Well, it’s the annual farce that is International Women’s Day, we thought we’d mark it with a story which reminds us about the true direction of travel of ‘gender equality’. Our thanks to John, from Australia, who sent this earlier today:

Hi Mike, greetings from Australia! I am a huge fan and take great pleasure in hearing you raise awareness about boy’ and men’s issues and also debunking feminist myths.

Recently my employer ANZ, the fourth largest bank in Australia, have started the ‘Equal Future’ campaign and have released an ‘ANZ Women’s Report’ which shamefully gives life to the lie which is the gender pay gap, failing to make mention of the gap coming down to women’s choices.

A step they have taken to bridge this so-called ‘gap’ is deciding to pay female staff an additional $500 in superannuation annually. Let’s put that into perspective. I, a part-time male permanent worker, will receive $500 a year less in superannuation than my female co-worker for doing the exact same work, purely on the basis that I’m a man and she’s a woman.

I find it comical that in your dealings with feminists they cannot highlight one example of women being paid less than a man for doing the exact same work, but here we have an example of the exact opposite, men getting paid less than women. Below are some links of the campaign which I think you will find interesting and amusing, including an extremely cringeworthy nationwide ad campaign they have released. Kind regards, John.

http://www.women.anz.com/at-anz/we-are-bridging-the-super-gap
http://www.women.anz.com/featured

The start of the article when you click on the first link:

When you look at today’s superannuation system, you can see it wasn’t designed with the specific needs of women in mind. [The specific need to enjoy the same pension as men, despite working less hard.]

Based on the latest data, the average woman retiring now has around half of the average man’s super balance.¹

One of the main reasons for this is that, on average, women earn less than men, and because super is a percentage of your salary, that means less super. [The reason that women earn less than men, on average, is that women work far fewer hours than men over a lifetime, and are less inclined to put in the time and effort men do, to reach the more demanding and stressful higher-paid positions. But we don’t want to trouble you any more with silly facts, so let’s move on.]

Women also tend to spend more time out of the workforce, and are more likely to work part-time to care for family, which again means less money for super. [Women are more likely to work part-time even if they’re not caring for families, but never mind, we’ll throw a pot of money at those women, too. After all, they have the main qualification required for special treatment, vaginas.]

Doesn’t really seem fair, does it? And it’s even worse when you consider that women retire earlier and live longer than men. [How unfair that women retire earlier!!! Hopefully women in general, and feminists in particular, are campaigning against this vile patriarchal iniquity?] This means they’re likely to need more super for a comfortable retirement.

ANZ believes it’s important to help women bridge this gap in retirement savings and has announced two initiatives to help its female employees build stronger superannuation balances:

1. ANZ will make an additional $500 super contribution to every fixed-term and permanent female employee each year from 8 January 2016

2. ANZ will make super contributions to all employees for any period of paid and unpaid parental leave an employee may take from 1 October 2015.

Joyce Phillips, ANZ Wealth CEO, says “these initiatives are all about supporting the future financial wellbeing of our staff who have vaginas”.

I may have added three words at the end there, but you get the picture, which can be summarised as:

It’s bad if men are paid more than women for doing the same work.

It’s good if women are paid more than men for doing the same work.

My thanks to M who occasionally sends me clippings from the Mail on Sunday. The 21 February edition contained a piece about the nature and scandalous extent of the theft of possessions of residents in care homes by ‘carers’. The following caught my eye:

A care home manager walked free from court after stealing more than £20,000 from three vulnerable residents – and had to pay back only £1.

Lisa McIntyre, 41, siphoned off the money by using residents’ online bank accounts and used it to pay for a holiday to America and gambling sprees.

She pleaded guilty at Derby Crown Court in 2014 to three counts of fraud and was handed a nine-month sentence, suspended for two years. She had stolen the money from vulnerable residents at Annefield House, in Littleover, a care home which looks after elderly people as well as those with mental health issues.

But a judge ordered her to pay back only £1 as she was in debt and had no assets.

The case appears not to have made it into the national press at the time, but an article appeared in the Derby Telegraph – here. Excerpts:

The judge added: “The money was stolen in desperation rather than in sheer greed for high living. It is rare for someone to walk into a police station and volunteer their crime, which you did. [After she’d been questioned by one of the care home’s directors.] Despite the meanness of this crime, you still had a moral conscience.” [Rubbish. She was bowing to the inevitable, in a bid to be treated more leniently.]

Daniel Oscroft, mitigating, said: “She is extremely sorry for what she has done. The guilt has weighed on her very heavily. She had never been in trouble before. A gambling addiction took a grip of her. She had no idea when she reported it how much she had taken. Her mind has been warped by the addiction.”

It’s clear that Lisa McIntyre is a fine upstanding citizen, who bears no responsibility whatsoever for what happened, due to the mind warping, and all.

Why does the CPS not spare the long-suffering taxpayer the cost of such pointless trials, and publish a document outlining the crimes and circumstances where women won’t be punished even if found guilty, so there need not be a trial? They could start with paternity fraud, of course, a crime the Crown never prosecutes women for – despite knowing for many years of 500+ cases a year of paternity fraud through the CSA alone, where men demand (and have to pay for) paternity tests to prove they’re not the fathers of individual children.

I’m inclined to agree with one of the commenters in this case:

The debt should live with her until every single penny is paid back (including interest) – and if that means she lives in poverty for the rest of her days, then so be it……

The ‘punishment’ she received was 300 hours unpaid work. We’re never told what the ‘work’ is in such cases, but we can be sure it was light work in pleasant surroundings. Two commenters wrote this:

Disgusting! She pays back £1, does 300 hours to cancel the debt – at circa £70 per hour and the victims get…?

