Dr Max Pemberton: Boys must be saved from this barbarity (MGM)

Dr Max Pemberton has a column in the Saturday edition of the Daily Mail, and he’s criticised MGM before. Another piece appears in today’s edition. The text in full below. While it’s welcome, you’ll be able to spot the flaws in some of his points:

There is no doubt that female genital mutilation (FGM) is a barbaric practice and has no place in our society.

It’s gone from something that was hidden within communities and condoned, to something that everyone has heard about and we loudly condemn.

One of the smart things that campaigners did was to change the terminology used to describe the practice from ‘female circumcision’ to FGM. Female circumcision sounded too medical and didn’t properly capture the horror of what was happening.

I have long questioned why we don’t talk about ‘male genital mutilation’ when it comes to male circumcision. This week, Dr Niall McCrae, a mental health expert at King’s College London, argued that while FGM has been illegal in the UK for 30 years, no one dares do the same with male circumcision for fear of offending religious sensibilities.

I totally agree with him.

Male circumcision involves the removal of healthy tissue, just as FGM does. It’s no less ethical or more justified doing it to a male as it is a female — there is no difference.

There are medical conditions when it might be necessary. Indeed, I was circumcised when I was four for medical reasons. But the majority of circumcisions are for cultural reasons or because it’s thought to be more hygienic — interestingly, the exact same justifications used for FGM.

Circumcision is a painful and potentially damaging operation that can have life-long consequences. I have seen many men who are having relationship difficulties as a result of sexual problems caused by it. As for hygiene, you don’t need to remove a part of a child’s anatomy, you just teach them to use soap.

The only proven medical benefit is reduced risk of HIV infection. But surely we should be teaching boys the importance of safe sex rather than lopping off things, just in case. Let’s call male circumcision what it really is: male genital mutilation.

Closing gender gap in physics ‘will take generations’

Our thanks to Nick for this piece by a woman on the BBC website. An extract:

The researchers said practical measures are already known that could help close the gap, including:

  • Reforming publishing [J4MB: Publishing more papers by women, regardless of merit.]
  • Ensuring women receive equal resources at work [J4MB: We have no idea what this means.]
  • Greater recognition of demands outside the workplace that traditionally fall on women when assessing achievements [J4MB: Lesser expectations of work output, exaggeration of women’s “achievements”.]
  • Better access to parental leave and career breaks [J4MB: Less time at work.]
  • Equal access to informal professional networks. [J4MB: Unmeasurable, and reeks of a baseless conspiracy theory.]

“The solutions are out there but it’s difficult to bring about change and get people to act on them,” said Dr Luke Holman, a five-star mangina.

“We haven’t acted on them enough because it’s difficult to change the way that people have always done things and it’s maybe not afforded as high a priority as it should be by people in positions of power in the scientific industry and academia.”

We may have added a few words there. The notion that not enough of a priority has been given to “solving” this non-existing “problem” is nonsensical. Athena SWAN programmes are being run in university STEM departments across the country, leading to women being given positions in preference to better-qualified and harder-working men.

James Delingpole’s comments on Laura Bates, Special Snowflake

A piece in the current Spectator. This gives me an excuse to publish the paragraph with a reference to Special Snowflake (in bold):

Indian Summer School (C4) is the latest variant on one of my favourite reality TV genres: unteachables go to brat camp. In this case, the tough reformatory for five naughty English kids is the Doon School — ‘India’s Eton’ — a magnificent boarding school set in 70 acres of grounds abundant with trees and flowers in the foothills of the Himalayas north of Delhi. So — not much real hardship: just homesickness and exposure to the kind of old-school rigour, discipline and traditionalism which, in India at least, have yet to be killed by trendy headmasters who think it’s a good idea to give boys the option of wearing skirts or to invite Laura Bates from the Everyday Sexism Project to come and lecture them on how they’re all potential rapists.

You can subscribe to The Spectator here. They have an introductory offer of 12 (weekly) copies at £1.00 per copy, after which you can cancel or take out a full subscription.

