The Rights Of Man

REJOICE AS THE EQUALITIES COMMISSION IS TO SUFFER MASSIVE CUTS

The London Evening Standard reported that the resolutely anti-male Equalities and Human Rights Commission is going to see its budget cut from £60 million down to £22.5 million and its 460 staff halved.

As reported previously with the scrapping of the Women's National Commission, this is good news.

The Equalities Commission which supposedly is there as a government quango to ensure there is equality between men and woman (and other groups) is completely and utterly anti-male. They constantly campaign on the mythical gender pay gap, want discrimination against men to ensure there are more women in politics (abig supporters of gender quotas / all women-shortlists) as well as ensuring there is no support for men in terms of education, domestic abuse, pensions, health and unemployment.

They never run campaigns or information about discrimination against men but they are sign up to every campiagn going if it attacks men. They are proud of it!

The cuts are important because it should mean it is less pro-women and anti male because it employs less anti-male people and cannot run as many campaigns. In a rational political era, one that is not infested with anti-male feminists, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission could have been a vehicle of change for men. Unfortunately those who run it and mainly those who work for it, dislike men intensely. We are better off without it.

Posted by Skimmington

IN THE NAME OF EQUALITY WILL THE GOVERNMENT LISTEN TO MEN'S REPRESENTATIVES THEN?

A kindly soul has sent over the text from the latest newsletter from the Government 'Equalities' Office (taxpayer funded remember with 100 staff!) which says:

Following the closure of the Women's National Commission, GEO has developed a new approach to  enable women and women's organisations to interact more closely and directly with government. As part of this, GEO will be holding a briefing event for UK NGO's on Wednesday 19th January prior to the UN Commission on the Status of Women 55th Session.

The GEO will also be sending regular updates to partner women's organisations, with the first one later this month, and publishing a dedicated web page as part of our engagement activity. There will also be an outreach programme to discuss key issues with government ministers.

As argued at the turn of the year, this government is no better than the anti-male Labour government of the past and this simply adds further proof.

The issue is not so much that the government is having a dialogue with groups representing women and making a big deal about it - it is the fact that they are having no similar dialogue (and making a big deal out of it ) with men's groups.

It is not as if the government could have an issue with mainstream groups like: Families Need Fathers, The ManKind Initiative, Mankind Counselling, The Men's Health Forum, The Men's Network, False Allegations Support Organisation, CALM, The Prostate Cancer Society and many many more. They even help fund some of them!

This site keeps reiterating that this government, just like the last, has no real interest in addressing issues that negatively affect men (and boys) and is guilty of a form of covert institutional sexual and gender discrimination against men. It is because rather than saying it is not interested in male issues, it just ignores them, turns a blind eye and hopes no one will notice.

Here it says it will speak to women's groups but has no interest in speaking to men's group. How is that equality from the Government Equalities Office?

It is another case of discrimination by omission just like the fact that men get a half hearted sentence (and only Caribbean boys at that) in its gender equality strategy. 

Posted by Skimmington

2010 - ANOTHER BAD YEAR AND ANOTHER BAD GOVERNMENT FOR BRITISH MEN

When the coalition government came together (also with lots of new MP's) there was some hope that the prospects for equality for men would improve after 13 years of a proudly anti-male Labour government with Deputy Leader, Harriet Harman, proudly proclaiming her anti-male credentials.

When the coalition government came to power, there were a number of positive things it outlined. Family law reform (still pending), anonymity for rape defendants unless found guilty and a commitment not to implement the controversial 'positive' discrimination sections of the Equality Act specifically designed to undermine the employment chances of men. Plus there was a general feeling that there would no longer be the harsh anti-male tone of the previous Government.

There were still troubling issues such as the fact that there was again a Minister for Women but no Minister for Men (how can a government state it believes in equality and have a Minister for one gender and not for the other, if it has to them at all). It also talked about equality in the boardroom (now going ahead), continuing with pension age discrimination and also nothing on men's health or education.

So what has happened, well its worse than we feared:

(1) The government performed a heinous u-turn on anonymity for rape defendants.

