Enjoy.

Someone has just left the following comment in response to our piece about a lesbian being spared a prison sentence for revenge porn:

Mike, something that this article left me wondering is what is the average sentence that the twelve men so far convicted of this crime have received. Without that information, it’s impossible to tell if this sentence was light or par for the crime.

Fair point. A few seconds of internet searching led to a story of a man convicted for revenge porn – here. He was given a prison sentence of five months.

This is, of course, merely one symptom of a broader problem with the criminal injustice system. William Collins explained in this piece that if men were sentenced as leniently as women by the courts, five out of six men in prisons in the UK wouldn’t be there. Gender equality would provide a rapid solution to the prison overcrowding crisis, as the male prisoner population would fall from about 80,000 to around 13,000. We recently raised this matter with Michael Gove, Justice Secretary, with predictable results – here.

We recently posted a piece showing that smokers pay far more in tobacco-related taxes than is spent by taxpayers on treating smoking-related diseases. As someone who enjoys the occasional half pint of real ale, I’ve wondered if the same could be said about people who drink alcohol. Christopher Snowdon of the Institute of Economic Affairs has just supplied the answer – here. The bottom line? People who smoke and/or drink alcohol are heavily subsidising non-smokers and/or teetotallers, and should be thanked accordingly by them.

Our thanks to Robert for pointing us to an American website. This is how the group describes itself:

Accuracy in Academia, a non-profit research group based in Washington, D. C., wants schools to return to their traditional mission – the quest for truth. To promote this goal, AIA documents and publicizes political bias in education in Campus Report, its monthly newsletter. CR articles focus on:

The use of classroom and/or university resources to indoctrinate students;

Discrimination against students, faculty or administrators based on political or academic beliefs; and

Campus violations of free speech.

Our thanks to Toy Soldier for this. A far higher proportion of sexual abuse is carried out by women than most people realise, but the criminal justice system rarely prosecutes them, being fixated on male sex offenders. As we reported recently, the disinclination to prosecute abusive women remains even after they’ve admitted abusing their sons to the police – here.

The issue of sexual abuse was covered in pp.31-37 of our election manifesto.

Interesting. So, how common is the problem of harassment of women on trains that Jeremy Corbyn, the leading contender for the Labour leadership, considers women-only carriages a sensible preventative measure? From the article:

Accepting that sex related crimes are concentrated on females, the probability of a female being subject to a sex related incident on the tube or surface train does not exceed 0.4 per million journeys.

Supposing a woman makes 400 such journeys per year for a working lifetime of 40 years, the probability of her being involved in a sex related incident, at any time in her life, is about 0.007.

Our thanks to John for sending us this, a photograph of a Women’s Aid anti-male poster. He writes:

Mike, my wife found this advert on the back of each toilet stall door at Trinity College in Dublin in July. The advert shows a young man looking over the shoulder of a young woman, and reads, “Know the difference between Safe and Sinister. 2in2u.ie. Spot the danger signs. Protect yourself and your friends online. http://www.2in2u.ie. Women’s Aid.”

Young women are facing this toxic propaganda every time they use a toilet at the university. This constant viewing must surely condition them to think of men and boys as creepy spies constantly looking over their shoulder – as it’s designed to. It consciously and subconsciously shapes their views and creates a false and negative stereotype of men.

It is also discriminatory as there is no equivalent advert in the men’s toilet. It creates anxiety amongst young women, and could turn them into nervous wrecks when it comes to their views towards men and boys.

I hope you can give some exposure to this anti-male poster campaign.

Regards,

<name redacted>

A tip of the hat to moms4dads for this.

Our thanks to Michael for pointing us to the latest feminist-inspired taxpayer-funded fiasco, this time wasting a trifling £77,000 on a sperm bank for lesbians and single women. From the BBC article:

The change in the rules in 2005 means children conceived using donor eggs or sperm will be able to trace their biological parent in the same way as children who are adopted.

Donors do not have the right to trace their offspring.

Why has there been such a poor response rate? Maybe there’s a clue here:

Concern about loss of anonymity has put many men off coming forward at a time when demand is rising, especially from same sex couples and single women.

Hmm, which same sex couples might be seeking sperm for taxpayer-funded conception, lesbians or gay men? In the immortal words of Toyah Wilcox:

It’s a mystery,

Oh, it’s a mystery.

In these economically straitened times, it would make sense to scrap the whackadoodle scheme, and instead have GPs hand out Amazon vouchers (worth £6.52) to lesbians wishing to get pregnant, so they could order one of these and a bottle of this.

It’s time to think both inside and outside the box…

Our thanks to Mark for pointing us to a thought-provoking piece. It’s worth scrolling through some of the comments to get a flavour of some counter-arguments. But regardless of the rigour of the claimed link between shootings and SSRI drugs, the widespread medication of boys and young men with psychotropic drugs remains a scandal in the US, UK, and probably elsewhere.

One in four boys in the UK has been diagnosed as having Special Educational Needs – here. Could there be a more stark indicator of the failure of the highly feminized state education system towards boys?