The Rights Of Man

FAIRNESS IN FAMILIES INDEX - THE FATHERHOOD INSTITUTE'S REPORT IGNORES FAMILY CHOICE AND THE POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR FATHERS

The Fatherhood Institute is an organisation that is hard to pin down in terms of what it stands for and whether it's definition of equality on fathers and mothers is based on coercion or choice.

It does great things like attacking politicians who just slag off dads  because it is all their fault and to encourage government policy to include fathers (the current family law review is absolutely crucial) but then produces a report last week - the Fairness in Families Index (FiFI) - that seems to say that Britain is down the league table last week (18th of 21).

This would not necessarily be a problem but it is the basis that it makes such an issue that is troubling as would be the unintended consequences of even more efforts to allegedly 'even' up the playing field. This would lead to even more discrimination against men and fathers than we have already.

The ranking is based on ten factors including the number of men in the part-time workforce, % of women in senior positions, % of women in Parliament and the gender pay gap, the amount of time spent caring for a child per gender, amongst other things. Basically, the lower down the figure, the lower the fairness score.

The problems with this are many fold.

Firstly, it by effectively suggesting that fathers and mothers should not choose their domestic arrangements when they have children unless it fits with variables in the Fairness in Families Index.

The Institute is basically stating that if a couple decide that the man as part of the family unit should be the one (if they have to choose of course) to work longer hours, or be an MP, be in a senior position, to invest more of his time in building a career etc , whilst his wife/partner chooses to spend more time bringing up their children then this a bad and unequal thing. If it does not fit the Index criteria then it is a bad thing.

Part of the genetic make up of men and women is that many women when they have children want to spend time bringing them up in their early years at least (thereby reducing their work) while the man works full time and does all he can to ensure the household is financially OK. Of course, and rightly, it happens the other way around or that both men and women work equally as hard and bring up the children.

To the Fatherhood Institute, their interest is in stereotypes and not about individual household choice. The reason there are less women in Parliament is because less want to be politicians and also it makes no difference to how 'man-friendly' family policy is (We had 13 years of an anti-male Labour Government and this government is no better!). Just because there are less women in senior positions or there is a gender pay gap (the biggest myth ever perpetrated to undermine men is to suggest the gap is due to discrimination) does not men there is not fairness in families if the father and mother make a mature decision about it.

It is almost as if the Fatherhood Institutes's view of family fairness is about circumventing mature and rational decisions made by the father and mother. They rae saying they want more women in management positions because it is fairer to the family, but that may not be what mothers and fathers in each individual family want for their family unit.

The second issue is of course our old chestnut - equality in the UK means that some people are more equal than others as well as the unintended consequences of the changes to 'even' things up are for fathers.

It counts as a fairness negative that there are not enough women in Parliament, in senior positions and too many work part-time (has the Fatherhood Institute asked those mothers working part time if this is something they and their husbands/partners are happy about?).

So to change things more quickly than they are already would mean more positive discrimination to get more women into Parliament and into senior positions. This means positive discrimination/action (do not be fooled by those who believe that positive action is different to positive discrimination - the latter is the outcome of the former). This means more all-women shortlists and gender quotas. To get more women into part time roles does this mean not employing men in full time roles (and switching topart time) or stopping women from choosing to work part time? 

All these would help improve the position of the UK in the Fairness in Families Index (FiFI) but to ensure this happens would mean discriminating against fathers and their families because it would make it harder for a father to be a MP, or be in senior position or work full time. Is this what the Fatherhood Institute want?

And of course, is this in the best interest of the family, the children and the mother. Of course not, but according to the Fatherhood Institute's index it would be.

In summary, the Fairness in Families Index is a PR wheeze looking for a headline and to give some sort of credibility to the Fatherhood Institute. But actually its definition of what is fair and what the policy response would need to be to make it even more fairer would damage fathers and their families.

The Fatherhood Institute needs to think a lot deeper about what it does and what it stands for.

Posted by Skimmington 

   

HYPOCRISY IN WEYMOUTH

This week, Councillor Christine James (a campaigner for female victims of domestic abuse) from Weymouth and Portland Council was convicted of physically attacking her husband (also a councillor though he is Conservative and she is a Lib Dem). The report in the Dorset Echo says she she rained punches down on him. 

