Today’s video is here (6:20).

Over a period of almost six months we’re posting links to one video daily from the comedy channel of our associated award-winning website, Laughing at Feminists. Remember, it’s more than important to laugh at feminists, it’s a civic duty.  

You might also be interested in the 700+ videos on our YouTube channel, which includes our media appearances since 2012, 300+ videos of talks and other materials from the International Conferences on Men’s Issues (2014 – ), from the other men’s issues conferences we’ve been involved with, and so much more. The individual conference playlists are here.

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Good news from China. The authorities have clearly drawn inspiration from the final J4MB general election manifesto, published in 2022. Extracts from the X post about the new Chinese law:

“Property Division Changes: Ownership based on payment: The new law dictates that whoever paid for a property generally retains ownership, even if the other spouse’s name was added to the title after marriage.

Gifts to the husband: Property gifted to the husband by his parents will not be considered shared matrimonial property and will remain his property after divorce…

Child custody: Both parents retain custody of their children after divorce, unless there are extenuating circumstances.

Spousal maintenance: There is generally no spousal maintenance awarded in China after divorce, unless agreed upon by the parties.”

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Interesting (video, 8:33). The Runcorn and Helsby constituency by-election will be held on 1 May. Hopefully it will result in another Reform UK MP.

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Our thanks to Tom for this (video, 0:50).

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Sara writes:

“Its a confusing piece of feminist propaganda with a female sexual trigger angle, almost like the sexual fetishmovies “50 shades of grey” or “A handmaids tale”. Thats why its viral. Woman get off talking about it.

Such movies are the female equivalent to porn. Female porn is rather cerebral than optical. They like their “rough stuff” with a “storyline”.

Adolescence paradoxicaly portrays the viewpoint of a young boy. Feminists see men and boys as subhuman and thus cant fathom what they really think. They also dont want to talk to men and dont really care for their view on reality. So every line is essentialy a feminist biased sexually charged fantasy about what a male would say in a certain situation.

The result is, that the main “villain” is like a caricature painted by a radical feminist version of Andrew Tate. Males are depicted almost comicaly evil. Its the female version of the comic book adaptation.

Of course the 13 year old Boy must be misognyist and borderline right wing fascist with very well established and based concept of gender, race, sex, socialism, capitalism. Of course he uses the same points, feminists think red pilled men use. The story cant be too complex for the simple mind of the feminists, which usually is triggered by nuances of good and evil.

Any younger for the “Villain” and it would be considered a comedy. Imagine a movie, where a 10 year old white boy still playing with Lego is depicted as unpredictable menace to society….which grown men/woman takes this serious? Especially if he looks like a frail, below average little boy most peers would bully.

The weak and nerdy apearance dosnt help to emphasize the danger, but rather makes the blatand propaganda lie even more obvious. Its not white frail boys who are the danger but those who arent being portraied. And every english girl knows this and also gets cautioned by her parents who to go with and whom not. Even the non english girls know who the danger is. Uk is a dytopian society in which everyone knows whats going on, but they are so supressed that no one dares to speak out. Such systems usually end in mass murder and demographics of UK seem to indicate that as well.

In my opinion this movie was carefully constructed with a subliminal message of racism and misandry. They tried to piss of the maximum number of people and it seems like it worked out.

The only thing I wonder: Why choose an average frail looking white boy (yes he looks average for a 13 year old, maybe even slightly above) when you could have casted some ugly, predatory looking 15 or 16 year old and just say he is 13.

Seems to me like the main actor was carefully handpicked for some weird sexual reason. In 50 shades of grey the guy is a good looking. In handmaids tale the main male actors are as well looking far above average. Seems to understate the point that in those popular “r***e” fantasies among woman, he must be looking good:D.”

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Janice Fiamengo’s latest Substack piece In Every White Boy, a Potential Killer has attracted an unusually high number of high quality comments and responses to those comments. Earlier today Yvonne Elizabeth Aston posted this:

“Stop this misandry. It’s like the mud throwing in politics. It is served up again and again. Its roots are based on historic suppression of females and carried on by the sheer misogyny so apparent in too many Muslim countries. Publicity is given to crimes against the female, about fear caused by violent and controlling males, about gender pay gaps, about the unfeeling unfaithfulness of men. All the while is the perfect image of the fear filled female bravely contending with grave and murderous suppression and disregard. I am female. I am currently having problems with a man who lives in the flat beneath me and is basically a psycho. I am also delighted and amazed by my male nephews who want to deal with his treatment of me and also my friends’ husbands who are also appalled by him. Now, in today’s tale of male aggression and female suppression, the psycho is portrayed as Everyman. Normal male behaviour. Where does that leave all the men who are appalled by his behaviour. There are far more men who are angered and disgusted by attempts to bully and scare women than there are of men like him.

So then we progress to perfect women. Where are they, other than in the pages of books on saints and martyrs?

