From time to time I’ve asked supporters living outside the UK if they’d like to become party members or make a donation, and surprisingly often they say they’d assumed they had to be British citizens to do so. This isn’t the case. Indeed, in the past fortnight alone, people from the United States, Canada, and Australia, have become party members.

We must have had donations from supporters in over 20 countries since we launched the party in February 2013. A number have said they believe that the United Kingdom is uniquely well placed to become the first country in the world to have a men’s rights political breakthrough. That’s precisely what we expect to happen in 2020, when our campaigning could lead to the Conservatives not being re-elected. This will surely lead to headlines not just in the UK, but around the world.

We’re working hard towards that goal. We aim to field candidates in the Conservatives’ top 20 marginal seats, secured with majorities of between 27 and 1,925 votes on 7 May. We already have funding streams in place for 13 of those 20 candidates’ deposits. Please consider becoming a party member, and funding another deposit.

Regardless of whether or not you’re a British citizen, we need your financial support. If you’d like to fund a candidate’s deposit in 2020, I urge you to do so by becoming a party member, which will cost the equivalent of just 27 pence per day – details here. If you’d like to make a lump sum donation, you may do so here. Thank you for your support.

Robert Stacy McCain is a veteran American journalist, and my attention has been drawn to his recently-published book. It’s received very positive reviews on Amazon’s American website, on the strength of which I’ve just ordered the Kindle version, and will read it on my PC. It’s also available as a reasonably-priced paperback.

Mr McCain’s blog The Other McCain has attracted over 17 million page views since 2008.

It’s appropriate that the recently-launched Women for Equality party has as its spokeswoman a comedienne, Sandi Toksvig. Predictably, it didn’t take her long to win one of our Lying Feminist of the Month awards, and we anticipate it won’t be long before she wins more of them.

My thanks to John for pointing me to this video of Sandi Toksvig in discussion with Stephen Fry at the latest Hay Festival. It will be on iPlayer for another 25 days. The section in which she misleads Stephen Fry and the audience concerns increasing the number of women in senior positions, and starts at 34:23. She defends the use of gender quotas to drive up female representation on corporate boards, claiming:

Norway did it by quotas, and that went very well for them.

It may have gone ‘very well’ for the women appointed to boards they wouldn’t otherwise have been appointed to, but what about the companies? On average, as Campaign for Merit in Business has been saying relentlessly for the past three years, longitudinal studies show that the increased female representation on boards led to corporate financial decline in Norway and elsewhere. The C4MB briefing paper on the matter is downloadable via this link.

Then Toksvig utters a statement of a type that has led to other feminists winning ‘Lying Feminists of the Month’ awards:

Every single bit of business research will show you that a business that has a board with diversity on it does better.

She is clearly misleading the audience into accepting that a causal link exists between more women on boards, and enhanced financial performance. Is she aware she’s misleading the audience, or does she genuinely believe a causal link exists, that women deliver a mysterious ‘female factor’ in the boardroom? We can be sure nobody in the BBC will ever ask the probing questions that would soon enlighten us on the matter.

Stephen Fry nods approvingly throughout this section, and generally he shows her a level of respect which is embarrassing to watch. Surely his common sense would have led him to know she was misleading the audience? Perhaps not. Judging from his utterances on QI he holds business people generally in contempt, other than those working for companies making high-tech gadgets, such as Apple.

My thanks to John for tipping me off about this. Tickets cost £25 and have sold out. Among the speakers will be Sandi Toksvig, who won a Lying Feminist of the Month award last week, for comments she made about the gender pay gap.

With all political parties (other than J4MB) being anti-male and pandering relentlessly to women, the idea of a Women’s Equality Party is laughable, so it’s appropriate a comedienne should be the party’s spokeswoman. If you’d be interested in handing out literature to people on their way to the venue, and engaging people in peaceful discussions, please email me mike@j4mb.org.uk. Thank you.

Some months ago a number of colleagues and I were filmed for a forthcoming documentary, The Trouble with the F Word, and we recently provided a link to a short excerpt the producer had published on YouTube. An official trailer has also been published on YouTube, with a number of the usual suspects including Julie Bindel and Caroline Priado-Perez, an unapologetic winner of three ‘Lying Feminist of the Month’ awards. Enjoy.

Last Friday I emailed Emma Ritch, the Chief Executive of Engender, a Scottish radical feminist campaigning organisation, asking her to direct me towards ‘lots of evidence’ she claims exists, showing that increasing female representation on corporate boards leads to enhanced corporate performance. If our previous experiences of challenging radical feminists are anything to go by, she won’t be responding by the deadline of 5pm on Friday 29 May, after which we’ll present her with our ‘Lying Feminist of the Month’ award.

A supporter has emailed me to ask if I know anything about how Engender is funded. A Google search soon led me to their 2013/14 annual report. Their funding and outgoings are broken down on p7. Of their £237,927 income, the Scottish government provided £210,868, 88.6% of the total.

