Housing sectretary James Brokenshire has announced plans for current and former troops with mental illnesses to have the same access to social housing as those with physical disabilities.

Concerns have been raised over the standards of accommodation in barracks, however.

Read more in The Sun.

In Canada, the government of Justin Trudeau has managed to save $18 million over the next four years by reducing payments to disabled veterans. This marks a u-turn from their 2015 manifesto pledge to bring back the ‘Pension for Life’ program and has been labelled a ‘betrayal’.

Read more in The Nectarine.

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

A good news story in the Evening Standard about a man who’s overcome a challenging start in life, including stints in prison and long term homelessness, to be identified as London’s happiest bus driver. Patrick Lawson said: “My favourite part [of being a bus driver] is going out there and just meeting passengers. I want to greet every single person when they come on the bus and when they leave, and I have done that from day one with a big smile. Some passengers look at me in shock when I do it.”

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

A piece by Toby Young in the latest edition of The Spectator:

For the first time in its history, the American Psychological Association (APA) has issued guidelines for mental health professionals working with men and boys. That may not sound like a momentous event, but the APA is a powerful body in the US. It has 117,500 members, including the vast majority of practising psychologists, and an annual budget of $115 million. Its guidance documents carry the imprimatur of scientific authority and are hugely influential when it comes to policies and behaviour in public institutions. This edict will be referred to by university administrators when policing sexual interactions on campus, by the courts when deciding who to award custody to in divorce hearings and by HR departments when assessing complaints about male employees. It’s not an exaggeration to say this new guidance will affect the lives of millions of men and boys for years to come.

I cannot claim to have read the entire 30,000-word document, but I’ve got the gist: masculinity is a bad, bad thing. Traditional male qualities like courage, self-reliance, competitiveness, stoicism, personal ambition and a love of adventure are ‘psychologically harmful’. On the face of it, men and boys might appear to benefit from ‘patriarchy’ — after all, 95.2 per cent of the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are men — but in reality the emotional repression needed to maintain this ‘privilege’ exacts a terrible toll. It is the ethical duty of psychologists, as well as parents, teachers, coaches, religious and community leaders, to root out these masculine pathologies and help men become… well, less manly.

If you’re in any doubt about the takeover of the American psychological profession by grievance studies professors, look no further than these guidelines. There’s scarcely a sentence that isn’t freighted with the ideology of the social justice left. Gender is ‘socially constructed’ and ‘non-binary’; sex is ‘assigned at birth’ rather than observed and recorded; ‘dominant masculinity’ is historically dependent on ‘the exclusion of men who are not white, heterosexual, cisgender, able-bodied and privileged’; psychologists should learn about ‘the impact of racism and homophobia on the behaviour and mental health of boys and men’ and ‘counter the damaging effects of microagressions’; on it goes. Racism, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, ageism, ableism… blah, blah, blah. The word ‘transgender’ occurs more often (56) than ‘masculine’ (53). This isn’t impartial, evidence-based advice. It’s a manifesto.

Needless to say, this identitarian mumbo jumbo is about as ‘scientific’ as the ravings of David Icke. The ‘unhealthy’ male characteristics the APA believes are created by ‘gender stereotypes’, such as a reluctance to spend hours talking about your feelings, are not foisted on men by white, heteronormative society. Rather, they’re rooted in our biological nature. Contrary to the postmodernist dogma that the differences between men and women are ‘socially constructed’, men exhibit the same basic qualities regardless of what sort of society they’re brought up in. The psychological drives experts attribute to ‘Western culture’, such as territorial aggression, date back to the emergence of homo sapiens from the primeval forest. Indeed, many masculine traits are cross-species, too. When baby monkeys are given the option of playing with toys, the males choose trucks and the females pick dolls. The traditional male characteristics these pseudoscientists are objecting to are part of our ineradicable essence.

What does appear to be genuinely psychologically harmful is this unending war on masculinity. The effect of telling men that their desire to protect and provide is ‘sexist’, as well as persuading women they’re better off without us, has been to unleash an epidemic of family breakdown. A whopping 25 per cent of American children are being raised by single mothers. No doubt the APA thinks boys who grow up without fathers are better off. After all, they’ve been spared exposure to noxious male role models. But the grim reality is they’re more likely to drop out of school, become alcohol and drug addicts and end up in the criminal justice system.

