Former minister for women calls for a minister for men

The Observer has a good article on Fletcher’s Minister for Men proposal. Explains in detail why this is an ill thought out idea.

Health issues should be a particular focus, because conditions which affect men (eg prostate cancer) generally get less attention than those which affect women (eg beast cancer).

Where do you get that idea from? Prostate cancer survival has massively increased in the last 50 years, largely due to the screening programme. Prostate cancer is also much more a disease of "old age" and more likely to be slow-growing i.e. many men will die with the disease rather than from it. 10 year survival is higher for prostate cancer even though the average age of diagnosis is higher than it is for breast cancer in women. You can look up all these statistics on the Cancer Research UK website.

Heart disease affects men more than women and has received lots of research and funding over the last few decades.

Meanwhile we have poor maternity care in this country, which exclusively affects women, and we are really lacking research and treatments for common gynaecological problems. Men can get viagra and penis pumps prescribed on the NHS but it's tumbleweed for women with sexual dysfunction. Just as a few examples.

“However, Isn’t the crisis for men more due to our late modernity form of capitalism? It’s all about the money (or lack of it). Widening inequalities along with offshoring of jobs, closing of manufacturing, increasing automation in the last 40 years has meant fewer jobs that were dominated by men. Plus, less funding for extracurricular spaces for boys to be active. Austerity has seen school’s playing fields sold off, community centres and youth services shut down, sports and arts are the first to be cut in schools. The price of a sporting event (premier football!) has skyrocketed.
^^
That boys turn to the internet and watch violent porn and are influenced by the likes of Andrew Tate is no surprise. That’s also all about the money, specifically for our tech firms whose algorithms promote misogynistic violent content to get more clicks and keep boys on the webpage for longer whatever it takes and the owners of the likes of Only Fans who’ve found a way to get filthy rich by being the platform middle men.
^^
I can’t see how a minister for men would convince the whole of the government/parliament to do its job and stop creating tax policies and subsidies that serve the narrow, vested interests of the financial elite and look to do a proper job of levelling up? Or convince the curriculum specialists and the minister for education that the educational reforms and relentless test culture are failing young boys?
^^
IF such a minister took on those challenges, great. But I’m not holding my breath. “

I agree with all of that (almost).

Tests and exams weren’t seen as “failing boys” back in the days when girls weren’t out performing them. They were seen as perfectly fine back then.

Re cancer, women are generally well aware of breast cancer risks and symptoms and know about other female-only cancers, and there have been big campaigns on them as well as screening schemes, for a long time. Prostate cancer campaigns are now much more high-profile than they were, but that’s relatively recent. Another big issue is men’s reluctance to see a gp with early symptoms which means not just worse outcomes for men, but greater NHS costs dealing with more advanced illness.

Agree with some PPs, there’s nothing wrong with having a minister for men, to focus on issues that affect men in particular/disproportionately, including some health things, and male aggression, mental health issues and misogynistic culture and porn issues that are affecting a lot of boys and young men. Raising awareness and getting the message out to men that these things are bad for them as well as for women, would be useful. There have already been ad campaigns and public health campaigns on several of these and a minister could promote and raise the issues - and in an ideal world work closely with the women’s minister to understand the inequalities and work against them together.

I do realise it probably wouldn’t actually turn out like that and especially while we’re still enmeshed in gender ideology that tries to make actual sex and sexism meaningless. But the right person, someone intelligent and rational, could have a useful impact.

Of course women are still at a massive disadvantage and are not treated equally in a million ways, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to address male problems. If done right it should play a part in making things better for females.

I like Nick Fletcher, he's a decent bloke(had a chat with him on the doorstep) and local MP. Actually on the side of womens rights and aware of needing good male role models in society.

I would be happy for there to be a minister for men. So long as the issues being addressed include male violence, absent fathers and the parenting of boys.

From a story about Cancer Research UK this week:

The Cancer Research UK analysis suggests major advances in tackling the disease over the last four decades have prevented 1.2 million deaths.

However, progress has not been equal across all cancers, and women have not reaped as many of the benefits as men. The “enormous strain” on the NHS also threatens to derail further progress, the charity said.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/sep/01/uk-golden-era-of-cancer-treatment-has-saved-1-million-lives-study-shows

Maybe they could look at the impact of telling millions of white boys that they and their privilege are the problem in society? Even if those boys come from deprived, chaotic, or difficult backgrounds they are to “check their privilege” and atone for inequalities others suffer. Class affects men, of course it does.

and, FFS, do something about porn. It’s breaking men, sending them totally mad ans making billions of pounds. It’s as much of a problem as alcohol and gambling for men, and it messes up their erections and that messes up their minds.

men have specific sex based issues which are not given attention and ruins lives.

id probably get a woman to be the minister though. A nice matronly type who takes none of their nonsense. Hattie Jaques, she’d sort the likes of pornhub out in a jiffy. “Now, now, we both know that you must prevent children from finding this material and do you mean to tell me you exist in order to make profit from sexual assaults?”

I was shocked to read that 13 men a day commit suicide.

More women attempt suicide compared to men (McManus et al., 2016). More men complete their suicide attempts due to the violent methods they use.

After listening to it, I hoped there’d be more on this thread given the minister for men idea being discussed on Woman’s Hour over the last two days to see what others thought about this private member’s bill.

