Tony Ashby, a father prevented by the family courts system from seeing his children, is currently on hunger strike outside David Cameron’s Oxfordshire home. He’s asking for a five-minute-long meeting with the prime minister, in return for which he’ll end the strike. You must find 135 seconds to watch a short video of this inspiring man:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152848385806515

If you have a little more time available to read about Tony’s case, then please visit this:

http://www.demos4children.com/

We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again. The treatment of fathers (and their children) by the family courts system is BARBARIC. J4MB is sending a message of support to Tony Ashby and the many other good fathers who should be seeing their children over the coming days – and regularly, come to that – but won’t be, because of a corrupt family courts system which gorges itself on taxpayer’s money and then emotionally and financially abuses fathers, and emotionally abuses their children.

[Note posted 28.12.13: AVfM have published this piece, and as always the associated comments stream is well worth looking through:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/janet-street-porter-the-most-vile-woman-in-britain/ ]

Our thanks to J for pointing us to this story. An hour ago he called and spluttered, ‘Mike, you won’t believe what the hag has written about today!’ Sure enough, he was referring to a piece by the ‘personality’ and ‘journalist’ Janet Street-Porter. I can’t recall when a piece in a newspaper – British or otherwise – last made me so angry.

The Daily Mail has many fine female columnists and one truly vile one, Janet Street-Porter. At the very time of year when so many men are suffering the most due to denial of access to their children, because their vindictive ex-partners employ the services of the state to enforce that denial, JS-P has been so cruel as to write a piece published in today’s edition titled, ‘Deadbeat dads are the real problem’. It’s the second story in her column:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2528123/Janet-Street-Porter-Never-EVER-trust-celeb-tries-tell-theyre-normal.html

In a vile piece, possibly the most vile is this:

In this country, courts do not deny dads access to their children unless they are deemed a threat. There has to be a very good reason not to grant them the right to see their kids every other weekend.

Leaving aside the issue of whether access to children ‘every other weekend’ is reasonable access – we believe it’s not – can JS-P possibly be unaware how blatantly untrue these remarks are? More importantly, can her editor be unaware? And how about this?

One new study reckons there are about 1 million dads who live apart from their children – one in ten of all dads – a huge number. After talking to 1,000 dads who were separated from their children, it emerged that many were not working, had a poor education and had married or lived with someone three or more times.

You’d be forgiven for thinking ‘1 million dads’ live apart from their children through choice. We’re not told what the ‘new study’ is, of course. That aside, is she implying that it’s reasonable to deny fathers access to their children, if they’re not working? Or if they’ve had a poor education (hardly their own fault, after all)? Or if they’ve married or lived with someone three or four times? As far as the last point is concerned, Kate Winslet would fall in the same category, having had three children by three different men. Would JS-P favour denying Winslet access to her children? JS-P herself has been married four times. Pot, kettle, black? And how about this?

Of course, some women deny fathers access to their children without due cause, which is incredibly cruel, but what about the men who produce babies by different women and don’t pay for any of them?

Vast numbers of single mothers in the UK know perfectly well who the fathers of their children are – to be fair, many of them are genuinely unsure, but that’s another issue altogether – but they tell the authorities they don’t know who the fathers are in order to be supplied with social housing for life, welfare benefits etc. And who pays for that accommodation and those benefits? Men, in the main, who pay 72% of the income tax collected in the UK.

In April 2012 we presented JS-P with a ‘Harpy’ award. It seems appropriate to provide a link to that story now. It will also take you to her award certificate:

http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/janet-street-porter-wins-a-harpy/

More than a few people have asked us if the image of the woman in the certificate is JS-P herself, but it’s not. It’s a picture of a waxwork female vampire. The same image is used on the cover of my book Feminism: the ugly truth.

Two months ago this awful harridan made another ‘misleading statement’ – about the impact of women on companies’ performance – and we made a public challenge, as yet unanswered:

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/our-public-challenge-to-janet-street-porter/

In the highly unlikely event this disgusting men-hating crone ever responds to the challenge, we’ll publish her response on this website. I end with a link to her profile on the website of a programme she appears on regularly, ITV’s Loose Women:

http://www.itv.com/loosewomen/presenters/janet-street-porter/

The following extract from her profile reveals all you need to know about her self-perception, and what others think of her:

The first thing I do in the morning is: Remind myself I am fabulous because no one else is going to!