Kate Woodhead, 39, convicted false rape accuser, thief, fraudster, in jail again for drink-drive crash death of a father of four

Kate Woodhead, 39, claimed she was blind and had a brain tumour to avoid justice

Times caption: Kate Woodhead, 39, claimed she was blind and had a brain tumour to avoid justice

Our thanks to Nick for this piece in The Times today, emphases ours:

A woman jailed for falsely accusing her boyfriend of rape has been sent to prison again for killing a man in a drink-drive crash.

Kate Woodhead, 39, had tried to avoid justice by claiming that she was blind, disabled and suffering from a brain tumour. She fooled psychiatrists who ruled her unfit to stand trial but her lies were uncovered when she was spotted working behind the bar of a pub.

Woodhead had driven at 75mph along a 40mph road while over the alcohol limit. Trevor Smith, 53, who was in the passenger seat, died instantly when she lost control of the Audi A3 and hit a tree in Rusper, West Sussex, last May. She had 105mg of alcohol in 100ml of blood. The limit is 80. She had earlier admitted causing death by dangerous driving. Yesterday she was jailed for nine years by Hove crown court and banned from driving for ten years.

Jade Downey, 34, Mr Smith’s eldest daughter, [J4MB: The eldest of four daughters] said: “She is a heartless woman. Our dad always saw the best in people but in trusting Woodhead he made the most dreadful mistake. It cost him his life.”

Woodhead, from Horsham, West Sussex, made the rape claims in 2009 when Paul Joseph, 39, tried to end their 18-month relationship. She claimed that the £200,000-a-year IT consultant had carried out the attack after giving her a crisp sandwich laced with drugs. She was jailed for three years for inventing the story as well as charges of theft and fraud. [J4MB emphasis]

After her release she met Mr Smith, an engineer, and they became friends and would drink together in pubs.

You can subscribe to The Times here.

The case for “Men’s Rights Movement” (MRM) > “Gender Equality Movement” (GEM), and, in turn, “Men’s Rights Activist” (MRA) > “Gender Equality Activist” (GEA)

In recent times we’ve been giving some consideration to how we might more effectively present our arguments to the public and the media, and the results may have implications for the broader Men’s Rights Movement (MRM).

Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs) have always had a presentational problem. By definition, gynocentric societies don’t care about men’s rights, they regard men as disposable, as slaves to women, children, and the state (men’s income tax payments largely fund the state). So it’s always been an uphill battle to get public interest in men’s rights, although much progress has been made, particularly in recent years.

So what alternatives might there be to “men’s rights movement” as a term, which could get better traction in the media, and with the general public? I’ve been persuaded that the term “gender equality movement” is the way forward, at least at this stage. Because of course if real gender equality – as opposed to feminist “gender equality”, which is invariably about extending female privilege over males – were to be enacted, women (and girls) would need to lose privileges, and/or men (and boys) gain more rights. This is true of virtually all 20 areas explored in our 2015 general election manifesto.

What do we demand in the case of (for example) MGM? Male minors to have the same protection from genital mutilation as female minors. The 1985 Female Circumcision Act (and subsequent amendments) need only be made gender-neutral. Simple as that. And easier to present to the public and media than the crime and harms and human rights violations inflicted on males by MGM, about which few care.

Feminists can do their worst at attacking the MRM, and have, fooling some gullible people that there’s something amiss about the movement. But they’ll have more difficulty attacking the Gender Equality Movement (GEM), or the associated Gender Equality Activists (GEAs), without simultaneously revealing their hostility towards gender equality.

Speaking personally, I’m happy to be described as a MRA or a GEA, and for the great movement in which I’ve worked full-time for many years to be described as the MRM or GEM. But henceforth I plan to generally publicly present myself as a GEA, and our movement as the GEM. I invite other MRAs to join me. In the meantime, I’ve changed the wording accordingly in two places in my conference profile.

