[Note: this website is no longer being updated. All new posts are being published on the website of our associated political party and/or the website of our associated Campaign for Merit in Business. We also run two other sites – The Alternative Sexism Project and Men shouldn’t marry.]
In February 2013 our political party Justice for men & boys (and the women who love them) was registered with the Electoral Commission. We’re planning to change the face of British politics. The party’s name – and some of our thinking behind launching a political party - were revealed in an article Mike Buchanan wrote for the most-visited and most influential men’s human rights advocacy website in the world, A Voice for Men.
British men and boys have been increasingly insulted and demonised over the past 50 years by angry vociferous women driven by misandry (hatred of men). Men’s and boys’ interests have been ever more assaulted by the actions and inactions of politicians seeking to placate those women, particularly over the past 30 years, with no democratic mandate to do so. Conservative and Labour governments have been equally bad in this respect, and the current Conservative-led coalition is the worst of them all, with David Cameron slavishly following policy directions set by Harriet Harman and other gender feminist politicians over the past 30 years.
Men collectively pay 72% of the state’s income tax revenues, while women collectively pay only 28% and receive disproportionately far more from the state in return. Men pay a total of £68 billion more income tax annually than women, yet they’re increasingly ignored and disadvantaged by the state they largely finance.
We’re receiving support (and donations) not only from men, but also from women, who believe (as we do) in equality of opportunities for men and women rather than equality of outcomes, which require anti-meritocratic social engineering initiatives to deliver, cause considerable damage to the fabric of a civilised society, and result in justifiable resentment among men who are unfairly disadvantaged.
We’re receiving support from women who are mothers of boys, and see them increasingly disadvantaged by the education system.
We’re receiving support from women who love their male partners, fathers, brothers, male friends and acquaintances, and who deplore the assaults on those men’s interests.
One area we find women particularly angry about is the state’s continuing failure to ensure men are allowed reasonable access to their children, if and when their vindictive ex-partners deny them that access. Many women believe, as we do, that such denial of access is emotional abuse of men and children.
Our party will raise public consciousness about the many disadvantages and discriminations faced by men and boys in modern Britain, and campaign to have them reversed. We’ve completed a public consultation exercise and we’re currently working on our 2015 general election manifesto.
Our prime areas of concern are:
1. Paternal access to children – following relationship breakdowns, the state ensures fathers meet their financial obligations towards their children, whilst not ensuring them reasonable access to the same children. We believe this to be emotional abuse of both fathers and their children.
2. Domestic abuse / violence – there’s a great deal of evidence showing women are at least as aggressive as men in their intimate relationships, yet virtually all state support for victims of domestic abuse / violence is directed towards female victims, not male victims.
3. Anti-male bias in legislation and official guidelines for civil servants – these anti-male biases should be scrapped. No legislation or official guidelines favour men over women.
4. Political representation – there’s a Minister for Women, but no Minister for Men. The government should repeal legislation which enables political parties to use women-only shortlists to select prospective parliamentary candidates.
5. Education – a highly feminised education system ensures 60% of university students are female.
6. Employment – almost two-thirds of public sector workers are women, yet the ‘public sector equality duty’ in the Equality Act (2010) allows public sector organisations to favour women over men, when recruiting.
7. Marriage and divorce – in an era when women have long enjoyed equal employment rights as men, it’s unfair that women continue to achieve personal enrichment through divorce.
8. Health – the state spends far more on health provision for women e.g. almost as many men die of prostate cancer as women die of breast cancer, yet the state spends only a third of the sum on early diagnosis of prostate cancer, as it spends on early diagnosis of breast cancer.
9. Justice system – when convicted of the same crime, men are far more likely than women to receive custodial sentences, and more severe sentences generally. 80,000 British men are in prison, and 4,000 women, yet the government’s focus is on reducing the number of women in prison.
10. Anonymity for people suspected of sexual assault – the coalition government committed to reinstating anonymity for people suspected of sexual assault (until and unless convicted) but reneged on the commitment once in office.
