In our public challenge of Theresa May with respect to the Home Office’s ‘consultation’ on the strengthening of the law with respect to domestic abuse, we linked to a remarkable 72-page document from Red Pill UK, about the anti-male bias of the Home Office, Crown Prosecution Service, Ministry of Justice, EHRC… and Theresa May herself. So we were pleased to learn of this document relating to the ‘consultation’, posted today on the Red Pill UK website. We wish the site every success.

A report of a man murdered in Iran. An honour killing? Certainly. One that will be included in official statistics about honour killings in Iran? No.

Our thanks to M, a regular contributor of interesting pieces, for this. He comments:

Western women are more empowered than ever, and they’re in the workplace in higher numbers than ever.

At the same time Western nations have greater debts, unemployment, and social problems than ever before.

The exact opposite of what Hillary Clinton is saying.

He’s not wrong. Has Hillary Clinton ever said anything about women’s happiness? Or does she just want women to be like men, economic workhorses, regardless of how women would like to spend their lives, perhaps spending more time with family and fiends? What a truly grim woman she is. If she ever becomes President, life will get so much worse for American men. On the plus side, more of them will join up the dots and understand why their human rights are assaulted in so many areas.

In response to a number of people who’ve asked for a link to the consultation document and exercise, it’s here.

An interesting piece, less than 15 minutes long if you skip some early unrelated content, and start listening at 2:10.

The Home Office recently published a highly flawed and ideologically-driven consultation document on strengthening the law on domestic abuse, and associated it with an equally highly flawed consultation process. We’re publicly challenging Theresa May, Home Secretary, to hold a public inquiry instead. We’ve written to her and copied the letter to all 11 members of the Home Affairs committee. The letter is here. We’d like to warmly thank a supporter, R, for his contribution to the document.

Nearly as many men die from prostate cancer as women die from breast cancer. We accept that the age profile of men dying from prostate cancer is older than the age profile of women dying from breast cancer, but if the age-related situations were reversed, would we say that older women dying of breast cancer in huge numbers should mean that public spending shouldn’t be committed to a national breast cancer screening programme?

Of course we wouldn’t.

We’ve just had a response from the Department of Health to our recent FoI request concerning screening for gender-specific cancers – here. We learn that approximately the following sums are being spent annually on national screening programmes for cancer. The cancers – other than bowel cancer – are gender-specific:

Cervical cancer: £150 million

Breast cancer: £100 million

Bowel cancer: £100 million

Prostate cancer: £0.00

There are, of course, no national screening programmes for prostate cancer – or any other male-specific cancers. Are men being ignored, then? Certainly not. We learn:

Work is in progress to deliver a local pilot to raise awareness of prostate cancer in black men due to their higher risk of developing the disease.

Well, that’s all right, then.

£250 million is being spent annually on national screening programmes for female-specific cancers, and not a penny on national screening programmes for male-specific cancers.

A short but intriguing new piece from Ally Fogg. A major US study reports that in 2011, an estimated 1.7% of American men were ‘forced to penetrate’ in the preceding year, compared with an estimated 1.6% of women who were raped. Would we really expect the situation in the UK to be markedly different? Surely not.

We’re currently researching the area of sexual offences for our manifesto. I left the following comment on Ally’s blog, illustrating the shocking ‘gender gap’ in the UK with respect to sexual offences convictions:

“We’re currently researching this area for our election manifesto. Just had a FoI response from the Ministry of Justice, which speaks volumes about the gender bias of the justice system in this area, as in many others. To be fair, in the area of sexual assault, the problem is compounded by men’s reluctance to acknowledge they’ve been sexually assaulted, then their reluctance to report it, especially when the assailants are women. Reminding ourselves that slightly more men are ‘forced to penetrate’ than women are raped – in the US, anyway – let’s have a look at England & Wales stats for 2013:

RAPE CONVICTIONS
Men – 980 (924 sentenced to immediate custodial sentences)
Women – 5 (5 sentenced…)

ATTMEPTED RAPE CONVICTIONS
Men – 134 (122 sentenced…)
Women – 2 (2 sentenced…)

SEXUAL ASSAULT, INCLUDING INDECENT ASSAULT CONVICTIONS
Men – 2,352 (1,210 sentenced…)
Women – 28 (11 sentenced…)”

An outstanding piece just published by Ally Fogg.

J4MB runs a number of websites, including that of the Anti-Feminism League. We’re sometimes asked why we’re so vehemently opposed to feminism as an ideology, and feminists as individuals (and collectively). This short article explains why. For those interested in learning more about feminism, we have a sizeable list of recommended books here.

Christine Hoff Sommers is a highly respected American author, and identifies herself as a feminist. In 1994 her book Who Stole Feminism? How Women Have Betrayed Women was published. In the book she distinguished between two types of feminist, and in our experience every feminist is clearly one of the two types:

1. EQUITY FEMINISTS. Hoff Sommers identifies herself as an equity feminist. She writes that these women are committed to equal opportunities between men and women. Across most of the developed world (including the UK) women have long enjoyed the rights that men enjoy, along with fewer responsibilities. It’s unclear what equity feminists still have to fight for today, at least with respect to countries in the developed world.

2. GENDER FEMINISTS. In the UK we would more generally use the terms ‘radical feminist’ or ‘militant feminist’. These women believe in special advantaging of women, regardless of the consequences. The Labour MP Harriet Harman is an obvious example. The only form of feminism of the slightest consequence in the UK – and across most of the developed world – over the past 30+ years has been gender feminism. All the main political parties have long followed gender feminist agendas, and gender feminism has been the ruling ideology of governments and state institutions for 30+ years.

Only a small proportion of feminists are gender feminists, but gender feminists have long wielded extraordinary influence in government and all key state institutions. From this point forward the term ‘feminists’ should be taken to mean gender feminists.

Gender feminists are female supremacists, and they’re driven by misandry (the hatred of men). Anyone who doubts this assertion should watch this video.

Even J4MB wouldn’t claim that feminists are responsible for all the disadvantaging men and boys face in the modern world. But in almost every area of male disadvantage, feminists have made the situation worse for men. An example should illustrate this.

Erin Pizzey opened the world’s first women’s domestic violence (DV) refuge in Chiswick, London, in 1971. Within 12 months she had been ousted by feminists, and feminists control the refuge sector to this day. About 40% of victims of DV are men, yet provision of support for them is close to non-existent, because of the lack of refuge places available for them.

Women’s refuge organisations have a long history of lying and manipulating to drive their interests. They are very rarely, if ever, challenged by the mainstream media. In the autumn of 2014 J4MB publicly challenged three high-profile women heading major organisations, with respect to lies and/or misleading statements they – or their organisations’ spokeswomen – had made:

Polly Neate CEO, Women’s Aid
Sandra Horley Chief Executive, Refuge
Eleri Butler Chief Executive, Welsh Women’s Aid

At the time of writing (11 September, 2014) none of these women had made a substantive response to our public challenges.

Why do we say that feminists are the enemies not only of men, but also of women and children? Feminism is a creed derived from Marxism, and Marxism is virulently anti-marriage and anti-family. The British state has become ever more hostile towards marriage and the family over many years. Women and children suffer deeply from the consequent collapse of the family, along with men. This hostility has continued under the current Conservative-led coalition. Herbert Purdy, a highly respected blogger, wrote an important article on the Conservatives’ hostility towards marriage and the family.

For anyone still holding to the view that feminism is an ideology concerned with gender equality, we recommend this article by Janet Bloomfield.