(2) The controversial section (section 159) of the Equality Act was implemented (on the link see latest news on 2nd December 2010) and hidden in the small print on its announcement on its Equality Strategy (see 8 below). This pernicious part of the Act was substantially covered on this site (1 and 2 ) and the u-tunr was covered in the Telegraph, Daily Mail, Metro, Daily Telegraph 2, Daily Telegraph 3

(3) Still no Minister for Men

(4) The government adopted the End Violence against Women & Girls strategy which has meant that male victims of rape and domestic abuse do not feature in government, police or local authority plans in tackling rape or domestic abuse. The outcome can be seen by the way the government handled its trials on 'stop' orders which were framed at female victims (thereby setting the tone for the way the police will handle the issue) or its Christmas campaign. For an example of how it percolates through the system, see a response the ManKind Initiative recently received from the Equalities Commission.

(5) Its continuing and deliberate misinterpretation of the gender pay gap, even though we now know younger women earn more than younger men. Plus resurrecting the issue that there are not enough women in the boardroom (1 and 2) and stating it has an aspiration to ensure 50% of appointees to public bodies are female.

Lord Mervyn Davies who is leading the taskforce looking at the female make up of boardroom has already declared "let's put women first for 2011". I kid you not. With this and the Equality Act, men are being shut out, make no mistake. Academies for female executives, board internships and now the 30% club.

Equality should mean the best people, now basing people on their gender but that is now what is happening and in many circumstances men (and of course that means their wife/partner or daughter as well) will lose out because good men will be held back to allow a woman with less skill to take their place. How can this be equality, gender is irrelevant.

Can Lord Mervyn Davies hand on heart say that a black boy from a run-down council estate attending a sink school has more chance of being on a board of a FTSE-100 company that a white girl living in Knightsbridge and going to a private school. Davies thinks so. 

(6) No action on boy's education, men's health (Prostate Cancer society article shows why) or suicide (80% of young people committing suicide are men).

(7) No one in Parliament (including the 232 new MP's - 35% of the total) and certainly no one in the Government is standing up for men and men's issues. It means the anti-male feminists in all parties are again riding roughshod over the true meaning of equality and doing all the can to marginalise men. 

(8) And finally - the coup de grace - the government's shiny new Equality Strategy - Building a Fairer Britain. At no stage (except fleetingly on Caribean boys)  does it ever mention men and boys or the isuses facing them. None of them in this post are ever mentioned. Nothing on education, higher rates of unemployment, health, suicide - just example after example on issues affecting women.

The Equality Strategy published this month, makes it completley clear - this governement is no better and no more interested than the last in tackling issues that affect men & boys (and consequently their mothers, sisters, daughters and wives/partners/girlfriends).

It actually wants to make things worse not just by the overt discrimination (see 1, 2,3,4 and 5 above) but the covert discrimination of discrimination by omission. And with Parliamentary terms lasting five years now, we have over four years of this to go.

There have been a few advances, equality of pesnion age, a family review still pending (who know what the result will be) and Mirko Fischer's BA win. Plus some organisations seem to be pushing more and more (Men's Network, ManKind Initiative, Prostate Cancer Society, Families Need Fathers, Parity, False Allegations Support Organisation, Men's Health Forum amongst others) and they will need to be encouraged by us all to continue.

However, looking back, the hopes at the beginning of the year have proved unfounded and it is clear that things have got worse in 2010 for men and boys.

Posted by Skimmington 

FAWCETT SOCIETY LOSE LAUGHABLE BUDGET CLAIM BUT DANGEROUS PRECEDENTS ARE SET

When of the clear cases of hypocrisy in the so-called Feminist movement in the last few years as been their lies about the unemployment during this recession.

First we had Harman and Co saying the recession had affecting women in the private sector more than men. This was nailed as an untruth by the Government's own Office of national Statistics (here and here).

Then when the effects of the recession and government over-spending became clear and the need for retrenchment ion the public sector had top be made, there were the squeals of horror that this effected women more than men, and therefore had to be stopped.