She received a sentence of an 18 month conditional discharge (basically the judge convicts someone but passes no sentence unless a similar incident occurs) and had to pay £200 in costs. She also refuses to resign from the council.

Now if this was a male councillor there is no way such a weak and pathetic sentence would have been passed. There would have been a campaign of vilification by local women's groups (the local Women's Aid group especially), he would have been disowned by his political group on the council and the council itself would have condemned him. Yet, because the councillor is female nothing of the sort happens and the council itself says it is a 'domestic' and therefore none of its business!  

As an elected member of the community and someone who is meant to lead by example and having broken the law, the councillor has to resign. A male councillor would have come under such pressure he would have no choice, but not a word from the Lib Dems on this council. Eeveryone available would be lining up to condemn him.

As ever, double standards are shown to be norm when it comes to male and female victims or perpertrators of doemstic abuse. Silence and sweep under the carpet, keep moving, there is nothing to see here...

Posted by Skimmington 

Other Media Coverage - Dorset Echo#2, Daily Mail

 

 

 

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROTECTION ORDERS AND THE CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE ON MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC AND SEXUAL ABUSE

One of the most distressing things when you are a group that continues to fail to get a fair deal is when the media and politics continue and purposely marginalise you. Often and this site has raised it, it is a form of discrimination by omission.

Today, has been a classic example of how discrimination against men continues to be endemic in the uK. It is no surprise on the International Day of the Elimination of Violence against Women and Girls

This morning we were all greeted with the news that the Home Office has made £28 million available to end sexual and domestic violence against women and girls. Not a penny for male victims of sexual and domestic violence.No one is saying women and grils should not be supported who suffer in this way but many men do as well.

There is even a full blown strategy where conveniently the figures are highlighted showing that there are over 1 million women in England and Wales who are victims of domestic abuse and that 1 in 4 will be victim in their lifetime. Conveninetly the facts (as produced from the Home Office and collated by the ManKind Initiative) show that the male equivalent figures are 629,000 and 1 in 6.

The governement also announced (see bottom of press release) that they would pilot domestic violence protection orders in four areas. The quote greeeting everyone in the newspapers and in the media this morning from Home Secretary Theresa May was "Domestic violence is an appalling crime that sees two women per week die at the hands of her attackers." Wait a minute though, one man per fortnight also dies in this way but May does not mention that.

The whole issue of institutional discrimination against male victims of domestic abuse is of course exacerbated, albeit encouraged by a biased quote from the Home Secretary, by the media reporting. Once again, we have a gender neutral policy turned into one that is headlined and prefaced with the words 'wife-beater' or 'powers for police to ban men who abuse women' etc (see end for some examples).

But why instituntional discrimination in the way the orders are portayed by the government and the media?

It is because the orders apply to both male or female perpetrators of domestic abuse. Not only do they have to legally apply to all genders (though we know in a practical sense the police are only very likely to use them against male perpetrators and not female ones) but also because on BBC Radio 5 this morning, the presenter asked the Minister for Equalities, Lynne Featherstone, whether they applied to those who committed domestic violence against men. She said 'yes', but then used the usual caveat that most victims of domestic violence are women, thereby relegating male victims again to second class status.

But would you have known any of that by reading the govenment's annoucements or by reading any of the coverage? Of course not.

Today's announcement on the new money to tackle violence against women and girls (and nothing for men) as well as the deliberately inaccurate portrayal of the domestic violence control orders is another  classic example of the institutional discrimination by omission against men and male victims of domestic abuse.

This form of covert discrimination by omission is worse than overt discrimination because it is deliberately aimed at hiding the truth away. No wonder a government with a Minster for Women (and no Minster for Men) and numerous equalities ministers laugh in the face of men and the true meaning of equality.

