The Cousins Won’t Like This, Khan…

No separate entrances at the mosque for men and women, then? 

Combating the “pernicious influence” of misogynists such as Andrew Tate in primary schools is a vital part of teaching children about equality and respect, the mayor of London has told teachers. Sadiq Khan has written to every primary school in London urging them to counter the online misogyny of influencers such as Tate through new classes and workshops that are being set up across the capital as part of plans to tackle violence against women and girls.

Oh, of course. Ignoring the elephant in the room and declaring an Internet nobody Public Enemy No 1. How surprising...  

The mayor’s office has launched a £1m toolkit to help teachers counter dangerous messages from influencers after research revealed that one in three young males have a positive view of Tate, a self-proclaimed misogynist, and one in 10 children have watched pornography by the time they are nine. The toolkit, developed by the healthy relationships charity Tender, trains teachers how to run workshops, drama and interactive classroom sessions to teach nine- to 11-year-olds how to recognise and call out inequality and sexism.

And if they start calling it out when they are taught about Islam? What then? 

Susie McDonald, the chief executive of Tender, acknowledged that discussing gender inequality and healthy relationships could be difficult, but said primary school was a critical time for children to learn about communication, empathy and respect. “It’s imperative that children learn about healthy relationships and are supported to build positive attitudes and behaviours,” she said. “By challenging potentially problematic attitudes at their root, we can prevent a culture of abuse against women and girls.”

There's people banged up in jail at the behest of our lying coward  of a Prime Minister for doing exactly that, Susie.

A Tale Of Two Sets Of Guidance...

Ministers have been accused of watering down guidance around new buffer zones outside abortion clinics in England and Wales, after it emerged campaigners could still be allowed to conduct silent prayers and approach women attending clinics to discuss the issue.

It says: “The term ‘influence’ is not defined in the statute and therefore takes its ordinary dictionary meaning. The government would expect ‘influence’ to require more than mere mention of abortion or the provision of information. As such, informing, discussing, or offering help, does not necessarily amount to ‘influence’.”

I wonder if that's a definition the government's own notorious 'nudge' unit would subscribe to? 

But no matter, it was always an absurdity to throw the weight of the state against people for silently praying for what they consider to be wrongdoers. And since it's guidance and not law, are they not free to ignore it anyway? 

Healthcare workers are being told not to report women to the police if they believe their patients may have illegally ended their own pregnancy. The Royal College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (RCOG) says "deeply traumatised" women are being prosecuted following abortions.

The new guidance follows a recent rise in police investigations into abortions. The RCOG says these cases are rare, however, and it is encouraging women to seek medical help if needed. NHS staff can breach confidentiality rules to give information to the police about possible crimes, but only if it is in the "public interest".

The RCOG says it is "never" in the public interest to report women who have abortions, and that they must be safeguarded.

Looks like they are! So, how's that sauce, goose? The gander loved it. 

Oh, Now It Is, Sure...

...but if she'd been planning an abortion, suddenly, they'd be castigated for that opinion. 

Wouldn't they, Reader?

Weakening Justice Even Further...

A mother imprisoned for causing serious harm to her baby has told the court of appeal she lied at her trial because of the control her former boyfriend had over her.

Ah, the modern-day equivalent of 'pleading your belly'. 

The woman, known as Jenny, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told the appeal court it was her partner at the time who caused their son’s skull fractures and bleeding on the brain in June 2017.

The landmark hearing has the potential to change the way coercive control is understood in cases where a victim feels that abuse has led them to lie in court.

And of course, if she wins, there'll be a rush to the lawyers from every female incarcerated for killing her child, or standing by while her partner did so... 

At the original trial the woman, Jenny, said she caught her cardigan on a cupboard door while preparing her son’s feed, causing him to fall to a concrete floor. She was given a 10-year extended sentence, later reduced to five.

On Thursday she told judges the baby’s father punched her in the head as she held their son, causing them both to fall.

So she lied. Why do they never do them for perjury when they change their story? 

She claimed she was unable to tell police the truth because her boyfriend was present.

“I did not want to anger him or agitate him as he [was holding] my baby.”

While police were in the room? Pull the other one, love! 

Representing the Crown, John Price QC said the appeal was seeking a “second bite at the cherry”.

Actually, a third. She's already had her sentence reduced, remember... 

He said: “The evidence the applicant gave introduces nothing new about the degree of force with which the child struck the floor – whether that was caused by a cardigan catching or by a punch.”

He focused on the veracity of her reasoning as to why she failed to tell the jury the truth. “We submit there is no credible explanation for that,” he said. Price pointed to witness reports that after the incident the child’s father shouted that she had thrown the baby and she replied: “I was feeding the child, you hit me and that is how the baby dropped.”

Price argued they later changed their accounts and formed “a cynical agreement to further their mutual interests”.

Yup, no doubt. Why not? It's likely to work, these days... 

(Lady Justice) Macur acknowledged that coercive control victims could find themselves isolated. But she added: “I keep coming back to that incident. We have still got to make a decision about whether her evidence is worthy of belief.”

She's a proven liar. If that doesn't help with the decision, what will? 

How Are You Enjoying Reaping That Whirlwind, Universities..?

An academic who was sacked after calling a Right-wing commentator a 'house n***o' is suing the university which cut ties with her for...

Breach of contract? Unfair dismissal?

...discrimination against her belief in critical race theory and black radicalism.

