Huffington Post retracts Ellie Slee’s false allegation

[Note added 20.1.14: A Voice for Men has just published a slightly amended version of this piece http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/huffington-post-withdraws-a-false-allegation-against-j4mb/ ]

The 10 months since we launched J4MB have been invigorating, to say the least. The number of ‘hits’ on our sites – this one, along with our associated sites http://thealternativesexismproject.wordpress.com, http://c4mb.wordpress.com and http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com – have been far beyond our wildest expectations, and they continue to rise inexorably. We’re looking forward to 2014 and beyond with considerable optimism. Our base of supporters and donors is growing by the week.

We end the year with some good news. We recently gave some coverage to a Huffington Post contributor, Ellie Slee, who’d made a false allegation in an article, namely that J4MB refers to women as ‘gestational incubators’. Our piece on the matter:

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/ellie-slee-misrepresents-j4mb-in-an-article-in-the-huffington-post/

We have little time for false allegators (I couldn’t resist it) here at J4MB. We politely invited Ms Slee to retract the statement and apologise. Predictably – as a gender feminist, and therefore shameless by definition – she declined to do either. We duly placed the matter in the hands of the legal team at AOL – the company which has owned the Huffington Post since 2011 – and told them that if the statement were not retracted, we’d be taking legal advice on the matter. After a brief exchange of emails, we received one earlier today which included this:

In relation to Ellie’s blog on the Huffington Post, I’ve followed up with our blogs team here with respect to the ‘gestational incubator’ comment and they have now removed the reference to your political party, with the agreement of Ellie.  Please note that we have taken this action as a gesture of goodwill and it should not be treated as any admission of AOL (UK) Limited’s alleged liability.  We trust that our prompt action in removing this reference upon receipt of your complaint will be the end of this matter.

‘… with the agreement of Ellie.’ Priceless. We’d have preferred her publicly not to ‘agree’, to be honest, but you can’t have everything in life. So, what do we know of Ellie’s true feelings about the retraction? We need only turn to a ‘tweet’ she posted afterwards:

Ellie Slee @EllieSlee @MikeBuchanan11 Thanks for contacting HP. The blogs editor and I have changed the article so it’s more reflective of your ideas.

So, no admission she’d made a false allegation, never mind an apology. No, the Huffington Post blogs editor and Miss Ellie ‘changed the article’ so it better reflected an anti-feminist’s ‘ideas’. You really couldn’t make it up, could you? Again, priceless.

We wish you and your loved ones a happy and successful 2014. Thank you for your support.

God is no longer male, Scottish Episcopal Church rules

My thanks to M for a gem from 2010:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7982904/God-no-longer-male-Scottish-Episcopal-Church-rules.html

From the article:

The controversial changes were discussed at the church’s General Synod recently. The minutes of the synod reveal that female priests had asked why God was still referred to as a man.

The altered version of the 1982 Liturgy sees masculine pronouns removed when they refer to God and the new approach has even been extended to humans. For example, the word “mankind” has been taken out and replaced with “world”.

Some senior religious figures have objected to the new form of words. “It is political correctness,” said Rev Stuart Hall of the Scottish Prayer Book Society and Honorary Professor of Divinity at the University of St Andrews.

“It is quite unnecessary. The word man in English – especially among scientists – is inclusive of both sexes.

It was all too predictable that whiny female priests would concern themselves with such trivial matters. Why couldn’t they form their own church, refer to God as a woman, and leave the vast majority of Christians to carry on as they were? Because they couldn’t sustain their own church. This is nothing more than the same phenomenon whereby very few women start businesses, but they’re keen to be advanced into senior positions in successful businesses started and run by men. Men take the risks, sometimes they succeed, sometimes they fail (e.g. bankruptcy). When they succeed, they can be sure women will come along and seek good money for little work (e.g. as non-executive directors). In the same vein, no rich man – even if he were a vile person – ever struggled to find an attractive wife.

The Sun’s treatment of two cases of domestic violence

Our thanks to a valued supporter and donor, D, for this.

What would be our reaction if a leading national newspaper associated the following domestic violence stories with jocular headlines?

A husband stabbing his wife for returning home without beer

A husband putting bleach in his wife’s eyedrops

If we change the genders, would jocular headlines then be more acceptable, and if so, why? The stories as reported online, from the United States:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/man-stabbed-ceramic-squirrel-failing-buy-beer-article-1.1560341

An extract:

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — South Carolina authorities say a 44-year-old woman angry at a man for returning home without beer on Christmas beat and stabbed him with a ceramic squirrel. The Charleston County Sheriff’s office says in a report that deputies found a man covered with blood when they arrived at Helen Williams’ North Charleston home early Wednesday. She told investigators the man fell and cut himself, but couldn’t explain why her hands and clothes were also bloody.

