The Rights Of Man

THE TIMES : ANOTHER VOICE IN THE CAMPAIGN FOR FAMILY JUSTICE

In one of the most important media campaigns for many a year, The Times' newspaper campaign for family justice in the courts is one that deserves to win complete praise.

The articles cover the tragedy of how the court works and where the interests of families and children come second to the unaccountable storm troopers from CAFCASS and Social Services.

The Times' specially created site can be found here (link).

There has been much debate about the 42 day detention proposals for terrorist suspects. Well under the family court system, some children and father (big losers when it comes to family courts) and mothers suffer a lifelong sentence, without charge.

We cannot have unelected, unaccountable and unethical people running our family court system any longer. The same type of people who work for councils who snoop on people up and down the country. In a country that claims to be a democracy this has to change.

FEMALE SEXUAL HARASSMENT FIGURES FOIL ANOTHER FEMINIST MYTH

Well, well well, Law firm Peninusla (link) produced a survey about sexual harassment at work by women on men.

According to their figures, four out of five men have suffered sexual harassment at work and 85% of employers admit they take claims of sexual harrassment made by a men less seriously than if made by a women. Links to the story are here (Telegraph, Daily Mail).

David Price of Peninsula said "The majority of men don't feel gender discrimination applies to them, and tend to just accept it. Male employees should not feel they can't report incidents to their employer."

David also debated this issue across the media (go to press section of their web-site).

It now seems month by month, the one sided myths of the feminist fundamentalists are being shattered. The one-sided debate over education, domestic abuse, cancer, the gender pay gap and now this are being challenged.

Those fundamentalists who only run campaigns about men harassing women at work are anti-men, that is what drives them, they can no longer ignore the facts.

If anyone sees campaigns in their workplace that are only aimed at men harassing women, they should challenge those (normally female dominated HR departments) who put them up.

Happy for anyone who sees such campaigns to contact this site.

 

 

 

JACQUI SMITH, HOME SECRETARY STILL IGNORES MALE DOMESTIC ABUSE VICTIMS

Despite the fact that

• the Home Secretary's own Department's British Crime Survey (link - Page 80) states that 40% of men are victims of domestic abuse and that as many men as women are victims of severe force (1.7% and 1.8% respectively);
• the fact that they laughably claim that their policies on domestic abuse are gender neutral as seen by their response to this petition (link)(see future post);
• some parts of the media are changing their tune (see future post);

SHE STILL IGNORES MALE VICTIMS.

In an Government announcement (link) she announced a new wave of specialist domestic violence courts to support victims of domestic abuse. An extra 30 new Specialist Domestic Violence Courts (SDVC) brings the total number of dedicated domestic violence courts across England and Wales to 98.

She is quoted as stating ""We have made good progress on domestic violence over the last ten years but we know there is more to do and I want to reassure women everywhere that keeping them safe from harm is a top government priority."

Does the Government do this on purpose?

Do they do it to wind-up male victims and their friends and families?

Are they just forgetful?

Or are they just institutionally sexist against men?

THE BRIGHTON ARGUS SHOWS ITS IGNORANCE OVER DOMESTIC ABUSE

One of the many complaints from those operating in the sector helping male domestic abuse victims is the ignorance of their plight in the media and the gender discrimination in the reporting. Though media reporting in some quaters has improved with regular features on male victims, other media carry on the distortion.

As well known, two in every five victims are men but some media insist, when running stories on the issue, of just referring to females being vcitims and that men are wife-beaters.

The Brighton Argus has recenly done just that. They run a story on domestic violence courts under the headline "New Court System To Ensnare Wife Beaters" (link).

Well Done Brighton Argus for your balanced reporting!

SAD TALE OF A MALE DOMESTIC ABUSE VICTIM : SOUTHERN ECHO

The Southern Echo ran a piece outlining the sad tale of a male domestic abuse victim. Please follow the link here (link).

MEN IN FORCED MARRIAGES - GOVERNMENT CAUGHT AGAIN OF PURPOSELY TURNING A BLIND EYE TO MEN

In February, it was announced that the Government were looking at a male-only refuge for men and boys who were being forced into marriage. According to the BBC report (link)"it has emerged that 15% of the people who seek help about being forced into wedlock are men or boys." There are 165 refuges for women forced into marriage, none for men.

Foreign Office minister Meg Munn said: "Generally people expect men to be able to look after themselves, to manage situations, so men subject to domestic violence, men subject to forced marriage are likely to find it much, much more difficult."

Firstly, it shows once again, as in the case of the plight of male domestic violence victims, that the Government knows there is a problem affecting men but CHOOSES to ignore it - to purposely turn a blind eye. It has been caught out again, ignoring men.