We have argued long and hard on the site about the hypocrisy of this and also that any cuts in a woman's job or in benefits effects men as well (here and here).

The Fawcett Society, Britain's leading McCarthyite 'every man is a potential woman-hater'  anti-male organisation, challenged the UK government in the courts about the government's Budget in July this year and the fact they had not carried out an assessment on its effects on women and also that it affected women more than men. They wanted a Judicial Review of the Budget but Judge Ouseley refused on Monday. There response is here.

However, it is not all good news.

Firstly, the government admitted it had not considered a gender assessment of the Budget. It did so for the Comprehensive Spending Review in October which now means this type of assessment is now entrenched as the 'normal' way of policy-making. The government should of course repeal the rule forcing it to make such assessments as this was introduced by Harman and Co in the last government.

Secondly, the Judge says the Equalities Commission should carry out such a review, which then extends their power and influence. The government has to scrap this body but will be scared to do so because of the strength of the oxymoron - the so called 'equalities' lobby.

Thirdly, it gives more credibility to the Fawcett Society when they deserve absolutely none. Few if any real normal women support this orgainsation  - only political activists do.  

Lastly, it sets a precedent for this sort of activity through the courts, so all government's will be wary of upsetting the women's lobby. No one cares about the male equality so when it comes to making policy decisions they will become even more anti-male because they would be afraid of upsetting women's groups so they overcompensate. This will be unconscious and back of the mind decision-making leading to discrimination which will damage men and boys.

The Fawcett Society have made progress which is bad news for men and boys, and for all those women who like sharing their lives with men and boys.

Posted by Skimmington

Media cioverage  - Catherine McKinnell in the Guardian (one of the most laughable articles ever published and please read the comments section as well) and Press Association.

 

 

MORE RECOGNITION ON THE PLIGHT OF BOYS IN BRITISH SCHOOLS - BUT IS IT GROUNDHOG DAY?

The lack of male teachers has always been a strong theme here, an issue ignored for too long by policymakers who want to do nothing that could be seen as being helpful to men/boys.

This has left a dearth of male role models in school especially at a primary level, even more serious if after is not in the home (barred by the family courts/CSA as much as anything else) and has made some contribution to the continuing problem of boys falling way behind girls at school.

The lack of male teachers has not been helped by the "all men are potential paedophiles" atmosphere we live in. So much so that 25% of primary schools (4,700) do not have a male teacher.

The latest GSCE results show the damage done to two generations of boys education when exam-based O-levels (boy friendly because of their pressurised and competitive nature) were replaced with coursework and continuous assessment (girl friendly) and will still take decades to close (check out the amazingly warped last para in this Guardian article!). Boys are ahead/level at maths but way behind girls at English at 11 (Telegraph, Guardian, Daily Mail)

However, there is change on the horizon to ensure another generation of boys are not blighted by an education system that does not meet their needs thereby relegating them to second class status.

Firstly, there is a report by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission due to be published tomorrow which highlights the gender gap. It will be an interesting read especially in what it proposes in the support for boys because the Commission is notoriously anti-male and has done nothing in its three year existence to highlight or take action on discrimination against men and boys.

Secondly, the AQA exam board will offer only exam-based GCSE's, at last giving parents of boys the opportunity and choice on an exam system that suits their sons, rather than have to put up with an exam-system that only favours girls (girls and boys should be able to choose exam boards so they can sit courses that suit their relative strengths).

Thirdly, there are groups like this trying to attact more male teachers into primary schools and that there is more proactive studies (Standard, Independent, PA) and suggestions being put in place, rather than as previously seeing the problem and then not bothering to do anything about it (move along Harriet, there is nothing to see here).

Lastly, there was this cracking show (Gareth Malone's Extraordinary School for Boys) on the BBC about how to get boys re-engaged with education. What was the magic formula, er..., allow boys to act like boys.

Perhaps some progress will start to be made, maybe the change in Government has meant people are no longer scared to look at it without being hounded, but we cannot afford to see another generation of boys being left behind.