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20131227/ARGUS911/131227001/Michigan-wife-put-bleach-husband-s-eye-drops-posted-Craigslist-ad-assault?gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

An extract:

CANTON, Mich. — A woman is facing sentencing Jan. 13 following accusations she put bleach in her husband’s eye drops in revenge for marital problems, authorities said. Canton Detective Sgt. Chad Baugh said McDermed also allegedly placed an ad on a website, Craigslist, offering to pay someone to assault her husband. The wife and mother pleaded guilty this month to domestic violence after her husband went to police in mid-October, saying he had gotten out of the shower and started using the eye drops. “He felt a burning sensation and could smell what appeared to be bleach,” Baugh said.

So how did the Sun see fit to cover these shocking stories today? With the following ‘fillers’:

She’s Gone Nuts

A wife was charged with stabbing her hubby with a ceramic SQUIRREL for forgetting to buy beer in South Carolina, US.

Fry Your Eyes

A wife faces jail after putting bleach in her cheating hubby’s eyedrops in Canton, Michigan, US.

Susan Terrell Tompkins: ‘Boycott Divorce Corp movie? Fathers’ rights groups versus mothers’ rights groups.’

Susan Terrell Tompkins, representing North Carolina Fathers http://ncfathers.wordpress.com, writes:

Divorce Corp, a documentary due to be released in January 2014 is causing quite a stir between mothers’ rights groups and fathers’ rights groups who support equally shared parenting. In calling for a boycott of the film, mother’s rights groups are quite upset that Divorce Corp advocates for fairer and more balanced divorce and family court processes, something that apparently irks the mothers’ rights crowd which for years has enjoyed courts centred around them. As shared parenting is being advanced across the world, it appears that many in the mothers’ rights arena are calling for a boycott of Divorce Corp in an effort to maintain their position of total control.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-governance-feminism/boycott-divorce-corp-movie-mothers-rights-versus-fathers-2/

Independent: ‘More than half of women are discriminated against at work’

[Note: the material on this blog piece was later published, on 3.1.14, by ‘A Voice for Men’:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/independent-more-than-half-of-women-are-discriminated-against-at-work/

The comment stream is worth reading, as usual with AVfM.]

Our thanks to Greg for pointing us to this gem in the Independent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/more-than-half-of-women-are-discriminated-against-at-work-9029535.html

Greg asks:

What are they whining about? I thought that last year 98.7% of women were discriminated against in the workplace, and 45.2% of them experienced sexual harassment twice daily, after they’d made tea for their male colleagues? Things are clearly picking up for women in the workplace… it’s almost as if they LIKE whining!

The article, by Emily Dugan, might just get our vote for the most stupid newspaper article published this year relating to women in the workplace (and there’s lots of competition). Female journalists have a near-monopoly on reporting on this topic, and most of their articles are so absurd and divorced from reality they’re almost beyond parody. Almost. Let’s analyse the whole piece, which starts:

Almost a fifth of the women surveyed so far say that their careers have stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities.

Let’s put that another way, shall we?

Over four fifths of the women surveyed so far say that their careers haven’t stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities.

Hmm, that’s not quite so bad, is it? But of course it leaves aside the issue of women who haven’t been promoted because either:

There aren’t positions to be promoted to; or

They’re not well-qualified for promotion (never a problem for Entitlement Princesses)

The article continues:

The scale of workplace inequality still faced by millions of women has been laid bare by a survey that suggests more than half of female employees have experienced some form of discrimination at work.

The finding comes from the interim results of the most substantial survey ever conducted into the experiences of Britain’s female workforce. Project 28-40, undertaken by Opportunity Now, has already been completed by more than 25,000 women and aims to get to 100,000 before publishing its final results.

Hmm, I wonder what kind of woman would spend her valuable time completing such surveys? That’s right. The whiny kind. We hadn’t heard of ‘Opportunity Now’ before – it’s so difficult to keep up with the multitude of women’s whiny initiatives, and who in their right mind would try to? – but the strapline under the organisation’s logo is ‘Men – Women – Workplace’ which is obviously ironic given what their website says the organisation aims to do:

Opportunity Now is the campaign on gender diversity from Business in the Community. Opportunity Now aims to increase women’s success at work, because it’s not only good for business but good for society too.