A further £10,000 was obtained from Awards for All, i.e. the Big Lottery Fund, a sum which Engender say is ‘funding the development and dissemination of a film about women in the economy’. Hmm, we wonder if the film will mention Catherine Hakim’s Preference Theory (2000)? She found that in the UK only one in seven women is work-centred, in contrast with four in seven men.

We’re sure the film will at least cover the long-running scandal that most people registered as unemployed are men, yet taxpayer-funded initiatives aimed at getting people into fields of work historically the preserve of the opposite gender, are always aimed at women. Well, at least when the fields of work are well-paid, secure, amenable to flexible working, little commuting involved, plenty of social contact, indoors…

£120,000 is listed as coming from the Scottish government, a further £90,868 from VAF CSU. The acronym refers to Voluntary Action Fund – Community Safety Unit. The VAF manages a number of grants on behalf of the Scottish government – here. The three funds from which we assume Engender might apply for grants are as follows. At this stage – from exploring their website – we’re only sure Engender have obtained funding from the first:

1. Tackling Sectarianism. From the Engender website page on their work in this area:

Engender have worked over the past eighteen months to bring women together to talk about what sectarianism means to them. We have held focus groups, discussion forums and our ‘Women, Faith and Feminism’ event, as well as engaging with organisations working on a variety of different anti-sectarianism initiatives.

There you have it. ‘Women, Faith and Feminism’. Even when spending taxpayers’ money in relation to sectarianism, these women introduce their toxic ideology, which need not be introduced. It should have been a condition of the grant that it wouldn’t be used to introduce a third faith – feminism – into this already difficult area.

2.Violence Against Women and Girls Fund. £9.5 million available in 2015/16. Sometimes public bodies assert (ridiculously) that the term ‘violence against women and girls’ includes men and boys. There’s no such pretence here. From the website:

The Violence Against Women & Girls Fund: the purpose of which is to support organisations to tackle all forms of violence against women. This includes projects delivering frontline services or building capacity in local partnerships to strengthen responses to violence against women. It also enables children and young people experiencing domestic abuse to receive direct support and ensures that rape crisis services, in current receipt of funding, can also continue providing direct support to women.

3. Equality Fund. I invite you to check it out. Who can possibly doubt that the money will be hoovered up by feminist organisations, to advantage women?

It’s a familiar pattern. Feminist-run organisations are often parasites on taxpayers, although almost three-quarters of the income tax collected in the UK is paid by men. Radical feminist ‘academics’ running Gender Studies courses are parasites too, and would surely otherwise be unemployable.

Male taxpayers are funding the women (and sometimes men) who assault their interests, the people who lie relentlessly about domestic violence, rape, gender pay gap, employment, and so much else, decade after decade. And yet the mainstream media never expose them as the hate-driven liars they are. With rare exceptions academics don’t expose them either, even anonymously.

From time to time I put myself through the pain of reading titles such as the Guardian and Independent. As a matter of principle I read library copies, rather than buying them. The Independent, once a fine newspaper, becomes ever worse. From the Editorial of today’s edition of the paper:

Yvette Cooper is campaigning to become the Labour Party’s first woman leader on a platform of putting families back ‘at the heart’ of party policy, first by extending free childcare to children aged two, so that more parents can go back to work.

The doublespeak here is astonishing, but it reminds us why she won a ‘Gormless Feminist of the Month’ award. She equates putting families back at the heart of party policy, with incentivising ‘more parents’ into paid employment. By ‘more parents’ she largely means ‘more mothers’, of course, regardless of whether they want to engage in paid work when their children are so young.

Who will foot the enormous bill of extending yet further taxpayers’ funding of childcare? Mainly working men, of course, who already pay 72% of the income taxes collected in the UK. Many of the working men paying for this extra childcare will simultaneously be denied access to their own children – denied by the family courts, which will not deal robustly with the malicious mothers who are the cause of the problem, abusing both ex-partners and their own children.

Boris Johnson should hang his head in shame.

I never tire of pieces by Honey Badgers such as Janet Bloomfield (JudgyBitch) and Canada has more than its fair share of them. Karen Straughan (GirlWritesWhat, surely I can stop writing that by now?) and Alison Tieman come to mind. Janet’s latest piece – enjoy.

An outstanding piece by Kathy Gyngell. It was my misfortune to encounter Steve Hilton, David Cameron’s chief strategist – often described by the media as his ‘guru’ – at a meeting at Conservative Campaign Headquarters in 2006, early in my two-year-long consulting assignment. He flew into a blind rage at something perfectly innocuous I’d said. It was like watching a toddler having a temper tantrum. My embarrassment was shared by the two other men present at the meeting, one of whom was recently appointed a Conservative peer.

Opinions held by colleagues who had more frequent dealings with Hilton at CCHQ were near-unanimous. I was mulling over how to convey the sense of those opinions, when I noticed a comment by ‘CortexUK’ in response to Kathy’s piece. It conveys the gist of what I’d want to say:

Can we please just all accept that Steve Hilton is, was, and always will be, an egotistical and narcissistic idiot with ridiculous affectations and delusions of grandeur? Thanks.