Posted by Skimmington

   

 

 

CONSERVATIVES FAIL TO IMPLEMENT MOST PERNICIOUS ANTI-MALE PARTS OF EQUALITIES ACT

This week saw the implementation of the Equalities Act which essentially merges all of the myriad pieces of equalities legalisation in the UK (including the Sexual Discrimination Act) plus add a few more issues. This was a Labour Government Act of Parliament, not a Coalition Government one.

Two of the most pernicious anti-male parts of the Act were that companies with more than 250 employees would have to publish the gap between average pay for male and female employees, and, companies would be allowed to 'positively' discriminate against employees or potential employees if one group was supposedly under-represented.

Gender Pay Gap

The gender pay gap issue is one of the most Orwellian examples of the misuse of statistics in the Western World as oft explained on the site as the statistics are spun to suggest women get paid less than men for doing the same job. That is a lie and people like Ceri Goddard, Chief Executive of our friends at the Fawcett Society (misleadingly described by the BBC as an organisation campaigning for gender equality) who said that "rowing back on the requirement for big business to take action on any differences between the pay of men and women employees is tantamount to endorising the shocking pay gap". The BBC published this but had no one telling her she is talking nonsense. However, the Government has said it will force companies to implement this in 2013.

The problem is the gender pay gap is another weapon for people like Goddard, Harman and all the anti-male people who infest our country who just want to attack men and beat us up. The gender pay gap is a myth.

'Positive' Discrimination

The Labour Government had brought in clauses to the Equalities Act that would allow companies to discriminate in favour of someone's protected group (race, gender, disability etc)  were under-represented at that company. For example, a company with more male employees could give a job to a female if a man and a woman applying were equally qualified. The Conservatives, when in opposition, opposed the wide ranging definition and to be honest opposed the whole concept. This has been well covered on the site.

It was confirmed by the BBC that this had not been implemented and was not going to be the now Conservative/Liberal Democrat Government.

That is really good news as the intention behind the Act was always to give more employment opportunities to women at the cost of opportunities to men, even though more men are unemployed.

Opportunities

It is not all doom and gloom though. There remains opportunities for men who are dicriminated against. All public authorities currently have to comply with the gender equality duty to ensure that their services meet the needs of both men and women. This is wrapped up now into a Single Equality Duty (comes into force in April 2011). Whenever a man is not being served by his council, police force, Government, NHS or any other statutory body on the basis of him being a man, that body is breaking the Act.

Summary

It is good news overall that the Coalition Government has put the brakes on the most offending pieces of legalisation but it is worth keeping a keen eye on it. In fact, it would have been better if parts the Act had been repealed because if a Labour Government ever got elected again, they would bring the clauses in the Act straight back in (it would literally be at a stroke of a pen). I can hear Harman making a note in her diary right now.

Posted by Skimmington

  

 

 

IN THE NAME OF EQUALITY - SCRAP THE GOVERNMENT EQUALITIES OFFICE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE SPENDING REVIEW

Last week the BBC obtained a Government leak highlighting what Government department and quangos were for the chop in the coming Comprehensive Spending Review. In itself it is a fascinating list but it is worthwhile as ever to look a bit closer.

Page 11 shows that the Women's National Commission is to be abolished and its functions brought into the perversely named, Government Equalities Office (a body that costs UK taxpayers a whopping £69 million per year). Perversely, in that, it has no interest in the equal rights of men who make up 49% of the British population.

Set up in 1969 it says it provides a unique and independent voice working on women's equality with a specvial role to fulfil and an important remit with the UK's equality framework. As a non-departmental public body it is funded by the taxpayer (£661,000 - see last answer) but can speak freely. The home of their site shows arch-feminist Baroness Gould  plead with the Government not to scrap it.

That would be equality of course because there is no Men's National Commission being funded by the taxpayer and supported by a Government Department. It will go underground, the work will continue but not in the open.

However, the body's functions will be transferred remember so do not get out the bunting quite yet.

