The denigration of men: Ridiculed, abused, exploited - the triumph of feminism

has made today's men second class citizens, argues a deliciously provocative
new book And it's time the chaps fought back

Men are responsible for many great achievements but getting a raw deal
New book claims men have been unfairly undermined by modern
feminism
Men are doing more, working harder and getting none of the credit, it
says

By Peter Lloyd For The Daily Mail

Men are brilliant. Seriously, we are. We invented philosophy, medicine, architecture,

cars, trains, helicopters, submarines and the internet. Not to mention the jet engine,
IVF, electricity and modern medicine.

Weve led all the industrial revolutions and sent rockets into Space. Weve fought
wars with tin hats and bayonets and won them. The world we live in would be nothing
without Alexander Graham Bell, Sigmund Freud, Horatio Nelson, Winston Churchill,
William Shakespeare and Albert Einstein. The geniuses Leonardo da Vinci, Stephen
Hawking, Michelangelo, Beethoven, Charles Darwin and Michael Faraday have all
contributed immeasurably to our modern lives.

So why is it that, today, there has there never been a worse time to be a man?
Rubbishing the male of the species and everything he stands for is a disturbing
and growing 21st century phenomenon. It is the fashionable fascism of millions of
women and many, many men, too. Instead of feeling proud of our achievements,
we men are forced to spend our time apologising for them. When people chide us for
not being able to multi-task or use a washing machine we join in the mocking
laughter even though we invented the damned thing in the first place.

If ever we do manage to do something well were told its because our achievements
were handed to us on a plate probably at the expense of women and not
because were skilled and work hard. And, naturally, the problems of the world are all
our fault.

In 2013 the Labour MP Diane Abbott m

ade a damning speech about Britains men and boys, smugly announcing that
masculinity was in crisis.

The then shadow Public Health Minister declared that male culture is a celebration of
heartlessness; a lack of respect for womens autonomy and the normalisation of
homophobia.

She sneered that men were choosing to stay in extended adolescence by living at
home with their parents which has nothing to do with rising house prices, of
course, but everything, according to Ms Abbott, with men being resentful of family
life. If it werent so tragic it would be funny.

As it is, this kind of stiletto sexism popularised by an army of female media

commentators such as Julie Burchill, Suzanne Moore and Barbara Ellen has
become a depressingly familiar feature of modern British life. And it shows no sign of
going away.

Consider the statistics. If you become a father to twins one girl, one boy current
data proves that your son will die younger, leave school with fewer qualifications and
be less eligible for work than your daughter.

Our universities and further education institutions are dominated by women at a

proportion of ten to every seven men, with the Royal Veterinary College formally
identifying boys as an under-represented group.

Across the Russell Group of Britains leading 20 universities, just three have a
majority of male students.

This means your son will be more likely to join the ranks of the unemployed, the
majority of whom are now yes, youve guessed it men.

The Office of National Statistics noted that in the summer of 2014 a total of 1,147,511
British men were out of work, compared with 887,892 women.

Psychologically, your son will be more likely to suffer from depression and attempt
suicide than his sibling, but therell be less support in place to save him.

Hes also more likely to endure everyday violence than women, with the latest crime
statistics for England and Wales noting that two-thirds of homicide victims were men.

If hes seduced by his female teacher, shell leave court with a slapped wrist thanks
to a legal system which is frequently lenient with women. But if your daughter has an
affair with her male maths teacher hell be chalking up numbers on a prison wall
before you can say: burn your bra.

By the time your son is 18, he will probably have absorbed the social message that
his dad is much less valuable as a parent than his mother that fathers in families
are an added bonus, not a crucial cog.

Then, if he starts his own family and his relationship doesnt last, he may become
one of the four million UK men who have no access to their children, yet are forced to
fund them.

To cap it all, hell be progressively neglected by British healthcare despite being more
likely to get and die from nine out of the top ten killer diseases. You know, the
biggies: these include cancer, heart conditions, strokes, pneumonia, diabetes and
cirrhosis of the liver.
Fifteen years ago the UK Mens Health Forum showed that, for every 1 spent on
mens health, 8 was spent on womens. Since then little has changed, for no good
reason. Or rather, one very bad reason: we live in a medical matriarchy. In other
words, male life is cheap. Bargain basement, last-day-of-the-sale cheap.

The ultimate insult? Its all done at our expense. The National Health Service is
funded by the public purse, but its men yes, men who pay a whopping 70 per
cent of UK income tax. Yet we are thrown nothing but crumbs in return.

Currently, women are screened for breast cancer, ovarian and cervical cancer. This
is great, but excuse me if I dont jump for joy. Theres still no screening programme
for prostate cancer, even though it kills four times more men than cervical cancer
does women.

And while were on the subject of statistics, we men will die five years earlier than our
wives, sisters, daughters and girlfriends in a life expectancy gap thats increased 400
per cent since 1920.

Oh, and if we are lucky enough to survive the NHS long enough to be able to go on
holiday and sit next to a child on a commercial airline such as British Airways, hell be
moved in case he sexually abuses them. Your grown-up daughter wont, even if she
has previous form.

All in all, the outlook for your son is pretty bleak, isnt it? Sadly, he will accept the way
things are because over the past couple of decades or so its what men have done.

In our anxiety to support womens emancipation which men agree with, by the way
we have allowed our intellectual ability, our emotional intelligence and our capacity
for commitment to be endlessly ridiculed.

Obviously, this isnt to say that girls are having a brilliant time of it. Most of society is
well versed in the problems and pressures faced by women the same women who
have spent years trying to prove their worth beyond motherhood and housework.

But, unlike us, they get column inches and air time. They get government funding and
MPs. They have a vocal community who will stand in their defence.