Posted by Skimmington 

Examples of some of the worst of the media coverage - Daily Mail  , The Independent, The Guardian, ITN

NOVEMBER ARTICLE UPDATE

As is customary when a number of good articles have appeared but there has not been enough time to present or comment on them all, the site produces a list for general perusal and comment, and here are the latest:

Norman Tebbit - Why on earth should children need to study Women's History (Daily Telegraph)

UK Parliament - Family Courts (Families Need Fathers speaking)

Catherine Bennett - Women should stop whingeing about the coalition cuts (The Observer)

Patrick Heery - Who grows a moustache, er me... (BBC)

BBC - Why men are the weaker sex (BBC)

Jane Dudman - CAFCASS not fit for purpose (Guardian)

Westminster University, LSE and INSEAD - Pupils make effort with male teachers as they are seen as fair (Daily Mail) and research doc.

Daily Mail - Banned from mechanics course because he is a man (Daily Mail)

Harriet Sargeant - The cruelty of women who use children as weapons in divorce cases (Daily Mail)

Alice Azania-Jarvis - Why we are living in a young womens world (Independent on Sunday)

BBC Bristol - School told to admit boys or close (BBC Bristol)

Andrew Levy - Glamour girl who cried rape is jailed (Daily Mail)

Andrew Nicoll - Male victims of domestic abuse trebles (Scottish Sun)

Ericka Rackley - How feminism could improve judicial decision-making (The Guardian)

BBC Surrey - Kate Woodhead jailed for false rape accusation (BBC Surrey)

Daniel Razzaz - Crisis of Masculinty (Varsity)

Shropshire Star - £60,000 spent on false rape claims  (Shropshire Star)

Grimsby Telegraph - Women jailed for two and a half years for wicked false rape lies (Grimsbyy Telegraph)

Posted by Skimmington

REPORT ON INEQUALITY AND DISCRIMINATION AFFECTING MEN

Reece Wilks, a 17 year old student, who last year demanded that there should be a Minister for Men has produced a dissertation on inequality and discrimination against men on the 21st century.

It is avialable for downloading and reading:

Download Explore the issues of inequality and discrimination affecting men in the 21st century .

It is first class.

Posted by Skimmington 

COALITION'S COWARDICE WILL LEAD TO FALSELY ACCUSED MEN STILL LIVING WITH BLIGHTED REPUTATIONS

One of the great hopes that when the Coalition Government came together in May this year was this pledge in their agreement (page 24):

We will extend anonymity in rape cases to defendants

That is as black and white as you can possible get.

Over the ensuing months, following the onslaught by Harman, Flint and the rest (covered on the site), Crispin Blunt said that the "proposals did not stand on its merits."

The report that accompanied the U-turn states that there is insufficient empirical evidence in false accuasations to recommends a policy change. This is pretty weaselly considering that the report states the standard estimate is that 8-11% of rape allegations in England and Wales are false (see page 12), plus page 16 reports from research about the nature of false allegations.

This raises a number of issues, bar another U-turn in Government policy:

As raised here, there is an epidemic of false allegations, almost one per week is reported in the newapaper which is also covered by the the excellent False Rape Society which has rolling news on this issue and of cases of false allegation.

Each and every man accused of rape via a false allegation will continue to have their reputation stained (and stained forever because of the internet) with all the ensuing damage on the family, employment opportunities and psychology. Men have committed suicide becuase of this and some men have fled the country. Blunt thinks this is OK.

The second point which is most chilling is the fact that men have no hope of making sufficient gains in terms of equality (except for the review on Family Law and pensions!) because whenever a measure is put forward that brings equality for men, the Government buckle under the weight of the rantings and ravings from those who dislike men so much (Harman, Flint, Cooper, Fawcett Society, Equalities and Human Rights Commission etc).

We have already witnessed the laughable and dangerous antics of those who think equality only applies to women over the public sector cuts and pension changes. This u-turn sets an a very damaging presecdnet because it means they are terrified of the onslaught. The backbone of a jellyfish. 

Rather than stand firm on their manifesto commitment, equality in the British justice system and to prtuiect those falsely accused of rape, they buckled under the onslaught of the the nato-male Marxist feminists. They ran away like cowards under the cover of a report designed to give their u-turn some type of credibility to avioid being seen of being scared of the anti-male lobby.