Hahahahahaha! 

The case could see black radicalism - an academic movement which argues race is a social construct used to oppress minorities - made into a protected belief system, like religious belief.

Well, they can't say they never saw this coming, can they?  

Ms Khanom is being supported by Professor Kehinde Andrews, who branded Churchill a 'white supremacist', arguing the term 'house n***o' is not a 'racial slur' but a 'concept that come out (sic) of struggles for racial justice'.

Is there some grift involved, because there usually is? 

On an online fundraising page created to raise £5,000 to cover her legal costs, Ms Khanom claimed she was the victim of a 'network of alt-Right activists'.

Ah. There it is! 

She wrote: 'LBU's conduct towards me suggests that academics should be looking over their shoulder before they make statements about Israel and Palestine, or about critical race theory. That is why this case and LBU's role in it is not just about me and my reputation as an anti-racist.

'Fundamentally, this is an important issue of freedom of speech.'

Oh, you're not wrong there. But not the way you think.... 

Ms Khanom said the tweets were not sent by her, adding: 'No academic should find their contract terminated so publicly in the absence of a fair and thorough investigation.'

I don't recall you being so supportive of Maya Forstater or Dr Binoy Sobnack or Bo Winegard...maybe I missed the press releases? 

So, They Can Move Fast When They Want To...

A shamed anti-vaxxer nurse who spread coronavirus conspiracy theories and compared the NHS to the Nazis has been struck off.

Kate Shemirani used her status as a health professional to spread 'distorted propaganda' about the Covid-19 pandemic.

She claimed that symptoms of the virus were caused by 5G and that vaccines were 'rushed through' because 'they want to kill you'

That was quick, compared to their usual sloth in these matters! 

And it's astounding what you can get away with and not get struck off, so maybe she's just unlucky?

Now a NMC Fitness to Practice Committee has ruled that her misconduct was so serious that she should be struck from the nursing register permanently.

In its ruling, the chair of the panel found that Mrs Shemirani 'attempted to encourage people to act contrary to public health guidance issued by the UK government by spreading this information through social media platforms and at public events'.

If she'd just ignored that health guidance herself, like political advisers and police and doctors did, she'd have had nothing to worry about... 

And The Answer Is....

..."Yes, she's the reason you're behaving like this and expecting to get away with it.":

Matthew Mawhinney, 29, became rowdy on the flight home from filming the second series of Netflix dating show Too Hot to Handle in the Caribbean on February 7.

The defendants became abusive after being repeatedly told to put facemasks on and being informed that the captain had decided they should not be served any more alcohol.

In a hearing at Uxbridge Magistrates' Court on Friday, prosecutor Christelle McCracken told the court that stewardesses Heather Wenn and Sophie Griffiths had been the target of most of the abuse.

When Ms Wenn told Mawhinney he would not be getting any more drinks, he told her: 'Go and f****** look up who my mum is – Baroness Scotland, I'm a gold card holder – go and get me a drink.'

Lovely!  

District Judge Deborah Wright said the three defendants behaved with a 'profound sense of entitlement without any regard for the crew or any of the other passengers on the flight'.

I wonder where they could possibly have got that from? 

Mohamed Reza Ally, for Johnson and Greenslade, said: 'They are aware that things are not going to be easy in relation to the publicity.

'This behaviour on any view is wholly out of character, and in my submission that should be born in mind.'

I guess you didn't learn any Latin in law school, then? Like 'In vino veritas'..?

Each defendant was fined £1,500, ordered to pay £500 each to Ms Wenn and Ms Griffiths, and ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £150 and £85 costs for their abusive behaviour.

They were ordered to pay a further £100 for refusing to put on their masks when told to by the captain.

It's chickenfeed, to people like this.  

You Shouldn't Ask A Question When You Might Not Like The Answer...

As the discussions around gender violence continue, a story about a young Black woman has resurfaced.

Blessing Olusegun’s body was found last September on Bexhill seafront.Blessing was a 21-year-old from south London who worked in Sussex caring for elderly patients. Just one week into her placement, she was reported as missing and later found dead in Bexhill-on-Sea. Her death was “inconclusive” (Ed: I think she means 'cause of death', she's pretty conclusively dead!) and the postmortem examination found no external or internal injuries on her body.

Now people are starting to ask for more answers.

Like...what? That she was murdered by those cunning white supremacists that supposedly infest this green and pleasant land?  

Would Blessing’s death have garnered more attention if she was a white woman?

Ah. Right. Well, maybe, maybe not. 

Sarah Everard, of course, was murdered. And allegedly by a serving policeman. That would make her story newsworthy no matter what colour she was. 

How can people be concerned with Black women’s welfare if we aren’t included in gender violence conversations?

I'll include you, happily. But given you mostly meet your deaths and injuries at the hands of your own race, you might not like how that conversation develops... 

Steering The Ship Away From The Rocks...

The alleged murderer of eight people, six of whom were Asian American women, reportedly said that he was trying to “eliminate temptation”. It’s as if he thought others were responsible for his inner life, as though the horrific act of taking others’ lives rather than learning some form of self-control was appropriate. This aspect of a crime that was also horrifically racist reflects a culture in which men and the society at large blame women for men’s behavior and the things men do to women.

Oh oh! I see where this could be going... 

The idea of women as temptresses goes back to the Old Testament and is heavily stressed in white evangelical Christianity...

Whew! Avoided disaster in the nick of time!