When will this war stop? When will the attempt to cast all men as brutal misogynists and all women as downtrodden saints end? Why cannot we be friends and realise that we are allies rather than opponents. If men and women continue to wish to diminish each other, where will love, respect and happiness be found? My general experience with boys and men is positive. No way can I cast the bullying, ill educated and frankly repellent man downstairs as the representative of most of the men I have met, whether relatives or not. Mr. Everyman is not the bullying, murderous misogynist that we are being encouraged to see him as. So many women are happily married to men. So many women have been cared for and protected by men. What we need to remember though, the news is rarely made up of good things. It is the exceptional nastinesses that make the headlines. Choose, look around you men and women and decide for yourselves to see the majority good guys in life. Not the exceptions who are always leaders in news stories and thence have undue influence.”

I replied with this:

“Yvonne, thanks for you excellent comments. You write:

“When will this war stop? When will the attempt to cast all men as brutal misogynists and all women as downtrodden saints end?”

So long as enough women are feminists and feminists have enormous power – as they have for decades – the war will not stop. Countless female jobs (and some male jobs) exist as a result of this war, including in the rape and domestic violence industries. Feminists HAVE to make women fearful of men to drive those industries.

Rape is rare, as is domestic violence. It’s been known for decades that most victims of DV are men, most perpetrators women (I’m happy to send a link to the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project conclusions if you want.)

Feminists hide behind the cloak of unaccountability that all women enjoy. Men (and women to a lesser extent) don’t hold women in general (and feminists in particular) accountable as they should – as responsible adults!!! – in either their private or professional lives.

You write:

“Why cannot we be friends and realise that we are allies rather than opponents. If men and women continue to wish to diminish each other, where will love, respect and happiness be found?”

Women – not just feminists – are fond of diminishing men, while very few men (and no MRAs of my acquaintance) wish to diminish women. Most MRAs wish to treat women as equals but women are so used to being pandered to, they see being treated equally as misogyny.

Misogyny is a vanishingly rare thing, women’s perception that it’s common is a projection of their own misandry (“he’s challenging me, so he must hate me!”) I saw that play out countless times over the 15+ years I’ve been an MRA, including during street campaigning. I’d start to debunk some feminist narrative and a woman would call me a misogynist and walk away.

I hope this goes some way to answering your questions.

Thanks again.”

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Today’s video is here (9:29).

Over a period of almost six months we’re posting links to one video daily from the comedy channel of our associated award-winning website, Laughing at Feminists. Remember, it’s more than important to laugh at feminists, it’s a civic duty.  

You might also be interested in the 700+ videos on our YouTube channel, which includes our media appearances since 2012, 300+ videos of talks and other materials from the International Conferences on Men’s Issues (2014 – ), from the other men’s issues conferences we’ve been involved with, and so much more. The individual conference playlists are here.

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Interesting.

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

An interesting piece just published in The New York Times. Steve Hilton as an elected politician? The idea is as ridiculous as the man himself.

Over 2006-8 I worked as an independent business consultant for the Conservative party at their campaigning headquarters in London. I created and implemented a new commercial model for the autumn conferences. The events, the largest conferences in Europe at the time with 12,000+ delegates, had been outsourced and were loss-making for the party for a number of years.

The new conference model was managed by a newly-formed company established to only run the Tory party conferences, and delivered £11.5+ MILLION POUNDS to Conservative party coffers over 2007-14. It was, I was reliably informed, their #1 source of income over that period.

I wrote a blog piece about the matter in 2021, Mike Buchanan’s £11,500,000+ donation to the Conservative party. The future Baron Buchanan of Bedford, surely? Not long afterwards I was contacted by a feminist, threatening to report me to the parliamentary authorities for openly soliciting a peerage.

The progressive former Tory prime minister David Cameron – he loathed the older members of the party, and they loathed him – wrote the following in his autobiography For The Record (hardback edition, p.96), about the years following 2005, when he was elected as his party’s leader:

“We sold our historic headquarters in Smith Square, and even the loss-making annual party conference started to make money; by the time I left office [J4MB: 2016] it was making close to £2 million a year. The party was debt-free, and there was around £2 million cash in the bank.”

David Cameron’s chief strategist Steve Hilton (they became friends whilst both studying Philosophy, Politics and Economics – PPE – at Oxford university) was without doubt one of the strangest human beings it’s ever been my misfortune to meet (colleagues I spoke to about him almost all felt likewise).

In a meeting I had with Hilton and a number of other party officials early in my assignment – before I developed the new commercial model for conferences – I said something I thought utterly uncontroversial, at which he exploded like a bad-tempered toddler denied an ice cream. In my long business career I never witnessed such a lack of control on the part of anyone under any circumstances.

His colleagues were deeply embarrassed and one senior figure apologised to me for Hilton’s behaviour after the meeting, but everyone had kept quiet in Hilton’s presence during and after his outburst, given Hilton’s close relationship with Cameron. If you’d asked anyone if they’d vote for Hilton if he were seeking to become an elected politician, you’d surely have been met with howls of laughter.

In 2015 we published a post, Steve Hilton, David Cameron’s former chief strategist, fawns over Harriet Harman, with a link to a video (2:38) of the two of them being interviewed by Andrew Marr.

Hilton was satirised by the BBC comedy The Thick of It (2005-12) as the herbal tea drinking publicist Stewart Pearson.

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Our thanks to Brother K for this.

—————————-

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’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.