Media coverage - Daily Mirror, Independent, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, Guardian

Posted by Skimmington

CELEBRATE ON FRIDAY - IT'S INTERNATIONAL MEN'S DAY

Sorry there has not been any recent posts lately things cropped up which meant normal service was interrupted but will be resumed again now.

Anyhow, November is the most significant month for men in the UK and around the world. November is of course Movember, a campaign that gathers momentum and credibility each year.

On the 11th, it was Armistice day and the following Sunday was of course Remembrance Sunday when so many men (and women of course) gave their lives to our country.

And then on Friday, it is International Men's Day (now in its 12th year)  which this year has the theme of "Our Children, Our Future"

Britain's participation is being led by The Men's Network (run by Glenn Poole and Ben Dew), based in Brighton the4y are the UK's national coordinator for International Men's Day who have organised a conference on Friday morning, a Tash Dash on Saturday and a whole hots of other activities. They have an excellent Facebook site which also mentions support in Hartlepool. Is there anywhere else in the UK?

With the success and the impetus given by the Men's Network and the steady but very slow growth in awareness of issues facing Britain's Men and Boys, this year's events should act as a springboard for 2011.

Posted by Skimmington

 

LATEST MEN'S MATTERS BROADCAST

Here is the latest on Feminism

BRITISH JUSTICE SYSTEM DOES NOT SUPPORT MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE WHILST THE GRASSROOTS DO

The last few months month has seen further progress in ensuring there are more services for male victims of domestic abuse, however, the justice establishment (and part of the media) still do not take their plight seriously or treat them as equals.

A new charity has been set in Scotland called Abused Men in Scotland who run a helpline (great coverage in BBC, The Sun, Scotsman amongst others) plus new services in Boston (Lincolnshire) and  Leicestershire mean that men are able to get more support. There are national charities like the ManKind Initiative out there who provide central support.

On top of this, there is some very good research from the excellent Men's Advisory Project in Northern Ireland who looked at the experiences of male victims they had supported. They like others (Abused Men in Scotland and the ManKind Initiative) do not subscribe to the nonsense anti-male view that domestic abuse is a crime against a gender. Those that believe it is a gendered crime purposely do not want male victims to be supported. 

However, while progress is made on that front the judiciary remain in a contemptible state of denial. Not helped by the stereotyping by the media.

We have already commented on the Equal Treatment Bench Book, a book that is clearly unequal.

Then a week or so ago, we had Judge Millford calling Dennis Long, a man who snapped after 30 years of domestic abuse and killed his wife, 'weak'. This was then picked up by the media who ran with the story that he was hen-pecked - when he had been hot repeatedly with an ornamental poker! There is an article on the ManKind Initiative website outlining the issue and is very well worth a read.

Judge Sir Nicholas Wall President of the Family Division gave a speech to Resolution, the family law legal service. The first part of the speech (from 8 onwards) looks at domestic abuse and he unbelievably says:

 "In my experience, physical domestic abuse is largely a male problem. There are, of course, women who physically abuse their partners and their children, but they are, in my experience, the minority. This is not a politically correct opinion. The politically correct view is that domestic violence affects both sexes and is perpetrated by both. So, of course, it is, but male violence is, in my experience, more common. Moreover, in my experience, men are notoriously unwilling to admit to being the perpetrators of domestic abuse. Furthermore, it seems to me that if men embrace the comfortable doctrine that domestic abuse affects people of both genders, that is but a short step away from doing nothing about it."

This is unbelievable and chimes with the establishment view. Justice Wall has not got a clue how offensive his comments are to those male victims who suffer in silence. To say that it is politically correct view is Orwellian double speak, when the Government's own figures show one in three victims are male and that new services are springing up all the time because there is a need.

How will men feel comfortable in coming forward if these are the views of judges and of course if you are a male victim who comes before Justice Wall, he has already placed it on record that he thinks you are a liar.

While grassroots services are springing up all the time, the judiciary are holding progress back. They do  not believe in equal justice when they think some victims (female) are more equal than other victims (male).

Posted by Skimmington

 

MRA WEB DESIGNER NEEDED

Paid Position for MRA Web Designer in London:

If you're interested in men's equality issues, have an ability to write code for web design, and have good availability over the next month in particular, then please contact 

[email protected]