The Rights Of Man

GENDER PAY GAP - EXPOSING THE MYTHS OF BRITISH FEMINISTS #3

The Fawcett Society, Britain's leading Feminist Fundamentalist* group, have been running a desperate campaign called "It's a rip off". It can be found here (link).

The aim of the campaign is to show that because of the gender pay gap, women work for free from the 30th October. They also use data showing that the average pay of a mechanic is higher than a carer and that a police officers pay is higher than a nurse. This is to highlight that 'male jobs' pay more than 'female' jobs.

This is as ever misleading because a women and male mechanic would be paid the same (if passing the equal job, talent and experience test (link)).

In addition, as most mechanic positions are in the private sector because they face different economic realities (customers, working hours and profits) than people working in public sector carers job.

In addition, it does not take into account that a police officers job is always going to be paid more than a nurse because of the inherent dangers that a police officer would face relative to a nurse. Some police officers die in the line of duty, how many nurses do?

This campaign is nonsense and shows a sign of desperation in keeping the feminist gender pay gap agenda going. They received far less publicity this year when the gender pay gap figures were published than in recent years.

This is because over the last year, people have been looking at the gap in a rational economic fashion rather than just accepting the siren calls from organisations such as The Fawcett Society, The Equal Opportunities Commission and the Minister for Women. Let us hope this desperation continues because it just shows them up. 

* People and organisations that want women to have more rights than men

GENDER PAY GAP - 2007 STATISTICS PUBLISHED

The gender pay gap statistics for 2007 were published today by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) today (link).

They show that the gap (median level) is at the lowest since records began - 12.6% from 12.8% in 2006

At a mean level, the gap has also reduced to 17.2% from 17.5% respectively.

What is interesting is that the ONS have produced a good explanation (see below) on why there are differences which coincide with the arguments made in the last two posts (link) (link). This should help take the wind out of the sails of the Feminist Fundamentalists who decry the gap as being a clear sign of sexual discrimination and thereby allowing them to promote the need for women to receive extra help at the expense of men.

"Women's weekly earnings, including overtime, were lower than men's. This was partly because they worked fewer paid hours per week."

"Although median hourly pay provides a useful comparison between the earnings of men and women, it does not necessarily indicate differences in rates of pay for comparable jobs. Pay medians are affected by the different work patterns of men and women, such as the proportions in different occupations and their length of time in jobs."

GENDER PAY GAP - EXPOSING THE MYTHS OF THE BRITISH FEMINISTS #2

On November 7th, the new gender pay gap statistics will be published by the Office of National Statistics.

As stated in previous posts (link) (link) (link) and (link), this gap is used annually by Britain's feminist fundamentalists* to call for more positive discrimination (which means negative discrimination for men) and to attack men who they portray as sexist and want women to be kept down or stay in the kitchen etc. This nonsense is then repeated ad nauseum on the BBC, The Guardian and other havens of the politically correct, with no dissenting voices.

This week, the feminists will misuse and treat the statistics in a way that would shame a GCSE statistics student. They will state that because there is a difference, it has to be caused by sexual discrimination. However, they will offer no proof because they have no proof and cannot find the proof. They make the attack based on their pre-ordained politically correct view that any difference between men and women has to be because of evil men and the evil system that men run. They would receive an Ungraded if they made this assumption in a statistics exam without any proof.

To be clear, there is a gap between women and men's pay but that is not down to sexual discrimination, it is down to lifestyle, choice and the innate difference between men and women.

Discrimination can only be proved if a woman earns less than a man working the same hours for the same company, in the same roles, with equal talent, equal experience and adds the same economic value. Any difference in these factors between any one man and any one woman is not sexual discrimination.

The difference between men and women's pay is due to:-

1. Women take time out from their careers to have children - Many women, in agreement with their male partners, choose to have children and choose to take time out from their careers to bring up their children in their early years or longer. It means they will not have income during those years. It means that men at work at the same company for example, will be earning money and when that woman goes back to work, the man will likely to be earning more because he has more experience having not had a career break. In addition, the woman's male partner will likely to be working longer hours and working hard to make up for the shortfall in family income.  This is not sexism.

