The Rights Of Man

JOHN TAYLOR'S LETTER TO TESCO ABOUT THE RACE FOR LIFE

P. Clark Esq. CEO Tesco Ltd. Tesco House, Delamare Road, Chestnut, Hertfordshire EN8 8SL                  ………………………………..............................................

 R.C Taylor Esq., Executive Director, Fund Raising and Supporter Marketing, Cancer Research UK.,  Angel Buildings,407 St John Street, LONDON, EC1V 4AD

………………

Monday, 21 May 2012

 Recorded Delivery

 

OPEN IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Every little helps -Together we will beat cancer

 

Every inhabitant of the UK should be extremely proud and supportive of  Cancer Support UK’s objectives, also Tesco’s very generous support - particularly for the female only Race for Life - but what is the reality?

 Alas, it saddens me to state my experience since the death of my eldest daughter, to cancer, in 2001, is that many males & females are extremely dismayed Race for Life only allows (small boys) to participate until age 11...This causes me to ask: what transpires when those boys are aged over 12  - against the background of the rules being changed recently - following a statement by a small boy, also because of the demands of a mother - Claire Parker ?

 Please see appended details re LITTLE LEGS FOR LIFE. A young lad named Luke from Burhill School asked his mummy why he couldn’t run too - LITTLE LEGS FOR LIFE then became the reality.  

 Then, in Derbyshire Times, of 13^th April. The news is revealed re Claire Parker getting Cancer Research UK to change the rules to allow boys to participate  under 11 years of age. 

Further, in THIRD Sector, the report indicates that 64,000 fewer participated in Race for Life.  

Previously, Gloria Hunningford  in a video on You Tube was pleading for more participants http://bit.ly/KRmrjV

 Then, on BBC News : CRUK’s Natasha Hill was again stressing Race for Life participants were down… http://bbc.in/KpxlJ8          

Against that background I stress, I commend all the female participants in Race for Life, for the millions raised over the years but, alas, sadly, the reality is any of those females could be afflicted, or die, from cancer - I sincerely hope not…

 …But, in those terrible circumstances I must ask, surely, CRUK & TESCO should agree that all males : “the Grandfathers, Fathers, Uncles, Brothers, Sons, Nephews and male friends of the family should be allowed to participate in Race for Life, in every venue, to raise funds in memory of their deceased female relatives ”… I trust you agree?

 Race for Life could / should follow the example of e.g. The London Marathon and Great North Run etc - in which males and females participate together with tremendous success… Race for Life could / should be optional 5 or 10k and “non-competitive”. I sincerely hope you  agree???

 Surely, CRUK will not be heartless and tell all those small boys aged under (11) eleven - they cannot participate when aged (12) twelve and older ?

 I look forward, hopefully, for your considered response confirming all males will be allowed to participate in Race for Life…Your failure to do so will, sadly, leave me no other alternative but to encourage others not to support Cancer Research UK. There are, as you will be aware, many other cancer charities to support… I cannot support a charity that discriminates against half the population - including male customers of Tesco…

Further, your failure  will make a mockery of the statement:

 Every little helps -Together we will beat cancer

 >>> When half the population is excluded from Race for Life <<<

 Yours sincerely,

John Taylor

NEWS UPDATE

A few recent ones and thank you to those who have sent them in.

The Guardian - The Second Sexism is just victim-envy (Suzanne Moore)

Daily Mail - Who cares if men are stuck in the glass cellar (Liz Jones)

Daily Telegraph - Number of men working part-time dopubles as they cannot find full-time work (TUC): Full TUC report. The TUC to me, is severely compromised and inconsistent in talking about this issue as it is constantly banging on about women's rights. Only the day before it issued this report, it said the Equalities Commission had to equality proof the government's policies on behalf of women - which what it really mean was women needed special treatment over men.

You Tube - James Williams' interview with Dr Peter Ball of Norm-UK

You Tube -  VW pro-father ad

New Statesmen - The Men's Rights Zeitgeist (Rhiannon and Holly)

Men;s Network - National conference early bird tickets on sale

Daily Mail - Tasered twice and stabbed husband 17 times (Paul Bentley): What are the odds that if the genders were revered, the husband would go to prison?

The Observer - Cannes 2012, Why no female directors (Vanessa Thorpe): This is a classic case of victimhood without evidence. Where is the evidence that a film directed by a women should be in the top 22 list but is not because of discrimination. There is no evidence so to claim discrimination is just another request for special treatment and the end of equality.

