The Rights Of Man

NEWS UPDATE

Just a few articles, including one following up from yesterday:

Daily Mail - Father falsely acused of being a paedophile by ex-wife tells his story (Jenny Johnson) - Proof of the power of the false accusation.

Daily Mail - Wicked women jailed for crying rape

ManKind Initiative - Sponsor Emily Spink at the Great North Run

Evening Standard - Feminist group plans cuts backlash (Anna Davis) - Did they see the GCSE results this week?

Financial Times - Why women are losing the battle for jobs (Liz Bolshaw) - Does the author of this actually look at the unemployment figures which show far more men are unemployed!

Daily Telegraph - Legal case stops expats moving children abroad (Henry Brookman)

BBC - Tubecrush site taking pictures of men on the Underground (Matt Cooke): Women are allowed to post pictures of men without their permission but not the other way - an everyday example of sexism against men in the UK.

Posted by Skimmington

MORE SICKENING STORIES OF FALSE ACCUSATIONS

Despite the attempts of this government and the last to ignore the damage that false accusations causes men (this government bottled giving defendents anonymity unless found guilty and also have made it easier for men to be taken from their homes without court approved evidence on domestic abuse) more and more others in positions of power are fully aware of the problem.

This week, there has been two significant stories.

Firstly, there was the story of Patrick Clark who was unfairly sacked because of a false accusation by his former partner (covered by STV ) and won his case against his employer (a chairty) on the grounds of sexual discrimination and unfair dismissal. Worth reading the three comments on the STV story. 

The other story this week was sickening where a mother coached her daughter into making sex abuse claims against her father (Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail). The work of Victoria Haigh and also the female private investigator were shameful and for once British justice was balanced and fair to a man who was having his life ruined.

For all those who downplay the damage of false allegations and false accusations, these two powerful stories show why those who ignore the issue do so because they choose to. Why do those with such loud voices remain silent?

Posted by Skimmington

HIGH COURT JUDGE THINKS £4 BILLION DISCRIMINATION AGAINST NHS WIDOWERS IS RIGHT

Last month we reported that Iain Cockburn was taking the government to court over the fact that he received less pension because he was a widower than if he had been a widow.

While the government admitted it was discriminatory it still challenged his claim and it has won!

Yes you are right to read it. The judges said the discrimination is fair as it was "objectively and reasonably justified".

Mr Justice Supperstone,said : ‘in my view the absence of the non-dependant widower’s pension prior to the 1989 regulations was objectively justified.  

‘There is no evidence that overall female members in the scheme were in any different position to that of women in society and in the workforce as a whole.’

That is such sexism.

Such is the disdain the judiciary and establishment has for ensuring that equality applies to men too. Silence from the Minister for Equalities, as ever.

The Department of Health has said it would cost £4 billion to rectify. That shows the cost of the discrimination against men and also the discrimination against those poor women in the NHS who had died as they would not want their widowers to lose out because they were men.

When there were campaigns against women being unfarily paid less than men on the same grade at councils, if the same logic applied, then this would have been acceptable before 1988, and therefore they would not be entitled to have back their 'missing' pay before that year. Rightly nonsense, but the judges think it is OK if you are a man. 

Posted by Skimmington

Media coverage: Result covered in Professional Pensions (original story on Professional Pensions) and GP online plus background coverage in Daily Mail, Birmingham Post, Daily Telegraph

CLARE'S LAW MUST BE CLARE AND CLIVE'S LAW

The papers this morning (Telegraph and Daily Mail) are previewing the launch of  the "Clare's Law" which will allow women to ask the police if their boyfriend/partner has been convicted for being violent. It is being launched on Monday and Home Secretary Theresa May is considering the issue.

Robert Buckland MP makes the point though  ''We're all in favour of curbing violence against women but we have to be certain this will not lead to fishing expeditions by women demanding confidential information about potential boyfriends without proper justification. You cannot have a carte blanche system where people can simply turn up at a police station, give the name of a boyfriend or potential boyfriend, and expect the police to open up all the files on him.''

As well as creating some sort of stasi state, the whole undertone behind the law is all men are likely to be guilty of violence so we better make sure we check up on him. This is the way it is being presented in the newspapers - all men are potential women-beaters. 

The other point and this is really for the media's ear - will "Clare's Law" by "Clare and Clive's Law"?

