Our thanks to John, 16, for this:
Hi Mike.
In recent weeks I have been exploring the injustices men face today on the internet. This is why I was so disgusted with the J4MB Wikipedia article. I wouldn’t blame you if you wanted to hear no more on the issue, but in this email I would just like to express my support for you and your party. I used to edit Wikipedia – mainly music articles – so I know the frustration of having an edit reverted endlessly for no good reason (pure bias of the editor) while the editor cites the unhelpful gobbledegook that Wikipedia calls “guidelines”.
More importantly though, I think this case is an appalling example of how Feminists and the general Left refuse to take Men’s issues seriously, instead treating them with contempt and applying their own prejudices to a party.
I don’t suppose need me to tell you this, but Wikipedia is becoming less and less trusted by internet users, especially those of us who have had experience editing Wikipedia – so I wouldn’t attach too much concern to the matter.
It may interest you that Philip Cross is a habitual troublemaker on Wikipedia, and this article [J4MB: “Is GCHQ embedded in Wikipedia?”, by Craig Murray, author, broadcaster and human rights activist] may shed more light: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/03/the-astonishing-case-of-the-doppelganger/
[J4MB: The article starts –
“Once upon a time, being a leader writer for the Times implied Jupiter like vision and magisterial judgement, thundering out opinions that changed events across the globe. Astonishing that now it is done by the empty, bombastic Murdoch lickspittle Oliver Kamm.
On 7 February I published an article calling out Kamm for publishing a blatant and deliberate lie about me. The very next day, 8 February, my Wikipedia page came under obsessive attack from somebody called Philip Cross who made an astonishing 107 changes over the course of the next three days. Many were very minor, but the overall effect was undoubtedly derogatory. He even removed my photo on the extraordinary grounds that it was “not typical” of me. Edits to Wikipedia articles can be seen by clicking the “view history” tab top right. Here is just a sample of the record of “Philip Cross’” obsession with me. (graphic)
I don’t look at my own Wikipedia page, but was told about it yesterday. I therefore googled Philip Cross and was amazed to discover that he is allegedly an alias for Oliver Kamm attacking people online. Furthermore that Kamm has employed lawyers to threaten those who claim that he is Philip Cross, and by Kamm’s own account the Metropolitan Police have even warned off Neil Clark from saying Kamm is Cross. The Kamm/Cross affair was discussed on George Galloway’s show on Saturday.”
[J4MB: End of the Craig Murray article extract, back to John’s email.]
I would like to take this opportunity to applaud you for your work towards justice for what in the eyes of the media has become the lesser sex. I am a white male of 16 years, and it is a great reassurance to me as I turn into an adult that there are other people in the world who see the injustice feminism has caused, and continues to perpetuate. That you are so actively involved is even better.
I hope it means as much to you as it does for me when I say you have another supporter in me.
With warm regards,
John (London)
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.
Justice for Men & Boys 
I have some considerable hope in the younger generation. The older generations are still imbued with chivalry and a tendency to regard women as more worthy and feminists as an annoying but peripheral irritation. That is unless they have experiences of family courts etc. It may seem paradoxical but the very fact that feminism has moved into education at all levels means that for younger generations it is “orthodoxy” and much more exposed. Young men see themselves having to compete with women directly and see more clearly the “benign sexism” behind advantaging women in education and work. They are also far more au fait with feminist theory as it’s thrust at them. I think this is often behind the young women and feminist mothers of sons being critical for instance.
For much of the last 50 years feminism was semi secret from the general population , existing in academia and some liberal arts and social admin. professions. In a sense although policy makers might be influenced the general public generally were unaware of this and still laughed off “bra burners” and goofy media darlings such as Germaine Greer. Now the very success of feminism becoming part of the official education of all young people both makes it more transparent, the impacts more obvious, and I hope wakes men and the women who love them to the flip side of “benign sexism”; misandry and discrimination.
LikeLike
I absolutely agree. The education system does seem to be dominated by feminist ideals. For instance, it has become unacceptable for schools to allow play-fighting, despite this being a natural part of male bonding and friendships. Even picking up sticks and bugs in the playground is frowned upon. It is reassuring however that most sensible families are happy for their sons to engage in naturally boyish activities. This mainly concerns primary schools, yet when doing my compulsory PSHRE course (alongside GCSEs) there was no mention of Men’s issues. When it came to gender equality the main discussion was the gender-pay gap and slut-walks.
Another concern I have is how the reintroduction of Grammar Schools may affect boys. There may well be benefits in separating the higher achieving from the lower achieving, however given the current school performance trends for boys and girls we may risk simply dividing girls from boys.
Girls by nature are the ideal candidates for Grammar places. They tend to work quietly and very hard, establishing themselves as consistent high achievers.
Boys tend to live in the moment, focusing more on having fun than on grades (which in my opinion is exactly what children should be doing). The way boys interact – noisily and with a mild penchant for havoc – may mean that girls are almost automatically chosen for grammar schools because they are quieter and more hard-working, and one of the key points of Grammars is to allow higher achieving pupils to be unaffected by the troublemaking that lower achievers are often stereotyped of. So, will this mean that at least the vast majority of girls will get into Grammar school, with the majority of boys left languishing in the lower sets for the rest of their education. Will this also mean that the male to female ratio of university students will tip further out of favour of young men? Even for the boys who do get a Grammar place, this scenario (which I think is highly likely to become a reality if Grammars are brought back) they will be a minority in the classroom, possibly even the only boy in a class of girls. Bluntly, I don’t think such an arrangement is healthy for any boy, given how the strongest friendships at that age are between children of the same gender (i.e. some boys would be left without friends in class, and the same could happen to lower achieving girls as well).
I think that the increasing pressure on young people to achieve so many high grades is ridiculous. The pressure that follows – to go to university, to have a shining career – even more so. However, I think boys will experience this pressure much more harshly. While men are (much as our society doesn’t like to admit it) still expected to be breadwinners, they get less (gender-specific) support during their education and are less likely to university (particularly white working class boys) and finally they face the nightmare of securing a job in an economy riddled with quotas in favour of women. It has been show that as a broad average for the whole UK, women are favoured over men when applying for jobs on a 2:1 basis. That means a man is half as likely to get a job as a woman.
LikeLike