class.

This is even more damaging when you see the state of the economy and how desperate we are for unemployed men (currently 1.5 million and a rate of 75.4% as opposed to 1 million and a rate of 65.4% women)to get onto the employment ladder (and women of course).

So why are there are special schemes for female entrepreneurs and why is the government talking them up when the economy needs male and female entrepreneurs. Is May really saying, just like Harman before her, that a Rodean educated woman needs help to be an entrepreneur while a white/black working class boys from a Peckham council estate who went to a sink school doesn't. Its sexist.

This week we have the men being shut out of fatherhood and now we have them being shut on our the economy and being able to create jobs for themselves, their families and others.

Men are being deliberately crushed.

Posted by Skimmington

NEWS UPDATE

Here are a few recent articles:

 Irish Independent: Charity dismayed at banned ad (Fergus Black) A good example of how to use equality laws to fight the case for male equality. Further debate in Irish Examiner, Irish Herald and ASAI.

 BBC News Scotland: Rise in male victims of domestic abuse  - Excellent work from Abused Men in Scotland

 Daily Mail - Cameron demands more women to be in top jobs (Kirsty Walker)

 Daily Telegraph - Ed's pro women reshuffle gives Cameron a problem (John McTiernan). As with boardroom appointments, the positive discrimination for women in politics continues apace as it dominates the news agenda with Miliband's reshuffle and it dominates the Conservative Party's thinking. Talent is secondary to gender.

 BBC: Nearly half of allegations against teachers are malicious - Still waiting for the government legislation on this stopping teachers from being named unless guilty.

 Guardian -Women need quotas not canapes (Jane Martinson) - More dangerous antimale nonsense from Ms Martinson

 Guardian - Boardroom quotas for women? Good or Bad (Jill Treanor)

Posted by Skimmington

 

DELOITTE ADD TO CHORUS WANTING TO END MERITOCRACY IN BRITAIN'S BOARDROOMS

The 30% Club, the anti-male group who want preferential treatment for women to be placed on the boards of major companies, despite the fact that younger women earn more and therefore more will be on boards soon, were joined by Deloitte this week. An issue covered extensively before

They joined the carnival of anti-male groups desperate to get headlines for their company and the easy win is to go in for man-bashing. Their report said 20% of FTSE-100 companies had no women on their board, and many had not set equality target sdemanded by the government specifically designed to promote women over men to tick a box.

The key issue from Deloitte, the 30% club and those who fall behind this issue, is the fact that nowhere do they mention talent or give examples where more talented women have been denied a place on a board by less talented men - a clear case of discrimination. But that argument is never made, it is all about the statistics. And from companies like Deloitte and organisations like the 30% Club that is rather pathetic. Deloitte claim to provide a quality service, but their research is shallow and panders to the anti-male carnival.

Two trends are emerging from all of this:

Firstly, there is now clear impetus on this issue and men will face the double whammy of underachievement in getting into professions and being out-competed because their exam grades will be lower.

Secondly, years ago men were easy targets for man bashing adverts normally by trashy consumer brands and while this trend has continued unabated, it is now being joined by allegedly more 'respectable' organisations like Deloitte.

They don't use low grade advertising, they use shallow research to bash men like this report. And why do they do it? They need column inches so they are in the papers more than their commercial rivals (Ernst & Young, PwC etc) and an easy win for organisations is to go in for pro-women, anti-male research because it is so acceptable these days and the newspapers are more than happy to print it without question.

Posted by Skimmington

Media coverage - Independent graphic, Independent, Guardian, Telegraph, BBC, Telegraph, Telegraph

 

NEWS UPDATE

A few to catch up on

Cycletta - Women-only cycle rides inclduing at Whipsnade Zoo

The Guardian - Labour must stand by side with women (Yvette Cooper)

The Guardian - Rolls Royce points to lack of female maths and science students (Jill Treanor)

The Guardian - Sheffield council agrees to backpay of thousands of women (Owen Bowcott)

Evening Standard - The one woman Dave needs to listen to (Sarah Sands)

Irish Times - Amen launch abuse campaign (Aoife Carr)

The Guardian - Is Iceland the best country for feminists (Kira Cochrane)

The Guardian  - Is it any wonder women's support for Cameron is dwindling (Jane Martinson) - Ms Martin does not seem to like women who do not share her "all men are bastards" worldview.

Posted by Skimmington

 

GENDER PAY GAP AND THE INDEPENDENT'S INTERNAL CONFLICT

Many of you rightly pointed out (see comments) to Monday's Independent front page  about the gender pay gap being in favour of women for people between 22 and 29 - a story we commented about at the end of last year.

There are as ever two areas to review - firstly the comments section (the Independent piece had 298 comments) which gives those who truly want equality for men and women a voice across the UK.

The second piece is really around the comments and this is where you see the institutional antipathy of men especially by those who 'claim' to believe in equality.

Exhibit 1: Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union

She said: "I am pleased that young females are now earning more but we still have a lot of work to do before we bridge the pay gap between men and women in higher education, especially at professorial level."

So Ms Hunt is happy females are earning more than men, but does not say that we should now look at why men are underperforming (we know why - fewer education grades) and do something about that.

This is where you really do see the antipathy about men - sit on hands.

Exhibit 2:The Independent's leader 

This is a classic example of the conflict between those who believe in equality for both genders and the fear they have of the backlash for saying so. The leader says the gap is both welcome and unwelcome. It cannot be both.

Why does it not just say it is unwelcome if they gap is to widen which it surmises (like this site has) rather than trying to couch it that it is welcome. There is clear tension in their thinking - their emotional brain has been brainwashed by the anti-male feminists (the gap is welcome) while their reason/logic part of the brain is, er, logical (which is why they say it unwelcome).

 Posted by Skimmington