What’s so funny about a men’s rights debate?

Three years ago Philip Davies, a Conservative MP, won our Winston award – link to it here – for comments he made about men being more likely than women to be jailed for the same crimes, and men serving longer sentences for the same crimes. He remains the only parliamentarian to have won the award, and to the best of my knowledge he’s the only MP to raise men’s issues in the course of his work.

Davies recently applied to a House of Commons committee to have men’s issues discussed on International Men’s Day. He had little support, and a new Labour MP, Jess Phillips, theatrically laughed at the idea, and made some truly obnoxious comments.

Our thanks to Nick for pointing us to an article by Glen Poole in the Telegraph. There’s a link to the video of Philip Davies, and we’ll post it onto our YouTube channel in the next day or two.

I believe Glen recently emigrated to Australia, with his daughter.

8 thoughts on “What’s so funny about a men’s rights debate?

  1. Just written to my Labour MP asking him to convey my disgust at Jess Phillips remarks.
    My MP is a Labour party member, we need cross party support.
    I have asked him to confirm his support to Phillip Davies regarding this debate on
    International Men’s day.

  2. Having lost my father to cancer, I’m absolutely incensed by Jess Phillips’ obnoxious and childish behaviour in that discussion.
    For what it’s worth, I’m going to write to my MP.
    Mike do you think that you could drum up some of your supporters, preferably in the West Midlands and elsewhere as well, to get the message to this callous individual that this sort of behaviour is intolerable in an MP?
    What about a public challenge? This sort of thing must not go unopposed.

  3. From Ms Phillips’ Labour Party profile: ‘Jess is dedicated to making sure that peoples voices are heard and to getting people involved and inspired to take part.’ [http://www.labour.org.uk/people/detail/jess-phillips]

    The word ‘hypocrite’ springs to mind, since she’s plainly unwilling to even countenance discussion of the issues of some fifty percent of her constituents. If I had to choose a pertinent phrase it would be ‘unfit for purpose’.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.