The Rights Of Man

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

GOVERNMENT SHOWS NO INTEREST IN MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE - EXAMPLE 1,999

Just a quick post but yesterday we had the BBC running two features on male victims of domestic abuse on the same day the government confirms (as they did before Christmas) that they do not think they exist.

The Parliamentary Question from Louise Bagshawe MP asks what action the government will take to push up conviction rates for domestic abuse and sexual offences. The Attorney General then talks about the Violence against Women strategy and how that and the governement will push up conviction rapes under this policy umbrella.

But Bagshawe never mentioned just women, her question mentioned no gender at all. Obvioulsy, male victims are so low down the government's food chain they don't get a mention, only female victims do.

Posted by Skimmington

NEW BOOK - CATHERINE HAKIM ON FEMINIST MYTHS AND MAGIC MEDICINE

Dr Catherine Hakimis one of this site's heroines because she is never fails to stand her ground and challenging the myths of the feminists. She is certainly up there with people like Erin Pizzey.

This week she launched via the Centre for Policy Studies think tank, her latest publication - Feminist Myths and Magic Medicine. This challenges the whole concept of the gender pay gap (an issue this site constantly refers to as a stick to beat men with and give special treatment to women/girls over men/boys), those who say employement differences are to patriachal discrimination and that there are no differences in the outlooks of men and women in the workplace

What is even better is that it is free to download from their site.

 
 

What has also been so great is the fact that it has put the issue in the public eye and generated reams of coverage and discussion including Daily Mail, Daily Mail 2, Daily Telegraph, Daily Telegraph 2, Daily Mail 3, Daily Telegraph 3, Daily Telegraph 4, Daily Mail 4 (nothing in the Guardian!)

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 

NO MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE EXIST IN WEST YORKSHIRE - ACCORDING TO LOCAL POLICE

A few posts ago, it was highlighted how the Coalition Government did not believe that any men suffer from domestic abuse over Christmas and whether there were any other sexist campaigns being organised (at taxpayers expense) by any other statutory body.

Normally, the campaigns will only highlight female victims but not male victimss. Sexual discrimination by omission especially when according to the government one in three victims of domestic abuse are men.

Well up popped this corker from West Yorkshire police. You get a poster all over the region and in GP surgeries etc asking for female victims to come forward plus posters for male perpertrators to come forward and stop and even a video for you to enjoy.

Even the list of organisations at the bottom of the web page do not even mention the Men's Advice Line or the ManKind Initiative (often at least one will be included so an organisation can say "we do care about men as well").

If you are a man (and your children) and are suffering from domestic abuse at Christmas in West Yorkshire - they police do not recognise you exist.

Such a blatant example of institutional sexism by West Yorkshire Police who fail to understand that equality means equality for all victims of domestic abuse.

Posted by Skimmington 

GOVERNMENT SAYS MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE DON'T COUNT AT CHRISTMAS

A few weeks ago, this site highlighted the issue about the government's "stop order"trials and how they had been couched in terms of just female victims even they also apply to male victims. This had to be literally dragged out of Lynne Featherstone, the Minister for "Equalities" by Nicky Campbell on Radio 5.

After receiving a tip off from a keen eyed reader, it is now completely clear that the Conservative/Lib Dem coalition government is no more interested in male victims of domestic abuse than the previous Labour government.

The government's campaign against domestic abuse at Christmas looks laudable on paper but then you read the press release and watch the video (at the bottom of the release) and there is not one mention of male victims, just female victims.

So men (and their children) suffering at Christmas are not even worthy of a mention. They don't exist according to the government, swept under the carpet

If there are other Christmas campaigns like this or like this one in Lancashire where men don't get a mention but only women do, please list any more in the comments section.

Posted by Skimmington

WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF CHRISTINE JAMES WAS A CHRISTOPHER?

Last week, a Lib Dem Councillor Christine James, who sits on Weymouth and Portland Borough was convicted for assaulting her husband, also a councillor, albeit a Conservative one.

She has said to the Dorset Echo she would not be resigning even though the report also in the paper says she was screaming like a Banshee as she rained bows down on her husband.

As set out clearly by Andy Blackwood from Weymouth, how can this councillor possibly remain elected.

What one of the many issues is that what would have been the reaction of her party (Lib Dems) if Christine was a Christopher. What would the council have said and what would the local refuges/women's groups etc have said.

They would have demanded his on a plate, but because it is a her, then there is a defining silence. That is the hypocrisy that men live under in the UK.

Move along...nothing happening here in Weymouth and Portland...

Posted by Skimmington

Other media coverage - Daily Mail

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.

 

 

SPAT IN BRISTOL ON WHETHER ALL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS WRONG

An interesting story broke out last week when Lib Dem Councillor Barbara Janke walked out of an event about ending violence against women. This was part of the UN event (see recent post) which many organisations such as councils and police force forces combine with White Ribbon Day (men to stand up against violence against women) and also domestic abuse awareness week.

We could argue to the cows come home about the UN event and the White Ribbon Day but it is often ends up being sexist when domestic abuse awareness week is wrapped up with it (on purpose of course) because it means domestic violence against men gets lost.

Anyway, the article in Bristol (inldunclduing the reasons by the feminists) and also the response on a feminist website is worth reading. What is amazing is the reaction to anything that feminists disagree with, that is the most telling. They cannot take an alternative view.

Posted by Skimmington

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