Another interesting aside is that the infamous women's rights anti-male charity, the Fawcett Society, has not issued one  missive or press release crying about the proposal. Why so, when if anyone suggests anything that could potentially have a negative effect on a woman, this August organisation is 'manning' the barricades and issuing press releases and missives all over the airwaves. Could it be that of the Women's National Commission is scrapped they can lay their hands on the title of being the UK's leading organisation giving voice to women. Of course it is, they have seen a vacuum and want to take the Commission's place. That's why there is silence. They cannot fool us!

On the same list obtained by the BBC, the fate of the other perversely named Equalities and Human Rights Commission has yet to be decided. Costing £60 million per year (2008/09), this organisation which combines the former Disabled, Race and Equal Opportunities Commissionsdoes nothing to support men. All of its campaigns on gender are about women (even on the recent Budget when it complained it would hit women - but no mention of how the recession in the private sector hit men the hardest) and is another public body guilty of sexual discrimination against by omission.

 Every gender issue is always about men having power over women and making their lives a misery. There is never a study onto boys education, the lack of monies for male cancers, suicide rates, domestic violence (they told the ManKind Initiative to bugger off) or even the family courts (the Ministry of Justice admit men and grandparents think their is a problem yet the Equalities Commission you nothing, not even a squeak).

It forgets men (and boys) exist even though it believes we are equal. We have run so many stories about their inadequacy they have their own content list and were slammed by a Select Committee earlier this year. It could have been a useful organisation but it does not care about men.

While it is welcome news that the WNC is going and would be great if the Equalities Commission went for a Burton, there remains the concern that there would still remain a Government Equlaities Office.

It says that it employs 100 people and that it 'takes a lead on issues relating to women, sexual orientation and transgender equalities matters.' Read it again.

The Governments's Equalities Office does not believe that equality covers men as well. To make matters worse, this is not something that has been investigated it is there proud as punch on the home page of their website (only one of the six people featured on its home page is a male).

The hypocrisy continues as it's board of ten only has three men, it employs 65% women and it has a gender pay gap of -7.7%. This is no typo, because women are paid on average 7.7% more than men in the department it is classed as a negative pay gap because to them all pay gaps are about men being paid more than women. Classic Orwell.

There is no point in closing the Women's National Commission and the Equailities and Human Rights Commission if the Government's Equalities Office is not scrapped either. It is as anti-male as the other two bodies and none have an interest in applying the concept of equality to men. 

Go on Osborne and the Coalition, if you truly believe in equality you will scarp all three. That would be equality in its truest sense. 

Posted by Skimmington

RECOGNITION FOR MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE - SOME PROGRESS BUT STILL LIKE PUSHING BOULDERS UPHILL

A constant issue is often the way that the media forget that men can also be victims of domestic abuse.

Part of the problem is that they are constantly being fed by organisations like Women's Aid and Refuge who live off the mega-million-pound domestic abuse industry and do not want the money shared around to male victims. Also they are being fed only side of the story by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission as well as organisations like the Government's Equalities Office (which incidentally has a budget of £69 million reduced from a massive £83 million in 07/08!!).

But legally the Government has to ensure legislation applies equally to male and female victims and often it will make announcements that affect all victims but these are written up by the media as if they only apply to female victims. A recent article (The Media's Invisible Men) on the ManKind Initiative website (they have also update their stats package) shows how this occurred recently when the Home Secretary  and Minister for Women spoke about a New York style system of keeping tabs on perpetrators.

Much of the media then converted the story into one about wife beaters when the system applies to perpetrators from both genders and Theresa May never mentioned wife beaters once. The Guardian repeated the trick in this article. Still May is hardly blameless in forgetting about men on this issue.

There has been progress in some quarters though and some has been covered here on the site  but additionally.

Firstly, new Oxford West and Abingdon MP, Nicola Blackwood, covered the issue of male victims in her Maiden Speech in Parliament, though this is tempered by the fact that Baroness Scotland has maintained her position as Chairman of the All Party Group on Domestic Violence (with Caroline Flint alarmingly as Secretary) so male victims have absolutely no chance of getting any semblance of a hearing or recognition with those two running it.