The second issue, is that male domestic violence victims (of whatever race) have been systematically ignored for decades - there is only one/two refuges for men. However, as soon as race/multi culturalism is brought into it, the Government jumps on the issue, ignoring the fact that many domestic violence victims are also from an ethnic background and they have been ignored.

They have been caught - once of ignoring men when knowing there is a problem and secondly only reacting on an issue because of multi-culturalism/political correctness.

TRACY BROOKS CASE SHOWS ONCE AGAIN WHY MEN SHOULD REMAIN ANONYMOUS UNTIL FOUND GUILTY IN RAPE CASES

The case of Tracy Brooks who had down the years falsely accused five men of rape is a salutary tale (link).

It not only serves as a great disservice to those women who are raped but again shines the spotlight into the way that the criminal justice system 'automatically' believes a man is guilty.

What is also made worse is that a man, once charged, is named irrelevant as to whether he is found guilty. It is too late for those who are found innocent or who eventually have the charges dropped against them, their names have been emblazoned across the media and the friends and work colleagues will never quite believe them.

Often the feminist fundamentalists will state that nothing can be in place that will out off women from coming forward if they have been raped. Of course, that is true, but there is no evidence to state that by keeping a man's identity secret, unless found guilty, would put women off from coming forward.

The current situation is a clear case of sexual discrimination against men and cannot be justified on moral, logical or rational terms.

The Government have looked at it but done nothing about it, no doubt because Harriet Harman QC MP sees it as an opportunity to attack and undermine men

This is one Law that has to be changed.

NEW INITIATIVES FOR MALE DOMESTIC ABUSE VICTIMS

The past few months have seen an increase in activity in the organisiations (albeit still small) in the male victims of domestic abuse sector.

The ManKind Initiative has a new web-site (link)

A new help-line and service has been set up in Wales called Dyn Wales (link) and (link)

A new branch of Men's Aid has been set up in Scotland (link)

HARRIET HARMAN - THE ENEMY OF MEN

This site and many others have often commented on how Harriet Harman, The Deputy Leader of The Labour Party, Cabinet Member, Leader of The Commons and Minister for Women, is the most dangerously anti-male person in the UK. As pointed out here (link), this is not a new phenomena. What makes her such a danger is the fact that she is in power and can actually bring in new laws and rules that actively damage individuals (who happen to be men) and is certainly the leading Marxist feminist in the UK. Whilst other groups can lobby and complain, she can actually do.

The key reason for raising this issue again, is the fact that this week she and her spin doctors were briefing the media about a consultation on changes to the Single Equalities Bill that will stop men (predominately white, but this site is not interested in the racial aspects) from getting jobs because it will allow employers the right to take into account gender when choosing candidates with exactly the same qualifications. 

The change as described and debated in the media (link, link, link, link) will be similar to the so-called 'positive action' (there is no such thing as positive action, because it means negative action for someone else, which means discrimination) schemes in the USA where in areas where there are few women, they get a specila treatment.

This is very dangerous system for men and all men in the UK should be scared because:-

Firstly, it plays to the politically correct game of identity politics and victim status. Instead of treating everyone as an individual whose gender is very much a secondary feature, it places men as the victors in every facet of life and women as victims who need help. It means that a poor boy from Peckham is seen as having more life advantages as a rich girl from Rodean public school (or St.Paul's Girls School which Harmen went to). This is manifestly wrong, immoral and unethical.

Secondly, men will lose out and they will be discriminated against solely on the basis of their gender, so the talents of a man are secondary, it is the fact they are not a woman that counts. There is already too much women-only grants, women-only societies and women-only management courses, many of which are funded by the taxpayer.

Thirdly, it means that the so-called meritocracy is dead, and a new system where your talent and contribution is secondary, it is your gender that is more important. Again, immoral, unethical and wrong in a democratic society.

Fourthly, male discrimination affects women. Men have mothers, sisters, wives/partners and daughters. If a male is discriminated against, then these women are also discriminated against, yet, according to Harman, it is being undertaken in their name.

Fifthly, it will not be applied, it is never is, to areas where men are wholly under-represented. This is especially a consideration in the primary school education sector where only 15% of teachers are male. Local authorities and the other state agencies are infested with feminist fundamentalists who were educated in the 1980's when the fundamentalist cause was born. These women are now in powerful positions and control policy, they do not care about men.

The only conclusion, and is gladdening to see for a change that even organisations like The Fawcett Society are questioning the proposals, is that if any pro-active 'action' consultation becomes law, it will give the green light to systematic discrimination against men, rich or poor, black or white (a black women will benefit from positive action over a black man - she ticks the box twice, he only once) will be systematically discriminated against.

That is why Harriett Harman is the number one enemy of British men.

GMTV FEATURE THE PLIGHT OF MALE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS

The ManKind Initiative are reporting that GMTV (link) on ITV1 are running features on the plight of male domestic violence victims both tomorrow (Wednesday) and Thursday.