For the sake of our daughters, don’t forget the boys

It’s good to see the Telegraph continuing to give exposure to men’s and boys’ human rights issues. Glen Poole penned the following insightful piece for today’s edition:


About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to For the sake of our daughters, don’t forget the boys

  1. vadark says:

    Fantastic article and thumbs up for Glen Poole. This is exactly what we need and it appears that exposure is indeed growing by the month at the moment. Again, the comments sections say it all and this is where men can avoid the stigma associated with showing their emotions, use technology anonymously, come together to form a strong, collaborative bond and show society that they won’t take this crap any longer! Men are disadvantaged in so many ways it’s almost impossible to know where to start. There are high-level issues such as Health spend, homelessness, workplace, child custody, marriage and divorce, domestic violence, politics, war, suicide, education etc. And then there are low level issues whereby the general perception and respect given to men and boys is at an all-time low. What am I talking about? Allow me to mention a tiny number of life’s observations that I have made very recently (I’m talking in the last week!), all of which demonstrate total root-level disrespect:

    Why do women feel they have the rights to walk into and use men’s changing rooms in shops?
    Why do they think it’s ok to use men’s toilets?
    Why do female teachers (and Mothers of children) think it’s ok to walk into the boys loos at school? (Men don’t do that!)
    Why are school children taught about segregation and then boys told that girls go first or to give up their seats for girls?
    Why is there such thing as ladies first?
    Why does the news draw attention to women and children getting killed without mentioning the men?
    Why do adverts make fathers look like morons? (seen loads of these again lately)
    Why is it ok to show male strippers on TV shows at family viewing time but not female strippers?
    Why is it ok to objectify men nowadays (it’s everywhere) but frowned upon to objectify women?
    Why does the TV allow male genitals to be shown whilst at the same time, in the same programme, censoring women’s bits?
    Why is there all the talk about pornography being damaging to girls and that boys/men are the only perpetrators?
    Why all the talk about female body image and the damage it does to girls only?
    Why do they show men getting hit between the legs on TV, for fun?
    Why do they allow swearing that involves words that are derogatory to men and yet avoid or censor words that are derogatory to women?
    Why do so many female work colleagues think it’s ok to mock a man for man-flu or multitasking, or being stupid, typical lazy male etc.
    Why can female workers put their hands all over men’s chests and yet men feel they can’t even so much as look at a woman these days?
    Why are men’s magazines (like nuts or zoo) placed on top shelf whilst Cosmo and the rest of the man-hating women’s mags, which are also strewn with naked men, allowed prime position?
    Why are young boys encouraged and allowed to take sandwich boxes to school with violent, half-naked, beefed up fighters in glorious technicolour pictured on the side?
    And why do Tescos and Asda etc. allow such violent toys to be marketed and sold to boys when there’s no way in the World that they allow a rack of bikini-clad female fighters to go on sale?
    Why are wives and girlfriends relentless with their complaints about men and housework etc. but conveniently ignore the plethora of other ‘more manly’ chores that men do simply because females don’t do them?
    Why do females get to slap males in soaps and dramas without fear of consequence or ramification when on the other hand, if a male slaps a female, the story line sees that he ultimately gets punished?
    Why do you see pubs with signs like “girls get free drinks between 9 and 10” etc. Seen two of those very recently.
    Why when a man gets hurt, or something negative happens to them, do women say “come on, take it like a man!”?
    Why do men help female strangers in times of difficulty while women frequently ignore men?
    Why do shops sell father’s day cards that refer to them as lazy slobs or poke fun at them or refer to their genitals when Mother’s day sees not even a sniff at such material?

    Anyway, that was a list of things I noticed over the last few days. None particularly high level, just run-of-the-mill, general double-standards that men appear to put up with for some reason. All of which amalgomate to form a general blanket of disrespectful behaviour towards men in society. Women must feel fairly smug with the fact that none of that lot affects them!

    Sorry for the long post. On my high-horse at the moment!

    • I am sorry Mike, but I believe I am looking at the big picture, and the title of this article is only a part. I found much of its actual content to be near sighted and obnoxious. Some of the sentiments Poole reveals betray something that totally undermines everything that many people who fear for the long term future of the developed world believe need to be dealt with.

      Poole writes:-

      “I’m not too concerned about my daughter’s ability to get on in life as she’s already turned my commitment to challenging gender stereotypes to her own advantage. Her current catchphrase is: “Oi, you’re into role reversal, go and make my dinner.”
      Having watched her peer group blossom into confident young women, I am more concerned that we haven’t got an entire Government department working around the clock to bring their male counterparts up to scratch.
      Her generation of brilliant friends……….etc.

      Glen Poole’s input here on how human cultures, and the institutions existing within them, flourish is ridiculous. You cannot undermine standards and content within an education system, deliberately design it so that it suites the interests of females over and above males, and then describe as ‘brilliant’ those who appear to ‘blossom’ within it. Not to mention his declaration, made with obvious pride, that his daughter is turning it all to her own advantage. He fools himself, his daughter and everyone else.

      Until the education, self belief, sense of vocation and duty – to their families, communities and the wider society – of its young men is fully and unashamedly prioritised, we shall all continue to exist within a culture that is very ill indeed, and is literally slowly dying. The evidence of that is all around us, and will worsen as each every passes.

      There are indeed many strands to this struggle Mike, and I am very grateful that there are wonderful people like yourself who are actually deciding to do something about it. But I am not, perhaps, pointing in quite the same direction. This is in no way a criticism of yourself when I say that I deal with undiluted truth. And whether you agree with me or not about my belief in a necessary commitment to human patriarchy (which I feel certain humanity can never escape from without bringing upon itself terrible, even fatal, spiritual and cultural damage), I am fully aware that it is you, not me, who is attempting to make progress within the increasingly deceitful world of modern politics. And I salute you for that.


  2. Peter, thanks for this. As a father of two daughters myself, I too was concerned by the article’s slant that we need to be concerned about boys because of their ‘failures to thrive’ impacting on girls. We should, of course, be concerned about boys in their own right. I feel the title – which I imagine wasn’t penned by Glen – gave the whole piece a regrettable slant.

    Let’s consider the ‘big picture’. Glen is a high-profile and highly-respected hands-on campaigner for men’s and boys’ human rights, and as a result achieves more coverage in major newspapers – including the Guardian and DTel – than myself or others. As such, he merits our support, and he has mine. There are many strands to this struggle. Mine is political and ideological, his isn’t, but we’re pointing in the same direction, I think.

  3. I hate to ‘upset the apple cart’ here, but I do not find Glen Poole or his article to be insightful in any way. Quite the reverse. Helping boys for the benefit of girls and declaring he is committed to challenging gender stereotypes – not to mention Poole’s delight in the arrogant feminist preening of his daughter – strongly suggest that Glen Poole is a buffoon with beliefs and attitudes that are very misguided and damaging. And reading between the lines of Poole’s nonsense, the manner in which he contrasts what he believes to be gender disparity relating to education and future opportunity in the workplace, delivers to the reader something that is one-dimensional, logically skewered and written in a manner that actually hints at misandric delight, rather than any genuine concern. I really found some of Glen Pool’s remarks to be very offensive.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s