I imagine her ex-husbands wake up every morning and spontaneously burst into a loud rendition of, ‘Oh, what a beautiful morning… oh, what a beautiful day!’

Kate Winslet made some controversial remarks in a recent interview with Vogue – about the upbringing of her children – which led to Fathers4Justice deciding to run a press campaign. She’s threatening to sue F4J – I should personally be astounded if she actually did so – and there’s been plenty of commentary in the media about the matter. None of that commentary has yet reached the quality standards we demand for this website, but AVfM has just published a remarkable piece by a well-known American Honey Badger, Janet Bloomfield (‘Judgy Bitch’). It starts off with her thoughts on the Winslet affair but moves on to issues surrounding parental alienation, and her moving personal story about the issue. Everything JB writes is worth reading in full, but she rarely gets better than this:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/fathers/katewinslet-a-christmas-letter-for-fathers-alienated-from-their-children-katewinslet/

Another outstanding piece from Diana:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/mhpshow-feminism-vs-facts-marissa-alexander-angela-corey-melissa-harris-perry-msnbc/

A short (1:42) Xmas message from one of our favourite Canadian Honey Badgers, Diana Davison. Enjoy:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/on-the-importance-of-being-a-supervillain/

Aimee C Nicholls is a beautiful young English lady who made a very moving video earlier this year, to which we posted a link at the time. Now 17, she was forbidden by the family courts system to have contact with her father (or younger sister, Kitty) for 11 years, but when she reached 16 she left her mother to live with her father. She’s just posted a short but very moving video, which ends with some words about a man forbidden to see his children, and who’s currently on hunger strike outside David Cameron’s house. Through the following AVfM link you’ll also be able to access both her new video – AVfM have called it their ‘must see’ video of the week – and her equally moving earlier video:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/must-see-video-of-the-week-84-of-uk-agree-christmas-is-ruined-for-dads/

Our thanks to a regular contributor, M, for sending us two emails this morning. AVfM have published the story and as always with AVfM, the comments section is worth reading:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-censorship/santas-warned-ho-ho-ho-offensive-to-women/

Amanda Platell, a Daily Mail columnist, can usually be relied upon to pen at least one short piece every week which speaks volumes about the realities of how the genders are treated differently, whether by the state or otherwise. Our thanks to the three supporters who’ve pointed us to one of her pieces, in yesterday’s edition of the paper:

Why Help the Peru Two?

From the moment two British high-life-loving  party girls were arrested for trying to smuggle 11kg of cocaine out of Peru, the  Foreign Office has worked tirelessly to help them.

As a result, they received much reduced  sentences, which they may yet get to serve in Britain.

What a contrast to the FO’s apparent  abandonment of the British surgeon, Dr Abbas Khan, who went to Syria on a  humanitarian mission and was found hanged after a year’s imprisonment and  torture, just days before his promised release.

His brother Shahnawaz Khan said: ‘We are proud that he died doing something he believed in, helping people who were in  desperate need.’

How different to the drug mules, who were just greedy fools fuelling a trade in misery. So why were they the ones to get  Government support?

Does Ms Platell really not know why criminal women received more support from the state than a male doctor on a humanitarian mission? We somehow doubt it. It’s solidly in line with how the state always allocates limited resources on the basis of gender, given a choice.

We put the question of who to select for next month’s Whiny Woman of the Month award to the team in Bath yesterday over the teatime Earl Grey, McVitie’s Digestives… and a new addition at Kevin’s request, Jammy Dodgers. I digress. There are always plenty of contenders for these awards, and before long gender feminists will doubtless see it as a ‘badge of honour’ to be presented with one. Maybe we’ll start selling them in return for donations to party funds.

Following a short discussion we selected the Huffington Post contributor Ellie Slee for the next award. The link below will take her to the award certificate which we feel sure she’ll print off, put into a nice frame, and display somewhere suitable in her home. Maybe on a wall with a pretty floral pattern wallpaper?

