Our thanks to Mike for this. From the article, a reference to correlation, leaving the reader to erroneously imply causation, although it’s been known for years that the only causal link between higher female representation on corporate boards and financial performance is a negative one:

Lord Davies rejected suggestions that companies were ‘padding’ boards with female non-executives for public relations purposes, insisting the women appointees were qualified for their posts.

‘It’s about business results,’ he said. ‘The more diverse the group is at the top of the company, the better the results.’

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.

This is very welcome. J4MB is going to publicly name and shame individuals in the UK who carry out the non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors for personal gain, religious or cultural reasons, or for any other reasons.

Following a number of complaints that the audio level on a video file we posted on our YouTube channel yesterday was low, our award-winning media team has pulled out all the stops, and posted a revised version, here.

Last month we posted a piece about highly offensive posters produced by Women’s Aid, and placed in Ladies’ toilets at Trinity College, Dublin. A photograph of the poster was taken by a supporter’s wife in July, and it’s here.

We’ve just lodged a complaint with the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland, in connection with the matter. I would encourage you to make your own complaint, and you can do so here.

My complaint was as follows, obviously you should make a complaint in your own words:

Women’s Aid is an organization which is notorious for its anti-male narratives, claiming violence (and the threat of violence) are used by men (as a class) to oppress women (as a class). This is known to be untrue:

Link 1

Researchers in the field of domestic violence (DV) have known for decades that DV is an inter-generational problem, not a gendered problem. Women are at least as physically aggressive towards opposite-sex intimate partners are men, and where the aggression is one-way, the perpetrator is more likely to be a woman than a man. There are links to many other reports and research studies here, scroll down to ‘Domestic violence’:

Link 2

Our public challenge of Polly Neate, Chief Executive of Women’s Aid is below. She has yet to admit her spokeswoman lied and made misleading statements:

Link 3

The purpose of the Women’s Aid posters is clearly to make women fear men unduly, and in turn to hate men as a class. To force women to confront this hateful anti-male propaganda whilst going to the toilet is an assault on them. There were, needless to say, no posters in the Gents’ toilets warning men about women.

Great news.

Our thanks to John for this. He writes:

This is just getting crazy now.

He’s right.

Here we go again. From the article:

Prosecutor Graeme Simpson said: ‘There is evidence that there was an occasion when all three were in bed together, but no evidence of any sexual activity on that occasion.’

Graeme Simpson is the prosecutor? What, precisely, would constitute ‘evidence’ of sexual activity between a woman and two teenage girls? A video recording? Does Mr Simpson imagine a 31-year-old teacher – who the taxpayer is paying him to prosecute – was in bed with 13-year-old and 16-year-old female pupils to give them feedback on their homework? Give me strength.

At least two other male geniuses were in the courtroom. The first:

Adjourning the case for a pre-sentence report to be prepared, Judge Andrew Lockhart QC said: ‘The court is dealing here with a teacher who has abused the position of trust she was given by the education authority by reason of the position she took between 2008 and 2011.

‘It involves a gross breach of trust. These are often matters of complex relationships which develop over a period of time and become confused. But it is a very serious matter, as she has no doubt been told.’

‘… complex relationships … become confused’. Yes, the judge would employ that argument in the case of a 31-year-old male teacher found in bed with 13-year-old and 16-year-old boys (or girls). Or perhaps not.

‘But it is a very serious matter, as she has no doubt been told’.

You couldn’t make it up, could you?

The second genius:

Lee Marklew, defending, said Brown was of ‘hitherto good character.’

Well, that’s all right, then.

A more accurate headline would have been, ‘Female PE teacher, 31, is facing jail after admitting sex acts with two female pupils (13, 16), but won’t be jailed, because vagina.’

A fine defence of free speech.

Another tragedy.