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 December 2015:

Our thanks to a number of supporters for pointing us to this.

Not for the first time, and assuredly not for the last, Professor Dame Sally Davies, England’s Chief Medical Officer, proves herself to be a blithering idiot. She’s a strong contender for a Gormless Feminist Lifetime Achievement Award.

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 December 2015:

One of our most valued sources of leads is Chloe, who happens to be a member of CIPD. She alerted me to a piece published on the CIPD website yesterday, which has resulted in Peter Cheese, Chief Executive, winning a Toady award. His certificate, explaining why he’s won the award, is here. Well deserved.

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 December 2015:

Our thanks to Francis for this. I’m starting to get a little more optimistic about the Telegraph.

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 December 2015:

Our thanks to Kevin for this. Nathan Muir is, indeed, a hero.

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 December 2015:

I recall that in my first management position, in the early 1980s, the Head of Personnel would wince as she reported the previous month’s sickness statistics for people working at the plant (Beecham Toiletries, Maidenhead). Month after month, across all age groups, and whether they had children or not, the average female employee took off markedly more days for ‘sickness’ than the average male employee. Maybe it’s simply another reflection of Dr Catherine Hakim’s Preference Theory – compared with women, four times as many men are work-centred. And of course more women than men can rely on being financially supported by a partner.

My thanks to Chloe for this.

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 December 2015:

Yet more proof, as if we needed it, that the world’s gone mad.

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 December 2015:

Our thanks to Alan for this. From the article, on the ‘International Alliance of Women’ website:

Misconceived equality
The Norwegian Association for Women’s Rights (NKF) considers female conscription as a misunderstanding of the concept of gender equality and the intentions of the Law on Equality. Gender equality implies first and foremost that women and men should have the same human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Women should be valued and allocated power and resources on equal terms with men [note: allocated – women shouldn’t be expected to earn those things in the way men have to, through the application of hard work, expertise, experience…]. But women and men do not have to be alike or do the same things to be equal.

To ensure gender equality it is important in many cases that women and men are treated equally. But they should not necessarily be treated equally in all situations. [Plain English: We’ll demand equality with respect to the things we want, such as ‘more women on boards’, we’ll demand continuing inequality in the things we don’t want, e.g. conscription.]

‘Misconceived equality’. Priceless.

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 December 2015:

Our thanks to a particularly generous donor for this:

Hi Mike,

Hope you are well. Have you heard about WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality)? Here they are on Facebook:

Link #1.

You’d be forgiven for thinking the MHRM is making a breakthrough, and that these women are campaigning for some sort of compensation for the men who had to wait 5 years longer for a state pension on the grounds of their gender, despite contributing the vast majority of those funds in the first place, and dying earlier than women.

Nope. WASPI are campaigning for the equalisation of state pension ages TO BE DONE AT A SLOWER RATE. They are arguing that they haven’t been given enough notice that are now going to be treated equally when it comes to state pensions. They think THEY are the ones being discriminated against here. They are actively campaigning for an inequality to be MAINTAINED for longer.

Sorry for the shouty capitals but I am angry. There is even a donation site here, to help fund their legal appeal:

Link #2.

[Note: the £6,000 target was reached five months ago.]

I only hope that the idiots who pledge their money to this legal fund might end up losing it if the case comes before a judge with some perspective and common sense. But I won’t hold my breath.

Hope you have a happy Christmas, all the same.

Cheers,

<Name redacted>

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 December 2015:

Our thanks to Francis for this. The piece (by a female reporter, predictably) is presented with four bullet points at the start:

Poll found 54 per cent thought women’s decisions controlled by hormones

2,000 questioned and just under half said sexes had different capabilities

More than two thirds said they ‘did not believe’ in a gender pay gap

Pollsters said the results were ‘worrying’ for women in the work place

There’s a sentence in the article you might expect to find in the Guardian, rather than the Daily Mail:

More than two thirds of workers also said they ‘did not believe’ in the gender pay gap – despite official statistics showing it stands at 9.4 per cent for full-time employees.

Does the journalist not realise she’s conflating two different things, the overal gender pay gap (which starts at the age of 40, the reasons for which are well understood, and have nothing to do with sexism), and men and women being paid the same for the same work? I’m really tired of such sloppy journalism, day after day. But maybe she’s being deliberately obtuse?

William Collins had the last word on the gender pay gap – here. It’s been one of our most-cited articles this year.

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 December 2015:

Our thanks to Mike for pointing us to a truly woeful piece by a female journalist (what are the chances?) in the Telegraph.

The winter edition of a magazine published by Bonham’s, an auction house, states this:

It is a truth now universally acknowledged that women artists, both dead and living, are woefully undervalued.

Universally acknowledged? I think not.

How would such an analysis work out in another open market, if professional football clubs were required by law to consider female players as well as male players for their teams? The overwhelming majority of players – if not all of them – would be male, and paid (on average) a great deal more than female players (on average). Given a feminist analysis, that pay gap would be an ‘anomaly’ which left female players ‘woefully undervalued’.

The Law of Supply and Demand – it’s a problem, isn’t it?

Here’s an idea. I keep reading that 70-80% of money spent with retailers is spent by women, although women collectively earn less than 30% of income earned in the UK. Where are these women getting the rest of their money from? It’s a mystery, and that’s a fact. Why don’t these women start pooling their money and buying works by prominent female artists, thereby driving the prices up, so those artists are no longer ‘woefully undervalued’? How difficult could that be? More difficult than whining, certainly…

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