I know some will say that the proper term to employ should be not “Gender Equality Movement”, but “Sex Equality Movement”, and technically they’d have a point. However, in common parlance, the two terms are interchangeable, and “sex equality” would surely cause confusion in the minds of those not steeped in gender political terminology, the vast majority of people.

Please let us know what you think of the reframing away from “men’s rights” and towards “gender equality”. Thanks.

How it feels when your wife hits you

A piece in today’s Times:

This week Alix Skeel, 22, told how he suffered four years of mental abuse and nine months of violence at the hands of his girlfriend, Jordan Worth. The fine art graduate stabbed him with a knife, scalded him with boiling water and prevented him from seeing his friends and family. Worth, also 22, has been jailed for seven and a half years. Here, one man explains what happened to him when his wife turned violent, and why leaving is so hard.

We’re sitting at opposite ends of the sofa, watching Come Home, the BBC drama about an estranged couple fighting over their children. At one point my wife cries out, turns away and covers her ears. “I can’t bear it. It’s too violent. Turn the sound off — tell me when it’s over.” It’s not the first time she has objected to on-screen violence. The irony would make me laugh if it weren’t so awkward. Because Emily sometimes hits me.

The first time was in 2015. We were discussing DIY when she attacked me. Earlier in the day she’d said we didn’t have time to paint the kitchen. Once I had, she said I should have done a third coat. Exasperated, I replied that I’d never be able to make her happy. And that’s when she flipped. It started with screaming and sobbing. And then she punched me. On the arm, against the body, trying to connect with anything, including my face. I backed away into the bathroom and before I knew it she had my head and was trying to smash it into the basin.

Emily was no longer Emily, the woman I knew and loved. She was not reachable. I don’t remember what happened next, but I managed to get her out of the bathroom. I locked the door and waited for her to calm down while she continued to howl and scream insults. Later I discovered that she’d bruised her hand punching me, whereas I was physically unharmed. We talked late into the night and eventually made up.

I’d seen her explosions of anger before: shouting, shoving, calling me everything under the sun with a look that could kill. Everyone has a temper, I thought. Hers is just a little worse. Even after the punches I didn’t see it as domestic violence. And I wasn’t a victim. How could I be? I am 6ft 2in, whereas she is 5ft 6in. I weigh 14 stone to her 9. I could overpower her if I really wanted to. And normally Emily was soft, loving and gentle. She loved nature, appreciated beauty — she worked in the arts — and most of the time was a thoughtful, ethereal soul. We met in our early thirties and two years on had eloped to a village in Italy. It was idyllic at first. But as the seasons began to repeat themselves, there was a subtle shift. Rural escapism turned to isolation, and the togetherness became claustrophobic.

Those first punches were a turning point, but at the time I didn’t see it that way. When you love someone, you see them go too far and forgive them. You give them the benefit of the doubt, you believe you can work it out. We’ll fix it, you think.

We are back in the UK now with our two-year-old boy, Will. We love him very much. Yet the violence that day in Italy wasn’t a one-off, but the beginning of something toxic. For me it haunts everything about our relationship, so much so that I now associate life in an Umbrian hilltop village not with serenity, but violence. I say “for me” because Emily doesn’t see it like this. For her there is no violence. When I use the v-word, she laughs. It is a “come on, pull yourself together” laugh. Her refrain is: “I’ve never hit you; I’ve pummelled you a couple of times.”

The closest she comes to admitting she might have a problem is to say she’s less articulate than me. As if somehow I’m hurting her with words and she has a right to respond with fists or by throwing things at my face. She says that I provoke her, that no one else has made her this angry, that I use “emotional violence”.

Sometimes I’ve wondered if she’s right. Perhaps it is me. I can be uncompromising. And, anyway, is she actually violent? She has probably hit me hard only on four or five occasions. And surely my superior size and strength means that I am not truly threatened?

In practice, it’s not that easy to stop. I can’t hit a woman. And to tackle her to the ground would enrage her — at these moments she is like a woman possessed who could pull a door off its hinges, pick up a knife or smash something into my head. She would never hurt Will, but she has hit me while he’s in the room. The best course of action then is to try to take the heat out of the encounter, to withdraw and lock the door. In the narrative of being a man this counted as stoicism at first, but as the violence kept cropping up, trying to defuse the situation felt more like impotence. We had a baby together. I couldn’t just walk out. I was trapped.