2. Women with children value flexibility rather than money - Many women when they have children value the flexibility of a job/career where they can drop off and pick up their children from school etc. It means they work less hours than an equivalent man and also know that there will be a trade-off economically. The effect of the feminists when they patronisingly call for more female-friendly hours is that they ignore the impact on the company and also the impact of men and childless women who have to cover and change their work patterns.

3. Men work longer hours, work in dangerous/dirty jobs and work unsocial hours - women do not and do not want to.   A recent study (link) showed that women work (in employment) 175 minutes per day and men work 280 minutes and 61% in a BBC poll said that men work harder than women. In addition, men perform more dangerous and dirty jobs than women (building /maintenance trades, armed forces, engineering etc) and there is higher pay to compensate for this. In addition, more men work unsocial hours and again, they receive more pay because of this. It is not to say that women cannot do these jobs, it is just they choose not to. 

4. More women work in the lower paid public sector than men and vice versa - Statistics show (link) that public sector employment is made up of 65% women and 35% men and for the private sector it is 59% men and 41% women. With pay generally being lower in the public sector than the private sector, then this will also contribute to the gap and will be nothing to do with sexual discrimination.

In conclusion, this week will be another opportunity for Britain's feminist fundamentalists to launch another unwarranted attack on men, employers and anyone who challenges their view that the gender pay gap is down to sexual discrimination. They will use the opportunity to attack men and call for more powers to be used to promote women, women-only management/training courses and undeserved promotions.

All this undermines equality of opportunity, will lead to men being discriminated against in the workplace (leapfrogged by less talented women to bump up the number of women in managerial positions because it makes the statistics looks better and denied access to extra courses/training) and of course, perpetuate the myths of Britain 's feminist fundamentalists. You have been warned.

*Minister for Women, Equal Opportunities Commission, Commision for Equality and Human Rights, The Fawcett Society, BBC, The Guardian etc 

GENDER PAY GAP - EXPOSING THE MYTHS OF BRITISH FEMINISTS #1

This week, the gender pay gap statistics for 2007 will be published and the figures will undoubtedly show that men overall get paid more than women.

This will lead to the annual siren call in the media from feminist fundamentalists (Minister for Women, Shadow Minister for Women, Commission for Equality and Human Rights, Fawcett Society etc) whose misuse of the figures would shame a GCSE statistics student.

They will harangue every man in the country because they will say it is all down to sexual discrimination without any proof. They will then call for more rights for women which not only is against the ethos of equality but also will discriminate against men.

As part of the gender pay gap week, this site will confront and publish material that exposes the myths of these feminist fundamentalists.

American Warren Pharrell, Ph.D. has exposed the lies and myths of feminists in his book 'Why Men Earn More" (link).

You can also watch a classic intervew here:-

2007 GENDER PAY GAP - STATISTICS TO BE PUBLISHED 7TH NOVEMBER

The new gender pay gap statistics for 2006/07 will be published on Wednesday 7th November 2007 as part of the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (produced by the Office of National Statistics).

Look out for the annual abuse of the statistics by feminist fundamentalists so they can attack men and promote discriminatory measures* such as specialist help/support for women which then denies men equality in the workplace.

More on this later....

* In the guise of positive discrimination, which in practice means negative discrimination for men.

£22 MILLION EXTRA COST OF NEW 'EQUALITIES' COMMISSION REVEALED

The grandly titled Equalities and Human Rights Commission which took over from the anti-male Equal Opportunities Commission will cost £22 million more per year to run.

As revealed in the Daily Mail (link), the EHRC, a supposedly more streamlined body, took over from the Commission for Racial Equality, the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Commission for Racial Equality will cost £70 million per year instead of £48 million.

Who will benefit from this extra money that the humble British taxpayer has to pay for? Not men of course.

MORE KEN LIVINGSTONE SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MEN - BLACK CABS

Mayor of London Ken Livingstone, once again this week showed that he is proud to discriminate against men and wants more of it.

This time, he is offering preferential treatment to women preferential treatment so they can gain 'The Knowledge' needed to become a black cab driver in London. This move includes language, numeracy and childcare support.

