Our thanks to John for pointing us to this (audio, 12:21). The interview was recorded two days ago, when Cassie Jaye was in Los Angeles (04:30, local time). Emma Barnett (31), women’s editress of the Telegraph as well as a radio presenter, clearly has a very high opinion of herself – an affliction of all feminist BBC presenters – but her challenges of Cassie Jaye reveal her grasp of gender politics to be hopelessly weak.

In his email, John wrote this:

It’s worth noting Barnett’s background, her Twitter feed is just a stream of feminist nonsense. Most telling is her comment after the interview, at 11:49, about the idea of increasing male life expectancy, something she finds both baffling and amusing. She’s amazingly misandrous without even trying to be, or realising she is.

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.

Our thanks to John for this.

TRIGGER WARNING: at the end of the piece there’s a link to a video (2:00) in which the Smufwit disrobes to reveal a strap-on semi-erect black dildo.

To my mind, anyone who finds the video – or anything Smurfwit says, or does – funny, must be a hatchet-faced feminist, or have mental health issues… but I’m repeating myself. It’s little wonder BBC feminazis gives her so much exposure.

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.

(Jeremy Corbyn outside the Labour party conference in Liverpool. Copyright, Getty Images.)

Our thanks to Tim for this, a short article from ITV. A lengthier piece by the Independent on the same topic is here. The start of the ITV piece:

Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn has said that a future Labour government would put women at the heart of their policies.

He pledged his party would do more to bridge the pay gap between men and women and offer more support to victims of domestic abuse.

Marking International Human Rights Day, Mr Corbyn said: “Labour will measure every piece of legislation, and every policy, by the yardstick of its impact on women before it is brought before Parliament and put into practice.

“Women will not only be at the heart of my government, women’s rights and interests will be front and centre stage of everything we do.

We shouldn’t be surprised by this. Working-class men (and their partners) long ago realised the Labour party had deserted them, and that realisation has largely led to the woeful standing of Labour in the polls. Corbyn is acknowledging Labour doesn’t care a jot about men – working-class or otherwise – and in desperation is placing his bets on securing the “women’s vote”. Hmm, how did that strategy play out in the recent US presidential elections? 53 per cent of white female voters picked Trump, making Hillary herstory, happily.

In July 2015 Corbyn lauded a party document, Working with Women, which would surely have been accepted word-for-word by all radical feminists. In April of this year, in an interview with The Jewish Chronicle, he gave his support to Brit Milah, the Jewish version of MGM, performed on 8-day-old baby boys – here. In August he posted the following on his Facebook page:

It is unfathomable that – in this day and age – a Conservative MP can make derogatory sexist comments at a conference held by an openly misogynistic political party.

Jezza was referring, of course, to the estimable Philip Davies MP and our highly successful International Conference on Men’s Issues. Our short blog piece on Jezza’s intervention is here.

Now we come to something truly ominous in the ITV article, in the unlikely event Corbyn were ever to be elected prime minister:

Mr Corbyn said a future Labour government would ratify the Istanbul Convention which lays down minimum standards of care and backing for people fleeing abusive relationships.

We’ve been hearing more of feminist MPs in recent times calling for the ratification of the Istanbul Convention, the ‘Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence’. The Women’s Equality party and many other feminist organizations are calling for it, notably those in the domestic violence industry.

In August 2014 the excellent British ‘redpill.co.uk’ website published this on the convention. It’s five pages long and very well worth reading if you have the time.

In January 2013 – almost four years ago – AVfM published a piece by Lucian Valsan (AVfM Europe) titled, The great danger of the Intanbul convention. He started the piece with a fitting quotation from Edmund Burke:

All that is required for evil to prevail is that good men to do nothing.

Lucian cites some text from the document’s preamble:

Recalling the basic principles of international humanitarian law, and especially the Geneva Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (1949) and the Additional Protocols I and II (1977) thereto;

Condemning all forms of violence against women and domestic violence;

Recognizing that the realization of de jure and de facto equality between women and men is a key element in the prevention of violence against women;

Recognizing that violence against women is a manifestation of historically unequal power relations between women and men, which have led to domination over, and discrimination against, women by men and to the prevention of the full advancement of women;

The Istanbul Convention, if ever ratified in the UK, will be yet another nail in the coffin of British men’s human rights.

