We’re about to email a letter with FoI requests to Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions, in an effort to learn more about the influence wielded on the Crown Prosecution Service by radical feminist organizations such as Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis. We’ll publish the response in due course.

We recommend to anyone foolish enough to believe the feminist gender pay gap narrative, that they read a blog piece by William Collins – Gender Income Propaganda.

We have some key advisers who were of the view that the feminist-friendly agendas of the 2010-15 coalition were attributable (in part, at least) to the influence of the Lib Dems. I never believed that analysis. David Cameron made his pro-feminist / anti-male leanings perfectly clear before coming to power, most notably by announcing his intention in the autumn of 2009 to introduce all-women shortlists for prospective parliamentary candidates. Along with many other members I cancelled my party membership that day, and the proposal was dropped following uproar among Conservative MPs and other party supporters.

Following the government’s ‘success’ in bullying FTSE100 companies (through the threat of legislated gender quotas) into ‘voluntarily’ achieving 25% female representation on their boards – the figure is an average over all the companies – the government is going to extend its anti-male and anti-business agenda, by bullying companies with 250 employees or more into calculating and then publishing the gap between male average earnings and female average earnings. Today’s Daily Mail report on the matter is here. You would search in vain for criticisms of the initiative from the paper itself, even in the four-page-long business section. The rules are expected to come into force by the end of 2015.

The most intelligent contribution to the article was this:

Last night Len Shackleton, research fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: ‘The current Government shows no more understanding of the gender pay gap than its predecessors.

The gap is not caused primarily, if at all, by discrimination – but largely by career choices and family decisions.

The reality is that the measures announced by the Government will do little to reduce the gender pay gap – and in the case of the National Living Wage, may actually cause higher unemployment among women. They will however add to the burdens imposed on firms by this allegedly pro-business government.’

This is yet another feminist-inspired initiative which goes even further than the Labour party went in its last administrations (1997-2010). Both of our major political parties are dancing relentlessly to the feminists’ tunes.

In my 30 years in the business sector I recruited, managed, and promoted many people. Frequently people with the same job titles had different salaries, because of the different contributions they delivered, or the difficulty or ease with which roles in different specialisms could be filled.

The outcomes of the new rules are all too predictable. We’ll have the ‘equal pay for work of equal value’ farce, in which the factors that disincline women from particular jobs (risk, unpleasant working conditions, unsociable hours…) will be disregarded, so women’s earnings will be inflated to match those of men who are prepared to accept those factors.

We’ll have vexatious claims from women maintaining their contributions are as important as those of their male colleagues, regardless of the truth or otherwise of the claims. Wary of negative publicity, firms will settle out of court.

None of this will be accompanied by increased sales of the companies’ goods and services, of course, so the only way for firms to compensate for the increased earnings of women – without reducing profitability – will be to deflate the earnings of male employees.

An extract from the Daily Mail article, written by Daniel Martin, Chief Political Correspondent:

Writing in The Times, he (David Cameron) said: ‘Today I’m announcing a really big move. We will make every single company with 250 employees or more publish the gap between average female earnings and average male earnings. This will cast sunlight on the discrepancies and create the pressure we need for change, driving women’s wages up.

Higher pay is something we want for everyone. That is why the Chancellor announced the National Living Wage, which starts next April at £7.20 and will reach over £9 by 2020. This will primarily help women, who tend to be in lower paid jobs.

It will help close the gender pay gap. But we need to go further, and that’s why introducing gender pay audits is so important.’

David Cameron was the winner of our ‘Toady of the Year’ awards four years in succession – 2012/3/4/5. Details of all the awards are here. With this new initiative, Dave’s made a strong bid to win the award next year too.

We await a response from the CPS in relation to our request for a review of their recent woeful response to our FoI request concerning MGM. In the meantime, there’s at least one more public body that must be challenged with respect to MGM, the Home Office, in its role as the public body with responsibility for the police.

No laws permit the non-therapeutic genital mutilation of male minors, so why don’t the police press charges against practitioners of the operations, given they inflict bodily harm (actual or grievous)? It’s a question we’ve posed in our new public challenge of Theresa May MP, Home Secretary, at the same time calling for the government to make non-therapeutic genital mutilation of male minors illegal in the current parliamentary term (i.e. before May 2020). We included with our letter William Collins’s recent article on MGM.

An interesting piece from Dean Esmay. I have to say I hold to the same positions.

Another well-researched piece from Janet Bloomfield (JudgyBitch). She’s an important and prolific Canadian Honey Badger (female anti-feminist and/or men’s rights advocate).

I’m sometimes asked why these fine women are called Honey Badgers. The explanation is contained in one of our blog pieces – here – and I strongly recommend you catch the video of Honey Badgers which you can access through the link.

We’ve just learned of the recent publishing of a new book, which appears promising. The related website is here, and you can order the book either through that website or Amazon.

An insightful new piece from Paul Elam, the founder of A Voice for Men. He has worked professionally with alcoholics and drug addicts for many years.

Our thanks to the good people at World4Justice for this.

Now we know why the Conservatives have committed to introduce the living wage by 2020, when the minimum wage will be £9 an hour. A Daily Mail article by Gerri Peev, Political Correspondent of the Daily Mail, is here.

George Osborne said this:

It’s right that with more women in the workplace than ever, we do all we can to support them. Two-thirds of those who will benefit from the new national living wage are women, which is something I hope everyone will celebrate.

We know from a report written in 2013 by Belinda Brown, a social anthropologist – ‘Getting women into the workplace encourages replacement, not growth’ – that female employment is a driver of male unemployment. Our blog piece on the matter has a link to that report.

The bottom line is this:

The living wage will drive up female employment and male unemployment, although for many years a majority of unemployed people have been men.

The Conservatives continue being an anti-male party, which is why we plan to contest the party’s top 20 marginal seats at the 2020 general election. Our strategy for that election is here.

Another insightful piece by Ella Whelan for Spiked. My favourite two lines:

It is time for women to take a stand and kill off feminism as we know it. It is the only thing truly holding women back in the West today, reducing us to little more than our biology.

Sandi Toksvig, the party’s spokeswoman – a comedienne, fittingly – has already won two ‘Lying Feminist of the Month’ awards. Her award certificates are here and here.