Dominic Raab is no more keen on the Equality Act than he is on the Human Rights Act
Esher and Walton MP Dominic Raab has just been made justice minister alongside Michael Gove.
Raab is a longtime critic of the Human Rights Act – this appointment looks like David Cameron’s way of saying he is serious about scrapping it. In January 2014 Raab voted to allow human rights grounds to be used to prevent a foreign criminal being deported only in cases where there would be a breach of right to life or the right not to be tortured.
In 2013, he voted to remove the duty on the Commission for Equality and Human Rights to work to support the development of a society in which people’s ability to achieve their potential is not limited by prejudice or discrimination.
And in 2013 he also voted against making it illegal to discriminate on grounds of caste.
Raab also took an unusual stance on gender equality in 2011, when he expressed his fears that ‘from the cradle to the grave, men are getting a raw deal’. He attacked the ‘obnoxious bigotry’ of feminists and complained that men work longer hours than women (no mention of pay gap etc).
“While we have some of the toughest anti-discrimination laws in the world, we are blind to some of the most flagrant discrimination – against men.”
Seeming to have fallen at the first hurdle – assuming that feminism is anti-men – Raab also suggested that men start ‘burning their briefs’, presumably as a long- overdue retaliation against the feminists of the sixties (who did not, in fact, burn their bras.)
Raab’s diatribe continued:
“Britain’s not perfect, and we will never eradicate all human prejudice.”
This is especially true when we do not understand that prejudice. Another interesting choice from David Cameron.
Ruby Stockham is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow her on Twitter
398 Responses to “He thinks feminists are ‘obnoxious bigots’: meet the new justice minister”
Rex Duis
Ed you post one lines replies to the intelligent but differing comments on this page, and spit bile at people and you tell them to ‘grow up’ – really?
Bee Sharmaine
I completely agree but the purpose behind FGM and MGM are completely different (even if there is no merit in either). Also FGM is typically carried out when the girl starts menstruating – so much older, and lets not forget the differing levels of severity, they can not be compared under one broad spectrum. The purpose of FGM is entirely for the benefit of male counterparts because the social attitude (in cultures and countries where this is practised) is that women are property, they are lesser beings, and as such, thats what makes this ok.
Rex Duis
Evidence shows you are correct Matthew Yeo despite naysayers in denial. The figures on male homelessness, suicide levels, work-related deaths as well as provision of men’s shelters for rising domestic abuse and healthcare funding paint a stark picture compared to the popular narrative of the female victim.
As you rightly point out the situation is complex and multi-faceted with wealth perhaps being one of the biggest dividers, rather than gender. The most privileged group are white, middle-class and upper-class females in the 18-25 age group and not coincidentally this group shows the lowest figures for suicide across the entire UK. People suffering disadvantage and bias are more likely to kill themselves suggesting that males in their mid 40’s to early 50’s are the most unsupported group followed by younger men in their 20’s.
Rex Duis
Camilla – what’s more frightening to the rational minded is how anyone could still in 2015 accept ‘Patriarchy theory’ as an actual thing. The data in most western countries simply does not add up. To be blunt, more men die on this planet than women, and women outnumber men and in most countries in the world live longer lives. You can’t have it so bad then if you are still alive to complain about it. I know a few men in my life who aren’t any more including my 19yr old cousin who hung himself despite having so much ‘privilege’ to look forward to.
Rex Duis
Because we have a childish 50/50 split right down the line in everything else right. When whiny Feminists make up the missing 50% of miners, binmen, construction workers, soldiers and plenty of other distasteful, dangerous jobs instead of dominating areas like education then I would be happy too.. were I as childish as you. But I realise that we’re not all interested in the same things.
I personally think women have a much healthier work-life balance instinct, with figures showing around the world that women generally prefer to both work at least part-time AND raise a family. It’s mostly men who devote the majority of their focus to their careers, which goes ways to explaining the mythical pay gap and glass ceilings. You happily ignore the negative side effects of this behaviour such as high rates of male suicide in men in their late 40’s to early 50’s – the most at risk group.
Clearly the high flying corporate lifestyle is not as desireable as Feminism would have us believe. In this case I think women have got it right and we should be spending a bit more time enjoying our children and our lives and having some balance. That is REAL Feminism.