Posted by Skimmington

FRENCH SET THE PRECEDENT FOR A MINISTER FOR WOMEN'S RIGHTS IN BRITAIN

It is bad enough in the UK to have a Minister for Women since 1997 (no Minister for Men) along with a Government Equalities Department and an Equality and Human Rights Commission all part of an institutional apparatus to demand for extra treatment and rights for women, while purposely ignoring issues that affect men and boys.

A double whammy of discrimination against men under the auspice of equality topped up with discrimination by omission.

In France, though the new government has gone one step further. President Hollande has appointed a Ministry for Women Right's and even then as the Guardian explains many do not think it is enough.

While this position is basically the same as the Minister for Women, there are two clear differences. Firstly, the Minister for Women (Theresa May) is also the Home Secretary so it is not an exclusive role unlike in France. Secondly, while a Minister for Women will by its nature be a Minister for Women's Rights it is not so explicit and proactive as in France.

In problem it is bad enough that men are ignored and there is a constant stream of pro-women and anti-men rules and publicity, this is a step further.

The problem though is that it sets the precedent and therefore as with all these issues once you take an inch, taking a mile becomes so much easier.

With the current and continuing campaign on issues such as boardroom quotas, the lie becoming the truth around the pay gap and stopping women from going to prison - all now becoming mainstreamed, it is no longer such a leap for the Minister for Women to become the Minister for Women's Rights - rights which are really rights for special treatment rather than rights for equality.

The men of France are doomed, we're next.

Posted by Skimmington

MOBILE PHONE COMPANIES ARE CENSORING AND DEFAMING MEN'S RIGHTS SITES

Recently a number of commenters here suggested mobile phone companies in the UK were blocking some of the best men's rights sites so I've taken the time to investigate this issue further.

I appreciate that sites supporting men's equality sometimes don't mince their words, but the peaceful, pro-equality message of the sites campaigning for civil rights of the most disadvantaged people in our society is crystal clear and it's rare to ever see any inappropriate views and certainly nothing worthy of blocking (other than quotes of radical feminists of course).

I discovered that O2, one of the largest mobile communications providers in the UK has a "url checker" allowing anyone to see their blocking policy for a particular site. Essentially they have 3 levels of classification a total block, a "default block" (whereby people can only access a site if you request all censorship be turned off) and then a parental block.

I've checked a number of perfectly innocent men's rights sites, and somehow the company have decided to not only censor them by default, they even go as far as classifying them as "hate sites". Victims of these smears include the excellent antimisandry.com, angryharry.com and theantifeminist.com Furthermore I am yet to find a single misandrist site blocked in any form despite their content clearly being much easier to classify as sexist and hateful. Even many of your average Mumsnet or Guardian posts/articles are far worse than anything you'd find at any of the above sites as are the utterances of your average "equality" minister. There are indications that T-mobile have the same polices as O2 and I personally use that comapny so tried all teh above sites on my phone. All 3 attempts had the sites blocked saying i needed to be over 18 to access them. Again, I was unable to achieve such a message when accessing any radical feminist hate sites.

We need to give these companies the benefit of the doubt for now and hope this is a mistake. For now I'd ask that people check as many sites as possible and email them to complain about their censorship. A third party campaign against mobile censorship has a reporting facility here and the open rights groups also address the issue.

Even the writers over at Biased BBC have also been victim of this censorship so there appears to be a clear pattern emerging in terms of the type of thought-policing going on here.

Update - as an afterthought I also decided to check the status of this very blog on the O2 checker even though we're clearly on the moderate, professional and cautious side of the movement. To my horror and surprise even this very blog is classes as a hate site in spite of how cautious we've been in the language used in articles and in the commenting policy. Not one single post here is remotely controversial or hateful. I wrote on this issue here as I thought it was a safe place guaranteed to be free form censorship due to our policies but we've still become victims. We're blocked on t-mobile too, so that's now four of the most popular MRA sites blocked by these companies by default. This really is quite disturbing.

Further updates will be added here as more censorship and defamation is uncovered:

- O2 and T-mobile blocking: hereticalsex.blogspot.com and counterfem.blogspot.com

by John Kimble

LATEST MEN'S MATTERS

The long awaited Mens Matters radio show is back on tonight (Tuesday) at 1900 BST which is 1800 GMT/UT

 

I am at last free of political constraints. This show stars Paul Elam of Avoice for Men Radio in the USA.