The media must keep asking those running the campaign whether a man can equally check up on his girlfriend/female partner to check she has a hidden violent past. With 88,000 women a year being arrested for violence - men have a right to know if women have a right to know.  That's called equality.

Posted by Skimmington

 

WHAT IF TRACEY WAS TREVOR? WHAT WOULD BE THE JAIL SENTENCE THEN?

About 25 men per year (21 in 09/10) are killed at the hands of their partners and while a different year Tracey van Dungey’s ex-partner was one of those poor souls (BBC, Independent). Six years later, another man lost his life after she stabbed him at a party.

Only six years later - how could this be?

Well, its because the good old British Justice system applies different standards to men and women convicted of the same crime- the result of long running campaigns by Marxist feminists who do not believe women should go to prison. Their campaign nevers lets up and Tracey is one of their 'success' stories.

Tracey had served 42 months for kicking and punching her then partner Kevin Qui to death in 2004. Under four years and then later kills another man.

Two issues:

If Tracey was called Trevor and victims were women not men can you imagine the backlash in the papers, the lobbying, the endless use of the story as a way to campaign for tougher sentences for men who kill women by the Equalities Commission, the Fawcett Society, the Guardian and other campaigners. "42 months and then allowed to kill again" they'd say.

And to be honest they would be right. However, as Tracey is a Tracey the tragedy of her original pitiful  sentence goes unnoticed.

Secondly it shows how institutionally bankrupt and infested with differing standards the judiciary and probation service has become.

How can anyone who kills someone in this way be let out after less than four years unless there was something else at play. That something else has to be, whether explicit or implicit, whether front or back of mind - she is a woman therefore she does not need to stay behind bars as long as a man committing the same crime would.

This shows how how sexism and double standards has infested the institutions of Britain and some campaigners want more of it.

Posted by Skimmington 

MEN CAN USE FALSE ALLEGATIONS CRITERIA BUT WHY SO MANY WOMEN'S GROUPS ARE SILENT?

The Crown Prosecution Service this week announced the results of its review on prosecuting those who retract allegations of rape and domestic abuse (covered on the site here). The CPS decided that the law in this area needed to be clearer because of a case in Swansea where a woman was sent to prison for retracting an allegation, even though she was forced to retract it.

The problem with a case like this is the failure of the CPS and police to understand why this woman was placed in this position which therefore opens up the floodgates for the anti-male feminists to bring in new laws and rules in favour of women. They never miss a trick.

However, given the epidemic of prosecutions in the papers each week (61 women prosecuted for false allegations last year), the CPS have also recognised this remains a problem. This has been helped by some male Conservative MP's raising the problem in Parliament before the government's infamous u-turn on defendant anonymity, the numbers of clear cut cases where women have been sent to prison and the pressure from organisations like Parity, Men's Aid and of course the False Allegations Support Organisation (respondents listed here).

Whilst the premise for the CPS policy remains on protecting women who retract allegations and making it easier for them to do so (thereby it can be said encouraging them to make false allegations), there is now a clear test in the guidance for prosecuting false allegations which will help organisations helping men, men themselves and the police/prosecutors. Not just rape but also domestic abuse/violence.

These are in section 26 of the guidance which says:

Applying the public interest factors set out in the Code, prosecutors should bear in mind that a prosecution for perverting the course of justice is more likely to be required where -  

• a false complaint was motivated by malice
• a false complaint was sustained over a period of time (particularly where there were opportunities to retract)
• the suspect in the original allegation was charged and remanded in custody
• the suspect in the original allegation was tried, convicted and/or sentenced
• the person who made the original allegation has previous convictions or out-of-court disposals relevant to this offence, or a history of making demonstrably false complaints
• the suspect in the original allegation was in a vulnerable position or had been taken advantage of
• the suspect in the original allegation has sustained significant damage to his or her reputation.

By stating it so clearly, this actually gives men and organisations supporting the falsely accused clearer power to challenge those making false allegations and put pressure on the police and CPS who refuse to prosecute.

One last point is on the silence of female groups involved in providing support to women who are raped or are victims of domestic violence. Whenever there is a story of women going to prison for a false allegation, you never hear a peep from Refuge/Women's Aid/Fawcett Society etc, even though that person making the false allegation is damaging those women who have been raped.

