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”
fmf
*if they activated in a constructive way that didn’t demonize or reduce the campaign in FGM, because we’re on the same side here, division does nothing. We need to work on integrating.
fmf
Aw cute propoganda.
Listen, I don’t want to fight you.
If you were part of the feminist community, you’d know what went on. Like me, I actively observe men’s rights sites in order to know what actually is going on.
Go under the hood, then tell me that what you’re claiming has any roots in reality.
fmf
Hi. Thanks for the mostly informative post. Some links would be nice (like the singer), but you make an interesting point none-the-less. However, FGM takes MORE material from genitals, hence the name. If it was only cliterodectemies (sp) then it would be called female circumcision, but it’s not. It would be like claiming castration was the same as circumcision: both are bad, ones more extreme.
Like I said, I don’t want to fight, what is the point? Is it not enough that I support ending circumcision? We’re on the same side, language quibbles don’t help solve ANYTHING.
fmf
And where do you know feminism from? From media, that has a vested interest in decisive bigotry, like all of capitalism. You’re biased to see us as the baddies no matter what we do, because that’s how the (restrictive, harmful) status quo wants you to see us, because we challenge it.
I mean I know some deep dark corners of the internet where people talk about the inherent evil of penis in vagina sex, and I’m not proud. But I also know they hold no sway in the world and are deeply unpopular to boot. Anyone with half an eye could see that they are not a threat.
Bryan Scandrett
Then drop FGM and ‘circumcision’ and go with CGM. Obvious.
Ban the mutilation of babies and stop the sexist gendering. It’s preventing real progress.
There are no grounds whatsoever for focusing on one gender. Why? It’s obscene and barbaric.