Belinda Brown: At last, a group that puts men and boys first

A deeply disappointing piece about the feminist-compliant Men and Boys Coalition on The Conservative Woman website. I’ve left a lengthy comment, and invite you to comment too. One of Belinda’s replies to a commenter:

I think inclusivity of the female and feminist perspective and dialogue with them is very important to the fact some of their founding members describe themselves as committed feminists so I really don’t think that it will become anti-female or anti-feminist.

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.
  • William Gruff

    I’ve tried several times to write a response to this and I think it best to say simply: there is no such thing as a female MRA.

    • William, I think you are wrong. There are some very active and effective female advocates for men’s rights. When you add in the pure anti-feminists, who I necessarily consider allies, then I would say that many of them are female.

      • William Gruff


        You write much I admire, in a tone I wish I could, however, here I disagree with you. My assessment of those females advocating men’s rights is that they do so only because they see their own disadvantage in in the negation of them, with the signal exception of Professor Fiamengo, who is the only woman I listen to on matters regarding sexual equality.

        ‘Pure anti-feminists’ are not ‘necessarily allies’. I would say that most, not many, of them are females and, with the exception referred to above, all are, in my estimation, gynocentric, which means they do not have my interests at heart (Your position is that of SOE – during the second world war the Soviet Union was an ally while Italy was a co-belligerent from the middle of 1943.) I may be too narrowly ideologically constrained but I am not out to win friends or the war in my lifetime. Our war is not with feminists, they are too easily beaten (Mike beats them every time he’s set up with one yet Gloria Piero obtained more votes than in 2010 – no slight to MB) it is with gynocentrism. Moderation does not win battles, wars, hearts or minds. While it may seem reasonable to regard a woman opposing feminism as an ally of men, and to advocate working with the same, it is naive: women only work for men’s interests when their own interests are served, with the exception of the woman referred to above. All you can hope to achieve in the furtherance of their aims is the ultimate frustration of yours.

        The late Angry Harry wrote that equality is not achievable, ever, and he was right. Bear that in mind.

      • Hi William. While I’d certainly agree that female MRAs are few and far between – as are male MRAs, let us not forget – those that exist are very important. Just think of the five who spoke at ICMI16. Erin Pizzey – stalwart campaigner for male victims of domestic violence to be recognized since 1971, 45 years ago. Karen Straughan – arguably the most important vlogger ever to raise public awareness of the evils of feminism. At the 2014 Detroit conference, most people told me her videos had been their introduction to understanding feminism and wider gender issues. Janet Bloomfield – a highly impressive blogger on the topic of women needing to act like adults, and take responsibility for their actions and inactions. Kathy Gyngell – Co-editor of The Conservative Woman, an important website, the only such website in the UK. It tends to take an anti-feminist line, Belinda Brown’s article notwithstanding. Then of course Janice Fiamengo, who you’ve recognized.

  • still has not arrived at a formal position regarding this ‘coalition’ so these are my personal views only..

    The formation of a coalition that cares about men & boys has been needed for years. Many dedicated advocates have been pushing for it for many years – a recently deceased one starting as long ago as 25 years.

    It is therefore very regrettable that not one body that has made a poilitical difference for men and boys, or bringing any of the many issues forward to the public’s attention, was invited to join this ‘coalition’. There are, for sure, some people and organisations that have worked with boys at individual level and may have done some good. I don’t know: most of them have never been heard of before by the major national figures in the country.

    The pre-existiing network4men was not approached. Neither the organisation, nor – so far as I can determine – any single member of it was invited to hold discussions. Why so many people who have worked so hard to improve the lives of men and boys should be sidelined by some new group that appeared out of nowhere is still a mystery.

    This new ‘coalition’ (it doesn’t appear to be one, by my dictionary’s definition) seems suspiciously like something to deliberately keep the major voices distant from ever having a formal voice. Any individual or organisation who dares to disagree with government policies, or to argue aginst the ideological rot that is the root cause of problems many men and boys have, has not been invited. Not one.