The only conclusion is that anti-male Marxist feminsists can never bring themselves to criticise a woman no matter how awful she has been. Their ideology dictates it so and shows that beneath the bonnett, no matter what has happened it is men=bad, women=good.

Posted by Skimmington 

Media coverage - Guardian

NEWS UPDATE

Lots been going on this week, so to keep up here are a few of the articles of relevance:

The Sun - Tories worse than Labour on U-Turns (Tom Newton-Dunne) Recognition of the infamous rape anonymity u-turn as this u-turn seems to have been erased when others talk about u-turns. Well done The Sun.

The Independent - How does slut-walking advance feminism (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown) - she attacks slut walking but then makes wild accusations about men

Daily Telegraph - Chivalry is benevolent sexism (Andy Bloxham) - madness from the USA making feminism a laughing stock

Daily Telegraph - If chivalry is dead, blame it on the selfish feminists (Lucy Jones) - sensible women fight back

Daily Telegraph - Why I'll be keep opening the door for women (Stephen Bayley)

Daily Mail - Equalities Office where women earn more than men (Gerri Peev) - Great work from Dominic Raab MP showing the hypocrisy of the Government's Office where equality only counts if you are a woman (and in Telegraph).

Conservative Home - Andrew Bridgen MP has no case to answer - Another man having his name dragged through the papers when he is not guilty, no mention of the girl's name - perhaps Mr Bridgen may want to campaign against his government's u-turn?

Daily Mail - Forgiving husbands begs police not to charge wife he stabbed him

Northampton Chronicle - Brian Binley MP hits out at Nuffield Foundation

The Guardian - Don't turn the clock back on women (Rachel Reeves) - More anti-male, pro women special pleading

Daily Mail - Feminism is so passe, it's boy's who need help now (Sandra Parsons) - Brilliant from Sandra Parsons

Daily Mail - Female drunks at Take That concert (James Tozer) - What will the feminists think of this sign of empowerment?

BBC - Russell Crowe backs downs on circumcision - The anti-male (including many men) out in force to force the actor to backtrack

The Sun - Bulimia rise in boys (Emma Little) - Emma's first class research which was on the front page of the Sun shows the paper has its serious side on men's issues (it run a front page on male victims of doemstic abuse two years ago). The Daily Mail and Telegraph  followed it up.

Posted by Skimmington

WELSH IPCC DOES NOT RECOGNISE MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE EITHER

In April the site commented that the Director of Public Prosecutions at the Crown Prosecution Service, Kier Starmer, did not recognise the existence of male victims of domestic abuse.

Now the Independent Police Compliants Commissioner for Wales, Tom Davies, does not either.

At a conference this week in Wales he makes no mention of their existence, only the existence of female victims. Welsh male victims do not exist according to the leader of the Welsh IPCC. No mention in the press release either and nothing on the BBC from the IPCC although the broadcaster does mention the increase in females arrested.

There was a session on male victims as mentioned here but if all victims of domestic abuse are to be recognised people like Davies cannot continue to ignore male victims. They must show leadership and stop ignoring a key number of victims because of their gender. 

Posted by Skimmington

WOMEN'S JUSTICE TASKFORCE PROPOSES THE END OF BLIND AND EQUAL JUSTICE

One of the stories of last week was the story on the increase in the number of women being convicted of domestic abuse. The same week, the Women's Justice Taskforce, set out a report welcomed by the Ministry of Justice, that said women's prisons should close. The BBC also reported that the taskforce of self-appointed experts wanted a  director of women's justice to be appointed to provide "clear leadership and accountability". A Minister for Women is not enough.

The story was also in the Daily Mail (read the comments for illumination) and Independent and Mary Riddell in the Telegraph waded in with some rank hypocrisy of the highest order.

This is an issue that we have covered before but reports like this are unbelievably dangerous for men and society as whole. How can Britain possible ever claim to be a champion of equality and have equality before the law when there the justice system discriminates against genders.

The whole justice system is based on the tenet that justice is blind, but how can it be when she sneaks a look from behind the blindfold to check what the gender is of the prosecuted and then hands down the sentence accordingly. Prison for the man, community service for the women - even if the crime is the same.

That is what the Women's Justice Taskforce wants and believes in (do they want this woman out on community service?).

It is not equality of justice is it is discriminatory justice.

Is there no end to discrimination against men, special treatment for women and the undermining of the rule of law and equal justice.

