We recently posted a piece about Julie Bindel being the current ‘journalist-in-residence’ at Brunel University, where female postgraduate engineering students are eligible for an addition £15,000 p.a. on the grounds of the gender alone:

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/julie-bindel-is-journalist-in-residence-at-brunel-university/

In the piece we linked to the university’s profile of Professor Sarah Niblock, Head of Journalism. Now this is a woman who has no reservations about posting opinions online. With reference to the appointment of Julie Bindel, on the Brunel university website http://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/news-items/ne_330620 we find the following:

Brunel’s Head of Journalism Sarah Niblock welcomed the appointment: “Julie is a phenomenal journalist who never ceases to bring tough social affairs stories to the forefront of the news agenda. She combines the research acumen of a sociologist with the news sense, policy know-how and editorial rigour of a reporter.”

“Our students find her passion for her subject matter infectious, and they can’t wait to work with her,” she added.

We emailed Ms Niblock with the following:

Sarah, good evening. Swayne O’Pie and I are going to debate with Julie Bindel and Cindy Gallop at Durham University next Friday evening, and I was interested to read that Ms Bindel is currently your ‘journalist-in-residence’. I don’t know if you’re aware that female engineering postgraduate engineering students at Brunel University are eligible for an additional £15,000 p.a. grant on account of their gender alone (link below). Do you support this move, and if so, could you explain to me why this country specifically needs more female engineers? Thank you.

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/brunel-university-an-update-on-a-scandalous-story/

We’ve just received the following response:

Mike,

Sorry but I can’t comment on Brunel University policies so I am directing this to our press office.

Have a good debate on Friday.

Best wishes,

Sarah

It hardly needs pointing out that we hadn’t asked her to ‘comment on Brunel University policies’. We’d asked her for her opinions, something she was keen to reveal publicly in the case of the appointment of a prominent gender feminist journalist to the position of ‘journalist-in-residence’.

We consider her response to be so pathetic and evasive (even by feminist standards) that we have little option but to make our two simple questions – does she support the additional £15,000 p.a. grant for women alone, and if so, why does the country specifically need more female engineers? – the subject of a new public challenge. In the unlikely event we receive a substantive response from her, we’ll publish it.

Let’s start the new week with a gem of a video by the legendary Canadian Honey Badger (a female advocate for men’s human rights), Karen Straughan (GirlWritesWhat). She uploaded this to her channel two days ago. Enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymkwdf7XPKc&feature=youtu.be

It’s good to see her solid examination of feminists’ shaming tactics. Feminists are incapable of engaging in rational debate, because all their assertions and theories are demonstrably flawed. Their assertions on ‘red button’ issues such as rape and domestic violence have been exposed as lies for decades. So they have little option but to resort to shaming tactics of one kind or another.

In her trademark forensic style, Karen points out that if we truly lived in a culture where misogyny is the norm – as claimed ad nauseam by high-profile gender feminists such as Caroline Criado-Perez – then charges of misogyny wouldn’t carry the power they do. The fact they DO carry power debunks the whole feminist ‘society hates women’ narrative.

Karen also covers issues surrounding ‘rape culture’ including threats on Twitter, and violence against women.

We recommend you subscribe to Karen’s channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat

[A Voice for Men published this piece 22.1.14 – the comment stream will probably be worth looking at, as usual with AVfM:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/j4mb-official-complaint-to-the-bbc-newsnight-piece-on-domestic-violence-was-in-breach-of-50-bbc-guidelines/ ]

The BBC has a long track record of following feminist and other left-wing narratives, and a glaring example is their coverage of domestic abuse/violence (‘DA’). For many years the BBC’s narratives have been solely – or almost solely – about female victims and male perpetrators, despite an overwhelming body of evidence showing that women are often perpetrators of DA, and men often victims. There are occasional balancing pieces, including this one on (surprisingly) Woman’s Hour, on 10 October 2013:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLlEJFcVOCQ

While such pieces exist, they’re rare – Woman’s Hour generally follows feminist narratives, as we’d expect. Other high-audience BBC programmes which are even keener on following those narratives includes the flagship news programmes Today and Newsnight. A particularly bad example on the Newsnight episode of 5 April 2013:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy8TxOQcWdU

Late in the evening of 7 January 2014 we received a large number of emails from supporters appalled at that evening’s episode of Newsnight. Not only was there a piece on the programme concerning menacing tweets sent to Caroline Criado-Perez – a subject the BBC has covered at inordinate length on many occasions – but more importantly to our supporters, a lengthy piece on DA failed to mention male victims and female perpetrators:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_arobNtUyU

Our blog piece on the matter:

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2014/01/08/bbc-newsnight-abuses-male-victims-of-domestic-violence-yet-again/

We decided it was time to send our first official complaint to the BBC, and to increase our chances of having an impact we decided to focus on the 7 January episode, and scrutinised the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines in detail. This link http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/ will take you through to those guidelines, which are viewable online and downloadable as a PDF (215 pages).

