Halve female prisoner numbers, says minister Simon Hughes

A piece from the BBC. 80,000 of the 84,000 prisoners in England and Wales are men, and we know from an article by William Collins that if male criminals were sentenced as leniently as female criminals, five out of six men currently in prison in England and Wales wouldn’t be there. Simon Hughes’s incredible suggestion is to halve the number of female prisoners. There’s no end to the gynocentrism displayed by politicians and others working in public bodies.

Hughes makes excuses for female criminality, all of which apply equally well to male criminals, such as mental health issues and abusive backgrounds. And finally this:

Many more women have caring responsibilities than men do.

Two points:

1. Why should having caring responsibilities be a ‘Get out of Jail Free’ card, other than to avoid the state incurring expenditure in imprisoning the women, and also for providing substitute care while the women are in prison? Does Hughes not realise he’s giving a green light to women with caring responsibilities to commit crimes?

2. Surely sentencing should be set at an individual level, not a group level? Why should it matter that many more women than men have caring responsibilities?

What a world we live in, when your likelihood of going to prison is considerably increased if you have the ‘wrong’ genitals. If this is justice, I’m a Waldorf salad.

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • “Women have more caring responsibilities.”

    *Translation* Women have driven men from the family unit, yet someone this gives women an excuse to use children as their shield.

  • Breaking the rule of law,the democratic principles and human rights in the name gentleman’s code of conduct….. Something doesn’t add up… It appears that something must give way..either our democratic principles must be OFFICIALLY replaced with arbitrary anti-men laws,or gentlemanly ,preferential treatment of women must go…because we can’t have a just,genuine democracy if we keep on perverting it with anti-men and pro women laws… Gentlemanly manners are subverting our justice and democracy,unfortunately,harming our men,children,families,businesses and the economy in the process.

  • Simon Hughes says “Many more women have caring responsibilities than men do.”

    No encouragement to get pregnant to avoid prison then? (already legal in the law) With the bonus of more welfare payments to compensate for having to look after a child, and saving us the cost of women’s prisons.

    Same logic, do not lock up male criminals and save even more money. No child payments required.

  • “Does Hughes not realise he’s giving a green light to women with caring responsibilities to commit crimes?”

    The flip side of this is also very interesting and important. We already know that the family and divorce courts deny men a decent relationship with their children, they force men into poverty, and strip them of their earnings which can then be spent by he mother however she wishes. These men are even kicked out of their own homes with nowhere else to go. On top of all this, the lack or a relationship with the children and associated lack of “responsibility” not to mention the lack of a decent home now puts these vulnerable men at massively more risk of imprisonment and similarly the discrimination in favour of mothers is extends further in that she gets the get out of jail free card on top of everything else.

  • Hughes’ comments are at least an extremely strong argument in favour of shared parenting. If the children have two parents caring for them and sharing the responsibilities, then as soon as either commits a significant crime they can instantly put put behind bars where they belong.

    One might think Hughes would be a huge fan of shared parenting as a solution to fixing the problem he identifies, yet that really doesn’t’ seem to be the case at all. There over 100 MPs who’ve signed the hared parenting EDM, yet Hughes’ name is nowhere to be seen, thsis despite the fact that the document is much more heavily supported by left-wingers than almost any similar document or proposal http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2013-14/210

  • Mike, I strongly suggest this is your main talking point from now on. This is why your party is so desperately needed. This needs to go on mainstream, so men can see how their rights to equal treatment are being taken away. Please ask the journalists if they think this is fair as your opening question.
    I will aim to cover this with PARITY.
    Two important points:
    1) The children issue. How many women in prison actually have children who are of dependent age, and were the women known as good mothers anyway?
    2) “Mr Hughes said very few women were inside for violent offences”. OK, so what per centage of men are in prison for non-violent offences?
    I think you need to point out that your party is the one that has more compassion for men than all of the others put together.