Meanwhile, the men who’ve been told that they’re no longer needed spend their lives playing video games, getting addicted to opioids and, in increasing numbers, committing suicide. The average life expectancy of American males last year was 76, down for the second year in a row. If the APA is looking for toxicity, it should start by examining itself.

You can subscribe to The Spectator here.

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

A new year, and we return to campaigning at Speakers’ Corner (Hyde Park, near Marble Arch) again. We’re hoping to attend more often than in previous years, starting this coming Sunday, 13 January, and fortnightly thereafter. As usually we’ll be meeting at a nearby cafe at 09:30 (if you’re known to us, I’ll be happy to let you know the address) and we try to get to Speakers Corner around 10:30. We look forward to meeting you, whether it’s your first time there, or not.

This coming Sunday, for the first time, we’ll be displaying large placards with the theme “Equal rights for men and women”, which you may recall was one of the key themes of the 2018 conference. The design is here. We’ll be handing out the related leaflets, printed on both sides, here and here.

The placards (printed both sides) are more than a metre high, and cost about £30 each, but are very impactful and readable from a considerable distance, so…

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Just received:

Hi Everybody,

Here we go, our first big move for 2019.

I’m launching a campaign to urge the government to take an evidence-based approach to family violence. To Stop Violence Against Everybody, not just women. To respect everyone, not just women.

Amazingly, this follows a request from key people in the Federal Government for evidence regarding the most effective approaches to tackling this important social issue.

The big news is feminist’s huge cash cow is facing a set-back. When I was speaking in Parliament House late last year, I learnt that the 100 million-dollar domestic funding package introduced four years ago by Malcolm Turnbull is about to run out. Naturally feminists are in a lather lobbying the government for the funding to continue.

Government ministers and bureaucrats usually only ever hear from one side – namely from the huge domestic violence industry which is using the last of their funding to bully politicians into submission.

But now we have a chance to tell the truth about this issue. To speak out against the feminist dogma suggesting all domestic violence is due to gender inequality and lack of respect for women. To talk about the male victims of violence, children growing up cowering from violent mothers. To have people from the coalface, members of the police force, social and community workers tell their experiences regarding the complex two-way violence they witness in most violent homes. Finally, someone is listening.

I’ve made a new video to launch the campaign, exposing the constant stream of male-bashing propaganda which is being inflicted on us by the femocrats. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukaj9lnctw0

It starts with the latest offering from OurWatch, a government body working to end violence against women, which is urging young men to intervene when men voice opinions they claim trigger domestic violence.

There’s an OurWatch video featuring young people chatting in a restaurant. Someone announces her company is hiring a new CEO, a woman. The male villain pipes up: “There’s no way a woman can run such a large company. Women are too emotional to lead.”

It’s a controversial comment, an opinion many people would challenge. But is it now forbidden to even voice such thoughts?

That’s what OurWatch is suggesting. Their website sports a list of items claimed promote disrespect towards women. These include: “thinking or saying women can’t do all the same jobs as men.” According to OurWatch, we are not even allowed to think that women can’t do the same jobs as men.

So here we have an organisation using domestic violence as an excuse to indulge in social engineering, encouraging us to denounce anyone who challenges feminist dogma. And spending vast amounts of our money in the process. OurWatch receives over 6 million a year in government grants and spends 1.3 million annually on such dubious advertising campaigns.

OurWatch is only one of many government-funded bodies which has been happily living off Malcolm Turnbull’s funding, promoting his favoured myth that domestic violence is all about respect for women.

My video includes some of the evidence showing causes of domestic violence are far more complex, such as the famous Partner Abuse State of Knowledge project, (PASK), which reviewed over 1700 scientific papers and concluded a large range of factors contribute to domestic violence, including mental illness, drug and alcohol abuse, poverty, conflicted relationships, being exposed to abuse or violence as a child. Most family violence was found to be two-way, involving female as well as male perpetrators.

Gender inequality is simply not a relevant factor in domestic violence in egalitarian countries like Australia. The underlying basis of the massive government expenditure on domestic violence is totally misguided.