300 hrs for £20,000? Tax free. Work that out for a hourly rate. Around £60 ish per hour . What a bargain! Where do I sign?

Our thanks to Chloe for an interesting article about infertility. Another example of the medical profession’s focus on women at the expense of men.

Ruth Sunderland is a business journalist with the Daily Mail. In January 2014 our associated organization Campaign for Merit in Business – C4MB – posted a blog piece critiquing her article on the financial returns in 2013 of FTSE100 and FTSE350 companies with female chief executives, here. An extract:

So, just one of the four female FTSE100 CEOs performed more strongly than the average male FTSE100 CEO in 2013. The article’s downplaying of female failure is breathtaking:

‘Cynthia Carroll left the top position at mining giant Anglo American earlier this year after disappointing investors and has been replaced by a man.’

‘Disappointing investors’? They lost their shirts. In the course of Cynthia Carroll’s five-year tenure at Anglo American £9 BILLION was wiped off the company’s value. The following is a link to our piece on the matter, along with further information on the performances of other female CEOs:

http://c4mb.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/womens-performances-as-ceos-of-major-companies/

Six months later, in July 2014, C4MB posted another blog piece on Ms Sunderland – here – with the snappy title, ‘Is Ruth Sunderland (Daily Mail journalist) willing to engage with evidence showing that placing more women on corporate boards leads to financial decline?’ It was, of course a rhetorical question, and the answer was, ‘No’.

My thanks to Chloe for pointing me to a piece by Ms Sunderland in today’s edition of the Daily Mail – here. It’s titled:

Female success isn’t at the expense of men, so why does equality still look like a distant dream?

She may not have written the silly title, but she wrote the silly article. Excerpts:

The gender pay gap in this country is higher than the OECD average and we still have only a small handful of women in chief executive roles at top companies…

Many companies have made serious efforts to get more female directors into the boardroom, and to help women with children navigate work and home. So why does equality still look like a distant dream?

My personal theory is ‘the snowball effect’. [Will this morph into ‘the glass snowball’ in time, to join all the other glass-related myths?] While outrageous sexism is relatively rare these days, for fear of lawsuits if nothing else, many women experience small, but repeated episodes of discrimination – of being overlooked, not listened to, assumed not to be ambitious and so forth…

Despite the nonsense spouted by the ‘men’s rights’ brigade, female success does not come at the expense of male failure.

I shall email Ms Sunderland a link to this blog piece, and ask her if she’ll EVER be prepared to engage with the evidence – here – demonstrating a causal link between appointing more women onto corporate boards, and financial decline. Don’t hold your breath.

The next talk hosted by The Gender Equity Network will be given by Mark Brooks, Chair of the ManKind Initiative, 31 March, University College, London. Details here. I’m looking forward to it.

Hannah Wallen is a highly regarded American Honey Badger, whose YouTube channel is here. Her self-desciption there:

My name is Hannah Wallen. I am female, middle-aged, and married to a divorcee, with children from both marriages. While feminists describe institutionalized oppression of women, I’ve realized that the opposite is true. I’ve seen female-on-male abuse among friends, family, neighbors, and coworkers.

I’ve seen a lot of injustice in the court system related to some of these conflicts, including male friends and family who have been subjected to false allegations of domestic abuse. Some of my close friends have been subjected to traumatic, long-term ordeals of malicious prosecution by vexatious litigants in response to custody battles and bitterness over dissolved relationships.

The events and circumstances I’ve witnessed have led me to speak out against a system heavily weighted against men, from a perspective not obstructed by the rose colored glasses through which feminism views my gender.

Hannah will be joining us at the London conference, although she won’t be giving a presentation.

Lucian Valsan is the European News Director, AVFM Operations LLC. He’s a Romanian libertarian-conservative, polyglot, and staunch non-feminist. He runs the YouTube channel Freedom Alternative. At the London conference his talk title will be, ‘The Status of Men in Continental Europe: Ideology, Legislation, and Activism’.

Lucian recently interviewed Hannah for his YouTube channel, the result is here, a little more than an hour long. Enjoy.

Gary Costanza’s excellent article on the latest addition to the AVfM ‘Known Genital Mutilators’ directory is here.

A strong and heartfelt piece (audio, 9:18) by Paul Elam in response to a female journalist’s article on MRAs and intactivists in relation to MGM. Some people will find some of Paul’s language offensive. I personally know of no language more offensive than the reality of Male Genital Mutilation, and many other assaults on the human rights of men and boys, and it doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

I invite you to email me mike@j4mb.org.uk if you can join us at the protest outside the Thornhill Clinic, Luton, on 22 March. It boasts of being the largest private male circumcision in the country. Full details here.

Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions, won our Toxic Feminist of the Month award in February 2016. Her certificate is here.

Ms Saunders failed to respond by the required deadline to our FOI request in September 2015 asking for minutes of meetings she’s had since she took on her role in November 2013, with organizations advocating for victims of domestic and/or sexual abuse. Her response is now 19 weeks overdue.

Our letter to Ms Saunders is here. We’ll continue to publish a post each week on the delay, and email the Crown Prosecution Service each time, until we get a response.

The latest ‘must watch’ gem (video, 15:10) from Professor Janice Fiamengo. At the London conference she’ll be speaking on the subject, ‘How Feminism is Destroying Higher Education’. The full list of 20 speakers is here. There are still some tickets available. If you haven’t already ordered yours, you can do so here.