Being hit by a male partner must be terrifying for a woman. For me, being hit by my wife wasn’t so much scary as lonely. It’s not about physical pain, it’s about the person you are closest to wanting to harm you, crossing a line, going beyond the bounds of normal behaviour. Four or five bouts over a couple of years doesn’t sound a lot, but it’s backed up by incidents of screaming, grabbing and throwing, so that over time there is a sense that it could kick off at any moment. The effect on our mutual trust is like dropping a heavy clay pot on to a stone floor so that it shatters into hundreds of pieces. They can be gathered up and reassembled, but they are jagged shards that never quite fit together again.

The sense of allowing someone to hit you is deeply troubling. It makes you doubt yourself. An anger builds up at not being able to hit back — your superior strength counts for nothing. I have become ashamed. I don’t know whether it is of being hit by her, or that I chose someone like her to live my life with. The shame makes me shy away from being with her socially. Even on my own I tend to avoid people I know.

Everything came to a head when social services, then the police, got involved. Last summer, at a low point of our relationship, I’d asked for NHS “talking therapy”. In the phone assessment I mentioned Emily’s violence. A month or two later the police got in touch saying they wanted to interview her under caution for assault. There were also hints that they saw it as a safeguarding issue. This was even though Emily has always been an exemplary, loving mother — something I had made clear to the therapist.

This was one of the most depressing, Kafkaesque chapters in the whole story: how the authorities took my desperate need for emotional support and turned it into a police matter. Emily was livid at what she saw as my betrayal. And we both feared we might be deemed unfit parents. It took all my energy, powers of persuasion and threats of going to the relevant ombudsmen for the authorities to back down.

Apart from that, I told no one. First, because I was confused — was this really serious and should I be making so much of it? Second, because it was embarrassing to talk about, not just for me, but for the other person as well. And finally, because once I’d told friends what Emily was really like there was no coming back — they’d always associate her with domestic violence. But talking, however difficult, is essential if you are to cope. I’ve now told two close friends and have seen an NHS counsellor who has helped me to realise just how angry I am.

The Crime Survey for England and Wales reported that 716,000 men were victims of domestic abuse — not necessarily violent — in the year to March 2016. It’s hard to trust statistics on a subject as taboo as this, but what seems clear is it’s happening a lot more than we like to admit. Society is grappling with gender fluidity and waking up to the scale of men sexually harassing women. But the idea that women might be beating up male partners is not something we know how to approach. There’s still a whiff of sexist comedy — the inadequate, henpecked husband under the thumb of a battle-axe who wears the trousers. I’m still shocked that I’ve been hit in my own home, but nowadays perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that women can be attackers as well as victims.

Emily says she loves me and wants me to stay. “Can I have a kiss?” she’ll ask, hours after a row. I still care about her and would like her to get help, but I no longer respect her and doubt I can love her again. Leaving would mean walking out on Will and those cosy evenings we still sometimes have as a family: feeding him in the high chair, bathtime, a story and a cuddle goodnight. So there are no good outcomes here. But after a long time feeling confused and angry, I’m beginning to come to terms with the shame that was hollowing me out.

Names have been changed

You can subscribe to The Times here.

Who do YOU get your electricity and gas from?

Walking through the centre of the throbbing metropolis of Bedford, Bedfordshire, late this afternoon, I spotted two young ladies engaging with passers-by with a view to switching them to alternative energy suppliers. And so it was that I had this exchange with one of them:

She: Hello, sir. Can you tell me who you get your electricity and gas from?

Me: Interesting question. I get my electricity from a power station – not sure which one, to be fair – and I assume my gas comes from the North Sea. Who do you get your electricity and gas from?

After a second or two of bemused puzzlement, the young lady decided to cut her losses, and apologised for wasting my time.