A well-detailed and moving article from Rohit Girdhar of SIFF – Save Indian Family Foundation. We hope they’ll get a lot of publicity in return for their suffering.

Last week I was interviewed by a Nottingham University feminist student for the University’s radio station – here. The piece is about 16 minutes long, and beneath the audio file there’s a link to the show’s web page about the interview. I’d much appreciate your comments on both our YouTube piece and on the show’s web page. Let’s explain to Nottingham University students why we’re anti-feminists.

Our thanks to B for pointing us to an excellent article by Martin Seager. It’s refreshing to see a recognition that expecting men in crisis to act like women and talk about their problems is cruel – for one thing, because practical support with respect to the problems they face (notably access to children, and being the victims of an abusive relationship) is unlikely to be available. That said, we always counsel men in crisis to contact organisations such as the Samaritans.

We’re big fans of Sargon of Akkad, a British vlogger. His website is recommended in our election manifesto and we’re clearly not alone in our admiration for his work. A week ago he uploaded a video which has already attracted over 66,000 viewers. It’s an hour long and we’re too pushed for time to watch it all, but starting at 7:35 there’s a section on Harriet Harman’s pink minibus, and then an interesting piece on Mel B’s refusal to self-identify as a feminist. All good stuff.

For anyone – and especially students at Nottingham University – holding to the conviction that feminism is the pursuit of gender equality, we recommend two things.

Firstly, they should immerse themselves in the website A Voice for Men. This website is the world’s most-visited and influential website advocating for the human rights of men and boys, and I had the honour of addressing the world’s first international conference on men’s issues in Detroil last July, which they organised. Around a third of the speakers were women, including the remarkable Karen Straughan (GirlWritesWhat), who is surely the world’s foremost ‘Honey Badger’ (a female anti-feminist).

Secondly, they should read a book published in 1913 – 102 years ago – and which is now downloadable for free, The Fraud of Feminism. It was written by Ernest Belfort Bax (1854 – 1926), a noted British barrister, journalist, historian, socialist, philosopher, and journalist. The Wikipedia entry on the man is here.

The opening of the Introduction:

In the following pages it is not intended to furnish a treatise on the evolution of woman generally or of her place in society, but simply to offer a criticism on the theory and practice of what is known as Modern Feminism.

By Modern Feminism I understand a certain attitude of mind towards the female sex. This attitude of mind is often self-contradictory and illogical. While on the one hand it will claim, on the ground of the intellectual and moral equality of women with men, the concession of female suffrage, and commonly, in addition thereto, the admission of women to all professions, offices and functions of public life; on the other it will strenuously champion the preservation and intensification of the privileges and immunities before the law, criminal and civil, in favour of women, which have grown up in the course of the nineteenth century.

The above attitude, with all its inconsistencies, has at its back a strong sex-conscious party, or sex union, as we may term it, among women, and a floating mass of inconsequent, slushy sentiment among men. There is more than one popular prejudice which obscures the meaning and significance of Modern Feminism with many people. There is a common theory, for instance, based upon what really obtained to some extent before the prevalence of Modern Feminism, that in any case of antagonism between the two sexes, women always take the man’s side against the woman. Now this theory, if it ever represented the true state of the case, has long ceased to do so.

The powerful female sex union spoken of, in the present day, exercises such a strong pressure in the formation of public opinion among women, that it is rapidly becoming next to impossible, even in the most flagrant cases, where man is the victim, to get any woman to acknowledge that another woman has committed a wrong. On the other hand it may be noted, that the entire absence of any consciousness of sex antagonism in the attitude of men towards women, combined with an intensification of the old-world chivalry prescribed by tradition towards the so-called weaker sex, exercises, if anything, an increasing sway over male public opinion. Hence the terrific force Feminism has obtained in the world of the early twentieth century.

The start of the final chapter, ‘The Indictment’:

Feminism, or, as it is sometimes called, the emancipation of woman, as we know it in the present day, may be justifiably indicted as a gigantic fraud – a fraud in its general aim and a fraud alike in its methods of controversy and in its practical tactics. It is through and through disingenuous and dishonest. Modern Feminism has always professed to be a movement for political and social equality between the sexes. The claim for this equalising of position and rights in modern society is logically based upon the assumption of an essential equality in natural ability between the sexes. As to this, we have indicated in the preceding pages on broad lines, the grounds for regarding the foregoing assumption as false. But quite apart from this question, I contend the fraudulent nature of the present movement can readily be seen by showing it to be not merely based on false grounds, but directly and consciously fraudulent in its pretensions.

It uniformly professes to aim at the placing of the sexes on a footing of social and political equality. A very little inquiry into its concrete demands suffices to show that its aim, so far from being equality, is the very reverse – viz. to bring about, with the aid of men themselves, as embodied in the forces of the State, a female ascendancy and a consolidation and extension of already existing female privileges. That this is so may be seen in general by the constant conjunction of Political and Sentimental Feminism in the same persons. It may be seen more particularly in detail, in the specific demands of Feminists. These demands, as formulated by suffragists as a reason why the vote is essential to the interests of women, amount to little if anything else than proposals for laws to enslave and browbeat men and to admit women to virtual if not actual immunity for all offences committed against men. It’s enough to consult any suggestions for a woman’s ‘charter’ in order to confirm what is here said. Such proposals invariably suggest the sacrificing of man at every turn to woman.

We hope we won’t be met with a demonstration – or hostile acts – on Saturday 14 March, when we’ll be campaigning at the West Entrance of the University Park campus of Nottingham University, but there’s a possibility we will be. Our thanks to Ray for alerting us to a powerful six-minute-long video by Pat Condell, which should be of particular interest to anyone thinking of harassing or attacking J4MB supporters who will be campaigning peacefully. Whatever happens on the day, we will return to the same spot again before the general election.

Doris, one of our first supporters and donors, has spotted that we failed to present a ‘Gormless Feminist of the Month’ award in February. We’ve been so busy campaigning, one or two things have been missed.

It’s an award Doris particularly enjoys. She points out that Natalie Collins nominated herself on The Big Questions for both a ‘Gormless Feminist of the Month’ award and a ‘Lying Feminist of the Month’ award, but thinks that on account of Natalie’s shameless ‘girly’ appeals to Nicky Campbell – to which he responded as you’d expect a chivalrous man to respond, by giving her more time than she deserved, and failing to berate her for interrupting the other contributors – the first award is more appropriate. We agree. Here’s Ms Collins’s award certificate:

A recent audio interview with Michael Marshall.

Our thanks to K for pointing us to this gem from Guido Fawkes.

I was recently interviewed for about half an hour in Nottingham university’s impressive radio studio by an intelligent and charming lady student who, bizarrely, self-identifies as a feminist. I believe the piece will be broadcast at some point, and I’ll put a link to it here.

My thanks to S for pointing me to a piece published in Impact, the Nottingham Uni student online magazine, in January. I invite you to leave a comment. Comments are moderated, and in case mine are blocked, here’s what I posted:

Thanks for this. A link to our election manifesto is below, for those prepared to read what we’re campaigning for, rather than naively believing the stream of lies that are told about us:

//j4mb.org.uk/2015-general-election-manifesto/

Mike Buchanan

JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
(and the women who love them)

http://atomic-temporary-215937230.wpcomstaging.com
http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com
http://thealternativesexismproject.wordpress.com
http://menshouldntmarry.wordpress.com
http://c4mb.wordpress.com

mike@j4mb.org.uk
07967 026163