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.

Our thanks to a supporter for processing this piece (audio, 33:38), recorded last Thursday. The phone-in after the discussion was particularly interesting, I think.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith was on fine form, as he always is on the topic of MGM. This was the third time in the course of 2016 that he interviewed Jewish proponents of MGM as well as myself. We have a Vimeo channel dedicated to video and audio pieces concerned with MGM – here – and all three of the interviews are there, as well as on our YouTube channel.

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.

In our 2015 general election manifesto one of the 20 topics we covered was sexual abuse. It was the longest section in the entire 80-page-long manifesto. The start of the Background in this section:

It will come as a surprise to many, but women are responsible for a substantial proportion of sexual offences, including sexual abuses of children. A website [ref. 116] concerned with female sex offenders has a bibliography [ref. 117] of over 900 academic studies, articles, and books on the subject, dating back to 1857.

People struggle to recognize women as perpetrators of sexual and non-sexual violence, in spite of the weight of evidence showing them to be frequent perpetrators of both. This is because we live in a culture which regards men as ‘actors’ and women as ‘acted upon’. The public has become conditioned to viewing men as perpetrators, and women as victims. Alison Tieman, a Canadian men’s human rights advocate, produced an insightful short video on this matter. [ref.118]

This culture leads to inequalities. Few women are held accountable for sex offences, including those women who sexually abuse children. It’s known from a major American survey (details below) that slightly over 25% of sex offences are committed by women against men (with no male accomplices). We would therefore expect the male/female ratio of people charged with sex offences to be a little under 3:1. In the UK, in 2013, the ratio was 146:1. [my emphasis]

(In the PDF of the manifesto, you can click on hyperlinks to get straight to the materials in question. For reasons I won’t bother you with, the final link in the above extract no longer works, but you can access Alison Tieman’s video here.)

This leads me to an interesting new piece by Toy Soldier. We look forward to the publication of Dr Siobhan Weare’s study into men who are forced by women to penetrate them, an issue we covered in the aforementioned section of our 2015 election manifesto.

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.

Our thanks to Jeff for pointing us to this gem by Quentin Letts.

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.

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 Coalition..in 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.

I’m about to be interviewed by Jonathan Vernon-Smith on BBC 3 Counties Radio in relation to the Danish Medical Association saying boys shouldn’t be circumcised until they’re old enough to choose for themselves. I invite you to contribute to the phone-in – 03459 455555 – lines will be open until 11:00. Thanks.

We’ve just published this (audio, 27:46) and recommend you read the brief description, with some background and commentary, first.

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.

Tomorrow morning I’m going to be interviewed by a radio station in connection with this. The piece in today’s Independent starts off encouragingly:

Boys should not be circumcised until they are old enough to choose for themselves, doctors in Denmark have said.

The Danish Medical Association said it had considered suggesting a legal ban on the procedure for children under the age of 18, because it believed circumcision should be “an informed, personal choice” that young men make for themselves.

When parents have their sons circumcised, it robs boys of the ability to make decisions about their own bodies, and choose their cultural and religious beliefs for themselves, the organisation said.

… but then descends into this:

The doctors stopped short of calling for an all-out legal ban on the procedure, which is currently allowed but remains relatively rare in Denmark, because it said the move could have too many negative consequences.

“We have discussed it thoroughly, also in our ethics committee,” Ms  Møller said. “We came to the conclusion that it is difficult to predict the consequences of a ban – both for the involved boys, who could for example face bullying or unauthorised procedures with complications – and for the cultural and religious groups they belong to.”

The end of the article:

Past polls have shown that upwards of 87 per cent of Danes support banning the practice on boys under the age of 18, the Local reported.

Without a legal ban, nothing will change, and the wishes of 87 per cent of Danes will count for nothing. One consequence of a legal ban which is easy to predict, would be an end to the physical and psychological harm caused to male minors by the unnecessary procedure. I despair of the medical profession in the area of MGM, in the UK and elsewhere. Whatever came of the Hippocratic oath, ‘First, do no harm’?

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.