Glen Poole: Philip Davies’s men’s rights victory turned me into a blubbering wreck

Glen Poole gets in touch with his feminine side with this piece in, appropriately, the Telegraph. In common with Ally Fogg, a Guardian writer, Poole claims to be a non-feminist. In common with Fogg, his writings couldn’t make it clearer he’s a feminist. The swipes at Philip Davies MP, one of only two MPs in the House of Commons advocating for the human rights of men and boys – the other is Karl McCartney (C, Lincoln) – start early:

… it was the words of Philip Davies, known affectionately by colleagues as a sexist troglodyte, [my emphasis] that made me weep.

A paragraph in which Poole ridiculously claims an equivalence between Philip Davies’s dignified request for a parliamentary debate on the last International Men’s Day, with Jess Phillips’s response to it:

Both MPs got into a right old tizz, like a pair of toddler twins having an epic tantrum, [my emphasis] with big brother Phil effectively saying,“It’s not fair, she has got a debate, why can’t I have a debate too” and baby sister Jess seeming to retaliate with, “But, but, but my problems are much bigger than his problems, you’ve got to fix all my problems before you can talk about his problems”.

Our video (10:34) of the exchange between Davies and Phillips is here. The only MP having anything approaching ‘an epic tantrum’ was Phillips.

Most of the remainder of Poole’s piece is taken up with a plug for International Men’s Day, with which he has long been involved. An extract:

IMD is not a right-wing, anti-feminist backlash against political correctness gone mad, it’s an inclusive platform that invites everyone who is concerned about the many different issues that men and boys face, to use the day to focus on possible solutions.

An extract from the IMD website, which fails to condemn (or even mention) MGM:

IMD in the UK takes a gender inclusive approach and therefore believes in ensuring that issues affecting women and girls are also resolved.

To be fair to Poole, he has written extensively about MGM in the past.

The signatories are ‘Glen, Mark, Dan, Ally, Martin and Ben’. I know the identities of five of the six. Why do they not reveal their surnames? Maybe because they’d be revealed as known feminists, or at best not anti-feminists?

If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • A personal view from experience and observation: Poole really doesn’t like MRAs and has on occasions been dismissive and rude. He appears to always take the view that either 1) we just need feminists to share the cake (fail!) or 2) get government to spend more on men’s charities. He can dance around the issues and spin plates, but never quite sure what his objectives really are. A slightly-odd character who can’t get off the fence, even after all these years.

  • I don’t think it’s quite fair to lump in Poole with Fogg. With Fogg it seems his politics can get in the way of his attempts to support men whereas that doesn’t seem to be much of an issue for Poole. He’s done a lot for men over the years and there’s a school of thought that it can be hard to achieve progress when always calling a spade a spade and therefore you have to sit on the fence to some extent.

    I suppose all Davies’ successes disprove the necessity of the above strategy, though maybe it still applies for anyone wanting to write in the papers (as shown by the conduct of IBTimes in ditching Mike for no reason).

    • Thanks John. Poole has named Fogg as his favourite writer on men’s issues in the UK. They’re on the same page, Poole simply doesn’t get too overtly political because it might detract from his messages. But his analysis is invariably left-wing and feminist, and his snide remarks about Philip Davies MP speak volumes. He rarely acknowledges even the existence of anti-feminist campaigners, let alone our political party. He refers to his 2011 event in Brighton, while failing to mention two International Conferences on Men’s Issues.

      • Poole has always been dismissive of MRAs. The 2011 conference was no exception. He put them on a Fri evening in a room, and disowned the ‘event’ in red on his web-site. No mention of MRAs were made in the public arena. He seems surprised and upset whenever he tries to raise men’s issues and gets put down by feminists. He has a long way to go. I’d be surprised if he didn’t eventually get some government job as a tame ‘men’s rep’. Does anyone know what he actually does anyway? PR? You can kind of tell by his discourse.

      • At one time he was the PR man for F4J (Matt O’Connor). He relocated to Oz a year or two back, you’d have hoped enough going on there to occupy him. His refusal to cover anti-feminist perspectives is shameful – in this article, mentioning his own event but not the two far larger and more important International Conferences on Men’s Issues!!! He and others like him e.g. Ally Fogg are on the wrong side of history. They might have got MSM coverage but they’ve never caused any positive changes for men and boys, which demonstrates the utter futility of Glen’s ‘pioneering conversations’. At least anti-feminists recognize that feminists won the war against men and boys 30+ years ago, and are preparing to fight a new one. We’re moving on from outlining the problems, to outlining solutions. The coming years are going to be very exciting, mark my words.