140101 Ellie Slee’s ‘Whiny Woman of the Month’ award certificate

In a recent Huffington Post article (link below) Ms Slee falsely claimed that J4MB refers to women as ‘gestational incubators’:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ellie-slee/durham-university-feminism_b_4438952.html

We’ve never referred to women in this way, needless to say. So what is the source of the reference to women as ‘gestational incubators’? Ms Slee links to a recent article written by Clint Carpentier and published on AVfM – ‘The Future of Women in a MGTOW Society’ – to which we provided a link. The full article’s here:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-politics/m-g-t-o-w/the-future-of-women-in-a-mgtow-society/

How many people would have bothered to check out the article link? Not many, we guess. And of the people who did, what proportion would reasonably – albeit incorrectly – have deduced Carpentier was writing on behalf of J4MB, and reflecting our views? We didn’t comment on the piece other than to say it was an interesting piece of ‘future gazing’, or words to that effect. An extract from Carpentier’s article:

What women didn’t realize was that the very things which made their lives easier – be they appliances or conveniently boxed pre-made meals at the grocery store – simultaneously reduced the necessity for women. Men are increasingly becoming aware of this, and are opting to go their own way and reject the farce that marriage has become.

Women have inadvertently been reduced to gestational incubators; everything else, men can take care of on their own. And the more that women harp on about how evil, and useless, and stupid men are, and how much men must be responsible for the life choices women make, the more men opt to ignore women altogether.

Even by feminist commentators’ notoriously low standards, Ms Slee’s plumbing new depths. She appears to be inferring that if an organisation links to material written by someone, the organisation can reasonably be represented in an article as the originator of any content in the material. In this case we have the following bizarre ‘trail’:

– Clint Carpentier (an individual with no connection whatsoever to J4MB) refers in a published article to women as ‘gestational incubators’

– J4MB publishes a link to the piece

– J4MB itself can therefore be presented as referring to women as ‘gestational incubators’

Wow. Is the Huffington Post aware that one of its contributors is working to this standard of journalistic integrity?

Given that Ms Slee cites Andrea Dworkin’s book Pornography, she’s skating on thin ice. Might J4MB be tempted to play the same game as Ms Slee, and present a carefully selected extract from Pornography as attributable to Ms Slee personally, rather than to Dworkin? Of course not. We don’t need to.

The MHRM is slowly but steadily gaining ground internationally through repeated and well-reasoned arguments, and calm presentation. Gender feminism is losing ground because for 30+ years the hate-driven women driving it – with their male collaborators – have relied for their existence as professional feminists on conspiracy theories, fantasies, lies, delusions and myths… and shrill emotionally-driven presentation. An ever-growing band of men and women, of all ages, are telling them to take a long hike.

It’s about damned time.

For decades gender feminists have been notorious for refusing to retract demonstrably misleading statements made in the media. We’ve yet to receive responses to our public challenges of Kat Banyard and Caroline Criado-Perez on (respectively) Channel 4 News and BBC radio:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R3fMxygLXw

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2013/08/25/caroline-criado-perez-is-asking-the-media-to-fact-check-no-seriously-she-is/

There have been plenty of other gender feminists unwilling to correct misleading statements. A small selection of these shameless women (and their male collaborators) is to be found here:

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/our-public-challenges-to-feminists/

One final thing. I haven’t the faintest idea if Ms Slee is married, but if she were to marry a Mr Peahead, she could thereafter rejoice in the name of Mrs Slee-Peahead, which has a satisfying ring to it.

Our thanks to D for pointing us to an interesting article in yesterday’s Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526801/JAN-MOIR-Being-vile-Winslet-wont-help-fathers-despair.html

Jan Moir writes:

It must be awful to feel that you are not  getting due access to your child. And truthfully, I have a great deal of  sympathy for dads who have been elbowed out of family life after the breakdown  of a marriage; left out on the cold doorstep like an empty milk bottle or a sack of rubbish.

Sometimes it is their fault, sometimes it is  the mother’s fault, sometimes the break-up of a relationship is nobody’s fault.  Some sensible couples manage to steer a happy path through the swamp of  separation,  others just cannot reach those equable heights.

Yet the indisputable truth is that fathers  are written out of family life far too easily, dismissed as irrelevant when  their parental influence and input is sorely needed.

Yet more often than not, Fathers4Justice does  its cause no favours. In its assorted campaigns and protests, it almost always  hits the wrong note.

This onslaught against Kate Winslet is  typical of its characteristically bullying tactics, not to mention the  intimidation, the egotistical and silly stunts, and the endless  hectoring.

Time and again F4J have pointed out that the only time they get mainstream media exposure is through adopting the tactics they do. Jan Moir makes not one suggestion on what F4J might do instead, whilst claiming to have ‘a great deal of sympathy’ with fathers who don’t have reasonable access to their children. Incredible.