Mens Matters can be rheard live on Express FM 93.7, but for most people listen on line at:

 

http://www.expressfm.com/player/

 

When it is eventually transferred over to the Listen Again section of the Express FMs website you should be able to listen at your leisure on:

 

Listen Again: http://www.expressfm.com/player/od/

 

Kind Regards

 

James Williams

 

EQUALITIES AND HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION'S ASSESSMENT OF SPENDING REVIEW 2010 PROVES THEY BELIEVE EQUALITY DOES NOT INCLUDE MEN

We have all known it, but this time it is proven beyond doubt - the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (ECHR) does not believe equality means equality for men as well as for women.

Here is the proof.

Due to political pressure from a number of groups especially the Fawcett Society, the ECHR carried out a formal equality assessment of the government’s 2010 Spending Review. It says in its statement:

"Public bodies, such as HM Treasury, were legally obliged at the time of the Spending Review to demonstrate that they had fully considered the potential effects of their decisions on women, ethnic minorities and disabled people, and that any decisions with an effect on these groups could be justified."

That is not true.

Public bodies have to consider men and women when making their decisions. That is the law under the Equality Act.

Such is the knee-jerk sexism and nati0-male feeling at the Equalities and Human Rights Commission that they forget who the law applies to and feel they have no qualms about forgetting that men exist.

A classic case of sexism by ommission and institutional sexism.

This is why, although in theory the Equalities and Human Rights Commission should stand up for men and women - we know it institutionally opposes men. This is why it should be abolished because it is part of the anti-male institutional apparatus.

Perhaps, we should complain about to the Commission about its own sexism in this statement - which is in fact a breach of the very same Equalities Act that it is supposed to police.

Posted by Skimmington 

NEWS UPDATE

A few recent ones -

BBC Radio 4 Today - Thought for the Day (1hr 48 min 30 secs in - John Lamberton Bell of the Iona community) - The most abominable anti-male diatribe ever broadcast on national radio. Disgusting. Any man who follows this person is a fool - he hates you.

The Guardian - The NHS is failing gay and bisexual men (Rachel Williams)

Daily Star - The abusive wife who left me to die (Ella Buchan) - ManKind press release about Coronation Street

The X Foundation - Drag Race for charity

Realmenswork - A new website and group for men in 'non-male' industries: sound responsible activism

The Observer - Are men the second sex (Elizabeth Day): discussion about David Benatar's book. By the way this site used the term Second Sex regarding men way back in 2009.

York Press - Student who made false rape allegation avaoids prison

Fighting Feminism - Some great articles from Mike Buchanan

Remember you have seen anything that has been missed whether general news or campaigns etc please let me know at [email protected]

Posted by Skimmington

EDITORIAL POLICY REMINDER

Chaps (and chapesses),

A number of us have spent years getting this site to where it is - a respected place for commentary and discussion about male gender and male sexual discrimination.

The editorial policy is clear  - there is to be no anti-women nonsense on this site. Anti-feminism, anti-gender feminism and anti anti-male feminism is fine but not anti-women.

I have had to delete a number of comments recently because they were extreme/anti-women/full of expletives and I will continue to do so. If people have a problem with that, they can set their own site up.

I get why some may be angry, this is why the site exists, but this is no place to channel that anger against women. I like women for a start!

Let's get back to it guys.

Posted by Skimmington

QUEEN'S SPEECH - ONE STEP FORWARD AND ONE STEP BACK

From the scant detail available on the Queen's Speech it seems clear there is one step forward and one step back for male equality.

The one step forward is clearly the recognition of shared parenting under the Children and Families Bill. As stated by the BBC that "Ministers intend to strengthen the law to ensure children have a relationship with both their parents after family separation, where that is safe, and in the child's best interests. The government says it will consult shortly on how the legislation can be framed."

The news was welcomed by Families Need Fathers. 

The one step back is albeit a potential problem but it would naive to think it won't happen. This is in the Crime and Courts Bill. The government's briefing document (page 37) states: "Reforming the judicial appointments process to introduce greater transparency in the judicial appointments process and improve judicial diversity."

Well we all know what that means - an extension of quotas, special treatment and positive discrimination for women which means the end of meritocracy and the institutionalisation of discrimination against men. Just like in boardrooms up and down the country (due to covert and overt 'pressure'), judges will no longer be selected based on their talent, skills and experience, all that matters is their gender - and if you are a man and good enough - there is no guarantee you will pass muster.

One step forward and one step back and all involve the justice system.

Posted by Skimmington

FACEBOOK CAMPAIGN TO END UNNECESSARY MALE CIRCUMCISION

Hot off the press so to speak. This is the type of proper campaigning we need,