Our thanks to John for this.

From Wikipedia:

Sam’s West, Inc. (doing business as Sam’s Club) is an American chain of membership-only retail warehouse clubs owned and operated by Walmart, founded in 1983 and named after Walmart founder Sam Walton. As of 2012, Sam’s Club chain serves 47 million U.S. and Puerto Rican members and is the 8th largest U.S. retailer. As of January 31, 2008, Sam’s Club ranks second in sales volume among warehouse clubs with 57 billion in sales behind Costco, despite the fact that Sam’s has more retail locations. Sam’s Club had sales of $57.157 billion in FY 2014.

Rosalind Brewer, CEO, made some comments which apparently took some people by surprise. From the article:

Just today we met with a supplier and the entire other side of the table was all Caucasian males. That was interesting. I decided not to talk about it directly with [the supplier’s] folks in the room because there were actually no female, like, levels down. So I’m going to place a call to him.

Now,  who is discriminated against by individuals promoting greater gender and racial diversity in their own companies, and in their suppliers? White males first, white females second. It’s not rocket science. When certain groups are advantaged, it follows that other groups must be disadvantaged. Why would anyone be in the least surprised by Ms Brewer’s comments?

Weasel words from Walmart’s CEO, Doug McMillon, who is – shockingly – a white male:

“For years, we’ve asked our suppliers to prioritize the talent and diversity of their sales teams calling on our company,” Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said. “Roz was simply trying to reiterate that we believe diverse and inclusive teams make for a stronger business. That’s all there is to it and I support that important ideal.”

Now we know of no evidence to support the contention that ‘diverse and inclusive teams make for a stronger business’, unless by ‘stronger’ he means more representative of the general population, which is a circular argument.

And so the crazy train rolls on…

Our thanks to Kevin for this.

Our thanks to Pete for his email, it takes up the remainder of this post.

“Some interesting points in this.

The BBC article leads with the standard large picture of a female victim – with a video of her – and a somewhat smaller picture of a male victim further on, no video.

Mentions of both women and men as victims and perpetrators, a welcome improvement, but once again placed toward the end of the article like an afterthought, a tip of the hat to a barely relevent minority.

Good info on changes in law regarding coercive control, as well as partner controlling your finances or running up debts in your name, again toward the end of the article.

These last two points I think affect men in so many ways, especially as the joined debt effectively traps a man from any escape once he includes that debt in his potential outgoings if he were to leave.

In my experience compulsive spending is a major trait for many females, and marriage, followed by having a family, then cohabitation, seems to have traditionally created unlicensed abuse in this regard.

Think for men awareness of this abuse is a valuable tool in learning to identify and articulate the abuse they suffer.

If men were more comfortable to report these actions, and such abuses were included in the national figures, things would look very different indeed, statistically speaking.

This would go a long way to levelling the accepted one-sided views on domestic abuse that have become the norm in society.

Reluctance to report physical abuse amongst men will take some time to work through, but I suspect most men do not realise the financial abuse is even abuse, and I bet its a much higher rate.

Do the collective community think this is something to push as a priority when we talk about abused men?

Nothing frustrates a man more than getting those bills that have been hidden from you, just when you thought all that overtime, and sacrifices made to get ahead are about to pay off. Sound familiar?

Financial abuse is one more likely to start being reported by men, as it’s a non emotional compulsive illogical action, unlike physical, psychological, and coercive abuses.

Compulsive behaviour is damaging.

As a levelling point I am aware of instances where women suffered this abuse also, but once again, I must state in my experience abuse towards men is not yet taken seriously by society at large.

It seems to me that accepting abuse has evolved as a part of our role as men, in tandem with our natural sense to protect and provide. Our good nature has been taken advantage of for too long.

Would be interested if anyone could point to further enlightening articles on this matter.”

Yet another suspended sentence. From the article:

She was also originally charged with perverting the course of justice by making a malicious allegation of sexual assault, but this charge was dropped by the prosecution.

Why was the charge dropped, you may well ask? Maybe because it might have resulted in a prison sentence, and the criminal justice system wants to see fewer women in prison, ideally none?

Some weasel words from the judge in this extract:

Mendis pleaded guilty to one count of blackmail when she appeared in court on Friday.

Sentencing her, Judge Peter Clarke QC said: ‘I pass a sentence on the basis you have used the criminal justice system to attempt to get a large sum of money from your ex-lover.

‘There was obviously some bad blood between you and you demanded £200,000 and it was linked to a rape allegation that would be withdrawn.

‘There were matters where you were wronged and part of your motive was impure, it was revenge on a man you felt had betrayed you.’

The Reggie Yates programme last night was as anti-men as we’d anticipated, most of the people interviewed at length having nothing to do with the mainstream MRM e.g. Roosh V, and the young man who sent rape threats to Caroline Criado-Perez. The piece included a lengthy interview of… er… Laurie Penny, a particularly odious radical feminist, who lied about me in an article following our meeting in London. In the next day or two we’ll post a link to the piece on i-Player, as well as an edited piece on our YouTube channel, the 20 minutes of the total 55 minutes worth watching, with good contributions from Milo Yiannpopoulos, Josh O’Brien, and Rod Lonsdale.

We were recently notified by YouTube that a BBC pieces we posted two months ago, an eight-minute-long piece from a fishing programme, breached BBC copyright. On a previous occasion we disputed such a claim, we were successful. This time the piece has been left online, but we’re expecting a decision shortly, and if it goes against us, the piece could be lost for good. The video is here, I recommend you read the background information first.

Nailed, in fine Elamesque style (video, 7:55).

As always, well deserved:

Our thanks to Toy Soldier for this. At least the three judges in the Court of Appeal didn’t insult our intelligence by pretending 21-year-old Jade Hatt had come close to being jailed at any point. Are parents of 11-year-old sons aware that if their 21-year-old female babysitter has sexual intercourse with their son, and the matter comes to court, the woman won’t be punished?

Our original piece on this story is here.

We are pleased to see A Voice for Men placing British practitioners of Male Genital Mutilation on their genital mutilators directory. Today it’s the turn of Dr Mahboob Shafii of the Birmingham Circumcision Clinic. The AVfM piece is here.

At 9pm tonight BBC3 will broadcast the latest in their relentlessly anti-male series on gender issues. Part of the programme will be taken up by a number of London-based MRAs speaking at Hyde Park corner. My thanks to Francis for pointing me to the Radio Times preview of the piece – here – which gives a taste of what we can expect. It starts:

In the second film of the series, Reggie Yates is exploring the men’s rights movement, which this lady reviewer struggles to sympathise with – as does, fortunately, a baffled Yates.

I met the producer and director of the piece some time before filming took place, and they attended a meeting of MGTOWs in London, at which I spoke. It was a condition of attending the meeting, that they did not carry out any video or audio recording. They told me I’d be interviewed by Reggie Yates, but it never happened. Maybe the BBC thought it would be difficult to edit a 1:1 interview into anti-male propaganda. In the same vein, BBC3 didn’t broadcast anything from my 30-minute-long interview with Tyger Drew-Honey.

We’ve assembled quite a list of BBC anti-male pieces, and a selection can be found on our list of Key Posts.