There are three documents associated with our complaint. The cover letter:

140120 letter to BBC re Newsnight 7 January 2014 – FINAL DRAFT

Our critique of BBC Editorial Guidelines in connection with the complaint, showing the Newsnight piece breached 50+ guidelines:

140120 Newsnight report’s breaches of BBC Editorial Guidelines – FINAL DRAFT

Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan’s slides from last year’s presentation to the National Conference for Male Victims of Domestic Violence:

140108 Nicola Graham-Kevan presentation, ‘Female perpetrators of intimate partner violence’

We’ll post the BBC’s response online as soon as we receive it. In the meantime we invite you to submit your own complaint about the Newsnight episode. First online page about making a complaint http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints. If you wish to make a complaint online start here http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/. Key pieces of advice:

Try to restrict yourself to one complaint, this increases your chance of getting a substantive response

Clarify you’re making a complaint, as distinct from a comment, and you require a written response

Ensure the BBC receives your complaint (whether by mail or online) by 5 February

Feel free to email me mike@j4mb.org.uk if you receive an interesting response to your complaint.

From a recent edition of The Scotsman:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/nurse-who-made-false-grandfather-rape-claim-jailed-1-3257518

Predictably, the piece was written by a female journalist. The nurse was jailed for just 22 months, and doubtless she won’t serve even that. If you look really closely at the piece, you might spot a sentence or two suggesting some sympathy for the grandfather. In most articles of this nature you won’t find any sympathy for the grievously wronged men. There’s invariably far more concern shown towards women who might be deterred by the negative publicity surrounding such cases, from going to the police with their own allegations.

Our thanks to William Collins for this. After reading our earlier piece on the corrupt mainstream media, he sent a note comparing the media’s exhaustive coverage of the cases of Bill Roache and Dave Lee Travis, suspected of sexual assaults 30-50 years ago, with their treatment of Joanna Dennehy. You could be forgiven for asking, ‘Joanna who?’ A Daily Mail report on this cold-blooded serial killer:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541442/Female-serial-killers-victims-moment-lunged-knife-two-separate-incidents.html

William’s commentary takes up the remainder of this post:

“On Thursday 16th January 2014 several trials started which would be of public interest. One group of trials were of media celebrities accused of sexual assaults in the 1960s-1980s, these prosecutions having arisen as a result of the post-Saville Operation Yewtree. The accused included Bill Roache (the Coronation Street actor) and Dave Lee Travis, the former Radio 1 DJ. Both men totally deny all the charges. The identities of the accusers is, of course, unknown to the public. They gave evidence in court from behind a screen. The accusations are of varying severity. Those against Travis are of ‘groping’, e.g. feeling the accuser’s breasts, or putting his hand up her skirt.

On the same day the trial started of the accomplices of serial killer Joanna Dennehy. This delightful women went on a 10 day spree killing men. The first three men were known to her. She knifed them through the heart and dumped their bodies in ditches in Cambridgeshire. Her blood lust being unsatisfied, she drove to Hereford where she selected another two men at random on the street and knifed them too, leaving them for dead (though both narrowly survived). In addition to being a naturally violent person, Dennehy’s motive appears to involve a deep hatred of men and a wish to denigrate them. Apart from the fact that all five victims were men, evidence of this is provided by the treatment of some of the bodies. Dennehy put one man into a woman’s dress after she had killed him, but with his posterior exposed as if to invite violation.

The point of my regaling you with these trials is this. Both started on the same day. The Yewtree trials of Roache and Travis received widespread coverage on TV and radio news programmes. In contrast, the trials related to the Joanna Dennehy killings weren’t mentioned. I am forced to conclude that in the minds of the people who schedule these things (could they be feminists?) an accusation of having squeezed a woman’s breasts several decades ago, though denied, is a more serious issue than the confessed knifing of five men resulting in three deaths last year. This illustrates the relative value that our society places on men and women.”

Our thanks to eagle-eyed M for this heart-warming story:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/25780615

Ms Wills will be ‘in line’ to make next season’s squad for the New York Lizards. Isn’t that nice? Presumably, in the interests of gender equality, men will now be eligible to play for women’s sports teams? With the inevitable improvements in performance, that would surely go a long way to making women’s sports more watchable, although I wouldn’t want to extend the principle to women’s beach volleyball. Some sports are fine just as they are.

If ever there was a story illustrating how female supremacy and male disposability play out in the justice system, this is it.