Both ‘good for business’ and ‘good for society’ are plain wrong but I don’t need to explain why to regular visitors to this blog. Let’s look at the Leadership team, which has the sort of balance we’ve come to expect when women run things:

http://opportunitynow.bitc.org.uk/about-opportunity-now/leadership-team

With a deep visceral groan, I note the chair of the Advisory Board is Helena Morrissey, CEO of Newton Investment Management. I do wish she’d spend more time at home with her nine children instead of working 24/7/365 in her bid to destroy the British business sector. She runs The 30% Club which aims to get major companies to increase female representation on their boards, regardless of the evidence showing financial decline will result. A third of FFTSE100 chairmen are members of the club. Why, those damnable patriarchs, keeping women down! The deputy chair of the Advisory Board is also a woman. Of the 16-strong Leadership team, 12 are women, including the Group HR Director of the Guardian Media Group, who looks more cheerful than you might expect of someone working for the Guardian. Back to the article:

Almost a fifth of the women surveyed so far say that their careers have stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities. Just over one in 10 experienced sexual harassment. The insight follows the news that the gender pay gap is widening for the first time in five years, according to data from the Office for National Statistics released earlier this month.

There’s no evidence that any gender pay gap widening has anything to with firms paying women less than men for the same work (which I take to be the inference from this paragraph). Year after year it’s explained that the gap is fully accountable by differences in the professions men and women go into, levels of seniority, sizes of organisation, industry sectors, blah, blah, blah. I’m too tired to comment further on that matter. So, did the Independent go to a respected organisation to comment on the interim findings of the Opportunity Now report? No, they went to the Fawcett Society. Hmm, I wonder what those upbeat gals had to say?

Daisy Sands, policy and campaigns manager at the Fawcett Society, said: “Today’s findings present a stark reminder of the raft of deep inequalities that women continue to face in the UK labour market, well into the 21st century. Women continue to dominate in low-paid and undervalued work – two-thirds of those in minimum-wage jobs are women. Conversely, women are sorely lacking at the top tables of power – only 25 per cent of senior managers in the UK are women.”

Back to the article:

Some 81 per cent of women believe having children will affect their career progression…

No shit, Sherlock… sorry, Emily. Would men who took the same time out of the workplace have the same problem? Of course. Moving on:

… and more than two-thirds say society expects women to put their family before their job.

Hmm, no mention of Dr Catherine Hakim’s Preference Theory (2000). Her research showed that while four in seven British men are ‘work-centred’, just one in seven British women is. Let’s move on:

Susan Himmelweit, an economist for the Women’s Budget Group, which analyses how women fare in the workplace, said: “Whenever there are pressures on people, as there are now – such as high unemployment – employers are in a better position to put more pressure on staff. Women with caring responsibilities have more difficulty with this [pressure]. Very often they’ve juggled things just to work and it’s more difficult for them to respond to changes. If it is a competitive environment then employers will think it’s not worth bothering with them.”

Professor Himmelweit said she believed the key to improving the gender gap lies in better rights for those who work part-time or flexibly. “What we really need is flexible working that the worker doesn’t have to pay for in some form,” she said. “The legislation on flexible working needs to become tougher so that those who have to use it are not discriminated against.”

Cool. In the interests of gender equality, should men who want to work flexibly not be discriminated against, too? Back to the article.

The Project 28-40 study found that 48 per cent of women had witnessed bullying or unfair treatment of a female colleague, but just 28 per cent said they had seen male colleagues suffer such abuse.

I’m losing the will to live now. We move onto some comments from a notorious gender feminist:

The TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said: “The battle for equality in the workplace is far from over. The gender pay gap got worse this year for the first time in many years, and spending cuts have hit women hard as many work in the public sector.”

Whoa, hold the horses. Two-thirds of public sector workers are women. Should the spending cuts have hit women less hard than men, so the proportion of women in the sector would increase? We can’t see any flaws in that argument. The genius continues:

“What really sets back women at work is becoming a mother. Career breaks, a period working part-time or simply the need to work sensible hours hold women back and limit job opportunities and promotion.”

‘What really sets back women at work is becoming a mother.’ Well, don’t become a mother, then.

Simples.

