A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in March 2019:

Our thanks to Ray for this (video, 0:30). This explains, in a readily understood manner, why:

Men always beat women at the highest levels in competitive events, whether physical strength is required (e.g. cycling) or not (e.g. chess); and

Mansplaining evolved – to help women learn from men’s superior knowledge.

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in March 2019:

During an evidence giving session with the House of Commons Justice Select Committee, that was not without a good point here and there, David Lammy made the claim that “the vast majority of women that I met in the criminal justice system are there because of a man and are there because of exploitation – and the system is not responding sufficiently to the role of that man in bringing them to court.” (video at Huffington Post).

This bigotry of low expectations, this idea of women as mere feathers in the wind to be blown hither and thither (rather than moral agents) is a classic feminist position on women in the criminal justice system. It is, of course, a position entirely inconsistent with other feminist positions that present women as morally capable or even superior to men – whatever argument is most expedient for the expansion of privileges for women is the argument they will push at any given time.

During an evidence giving session with the House of Commons Justice Select Committee, that was not without a good point here and there, David Lammy made the claim that “the vast majority of women that I met in the criminal justice system are there because of a man and are there because of exploitation – and the system is not responding sufficiently to the role of that man in bringing them to court.” (video at Huffington Post).

This bigotry of low expectations, this idea of women as mere feathers in the wind to be blown hither and thither (rather than moral agents) is a classic feminist position on women in the criminal justice system. It is, of course, a position entirely inconsistent with other feminist positions that present women as morally capable or even superior to men – whatever argument is most expedient for the expansion of privileges for women is the argument they will push at any given time.

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in March 2019:

Our thanks to Steve and others for this. An extract:

The judge told Worsley: “You became overwhelmed by the situation in which you found yourself.

“No-one could fail to be moved by your story.

“You were under enormous pressure and I have no doubt that all of this started as a result of you wanting to raise the money for his treatment.”

Worsley racked up £140,000 in gambling debts but the judge noted she had not spent any of the money on “luxuries” for herself.

Judge Kearl said: “This case is unique. The confluence of mitigating factors takes it far outside the norm and are unlikely to recur.”

Male criminals never have such a “confluence of mitigating factors”, to escape punishment completely.

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

An image published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in March 2019:

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in February 2019:

Here we go again. Really, we have to ask ourselves:

Is there any point in J4MB publishing story after story showing women to be all but above the law, unlike men?

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in February 2019:

Caption in The Sun: American Michelle Vanbuskirk was handed a suspended sentence for drunkenly attacking cabin crew and forcing the flight to turn back to London

Our thanks to Steve for this. Extracts:

Michelle Vanbuskirk, 43, forced the pilot to turn the United Airlines flight back to London Heathrow instead of continuing to Washington DC in September.

She had started drinking before boarding the flight and was then found swigging on a bottle of gin on the plane as she repeatedly banged on the TV screen in the seat in front of her.

When stewardess Porsha Chaplain asked her to stop and confiscated the booze, Vanbuskirk started swearing and screaming…

The decision was taken to turn the flight back to Heathrow, forcing the 209 passengers to stay in London overnight before flying out the next day…

Sentencing Judge Curtis Raleigh said: “A prison sentence is almost inevitable with the sentencing guidelines so that is the starting point.

“But I have to take into account mitigation. Being a woman is sufficient mitigation in itself, obviously. However, for the sake of appearances, I’m required to come up with some shit to explain why I won’t be giving you a prison sentence, so here goes.

“You take anti-anxiety medication for a diagnosed panic disorder.

“You work colleagues and friends have called you a hard worker, generous, kind and warmhearted.

“The assault on board was reckless rather than deliberate.

“You have a prestigious job… if you are put into prison you will lose your job, be deported and banned from the UK.

“The behaviour is totally out of character for you.

We may have inserted a couple of sentences there, to explain in plain English what was going on.

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in February 2019:

Our thanks to PCS for this. The start of the piece:

The number of people ditching their TV licences in favour of streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video or Now TV.

More than 860,000 TV licences were cancelled in 2017-18, compared to 798,000 in 2016-17.

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in February 2019:

Our thanks to Sean for this. He writes:

Of course no such encouragement for boys, who of course, don’t even have the boys scouts anymore. 2 levels of discrimination against boys in favour of girls. Boycott, pardon the pun, aer lingus.

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in February 2019:

Our thanks to John for this woeful licence fee funded feminist propaganda. It’s little wonder so many people are tearing up their TV licences. Just one paragraph comes close to explaining why so many young women don’t call themselves feminists:

Having interviewed a diverse group of young German and British women for my research, I found associations of the term “feminism” with man-hating, lesbianism or lack of femininity was a key factor in rejections of the label “feminist”.

The majority said they did not want to call themselves feminist because they feared they would be associated with these traits. This was despite many stressing they were not homophobic and some identifying as lesbian or bisexual. [J4MB: No denial of the truth of the “man-hating” point, then.]

Scharff’s profile page on the Kings College, London, website is here. An extract:

Christina explores gender, media and culture from an international perspective, through theoretically informed empirical research, and collaboration with colleagues and students. Before joining CMCI in 2010, Christina was Fellow in Contemporary Social Thought at the Sociology Department, London School of Economics.

Ah, yes. “Theoretically informed empirical research”. We all know what that means, don’t we?

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.

A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in February 2019:

BBC caption: The women’s kit was promoted differently from the men and boys

Our thanks to Sean for this. This relentless pandering to female narcissism is getting worse, with ever more men feeding it. An extract from the piece:

In a social media message to the Scottish FA, he [J4MB: Simon Kemp, Mangina of the Month] said: “Looking forward to taking my kids to the Women’s World Cup and thought I would buy new shirts for us all.

“So please explain why the official seller @JDSports has presented the boys and men as athletes, yet the female model is more “traditional” #everydaysexism .”

He added: “And by the way, my daughter plays football too, as do thousands of girls. What kind of example does this set for them?”

Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.