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
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
398 Responses to “He thinks feminists are ‘obnoxious bigots’: meet the new justice minister”
fmf
hey just replying because i got your notification, great to know you’re still being whiny rex, great to know you’re still giving me the time of day to let me know that you’re whiny.
Rex
You’re still repeating back to me the things I say… completely unoriginal. But I guess we can’t expect much better from someone like you. P.S. You sounded extra whiney and child-like. Thanks for confirming I’m right about you. Peace out x
Rex
Describe ‘primary care’… would that be the one changing the nappies or the one paying for them? Who decides who is best at changing nappies? I believe you are suggesting women have their cake and eat it, while men pay for the cake and are left with the crumbs. That’s not equality and it’s time it ended. You’ve had more than enough cake, it’s time to share.
Rex
Screaming loudest isn’t being ‘successful’… it’s being the squeakiest wheel getting far more than it’s fair share of grease. A good example of women using their female priviledge to get more attention. The stats are clear. Men deserve near equal funding for gender specific cancers, but they don’t get it, and worse, they pay far more into the healthcare system than women do, meaning males subsidise women’s health, and at the detriment of their own. Time for some balance ladies. You need to chip in a bit more and take out a bit less please.
Rex
Bodily autonomy isn’t an equality issue, it’s an individual human rights issue. The trouble with your example Debbie is women expect to have all the freedoms, and none of the responsibilities. It doesn’t work like that I’m afraid, or at least it shouldn’t. If you have greater power and choice, then you take greater responsibility. You don’t make men pay for the choices you make if you are the only one given the power to make them. Either give men equal power or if that is not acceptable because it might compromise bodily autonomy rights, then you take away the associated responsibility. I think a lot of women are uncomfortable with this idea because they’ve enjoyed the near invisible priviledge of not having to fully pay for their responsibilities themselves. Women with kids they CHOSE to have, get state assistance (paid out of our National Insurance contributions, to which men contribute a disproportionately high amount) and from the fathers themselves (meaning some men get screwed twice for a choice someone else made and which they had no say in). Where’s the equality Debbie?