So, now’s the time for all of you to step up and help me get these messages through to our government. I’m asking people to sign a petition urging the government to take an evidence-based approach, tackling proven causes like alcohol-related violence instead of simply promoting more feminist dogma.

To make this work we need large numbers signing this petition, particularly Australian men and women. We’re also encouraging people to send in personal stories and information about effective approaches to addressing the issues. See my website for details.

Please help me circulate the video. We have a rare opportunity to make a difference here.

Cheers, Tina

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Our thanks to Jim for this piece in the Wall Street Journal. He writes:

All of these girls who suffered from ROGD (Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria) and self-harmed were daughters of feminists.

No mention of fathers in the article – presumption that most of these girls not only raised by man-hating feminists but also without fathers.

The feminist mothers describe welcoming the news when their daughters came out as lesbians but when their daughters suddenly decided they were actually men then the mothers adamantly opposed it.

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Our thanks to David Eggins for this:

Liz Bates, the researcher below,  is very much into male victims of domestic violence. She is conducting a “post separation research programme”  of men’s experiences of DV.  The link is here and  below. 

Mark Brooks is Chair of the Mankind charity  and was recently awarded an OBE – congratulations Mark! – and a real step forward in UK for men and an important piece of recognition for the facts of men’s experiences – Liz Bates is a very firm supporter of Mankind.

The vast majority of domestic abuse, 80% plus,  is “situational couple violence” – 560 plus research projects attest to the facts of a gender symmetry. The tendency is for women to “start it” and men to “finish it”.  That’s why we ask “our questions”  and why Duluth, DVIP, My Time and other “accredited projects” etc avoid such questions!

Men’s “controlling behaviours”  are researched at 7 per thousand men before separation,  but emerge enormously post separation when they reach an enormous 22% or 220 per thousand. (This is not really surprising when one considers the emotional grief  the men experience at the potential loss of everything those men hold dear, particularly their children.)

Women’s “controlling behaviours”  5 per thousand before separation,  emerge quite strongly post separation when they reach a large 4.7%  or 47 per thousand. (I’d suggest many are spared the same grief of the loss of their children – which would probably account for a great deal of the difference, and they have usually got accommodation, too!)  However this figure is very likely to not include    “parental alienation” scenarios – which will be part of the vast majority of many of your ongoing problems.

https://cumbria.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/mens-post-separation-experiences

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Good news. Women give blood samples at a number of points in pregnancy, this test should be among the first.

We covered the egregious crime of paternity fraud in our last election manifesto (pp.52-4). The Crown has never prosecuted any women for paternity fraud under the Fraud Act 2006, despite the Child Maintenance Service alone learning of several hundred cases every year of mothers identifying men as the fathers of their children, but later paternity tests (which the men have to pay for) prove those men aren’t the biological fathers.

I’ve heard an explanation on behalf of some of the mothers, that they were mistaken as to who the fathers were. Makes you proud to be British, doesn’t it? There must be huge numbers of men who mistakenly accept they’re the fathers of the children in question, and financially support them for 20+ years.

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

A piece published today on the BBC website. The full text:

Every year, thousands of penguins become stranded on South America’s coast – with females three times more likely to wash up dead or injured than males.

Now scientists from Japan and Argentina have concluded this is because female Magellanic penguins are migrating further north in search of food than their male counterparts. [J4MB: Where, self-evidently, food is LESS plentiful. Doh!]

The findings are published in the journal Current Biology.

Hmm, this might well be a manifestation of the female spatial awareness problem, which affects virtually all animal species. It explains why, for example:

• in migrating birds, the birds at the front (who alternate from time to time, to share the wind resistance burden) are invariably male, because only they know where on earth to go (literally); and
• women need much wider and longer spaces than men in which to park their cars. Recent research at the University of Leighton Buzzard (as yet unpublished) concluded that the average woman needs a space at least 25 metres wide and 25 metres long in which to park, without becoming highly stressed. The length requirement doubles to 50 metres for reverse parking.

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Our thanks to Michael for this.

If everyone who read this gave us just £3.00 – or even better, £3.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.