Our thanks to Martin for this.

Our thanks to Jeff for this.

Feminism… NAILED.

Our thanks to Ray for this.

Surprisingly, given the title, it’s not a piece in the Daily Mash. It’s a quote from Jess Phillips MP, the gobby idiot who clearly fancies herself as the natural successor to Mad Hattie. Julie Burchill, a gobby idiotic journalist, is a big admirer of Ms P, predictably.

The irony of Phillips talking about misogyny is quite something. Because denying Philip Davies MP the opportunity of a debate on men’s issues on International Men’s Day wasn’t evidence of her misandry. No, siree… Thankfully other MPs on her committee, with IQs well above hers (running into double figures) later agreed to the debate being held.

Surely, for feminists, ‘low-level non-violent misogyny’ would be the best form of misogyny? Preferable to high-level violent misogyny, at the very least? Feminists are never happy, are they?

A short extract from a video of Harridan Harman being interviewed by the BBC – 21 seconds long, the limit of human endurance, when listening to her – whilst seemingly being transported in a spacious New York-style pimp wagon.

Will the damnable woman never retire from politics, if only to enjoy tormenting her long-suffering husband Jack Dromey MP for even more hours of the day? Somehow she didn’t insist on an all-women shortlist when he was being considered as a candidate for Birmingham Erdington, before the 2010 general election.

I hope the champagne industry is laying in stocks, in readiness for Harman’s retirement. If it’s not, there will be a global shortage of the stuff.

Our thanks to Linda for pointing us to an example of feminist propaganda on Wikipedia today. In the section ‘Did you Know…’, on the home page, there are three women among the first five entries:

Did you know…

… that former slave Lucy Goode Brooks helped found the Friends’ Asylum for Colored Orphans, which still serves families in Richmond, Virginia, as the Friends’ Association for Children?

… that six different species of gibbon are among the animals found in Laos?

… that Aviel Barclay, the first woman to be traditionally trained and certified as a Jewish scribe, completed her first Torah scroll in 2010?

… that the funeral march In Memoriam by Jean Sibelius was conceived in memory of Eugen Schauman, who shot a Governor-General in 1904?

… that Mãe Menininha do Gantois was instrumental in gaining legal recognition of Candomblé and its rituals?

What sad lives so many feminists are leading, engaged in their ‘Women are amazing, so I’m amazing!!!’ project. Their emotional need to laud women all the time – as with their ‘contributions’ to Wikipedia content – is surely a reflection of one or more psychological disorders, possibly linked to inferiority complexes. But I repeat myself. Among many other things, feminism is itself a psychological disorder, requiring relentless denial of the different natures of men and women. It must be both exhausting and dispiriting, but that’s the choice they’ve made.

Good news. The vast majority of homeless people are men, of course. The average age of death for homeless people is 47, compared with 77 for the general population. The subject is covered on pp.40-45 of our 2015 general election manifesto.

Yesterday we published a short piece, Feminists’ manipulation of Wikipedia content. We thank HEqual for posting the following comments in relation to the J4MB entry:

I know a thing or two about Wikipedia and while you’ve done well to notice recent changes you’ve missed some key information, not to mention the most serious smear and rule violation of all.

The changes you mention really aren’t too bad by feminist standards but I took a look at the identify of the editor who made them and found they had the following Wikipedia interests:

Feminism
LGBT
Socialism
Countering systemic bias (basically a feminist attempt to introduce article about totally insignificant women)

Obviously that set the alarms bells ringing quite furiously, so I decided to examine their edits of the article more closely. The key edits are not the changes they made to the main body text, but alterations to which categories J4MB is placed in. For one thing they’ve removed you from the category “Children’s rights organisations in the United Kingdom” which is clearly totally against common sense particularly given your prioritisation of MGM as your number one issue. However, it gets better, and their very first edit was to add J4MB to the category “misogyny”.

So, despite the name and all your work, J4MB isn’t concerned with children at all and is just about women hating as seen by actual Wikipedia categorisations!

To be honest I’m surprised it took feminists this long to attack and ruin the J4MB article, and at least you had from April 2015 to the 31st of December without being smeared on there.

Our thanks to Nick for this. Surprising to see York University has been awarded a ‘green light’, given that 190+ academics (some from the Gender Studies department), students, and alumni bullied the university authorities into not officially recognizing International Men’s Day.

Our thanks to Milo Yiannopoulos for linking on Twitter to an article by Emma Duncan in Intelligent Life, published by the Economist – here. Milo tweeted:

The real Ada Lovelace, shorn of feminist mythologising – fascinating stuff.

An extract, from near the end of the article:

Doubts about the extent of her contribution along with Ada’s celebrity status have led to claims that she has been over-promoted. “She was”, wrote Bruce Collier, one of Babbage’s biographers, “a manic-depressive with the most amazing delusions about her own talents, and a rather shallow understanding of both Charles Babbage and the Analytical Engine… I guess someone has to be the most overrated figure in the history of computing.”

But the world will continue to give Ada the benefit of the doubt – because it needs her. Computing is short of female heroines, and historical role models demonstrate that even in the days when it was hard for clever women to use their brains to great effect, there were female scientists passionate enough to overcome the barriers society placed in their way.

Could it be any clearer? The ‘world’ – for which, read feminists – ‘needs’ to make a heroine of Ada Lovelace and others who contributed little, by relentlessly lying about their contributions, and downplaying men’s contributions.

The same could, of course, be said for most of the women about whom feminists lie, including Rosalind Franklin, who worked on the structure of DNA before Crick and Watson cracked the code. William Collins’s piece on Ms Franklin is here.