11. The business sector – the government continues to bully companies (through its continuing threats of gender quotas) into increasing the proportion of women in their senior reaches – e.g. in the boardrooms of FTSE100 companies – despite being aware of the evidence that in doing so, they’re harming those companies’ future financial performance.
12. Homelessness – over 90% of homeless people are men.
13. Suicide – the suicide rate among men is 3x that among women.
14. Retirement age – on average men die earlier, yet retire later.
15. Abortion law reform – in 2012, in England and Wales, 185,122 abortions were carried out. 180,117 (97%) of them were carried out on the grounds of reducing the risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the women. Of these, 180,008 (99.94%) were carried out on risk to mental health grounds although there’s no evidence to support the thesis that abortion reduces the risk to women’s mental health.
We’ll be will contesting marginal seats at the May 2015 general election, and our primary objective will be to raise public consciousness about the state’s assaults – through its action and inaction – on the human rights of men and boys. While we’ll be fighting to win those seats, even a modest number of votes could be enough to unseat the sitting MPs. In later general elections, when we field more candidates, J4MB could change the outcome of elections. This would put men’s human rights squarely on the political ‘radar’ in the UK for the first time. The parties would thereafter have no choice but to engage with us in an effort to deter us from contesting their marginal seats, and start to reverse 30+ years of state-sponsored discriminations against men and boys.
The hostile, poisonous, undemocratic, anti-meritocratic, anti-male culture which has developed over 30+ years must be challenged and defeated for the sakes of men, women, and children. For the sake of Britain as a civilised society. The challenge will have to start at the ballot box, which is why we’ve launched a political party.
Political campaigns inevitably cost money to run, and we’ve a great deal of work to do. The people working for the party, including myself, receive no personal income from it. 100% of donations will be used to pay for general election deposits in 2015 and campaigning costs. An accountant ensures we abide strictly with Electoral Commission guidelines for political party funding and expenditure. We require further donations to more effectively contest marginal seats in 2015. So I’m making a personal appeal to you. Please donate what you can, to help us make the future brighter for men and boys, and the women who love them.
Please feel free to contact me at any time. My email address is firstname.lastname@example.org, my mobile number 07967 026163. Thank you for your interest in our work.
Campaign for Merit in Business http://c4mb.wordpress.com exists to challenge the government’s policy direction of bullying companies into appointing more women to their boards, because overwhelming evidence demonstrates that corporate financial performance will decline as a result. Details on the website.
About three weeks ago we posted on our YouTube channel recent video footage of gender feminists assaulting commendably peaceful Roman Catholic men seeking to prevent their cathedral in San Juan, Argentina, from being vandalised by the women.
The police did nothing to stop the women’s assaults - needless to say, had the genders been reversed, many men would have been arrested and charged with assaulting the women. It was ironically an illuminating display of female supremacy, whereby women weren’t held accountable for behaviour that men would never get away with. Behaviour that men wouldn’t let other men get away with.
There were 32 ‘upvotes’ and only one ‘downvote’ for the video, but one or more of the whiny brigade has evidently contacted YouTube, because the video’s been ‘flagged’ as inappropriate. YouTube have determined it contains content in violation of Community Guidelines, and removed it from our channel. I’ve just checked the guidelines and the only guideline the video violated was the following:
Graphic or gratuitous violence is not allowed. If your video shows someone getting hurt, attacked or humiliated, don’t post it.
This is priceless. Feminists have reported the video because it shows men ‘getting hurt, attacked, or humiliated’ – BY FEMINISTS!!! You couldn’t make it up. So be it. You can still catch the video through many links including the following, which has plenty of background information. It’s worth scrolling down and accessing the longer and more graphic video (about five minutes long) through the link in the text which reads:
(Note: Some of the most graphic content has been removed from the video. Uncensored footage is available here. Viewer discretion strongly advised.)
The bottom line? It’s taken me 10 minutes to expose gender feminists’ attempts to stop the public seeing how disgusting they really are, and the result will be more viewings of the video. I’ve said it before, and I’ll surely say it again:
Gender feminists - they aren’t the sharpest knives in the block, are they?