Today is the first anniversary of a dark day in the annals of the Canadian justice system, a dark day for Canadian men’s human rights. On 18 January 2013 Nicole Ryan was acquitted of a crime she admitted, that of offering CAD25,000 to a hitman – in reality, an undercover Royal Canadian Mounted Policeman – to kill her husband. AVfM has just published the following powerful piece. Find time to read this. Please.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/gynarchy/canada-a-first-world-cuntry/

In the UK, following a change in the law in the latter stages of the last Labour government, a woman who kills her partner in cold blood need only say she ‘feared’ him – no evidence that the fear was justified need be presented – and the charge will automatically be downgraded from murder to manslaughter. With good behaviour she’ll be out of prison within five years. Five years for killing a man in cold blood.

 

 

Once you realise how corrupt the mainstream media are when reporting on gender-related matters, the world can never quite seem the same again. Very often the media support gender feminist narratives not so much by what they do and say, as by what they don’t do and say.

A good example is the BBC. We’re about to send them an official complaint concerning a recent lengthy piece on Newsnight about domestic abuse/violence (‘DA’). The piece didn’t deny the existence of male victims or female perpetrators of DA, it simply ignored their existence altogether. As usual with the BBC – there have been programmes which have been exceptions, but only a few – the talk was only of female victims and male perpetrators. The video’s here – the piece dated 7 January 2014 – along with a little commentary from us:

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKhX1c3ow6BrzdzP3ydpeZQ/videos

Even historically right-of-centre mainstream media outlets have become peddlers of gender feminist narratives, or at least report in such a way as to not challenge those narratives. In the latest edition of The Economist the paper manages to devote a full page to the crises facing the NHS without mentioning that many are directly attributable to the relentless increase in the numbers of women doctors over many years. Over 30 years ago the bestselling writer Dr Vernon Coleman was warning that the feminisation of the NHS would have dire consequences in time. How right he was.

Another story in the paper caught my eye, in the ‘news round-up’ section. This is the full text:

An obstetrician in China was given a suspended death sentence for selling newborn babies from Shaanxi province to child traffickers. The doctor convinced parents to give up their babies by telling them the children had medical problems. Child trafficking is an increasingly common crime in China.

My hunch is most people reading the above would assume the doctor was a man, and that only a few babies were involved. Both assumptions would be incorrect:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2539297/Female-Chinese-doctor-stole-newborn-babies-telling-mothers-died-given-suspended-death-sentence.html

From the article:

A cruel Chinese female doctor who told mothers their new-born babies had died, but had secretly sold them, has been given a suspended death sentence. Obstetrician Zhang Shuxia, 55, was found guilty of stealing seven babies after telling their parents the newborns were sick or had died – before selling the children to traffickers for £2,255 for females and £5,240 for males…

It is believed Zhang sold many more children than the seven she was charged with stealing. According to reports received by police, some 26 babies were stolen from their mothers and Zhang was named as the main suspect.

I also read a piece in a leading broadsheet two or three days ago which reported only the doctor’s name, which to most British people would have given no indication of gender.

The final point is of course that because the doctor’s a woman, the death sentence was suspended. Can we seriously doubt that if the doctor had been a man, he’d have been shot in the back of the head by now? Surely not.

Swayne O’Pie and I are looking forward to meeting and debating with Julie Bindel and Cindy Gallop next Friday evening, at Durham University. Our thanks to C for pointing us to a piece about Ms Bindel being the current ‘journalist-in-residence’ at Brunel University. She’s joined the ‘Journalism team’:

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/news-items/ne_330620

Brunel University is, notoriously, the university at which female postgraduate engineering students are eligible for an additional £15,000 p.a. grant on account of their gender alone:

https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/brunel-university-an-update-on-a-scandalous-story/

We’ll ask Ms Bindel what she things about this grant next Friday. In the meantime we thought we’d ask Sarah Niblock, Professor and Head of Journalism at Brunel University, what she thinks of the grant. Her university profile page is here:

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/arts/journalism/staff/sarah-niblock

Along with policemen, professors are clearly getting younger with each passing year.

We’ve just sent an email to Ms Niblock sarah.niblock@brunel.ac.uk about the grant, and asked:

Do you support this move? And if so, could you explain to me why this country specifically needs more female engineers?

Surely a Professor and Head of Journalism won’t struggle to respond to our perfectly simple questions?

Our thanks to M for this. This could be very good news for some women, which we obviously welcome, but can we really doubt that a market will develop for poor women in developing countries to sell their wombs to careerist women in the developed world who’ve left it too late to conceive naturally?

http://www.mail.com/int/scitech/health/2570134-swedish-doctors-transplant-wombs-9-women.html