Our thanks to Martin for this gem. In common with most articles about male and female drivers it states that men account for most accidents, but fails to mention that when miles driven are taken into account, men are safer drivers than women. That aside, we particularly enjoyed the following:

The 10 spaces outside the main entrance were provided after women had trouble parking in the standard basement slots, managers said. “I think this is very convenient,” said user Yong Mei. “Other parking spaces are too narrow.”

“It’s not gender-biased,” she said. “It’s just that women have a few issues with vision when parking.”

We recently posted a piece explaining what success for J4MB would look like in the 2015 general election. A short while ago we received the following insightful response to the piece from Douglas of antimisandry.com, a website we recommend highly:

Many years ago, I was involved with the Green Movement, as it then was. Someone came up with the idea of forming a political party to push the agenda, and the Green Party was born.

That the Green Party still exists, and whether one likes their contemporary politics, is not my point. I lived through – and played my small part in – the formation of the Green Party which went from a struggling concept to a political platform within one or two elections. And the big point is that as soon as the big three parties saw votes being taken from them and going to this new Green Party, they ALL suddenly had ‘green’ issues on their agenda. Every one of the major parties started vying for the votes by declaring that they were greener than the others and environmental issues are a fixed part of modern politics.

Yes, the Green Party still exists and still pushes for… well, something… but most of the demands the Green Movement had back in the ‘old days’ have been met and often exceeded by the major political parties who have desperately wanted to appease the environmentalists hidden in most of us.

By making an election issue of men’s and boys’ needs, we can focus the attention of politicians on to male rights and the plight of men and boys. When main-stream politicians know for sure that getting voted in relies on them turning their back on divisive feminist policies and backing genuine equality, they will mandate accordingly and start voting in Parliament to appease the fair-mindedness that is in most of us.

It won’t even matter if the EU and UN keep pushing the feminist bigotry on the country: the politicians in power will reject it because they will know that to do otherwise will mean they will not stay in power. THAT is why every vote for J4MB matters.

Our thanks to Paul for pointing us to this story.

You’d have thought, would you not, that women starting degree courses at Cambridge University would be among the brightest young women in the country? Apparently not. Feminists wish to infantilise them by forcing them to attend compulsory sexual consent workshops at which they’ll learn they are never to consider themselves accountable for anything that happens to them – you want to walk alone round a park, stark naked, whilst blind drunk, at 3am? Go grrrrl!!! – and that ‘lad culture’ is to blame for everything. Oh, and check out the six ‘I need feminism because…’ pictures. They’re all idiotic even by the deplorable standards of this ‘genre’, but the two featuring men are particularly embarrassing.

Welcome news from the United States.

I’ve long been an admirer of the columnist Simon Heffer, and ended my longstanding subscription to an increasingly less perceptive Daily Telegraph when he left the paper to write a column for the Daily Mail. I wish he’d say more about gender issues, but hope springs eternal. His article in today’s edition of the paper about Dave’s recent cabinet reshuffle is very good, be sure to also scroll down and read his short piece titled, ‘Don’t doom us to another Miller’.

Out thanks to Steve for pointing us towards a disturbing article. Let’s call the right to ‘choose’ what it is, the right to kill – and for a girl not yet of an age to legally have sex, the right to kill not just once, but to kill twice… then kill again… then kill again. In fact, the right to kill as often as she wishes. All this after almost 50 years of near-infallible contraception, in the form of the Pill.

Most soldiers on active duty terminate fewer lives than this girl has.

An excellent article by Tim Black, Deputy Editor of Spiked. Hopefully it will be the last cabinet reshuffle Dave ever presides over, before he returns to working in Public Relations.

In the wake of my recent speech in Detroit, a number of people privately made the point to me that because the UK has a ‘first past the post’ electoral system, a system which disadvantages minor parties, the likelihood of J4MB candidates being elected as MPs in the 2015 general election (or in subsequent elections) is very low.

The history of general elections in the UK certainly bears this point out – very few candidates outside the three main parties have been elected as MPs in my lifetime (I’m 56).  The time made available for my speech in Detroit was cut short due to unforeseen circumstances, so I didn’t have the opportunity to explain a key point:

Our success won’t depend on having J4MB candidates elected as MPs.

Our success will depend on raising the public profile of our party and getting the issues we’re campaigning about into the public arena for wider debate. In later general elections, our success will depend on securing enough votes in enough marginal seats of one major party to markedly reduce that party’s prospects of being elected or re-elected. In 2015 we’ll be contesting Conservative marginal seats. At the last general election the margins in the 30 most marginal seats won by the Conservative ranged from 54 to 1,692 votes. Labour was the runner-up in 23 of these seats, while in seven seats it was the Liberal Democrats.