Secondly, a few new groups have sprung up including in Derbyshire (good ITV feature on it) and in Scotland (which must be better than the Government funded Mens Advice Line who are running a Scottish helpline and are a sub charity of Respect - who do nothing for female perpetrators becuase they do not believe they exist). De Gwynedd Women's Aid also changed its name to show it supported men as well.

Other coverage not covered on this site before includes the plight of Kieron Bell (This Morning and Daily Mirror).

Some progress is being made but it still does feel like it is pushing a boulder uphill.

Posted by Skimmington

WHY CAN'T CANCER RESEARCH COPY IRELAND'S MEN'S HEALTH FORUM

 

In a variation on Cancer Research UK's discriminatory Run For Life event the Men’s Health Forum Ireland is drawing attention to the need for focus on men’s health needs through runs for men, and women willing to dress as men! A fun idea to highlight the issues and raise money. Happening in September the Forum seems, with these runs, to have combined the idea of raising the issues and money without a blanket exclusion policy.

Meanwhile last year Cancer Research UK published the results of the most comprehensive research into the risks and treatment of all major cancers. The results shocked the researchers themselves.

 

Men are 70% more likely to die of cancers that are not sex specific (and 40% more likely if all cancers are included). Though such research indicates that many lives would be saved if there is little in the way of  action. CRUK in their own research establish men are more likely to contract all forms of cancer (apart from those specific to sex) and very much more likely to die in all apart from Melanomas.

 

However they continue to wriggle and squirm to avoid an inclusive approach to their Runs for Life. They may be correct that many men would prefer to do more challenging fundraising events, but why exclude those who do want to participate? Even better how about picking up the idea from Ireland to highlight men’s need for earlier diagnosis and treatment?

 

Posted by Adrian Ashby

 

Coverage of CR UK reseaerch is here - Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily Telegraph and BBC

 

Editor's Note - Please read this article about John Taylor's fight for equality in the Yorkshire Press

 

 

COALITION'S NEW PUBLIC BODY ASPIRATION HEAPS ON MORE DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MEN

As each day goes by the Coalition Government is exhibiting more and more of the Marxist feminist anti-male traits of its predecessor. As set out here it is backtracking on equality issues all the time extinguishing any hope that men will no longer be treated as second class citizens.

Last week, the Coalition Government announced that it had aspirations on the following:

1. By the end of the Parliament at least half of all new appointees being made to the boards of public bodies will be women

2.Business Minister Edward Davey and Lynne Featherstone, Minister for Equalities, have today announced that Lord Davies of Abersoch will develop a business strategy to increase the number of women on the boards of listed companies in the UK (covered here and here).

As this site and any one who believes in equality knows, positive action means negative action for someone else and that someone else is always men. This is what makes the Equality Act anything but about equality, when employers can discriminate against people because of their gender (the powers not yet taken by the Governement - interesting)

This of course is no difference to what Harman, Flint, the Fawcett Society and the Equalities Commission wanted before the election. Plus Ca Change.

The Government has tried to couch the policy on public bodies by stating that it will be based on merit. But we all know what happens in the real world of politics behind closed doors.

Good men will be weeded out at the selection process, subtle pressure put on public bodies to meet their target, even non-subtle targets (you'll lose funding if you don't appoint a woman), retiring men being replaced automatically by a women and of course there will be the full blown pressure put on public bodies to toe the line. Now this aspiration has been made, Harman will not let them forget it.

This is not an aspiration, in the real body politic world this is a hard and fast policy and woe betide any public body not meeting it. Because in reality if you have an aspiration you will do all you can to achieve it and if it looks like it is not working you will move heaven and earth to do so, and blow the issues of meritocracy or legality. Has any Government not wanted to meet an aspiration and gear policy both overtly and covertly towards meeting it? Never.

This aspiration is a policy and it is the end of meritocracy. All that matters is your gender, your ability is irrelevant.

Posted by Skimmington

Media Coverage - Telegraph, Independent, Independent