If you are man, you get nothing, if you are a women, all the help you can get. Many men spend years learning The Knowledge often having to sacrifice their spare time whilst they earn a lving elsewhere. This sacrifice often includes time away from family (which includes women of course). The story is covered here (link).

Livingstone is seeking re-election next May, no man should vote for him.

"WOMEN UNWILLING TO BREAK GLASS CEILING ON SENIOR POSITIONS" - NOT SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION

The Fawcett Society and the Equal Opportunities Commission have often complained that the lack of women in senior positions in UK companies is down to some form of sexual discrimination. They do this in an unthinking knee-jerk fashion without looking to see whether there are any other reasons. Then they propose positive discrimination policies that will lead to discrimination against men or just go into their typical male bashing mode

At the end of September, The Financial News (link), a City based weekly newspaper delved into this and found that lack of aspiration and financial motivation, might be to blame. The article can be seen here (link).

The article lists interesting reasons which will help in dismissing the mind-set of those who blame gaps in female pay or boardroom status on discrimination. The key issues that are identified are:-

"... a growing number of employment lawyers and consultants argue that [the lack of women in the boardroom] this is less down to overt sex discrimination and more of a question of a lack of ambition, unwillingness to ask for big pay rises and different motivation from their male counterparts.

Read the article for more detail. 

EQUAL RIGHTS CHARITY, PARITY, REVAMP WEB-SITE

Britain's only genuinely equal rights campaigning group, Parity, have revamped their web-site (link). It is first rate.

PARITY have been a trailblazing organisation fighting for equality. PARITY was first formed in 1986 as the Campaign for Equal State Pension Ages, a wholly voluntary organisation concerned with the equal rights of men and women. 

It has led where other supposedly equal rights groups like the now defunct Equal Opportunities Commission and other feminist organisations have hid away because they did not want to support genuine equality. They only support women's causes and nothing will change under the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights.

Through litigation in the courts applying European Union or European Convention law binding (by statute or treaty) in the UK, PARITY has instigated cases resulting in:

• equal qualifying ages for men and women - for exemption from NHS prescription charges (1995), for winter fuel payments (2000), and for local bus travel concessions (2003), and
• equal treatment for widowers and widows in survivors social security benefits and bereavement tax allowances (2000).

Their new web-site also includes sections on men's health, boy's education, sex discrimination, equal parenting and also male victims of domestic abuse.

10,000 PEOPLE SIGN PETITION OVER MALE DISCRIMINATION IN POLICE PENSIONS

A government e-petition organised by DC Mick Pearson of Greater Manchester police revealed clear sexist anti-male discrimination in the way that final lump sums are paid by the police pension schemes. Over 10,000 people signed the petition (link).

He found that on retirement, a female police office will recieve £12,000 more than a male officer and as revealed by Personnel Today (link), a female superintendent could recieve £26,000 more. This, despite, the fact that a woman could pay less.

This is a clear case of where men are sexually discriminated against. There has been rightfully an outcry on some women losing out on pensions because they have looked after their children and for other reasons. Nothing on an issue like this though, no outcry from the Equal Opoortunities Commission or the Guardian/BBC.

DC Pearson is quoted in Personnel Today as stating,  “Not all females live longer than males – and many other factors come into it, for example, some ethnic groups may live less than others, people who smoke tend to live less, or hereditary factors.

“To offer women higher lump sum payments purely because they are women is discrimination.”

He added: “Everybody should be treated equally – if it’s a financial investment, we all pay the same contributions each year, so we should all get the same contributions back.

“I don’t think the scheme should take into account different factors like gender, or factors such as hereditary disease or health factors [like life insurance funds do] as this is a financial investment – we should all get the same. Even if it’s legal, it’s still unfair.”

Pearson tried to raise the inequality between men and women in lump-sum police pension payments with the Police Federation three years ago, but said he was frustrated to find they “took the attitude that rules are rules – and they were set in stone”.

He is again calling on the Police Federation to review the current system. “The petition will be put before the new Prime Minister, and I can use it as a basis to ask the Police Federation to do something,” he said.