In our campaigning over the next 10 months we’ll be stressing to electors why a vote for J4MB won’t be a wasted vote, and why voting for the three main parties will be a wasted vote – all of them today are relentlessly anti-father, their educational policies disadvantage boys, and they discriminate against men on many fronts. We’ll explain that voting for J4MB will send a clear message to politicians:

The state’s assaults on the human rights of men and boys must end.

Millions of people watch the individual general election results being declared, so millions of people will for the first time learn of the existence of our party when our candidates’ vote counts are declared. After the election we’ll capitalise on the increased public awareness of J4MB to build a stronger, more effective campaigning machine in the years running up to the 2020 general election, and later we’ll be fighting in the 2025 general election.

We anticipate a virtuous circle of increasing public awareness leading to increased funding, which in turn will lead to increased campaigning effectiveness, and even more public awareness. The day is coming when the main parties will have no choice but to engage with J4MB, in a bid to dissuade J4MB from targeting their marginal seats. Now that will be a happy day.

[Note added 21.7.14: We’ve just received an insightful response to this blog piece from Douglas of antimisandry.com, a website we recommend highly. It takes up the remainder of this blog post.

Many years ago, I was involved with the Green Movement, as it then was. Someone came up with the idea of forming a political party to push the agenda, and the Green Party was born.

That the Green Party still exists, and whether one likes their contemporary politics, is not my point. I lived through – and played my small part in – the formation of the Green Party which went from a struggling concept to a political platform within one or two elections. And the big point is that as soon as the big three parties saw votes being taken from them and going to this new Green Party, they ALL suddenly had ‘green’ issues on their agenda. Every one of the major parties started vying for the votes by declaring that they were greener than the others and environmental issues are a fixed part of modern politics.

Yes, the Green Party still exists and still pushes for… well, something… but most of the demands the Green Movement had back in the ‘old days’ have been met and often exceeded by the major political parties who have desperately wanted to appease the environmentalists hidden in most of us.

By making an election issue of men’s and boys’ needs, we can focus the attention of politicians on to male rights and the plight of men and boys. When main-stream politicians know for sure that getting voted in relies on them turning their back on divisive feminist policies and backing genuine equality, they will mandate accordingly and start voting in Parliament to appease the fair-mindedness that is in most of us.

It won’t even matter if the EU and UN keep pushing the feminist bigotry on the country: the politicians in power will reject it because they will know that to do otherwise will mean they will not stay in power. THAT is why every vote for J4MB matters.

We’ve reported at length about the additional sponsorships of £22,750 available to Brunel University MSc students who are women, on the grounds of gender alone. Men can also get the sponsorships, but they have to undergo a sex change first. Men are eligible even if they’re ‘in transition’… hmm… we wonder which stage of the ‘transition’ will have to be passed for them to get the money. The loss of their meat and two veg, surely.

Our latest post on this scandal, which has had no mainstream media coverage, to the best of our knowledge, is here.

The apparent ‘brains’ behind the scheme is Petra Gratton, Brunel engineering lecturer. She was quoted as saying this:

Only around a quarter of students on engineering masters’ courses are women.

This interested us for two reasons. Firstly the figure of a quarter seemed improbably high to us, but even if it were correct, it would be a markedly higher proportion than that of women studying engineering at undergraduate level. Why, then, would there be a need to incentivise yet more female engineering graduates to do MSc courses?

We sent another FoI request to Brunel, asking for the numbers of men and women on undergraduate and postgraduate (MSc) engineering courses in the 2013/14 academic year, and we’ve just had the answer:

Undergraduates
Men: 1,527 (87.0%)
Women: 228 (13.0%)

Postgraduates
Men: 991 (84.1%)
Women: 188 (15.9%)

So there we have it. Petra Gratton’s figure of a quarter of engineering students doing an MSc is not only an exaggeration – at Brunel, at least, but we’d expect it to be an exaggeration generally for UK universities – but compared with the number of women doing undergraduate courses, a disproportionately higher number are doing MSc courses, doubtless seeking those nice office-based leadership roles where their hair won’t be messed up by hard hats. Given that female engineering graduates are more likely than their male counterparts to not enter the profession, to quit the profession – if and when they have children, almost certainly never to return to engineering – what on earth is the point of bribing yet more women onto MSc courses, other than to enable them to favour women in recruitment and promotion terms, if and when they attain senior positions? That, of course, is exactly the point.

Our thanks to Nigel, a highly valued supporter and donor, for pointing us towards two quite outstanding articles from Kathy Gyngell. The first was published just before David Cameron’s predictably anti-male cabinet reshuffle was announced, the second today.