Terrence Popp http://redonkulas.com has an uncanny knack for getting to the heart of issues. Enjoy:
Month: August 2013
Saira Khan: ‘Oh feminism, what happened to you?’
Spiked has published some insightful pieces on feminism of late, but the latest – written by a young lady, Saira Khan – has to be one of the best. It’s a great end to the week. I’ve left a comment congratulating her on the piece, adding a few points, and invite you to do likewise. Enjoy:
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/when_feminists_believed_in_freedom/13946#.Uhd8-N5wavE
Professor Dame Sally Davies speaks for the FBI (Feminist Bull**** Initiative)
Professor Dame Sally Davies is England’s first female chief medical officer, and she’s a living warning about the damage that can be wrought by smoking cannabis:
One of the few things keeping many women from applying for top jobs in greater numbers is the simple recognition that they’re poorly-qualified for them. The FBI (Feminist Bull**** Initiative) is based in the Fawcett Society offices in London – where else could it be based? – and the industrious ladies have been working hard on this ‘problem’. Professor Davies, who should’ve gone to Specsavers, recently unveiled the FBI’s new invention, ‘Imposter syndrome’. From the same edition of the Daily Mail:
Women are held back by ‘imposter syndrome’ while men use the ‘bull**** gene’ to succeed, according to Dame Sally.
She said women constantly questioned if they were good enough, while men found it easier to blag their way to the top positions.
Dame Sally joked that the Y-chromosome, which is only present in men, carried the ‘bull**** gene’.
She is England’s first female chief medical officer and was recently named the sixth most powerful woman in the country. She has campaigned for more women in science but said she had noticed differences between the sexes during her career.
In her radio interview, she said: ‘The imposter syndrome is particularly prevalent in women, where you wonder whether you can do it, but there’s also how you do it. I have been much entertained by many men as I have gone through my career who are great at bull*****ing and I have always thought the bull**** gene is on the Y-chromosome.’
How many more hilarious ‘jokes’ does the mad professor have up her sleeve? Can you imagine the furore that would result if the Health Minister, Jeremy Hunt, made similarly gender-insulting remarks about women? He’d surely lose his job within hours. Why are misandrous remarks by women in positions of power always deemed acceptable, even worthy of national newspaper coverage?
Meg Lanker-Simons, 28, feminist, threatens to rape… herself
How many online ‘rape threats’ are created by feminists, then circulated by feminists to shame men collectively? My hunch is a substantial number, possibly the vast majority. So it’s good when individual feminazis are exposed for this behaviour:
Tanya Lewis: Delusional People See the World Through Their Mind’s Eye
Something that often puzzles people with an interest in feminism is the extent to which feminists cling onto their beliefs even in the face of compelling evidence that their analyses – all of them – are deeply flawed.
Our thanks to the MHRA who’s just made us aware of a short but fascinating article published two days ago by livescience (link below). He asks the insightful question:
Does this explain the phenomenon of radical feminism?
http://www.livescience.com/39038-how-delusions-shape-perception.html
An appeal to men’s human rights advocates (MHRAs) around the world
Paul Elam, the founder and publisher of A Voice for Men, has just posted an interesting and inspiring appeal:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/mhrm-calling-the-world/
Without doubt, the MHRM is moving up a gear. The only way now is up. The feminists know it, and there’s nothing they can do about it. Every day MHRAs expose feminist narratives as conspiracy theories, fantasies, lies, delusions and myths. Every day we’re exposing feminists as individuals driven by misandry, with no interest in gender equality. Their only interest is in driving forward female supremacy, regardless of the cost to men, boys, and the vast majority of women and children. The tide of public opinion is turning against them.
Dr Tara J Palmatier: Commentary on 30-year-old woman’s temper tantrum
A few weeks ago we posted a video of a 30-year old American woman, Whitney Mongiat, having a temper tantrum whilst in a car being driven by her husband, James Mongiat. Our attention has been drawn to an interesting commentary on the video by Dr Tara J Palmatier http://shrink4men.com and the piece contains a link to the original video:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/women/hypergamy/lake-tantrum-james-mongiat-is-wrong/
Janet Bloomfield: The toddler wage gap erased
Our public challenge to Dr Petra Wilton, Director of Policy, Chartered Management Institute
On Woman’s Hour yesterday there was a piece about a recent report which showed that in the UK men on average earn twice the amount in bonuses as women.
In the public sector women on average earn more in bonuses than men, so we’re talking about the private sector here. It’s not in the least surprising that men earn higher bonuses. They’re far more likely than women to do the really tough, stressful, results-oriented jobs that lead to substantial bonuses, and if they don’t hit their targets, they’ll probably be fired. As an illustration of the gender divide at work here, virtually all the women being appointed to FTSE100 boards share something in common with virtually all the existing ones – they’re appointed as non-executive directors, a gravy-train for women.
Jenni Murray interviewed two people in the studio, Dr Petra Wilton of the Chartered Management Institute (‘CMI’), and Roger Barker, Director of Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors. The programme runs from 1:08 – 8:18 on the link below:
During the course of the discussion Dr Wilton stated the following:
There’s a real business case to get more women onto boards… studies by McKinsey etc. show time and time again that diversity does pay, it’s actually providing better returns for shareholders and investors.
I let out a low groan when I heard these lines. Anyone who follows our associated blog Campaign for Merit in Business http://c4mb.wordpress.com knows that reports such as McKinsey’s show a correlation between more women on boards and improved financial performance, but correlation isn’t proof of causation, nor does it even imply causation. Every study and report of which we’re aware, including McKinsey reports, make that critical point – yet it’s never mentioned in the relentless narrative of ‘more women on boards leads to improved returns’.
The only evidence of which we’re aware showing anything approaching a causal link, five longitudinal studies, shows that when female representation on boards increases, corporate financial performance declines. Our briefing paper on the matter:
Today I had an exchange of emails and a 20-minute-long phone discussion with Dr Wilton, and I’ll be emailing her a link to this piece shortly. Our public challenge to her:
Dr Wilton, could you – or any of your colleagues at the CMI – please provide evidence to back the assertion you made on Woman’s Hour yesterday, that (gender) diversity provides better returns for shareholders and investors? Please bear in mind that correlation isn’t evidence of causation. Thank you.
If we receive a response from Dr Wilton we’ll publish it, along with our critique of it.
A gem from Bill Burr (2004)
My thanks to the estimable gentleman who’s just provide a link to a gem of a piece by Bill Burr in 2004:
Justice for Men & Boys 