We men, on the other hand, have nobody. We are of no interest to MPs, UN panels
or charities. If we want somebody to fight our corner, we are going to have to do it
ourselves.

And fight it we must, before its too late. We dont want to undo or compete with
feminism far from it. But we urgently need our own version of womens lib to stop
our sons being permanently deflated, downgraded and disenfranchised. Remember
the suffragettes? We are the suffragents.

So here are my suggestions for a new, improved approach to masculinity. It may not
be politically correct, but look where political correctness has got us.
Lets start by ditching a few of those everyday myths about being a bloke in the 21st
century. First up, the wage gap. For years men have been guilt-tripped over a
supposed discrepancy in pay that apparently sees women lose thousands of pounds
every year compared with their male colleagues.

The great news? According to experts who understand it, this simply isnt true.

The claim has been debunked by leading economists, including Claudia Goldin and
Lawrence Katz, both professors of economics at Harvard University, and Christina
Hoff-Somers of the American Enterprise Institute.

The wage gap myth has been repeatedly discredited but it will not die, says Hoff-
Somers. The 23 per cent gap is the difference between average earnings for all men
and all women, but it does not take into account differences in occupation, expertise,
job tenure and hours worked. When it does, the so-called wage gap narrows to the
point of vanishing. Essentially, this means a woman who works as a primary school
teacher isnt going to be paid the same as a man who works as a brain surgeon.
Which is how it should be. This is about salaries structured on skill, difficulty and
reward.

Many women work fewer hours than men. Many choose comfortable, low-paying jobs
that fit in with their many other commitments, perhaps to children and ageing parents
rather than strenuous, dangerous and life-threatening ones. These naturally bring
higher pay for men, but according to the National Institute of Occupational Safety
and Health also put male workplace fatalities at 94 per cent of the total.

Which suddenly makes womens career choices look very much more sensible,
whatever the pay difference. And make no mistake about it, a choice there has to be.
When it comes to careers and families, something has to give.

But thats as it should be.

Its a mathematical fact there arent enough hours in the day for anyone, male or
female, to work 60-hour weeks all year, raise children and run a house full-time. So
the idea that it should be split down the middle to prove some political point might
sound right-on, but in reality its the cause of so much unnecessary marital conflict.

Instead, lets be realistic. Whether its an unwelcome truth or not, most new mothers
like to nurture the baby theyve been carrying for nine months, while fathers typically
return to work and help bankroll it.

This is absolutely OK.

Think about it: women carry life. Thats the ultimate. We men cant compete with that,
so our purpose is to provide for that life.

Thats our identity as fathers and what we bring to the table. Its been this way since
time immemorial because its cost-effective, practical and sensible.
Recent legislative changes tried to rewrite this fact when the Coalition brought in
extended paternity leave in 2011, taking it beyond the standard two weeks. But it
failed miserably. Fewer than one in 50 used it. In fact, for various reasons, a quarter
of new fathers took no leave at all.

This is also absolutely OK if its what both partners want.

Eventually, in every relationship, somebody will need to take the bulk of childcare
responsibility, while the other manages the rest. Personally, I dont care who
assumes the traditional breadwinner role, but unless you can afford a nanny (or
manny) to do the child rearing for you, it cant be both of you.

Whatever the outcome, just remember: its not a choice that must be adjudicated by
feminist harridans. I say this because whenever working fathers are discussed in the
media, the insinuation is that they dont pull their weight.

Actually, the opposite is true: aside from proving we can multi-task just fine, research
collated by the Fatherhood Institute shows that British dads work the longest hours in
Europe an average of 46.9 hours per week, compared with 45.5 hours in Portugal,
41.5 hours in Germany and 40 hours in France.

Around one in eight UK fathers works excessively long hours 60 or more while
almost 40 per cent graft more than 48 hours each week. Contrary to popular opinion,
we dont leave the house every morning for the sole purpose of jumping into bed with
our secretaries. And when we do get home to spend time with our children were no
slackers either.

In the late Nineties, fathers of children under five were devoting an average of two
hours per day on child-related activities, compared with under 15 minutes in the mid-
Seventies.

Today, fathers time spent with their children currently accounts for one-third of total
parental childcare, even though many of them are working full-time as well.

So weve established that men are, in fact, pulling their weight at home, and that the
pay gap is not what its cracked up to be.

Indeed, in many cases its going the other way: the Chartered Management Institute
found recently that female managers in their 20s are now bringing home 2.1 per cent
more than men of the same age.

So why, I ask, are men still expected to pay for nights out? Ive lost count of the
number of times Ive sat in restaurants observing men financing lavish dinners while
their glamorous guests freeze at the sight of the credit card machine even though,
dripping with jewellery, they could clearly afford to cough up.

Dont get me wrong. Plenty of women do go Dutch. Plenty more settle the tab
themselves. We like these women. We like them when they allow us to treat them
and likewise, we enjoy it when they spoil us. What were after here is a mutually
beneficial sharing of bills, as well as minds.
Thats not to say we should throw out chivalrous behaviour altogether. There are
plenty of aspects of it otherwise referred to as being nice that are worth
keeping. Holding a door open for a woman, for example, just makes the minutiae of
daily life a bit easier for everyone. Its a kind and respectful thing to do.

All Im asking for is that we men get a bit of respect in return. Because at the moment
were being exploited and abused not least, as Ill explain on Monday, when it
comes to our most important roles of all: as husbands and fathers.

Stand By Your Manhood by Peter Lloyd is published by Biteback at 16.99. 2015

Peter Lloyd. To buy a copy for 13.59 visit mailbookshop.co.uk or call 0808 272
0808. Discount until May 2, p&p free for a limited time only.