This morning, on the Today programme, John Humphrys interviewed Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions, in relation to the latest annual CPS report Violence Against Women and Girls (2014/15 Crime Report). The term ‘violence against women and girls’ is officially defined as including ‘violence against men and boys’, so the more violence there is towards ‘men and boys’, the more violence is reported as being against ‘women and girls’. An outrageous feminist manipulation of the language, truly Orwellian.
The CPS issued a three-page-long press release, which included quotations from Polly Neate (Women’s Aid) and Katie Russell (Rape Crisis). Neither showed any recognition of male victims of abuse. The only reference to specifically male victims in the document was this one sentence in the section on child abuse:
It is important to note that men and boys can also be victims of these offences and our policies ensure they have the same access to the support that we offer all victims of these abhorrent crimes.
‘…men and boys can also be victims…’. The writers of the report couldn’t even bring themselves to present an obvious truth, men and boys are victims, not ‘can be’.
In another example of feminist manipulation of the language, ‘violence’ includes sending abusive emails or texts, a point Humphrys made. Good to see Saunders on the back foot over this point.
Our thanks to K for uploading the audio file (4:54) onto our YouTube channel – here. Perhaps the most important exchange is at the end of the audio file, at 4:29. John Humphrys says to Alison Saunders:
Overall – and this may be simplifying it – when we look at the figures, we cannot reach the conclusion that Britain has become a more violent society, that more men are attacking more women?
Saunders concedes the point, then refers twice to the absurdity that runs throughout the CPS narrative:
No, and of course the figures do include assaults and offences against men too, although it’s termed ‘violence against women and girls’ it will include offences against men too.
Note she refers to ‘women and girls’, but doesn’t refer to boys, only to ‘men’, presumably because boys might attract some sympathy from listeners.
Justice for Men & Boys 
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
‘The term is officially defined as including violence against men and boys.’ So why didn’t Humphrys (or anybody) retort that what we’re actually talking about is violence against PEOPLE?
Also, how much of violence-against-women-and-girls is committed by – er – women and girls?
And, dare I ask, how much violence against men is (actually) committed by women?
I can hear Ms Saunders now, ‘We don’t have those figures (nor are we seeking them)’.
LikeLike
So all the violence against men stats contribute towards the total stats figures which are then (after being publicly funded) labelled and marketed as “violence against women & girls”.
Holy shit. Mike, you’re going to have to budget for some new files because your old “You couldn’t make this shit up!” files are bulging beyond repair, and aren’t gonna take this one!
This one MUST be up your sleeve for the next interview.
LikeLike
It is indeed good to see Saunders on the back foot, but it’s been a long time acomin’.
That the term ‘violence against women and girls’ is DEFINED to include violence against men and boys, thus inflating the figures of violence against women and girls, is deceit, misdirection, and doublethink of the most culpable kind.
That the Director of Public Prosecutions, no less, should engage in and support this rank, malodourous and pernicious deception shOws how far the machinery of the law has been corrupted, and by those most entrusted to adminIster justly too.
I call upon Alison Saunders to offer her RESIGNATION immediately, and for the ATTORNEY GENERAL to accept it without delay.
LikeLike