We decided it was time to run an initiative in response to Laura Bates’s Everyday Sexism Project http://everydaysexism.com. The link to the website is here, feel free to post comments about sexist behaviours and comments used to shame and/or control and/or disadvantage men and boys:
I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain.
This article is about some of the weapons shamelessly employed by women to manipulate and control men – shaming tactics, whining, and sexist behaviour and comments. Many women without mental health issues employ these weapons, but it’s become increasingly obvious that a disproportionate number of women who use them – and most, if not all, gender feminists – suffer from one or more mental health issues. These include personality disorders – most notably narcissistic personality disorder – borderline personality disorder, anger management issues, depression, anxiety disorders, and others. Many gender feminists are driven by poor experiences of men, often an individual man, perhaps a father (often absent from the family, whether through their choice or not) or a partner. Damaged women are drawn to feminism like moths to a flame, and are inevitably damaged further. They really need to get treatment for their mental health problems, but they find it easier to spend their lives collaborating with other damaged women in attacking men and boys.
Laura Bates is the creator of The Everyday Sexism Project http://everdaysexism.com. At our political party Justice for Men & Boys http://j4mb.org.uk we always refer to it as The Everyday Whining Project. The following should give you a flavour of the tsunami of whiny submissions the site receives:
The Royal Mint will be giving away silver pennies in blue and pink pouches to those with babies born on the same day as Kate and William’s. Wonder who will get pink and who will get blue?
Purchased a new Hoover at the weekend. Pleasant enough experience at Curry’s, until I get to the tills. Male cashier asks if I need a hand getting it to the car, which I politely declined. He then advised me it was ‘really quite heavy’ (to which I quipped ‘well it’ll be me lugging it round the house’) and insisted I let him know if I do ‘decide I need a hand’. I appreciate it’s good customer service to ask the first time, but would you persist like this if I were male? I wouldn’t mind, but he looked weaker than I do, even with his penis.
So what was the hapless cashier to do? Presumably some customers – women in particular – initially decline the offer of help getting items to a car, but then change their minds when they realise how heavy or bulky an item is. If the man hadn’t made the second offer, and the woman had changed her mind (a woman’s prerogative, of course) it would surely – given her line of reasoning – have been reasonable for him to refuse to help. In which case she would presumably have made a different complaint on Laura Bates’s website.
The site’s content is translated into 18 languages. Laura Bates is clearly a full-time whine collector. The amount of exposure she gets in the British mainstream media is beyond belief. I once had the grim experience of debating with Laura Bates on a popular BBC radio programme, The Jeremy Vine Show. If you wish to get a sense of just how whiny she is, this should do the trick:
One of her many TV appearances, whining on International Women’s Day last year:
I believe girls learn at a young age that whining gets them what they want, especially from over-indulgent parents who might later wonder why their daughters became Entitlement Princesses. Inevitably these girls continue whining into adolescence and adulthood because they continue to get what they want. It’s up to men to break the cycle, and I’ll write an article about that subject one day. I make a few suggestions later in this article.
It’s been speculated that whining and shaming tactics developed at an early stage in human evolution, so that men worked harder to provide for women and children than they might otherwise have been inclined. Natural selection would have favoured men who were more sensitive to shaming and whining, because when they worked harder, society would have benefitted, more children would survive…
The hard-wired propensity of women to whine, and the hard-wired propensity of men to do whatever it takes to stop them whining, have become deeply dysfunctional in the modern world. Many women have insatiable appetites for more goods and services, special treatment, and attention, and their partners are doomed to failure in even attempting to satisfy those appetites. The state, too, is doomed to failure in seeking to satisfy them.
Earlier today we launched The Whine Club, a club exclusively for whiny women. Inspired by the Entitled Princess of the Month award http://www.antifeministtech.info/entitlement-princess-of-the-month-submissions we’ll be asking for suggestions for Whiny Woman of the Month. So many obvious candidates to choose from. Laura Bates is, of course, the inaugural member of The Whine Club. Members will only be permitted to leave the club if they give us a written undertaking to stop whining.