Posted by Skimmington

Notes to Editors - this issue has been covered before: here, here

DOMESTIC ABUSE - NO RESPECT FOR RESPECT OR CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE

Sorry for the delay in putting any posts up in June, it has been pretty full on and as you know always happy to publish other people's work.

Part of the delay this week was to try and see where the story BBC Radio 5 ran with on Monday went and also to pick out any salient points (there were 137 comments on their piece). The story was about male victims of domestic abuse and the fact that the number of female perpetrators had doubled in the last five years to nearly 4,000. We received an email to say the ManKind Initiative had been helping the production team on it and their chairman, Mark Brooks, was quoted.

There were three main points worth picking up:

(1) On Radio 5, the interview between Respect (who run the Men's Advice Line a Home Office funded helpline despite being a charity about perpetrators) and Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan, a professor at the University of Central Lancashire. This is on just after 7am (one hour in) via BBC Radio 5's iplayer (A fuller interview with Mark Brooks is at the beginning of the three hour show). In this lively piece, Ippo Panteloudakis who runs the Men's Advice Line is dismissive of male victims. He says after firstly avoiding the question on whether he agrees with the Doctor on whether as many women are as violent as men in domestic relationships (he says 'dispelling' but is cut off- it'd been nice to find out what he was dispelling!) says:

"It doesn't really change the picture overall that the majority of domestic abuse perpertrators are male, the overwhelming majority. Women do occasionally use violence in their intimate relationships and this is what this report is telling us."

When pushed again on whether women are capable of violence, he goes on to say "We are all capable, it is a matter of whether we use violence or not and in my professional experience the overwhelming majority of perpetrators are male with a female victim." 

Firstly, he is not telling the truth as the government's figures show (highlighted on ManKind Initiative's website) that one in three victims of severe force are male and the doctor believes the figures are 50:50. Parity complained to the UK Statistics Authority about the use of 'overwhelming' - perhaps Respect ought to know or do they know but choose to ignore it.

Secondly, what is so disconcerting is that fact that all Respect want to do is try and downplay male victims and basically say this is a non-story becuase there are far more female victims. The problem is that no one is saying there are no female victims, that men should have better services and women should be ignored. All true equality campaigners want is to ensure there is full recognition of male victims in the same way as there is for female victims and that there are support services.

Respect seem to want to run a men's helpline but actually they don't really believe in what they are doing because male victims are not as important as female victims. Such hypocrisy is startling, but alas, not surprising. They are the enemy within.

(2) Later on in the subsequent Radio 5 phone in which covered the subject with lots of men being candid about their experiences including those at the hands of the police (the Association of Chief Police officers says that male victims are treated seriously), Nicky Campbell read out (22 minutes in) a statement from the Crown Prosecution Service stating  

"Any form of domestic abuse is a serious crime that ruins lives and breaks up families irrespective of whether the victim is male or female. There is no bias or lack of concern on the part of the CPS when dealing with cases involving male victims. The pernicious nature of the offending remains the same irrelevant of whether the victim is male or female. Our domestic violence policies are purposefully gender neutral - the wording does not single out men or women. We welcome any representations from groups or individuals who have concerns about how we deal with domestic violence."

Sometimes you do not know where to start but if one thing highlights this untruth it is Kier Starmer's speech (he is the director of public prosecutions) which did not even recognise that male victims exist. Sorry but the CPS is talking rubbish - there is the proof! Plus this from a few years back

And of course the policy may be gender neutral but the application is not. Has anyone seen a CPS leaflet encouraging men to come forward? I see tumbleweed.

(3) The last piece of interest was Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan's piecein the Guardian outlining how feminism has shut out recognition and services for male victims. Certainly will have ruffled a few feminist feathers. A first for the Guardian surely! However, the piece attracted over 480 comments.  

Overall, it has to be hats off to Radio 5, ManKind, Dr Graham-Kevan and all those men who came forward to discuss the issue. Only by this sort of coverage can the walls of anti-male feminism and anti-equality campaigners come crashing down.

Posted by Skimmington

Editors note

Coverage on the issue has been widespread (ITV Daybreak, News 24, Radio 1 etc) including in these places which add a bit extra to the story: Daily Mail, Bicester Advertiser, The Wright Stuff and a blog by the journalist who originated the story.