    So, yes, a coalition was needed. It existed. But it didn’t mind if people pointed out that you can’t support men and boys if you only want to keep doing more of what is damaging them so much. Network4men also had people who who were part of organisations that actively disagreed with feminism, who showed proof that feminism is damaging to society, to women, but most expecially to men and boys. Believers in egalitarian principles of being fair to all, and giving everyone equal opportunities in life – and therefore who oppose feminism – have been kept away.

    If this ‘coalition’ is to achieve anything for men or boys as a collective, it will have to rid itself of members who can be shown to work against the interest of men or boys. It will have to rid itself of members who support any organisation that works against the interest of men or boys. It will have to open membership, and influence, to those who have worked hard and have solid, workable, practical policies to propose for the benefit of men, boys, women and girls. It could start by subsuming itself into the network4men or talking about a merger. If it won’t do that, one must ask why.

    If this new collective will not work for the benefit of men and boys other than to support the current damaging policies and discriminatory laws that deny men their human rights, it will just become one more monolith that those of us who are willing to criticise will have to fight against, as we seek a fair and workabke society for all.

  • At, we have had a closer look at the stated objectives of the Men & Boys Coalition. Much of it reads fine, which can lead one to overlook the parts that are not so good.

    Some detail from their about page:

    “We will, where possible, assist members of the media to find relevant facts and research or signpost them towards professional experts on gender issues affecting men and boys.”

    Who is it that thinks men and boys are a ‘gender’ and not a ‘sex’?
    Who is it that has professional (i.e. taxpayer-salaried) experts on ‘gender issues’?
    Who is it that is convinced that they – and only they – have the ‘relevant facts’?
    Well, well, it doesn’t seem to be anyone who has so far demonstrated concern over the plight of men or boys.

    “The Coalition will not … Accept or work with organisations or individuals who … advocate removing resources from women/girls”

    So, nobody who has campaigned for equal pension rights is allowed (unless they wanted everyone’s age reduced: a highly unlikely eventuality); no-one who advocates that separated fathers should have more time with their kids is welcome; nobody who wants to end female quotas is permitted; no-one who wants males to have equal access in crowded DV shelters is wanted; (need I go on).

    Conspiciously absent, given the above quote, is ‘The Coalition will not … Accept or work with organisations or individuals who … advocate removing resources from men/boys’. You might imagine that’s obvious but such organisations or individuals are not excluded by the statement of the coalition’s aims. There is, for example, no ban on anyone who wants to bring in quotas that will reduce men’s access to politics, work or social facilities; just a ban on anyone wanting to get rid of such quotas.

    Now, who does that remind you of?

  • As soon as Feminists are involved it is corrupted beyond repair. Men’s issues will be prostituted and exploited so well off woman can cynically get more. Gynocentrism never analyses itself, and never will. Either does the upper classes where most of these woman come from or want to be. I find in organisations; the first woman who comes in is a brilliant talent, and a force for real good. The second one that arrives in not so good, the third rubbish and the forth an opponent to the whole purpose of the organisation. The organisation very quickly becomes a giant pecking order full of lifestyle nests for well off woman promoting their employments and life choices. And with a side order of male ‘pets’ to justify the forgotten purpose. Woman are unhappy now? Good!
    You should reap what Feminism sows too. We need Woman to kick Feminist arse, not more cushy over paid lifestyle jobs for sadistic narcissists.
    When a boy, young man, or male elder commits suicide you need to look at the mother, adult woman or female family/work culture closest to him with a careful eye. Driving boys and men to suicide is a sport for many woman, of every age, girls do it too. Many woman are family terrorists. If the men’s movement is controlled by woman they will always take the female side. And make a public celebrity out of the malignant sociopath, who may have psychologically tortured a boy or man into suicide.
    And when in that place as I was as a boy, in a strange way being pushed into suicide killing yourself is the right thing to do if you can’t endure. And if you did endure you find yourself falling back into that hell off and on for the rest of your life. The woman who do this are rewarded for doing it, it empowers them, it gives them confidence to up the game in this treatment of other males.
    This is what a Feminist looks like. Male Feminists have no concept of honour. And their truths are just tools of misandric gynocentrism.