The MP is right in that seemingly there’s a crisis amongst boys and young men. He would see that up north more. However there’s also a taint of whataboutery* in his arguments that is, IMO, wrong and unhelpful because it’s predicated on a binary and possibly zero sum game. Going down that path could see services for boys/men being diverted from services for girls/women.

But… there is definitely something going badly wrong for boys and young men.

However, Isn’t the crisis for men more due to our late modernity form of capitalism? It’s all about the money (or lack of it). Widening inequalities along with offshoring of jobs, closing of manufacturing, increasing automation in the last 40 years has meant fewer jobs that were dominated by men. Plus, less funding for extracurricular spaces for boys to be active. Austerity has seen school’s playing fields sold off, community centres and youth services shut down, sports and arts are the first to be cut in schools. The price of a sporting event (premier football!) has skyrocketed.

That boys turn to the internet and watch violent porn and are influenced by the likes of Andrew Tate is no surprise. That’s also all about the money, specifically for our tech firms whose algorithms promote misogynistic violent content to get more clicks and keep boys on the webpage for longer whatever it takes and the owners of the likes of Only Fans who’ve found a way to get filthy rich by being the platform middle men.

I can’t see how a minister for men would convince the whole of the government/parliament to do its job and stop creating tax policies and subsidies that serve the narrow, vested interests of the financial elite and look to do a proper job of levelling up? Or convince the curriculum specialists and the minister for education that the educational reforms and relentless test culture are failing young boys?

IF such a minister took on those challenges, great. But I’m not holding my breath.

*Dr Jessica Taylor wrote a brilliant article on whataboutery that is no longer available without permission because of the misogynistic threats of violence against her for writing a book about victim blaming.

Great idea. What's wrong with that? Someone who represents half of the voters should be represented as should women

@BarelyLiterate i can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not? You’re certainly not a health professional of any stripe. Prostate screening is a routine part of healthcare, as is breast screening. We can all argue that there should be more of these things, and earlier, but you’re either shitstirring, pisstaking, or a genuine moron for what you’ve said.

This would be 99% Fathers For Justice talking points and 1% actual male issues.

I agree with her. If women have a minister in government to (in theory) represent their interests, so should men.
Health issues should be a particular focus, because conditions which affect men (eg prostate cancer) generally get less attention than those which affect women (eg beast cancer).

Great in theory. But what issues do you imagine they’ll be “putting the spadework” into? Who’s going to be first in the queue hammering at the Minister for Men’s door, and what euphemisms will they be using in order to market their male entitlement goals to the public in a more palatable way?
E
First up will be “reproductive justice” - ensuring that males without a female partner can benefit from IVF services without experiencing any disadvantage compared to females without a male partner - aka enabling males in the UK to access ‘gestational carrier services’ without suffering the inconvenience and cost of travelling abroad to purchase access to an overseas woman’s body.

Then there’s Tatchell who would no doubt resurrect his long-standing campaign for adults who have sex with adolescents under 16years to not be considered child rapists if they persuade the child to regard the adult as their boyfriend.

The fathers for a kick about in the park and a MaccyD when it’s convenient F4J crowd would be right in there as well, of course.

There’ll be (even more) demands for women’s refuges etc to be made available to males, of course.

I like this in the same way I like men's football and women's football, as opposed to football and women's football. Let's kick the whole idea of the default into touch. Time they stopped yelling, what about us at every issue raised by women and looked to putting their own spade work in.

Indeed, perhaps the Minister for Men could look at all the government policies that have been designed around “the default male” and ensure that the same proportion of men are disadvantaged by them as the proportion of women they disadvantage?

Nick Fletcher said “It’s fantastic that women have got the opportunity that men have got nowadays,” he said. “But I think there’s an awful lot of men out there who do feel undervalued, they don’t feel as though they’ve got a place in society anymore… whether that’s at work or at home.”

Do these men feel undervalued by the gender pay gap perhaps? Or do they feel undervalued by being over-represented in the House of Commons, in the judiciary, in senior management roles, in televised sporting events, on TV comedy panel shows, on TV and radio discussions of women’s rights? Or do they feel undervalued by being prevented from doing less than their fair share of domestic chores?

Good idea.

Male anger / violence. Suicide. Men's Health. Sexual Health and education. Why not?

Has anyone listened to the Woman’s Hour debates on this issue this week?
While I have sympathy with the argument that all ministers are ministers for men, I also think there are big issues facing men that I would like to see them deal with, rather than leave it to women - like levels of male violence.

Go for it. Men's health is a good focus.

I think it's a great idea. I was shocked to read that 13 men a day commit suicide.

I would love to see toxic masculinity tackled in schools, for boys to learn that they need to be respectful to women and to people more vulnerable that them. They do need great role models.

Privileged men need to understand what it is that makes them privileged. That they hold all the power so they need to have empathy and support each other rather than competing against each other to make the country a better place for everyone.

Toxic masculinity is currently in all our political parties. Self serving politicians are causing havoc to our society. Aside from this article, I have long thought that both boys and girls should be taught politics as a career choice and what they could do for our country. That way, we might get a better standard of human in future governments instead of all these current entitled men.

Also I loved the clarity of language in that article and that when they say sex, they mean sex.

I thought every minister was a minister for men.

Men's health issues do need someone to champion them (levels of male suicide, men often not seeking medical attention until too late, for example). Those who suffer the impact of these issues are often women (the bereaved widow or partner) and any children.

Not sure a minister may be the best way to do this.

Potentially good as long as it is someone who can work well with the minister for women and not a Dominic Raab type who thinks feminism has gone too far.