We’ve just released this video (17:01) to promote the Budapest conference (10,11 August). It’s in three sections:
- a discussion with Paul Elam, Janice Fiamengo (keynote speaker in Budapest) and Mike Buchanan
- a promotional video, created by Andy Johnston, who’ll be filming the speeches in Budapest (with Tom Caulfield, who filmed and edited all the conference videos since 2016, also in attendance)
- an explanation of why, if you plan to attend the conference, you should order your ticket(s) no later than 12 April, a month from today.
—————————-
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
Our YouTube channel is here, our Facebook channel here, our Twitter channel here.
If everyone who reads this gives us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. You can support our work by making a donation here.
Justice for Men & Boys 
Such a valuable meeting of minds. I think Paul Elam’s observation about Gynocentrism is important because it has such explanatory power in terms of the ever open door to feminists in the corridors of power that Mike Buchanan points out. As the debate on “trans” constantly reminds us there are in fact “sex based rights” and all of these are for “women”. Most in fact pre date any form of feminism, and indeed many of the pieces of legislation repealed in the 60s and 70s, were from the Victorian era and were intended to protect women; from dirty and dangerous work, from the risk of being imprisoned for debt, from being separated from “their” children if imprisoned, from being put in harms way in public service (including the armed forces), even laws on Pubs and the sale of alcohol were explicitly about preventing men spending too much money and neglecting their duty to support their wives and families, and the laws against prostitution (which caught even Oscar Wilde for using “rent boys” in London hotels) also were to protect wives from both the miss spending of “family” money and bringing back home disease!
It helps to identify both the problem but also maybe the strategy. For Gynocentrism often cuts across the traditional political divide. With “the right” often siding with “the left” with policy initiatives that one would think undermine “the right”, for instance policies that undermine the formation of families, justice, personal freedom, merit or equal opportunity. If they perceive such things are being nice to women they are as often as enthusiastic as the cultural Marxists etc. Having an analysis helps to guide how to box clever.
I believe this is important because a great deal of feminist success is down to influencing the bureaucrats. Who are described well here (100) Claudine Gay, Silicon Valley, and Ending DEI Forever (christopherrufo.com)
Rather than any mass movement.
LikeLike
As an example of Gynocentrism Furious war widows make demand after ‘mean-spirited’ Government makes harsh decision | UK | News | Express.co.uk
Having established a 2022 scheme to pay a Widows pension (all recipients are of course women) in an era where we are told women don’t need to rely on men! Understandably if the woman has re-married and replaced her husband, who supposedly would have supported her for the rest of her life, the Ministry judges she no longer needs the generous pension. Non of it in fact moves beyond being nice to women and of course not to hand out money to women is “mean-spirited” despite it being based on the sexist assumption that the dead man was her financial supporter and she will be unable to manage without his continued financial input! Even more hypocritical in the context of a family court system that assumes a father and husband who works away from the home is somehow negligent!
LikeLike