High-flying women are ditching therapists – for psychics

J has pointed us to another story for the ‘You couldn’t make this s*** up!’ file. We’re constantly being told we ‘need’ more women at the top of business. Exactly why we ‘need’ them there, when longitudinal studies show that increasing the representation of women on corporate boards leads to financial decline, is a mystery. But at least high-flying women are as rational as high-flying men, right? Oops.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2530821/Psychics-Why-high-flying-women-ditching-therapists-psychics.html#ixzz2oxCY27CV

From the article:

The recommended psychic, Susan Kennard, was not cheap — sessions cost £100 an hour.

‘But I’d been feeling so awful, I didn’t see how it could make it any worse,’ says Catherine.

‘My friend is incredibly down to earth — she works with computers and you wouldn’t expect her to be into this type of thing. But she kept saying how fantastic Susan was.’

The experience was transformative.

‘It was quite incredible,’ says Catherine, who lives with her husband Bernard, 51, and is a partner in their architect firm. ‘It was as if she knew me, without me even having to open my mouth.’

Susan is a qualified psychotherapist who uses her psychic gift to enhance her understanding of her clients, their pasts and the things that are troubling them.

‘Within two sessions, the negative feelings had disappeared,’ says Catherine. ‘I can only describe it as a feeling of lightness. The issues don’t go away, of course, but I felt empowered to handle them.’

You might think professional psychics have had their day — but they’re back, and they’ve had something of a makeover. Rebranded as ‘intuitive therapists’, they are increasingly sought-after by high-flyers for advice on everything from fertility problems to choice of partners and even business decisions.

Let’s pause to relish that last sentence. High-flying women are using the services of psychics to help them make business decisions. What could possibly go wrong?

From later in the article:

Susan says her psychic ability allows her to tune in to her clients’ feelings; she also has visions of their futures, although she’s cautious about sharing them.

‘I think telling people their future takes their power to act away, but I might gently steer someone according to what I see, saying for example: “I feel it might be helpful for you to think about this”.’

Hmm… ‘visions of the future’. I wonder if Susan can tell me which horse is going to win the 2:30 at Doncaster? That would be worth £100…

Ellie Slee’s attacks – Chandrapal S Bhasker comments

Chandrapal S Bhasker is a well-known and well-regarded commentator in the MHRA community, so I was delighted to receive some comments from him on our Facebook page today, following the recent attacks on me by the Huffington Post contributor Ellie Slee. Ms Slee has (to date) refused to retract a misleading statement she made about J4MB in a recent Huff Post article, a matter which is currently with their legal team. She then proceeded to call me a ‘rape denier’ on Twitter, which she has also (to date) declined to retract.

Chandrapal’s comments take up the rest of this post. If there are any errors in the piece I invite Ms Slee to point them out, and we’ll make the necessary correction(s). Because that’s what we do, at J4MB.

Feminist Ellie Slee Spreading Hatred & Bigoted Lies Against Men’s Gender Justice Activist Mike Buchanan

Feminist Ellie Slee, a full-time Oppressed-White-Woman who also works as a part-time fashion model as well as a resident DJ for Babylove at London’s Dalston Superstore has taken up the job of spreading hatred and bigoted lies against Mike Buchanan by accusing him of being a “rape denier”.

Being a dedicated adherent of Female Supremacism she recently practised her pyro-bile techniques against Movemeber, a modest initiative to raise awareness about men’s health issues such as prostate cancer, by writing a self-righteous article titled “Sore About Your Prostate? Don’t Blame Breast Cancer” in which she assiduously raised a straw man argument – men raising awareness about prostate cancer are “blaming” breast cancer awareness campaigns. Nothing stands in the way of Oppressed-White-Woman leading the sisterhood amidst the Valley of the Shadow of the Evil Patriarchy.

Unfortunately for her, many of us are well aware of Mike Buchanan’s stupendous work for gender equity and against the injustice faced by boys and men in the UK. His rigour in presenting his arguments supported by facts is nothing short of exemplary.

It goes without saying that we stand in complete solidarity with Mike Buchanan. A privileged and entitled white woman such as Ellie Slee, in spreading shameless lies against Mike in a cowardly attempt to sully his years of efforts for gender justice, has proven herself to be a vicious hate-monger whose primary aim is nothing more than to spread hatred against boys and men and bigoted lies against men like Mike who are fighting for justice, fairness, and a better future for all irrespective of their gender.

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/ellie-slee-huffington-post-contributor-mike-buchanan-is-a-rape-denier/

http://www.nicelyturnedout.com/2011/09/featured-look-ellie-slee/

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ellie-slee/