There are, of course, numerous different varieties of whine, including:
Vintage whines – women are paid less than men when doing the same work, all men are rapists…
Classic whines – men objectify women, men discriminate against women in the workplace…
Corked whine – the regrettably short period of silence which follows a man deftly popping a cork into the mouth of a whining woman. Champagne corks are particularly effective
Red whine – one coming from a woman who’s so cross, her face is red
American whine – one coming from an American woman (likewise Italian whine, English whine…)
Then there’s ‘whine drinking’ or ‘whine tasting’, terms used to describe the experiences of countless men who let women whine despite having alternative options e.g. walking away, or listening to their MP3 players with the volume cranked up to whatever level it takes to drown out the whining. Men living in houses with cellars can put a sign on the cellar door, ‘The Whine Cellar’, and politely direct whining women towards it. In houses without a cellar, the smallest room in the house – or possibly the garden shed – could be designated ‘The Whine Box’.
Moving on from whining to sexism, our political party Justice for men & boys (and the women who love them) http://j4mb.org.uk recently launched The Alternative Sexism Project and I cordially invite you to contribute your own stories http://thealternativesexismproject.wordpress.com. You won’t need to leave either your real name or email address. We don’t want the site to have the whiny tone of The Everyday Sexism Project, we want to develop a resource showing that men and boys are disadvantaged – sometimes very severely – as a result of sexist behaviours and comments. We’re looking for personal stories from men (and women) about women (and men):
- shaming men and/or boys
- controlling men and/or boys
- disadvantaging men and/or boys
- advantaging women and/or girls
Obvious examples include the following, but there are countless others, both serious and low-level:
- Denial of access to children following relationship breakdowns, judges’ unwillingness to enforce contact orders
- Parental alienation of children
- Financial ruin as a consequence of divorce, even when the wife has contributed little or nothing to the couple’s joint wealth
- Police not believing male victims of domestic violence, taking the woman’s word for what happened
- Sexist narratives and statements in TV and radio programmes, in films, newspaper articles, websites and blogs…
- Sexist statements made by politicians, judges, civil servants…
- Lenient sentencing by the judicial system of women convicted of serious crimes e.g. making false rape accusations
- Economic disadvantaging e.g. on first dates, even in expensive restaurants, women will either not offer to pay a share of the cost, or will make a cursory effort to appear willing to do so, perhaps reaching for a purse when the bill arrives. When the man says, ‘Thanks, but I’ll take care of it’, no woman has ever been known to protest, lest he change his mind
- Lack of respect for men. On a crowded street even elderly men of a certain age are routinely expected to give way to women, including young women
- Women (and many men) preferencing women when recruiting and/or promoting staff
- Women being preferenced for social housing and social services
- When a woman has an unplanned pregnancy, she has the sole right to determine whether the foetus is aborted, the baby adopted, or the child raised at the man’s expense. The man has no rights and whatever responsibilities she chooses to give him
- Healthcare disadvantaging – programmes aimed at diagnosing female-specific cancers are far better funded than those for male-specific cancers
- Men suffering from the physical and/or mental consequences of male circumcision
- Educational disadvantaging – teachers (female and male) focusing more time and effort on boys than girls
- Teachers (female and male) punishing boys more harshly than girls after committing the same misdemeanours
- If her car breaks down, or a tyre is punctured, a woman can expect a man to stop and help her. Woman never stop to help men in the same situation
- Women shamelessly barging in front of men in queues, expecting service in bars when they’ve only just arrived, and you’ve been waiting for some time
- Women-only gym and swimming sessions
- In Labour and Lib Dem constituencies, women-only prospective parliamentary candidate shortlists
Thank you for your support.
In the light of the following piece we’ve decided to make this blog publicly available again:
However, new posts will only be published on the websites of our associated organisations:
- our political party Justice for men & boys (and the women who love them) http://j4mb.org.uk
- Campaign for Merit in Business http://c4mb.wordpress.com