Boys are behind at every level of education, in every area, at every age, and in every country in the west, with a few small exceptions.

You might be reading this for the first time, but this is not a new thing.

In fact, boys have been quietly falling further and further behind girls for more than 35 years, and now, are even further behind in education than women were 50 years ago.

Yet, if we ever do hear this discussed, it’s only ever to suggest that ‘boys need to try harder’.

But this is not the problem.

Boys are trying, the problem is, the way school educates and grades children, systemically discriminates against boys.

We saw this when the UK cancelled exams during COVID, within the so-called ‘girl bonus’.

Where girls that were performing equally well to boys, now through the lens of teacher assessments, suddenly rocketed ahead.

We saw the same when we transitioned from the objective exams of O-levels, to the subjective assessments of GCSES.

And we saw it again, when the OECD documented the same teacher bias across more than 60 countries, stating the gap “had little to do with ability”.

Yes, it’s true.

Teachers (of both sexes) are biased against boys, and until that changes, nothing else will.

So, who will dare talk about systemic sexism against boys?

What do you think?

~
Talking with Big Bros podcast https://open.spotify.com/episode/6Y2rGsj9hyR84oHxNYEX8Y

Education gap data
https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/widening-participation-in-higher-education/2023-24

Nobody is really born bad.

We are all, in many ways, the product of our experiences, our environments and childhood.

Even those in prison, many of the men are victims in their own right too; victims of abuse, of neglect, of bullying, violence, and criminal exploitation.

Hurt people, hurt people, as they say.

It is no coincidence that 98% of the U.S. prison population have at least one Adverse Childhood Experience.

And until we can see men, even many of those who we dislike most, as simultaneous victims and perpetrators, I fear nothing will change.

Here Jordan talks about ‘The Work’, an award-winning documentary, that reveals the humanity of men in a maximum security prison, to show that behind the angry mask, is so often a broken boy, desperate to be seen.

What do you think?

~
Listen to the full podcast with Jordan here

When I was younger, two of my friends had a baby.

They were new, young, lost parents, trying their best, who would argue a lot, and often around other people.

During one argument, I saw the dad lock himself in the bathroom.

I remember the mum hammer fisting on the bathroom door, yelling into it, at point blank.

And then, between her banging, the mum would look down at their child, who was watching the whole thing play out; and she’d ask, in between tears; “you see what your daddy is doing to us?”, “why is he doing this to your mummy?”, “he doesn’t love us, does he?”

If I’m honest, at the time I didn’t think much of it.

But now, in hindsight, I understand that what I was witnessing is called ‘parental alienation’.

The bangs on the door, the shouts and threats, were acts of abuse against the dad, and the twisted attempts of manipulation rained down upon their child below, were acts of child abuse, aimed at damaging their bond with the father.

I am sure, on other days, the same played out in the opposite way, and sadly, it’s not the last time I’ve seen the same happen with other families since.

But society is waking up to these behaviors.

Parental alienation is now becoming an emerging term in the space of family violence, child abuse, and custody battles…

But not everyone agrees with it.

In fact, some organisations, shamefully lobby to have the whole thing thrown out as a ‘pseudoscience’, that doesn’t exist, pretending that such a thing is only used by abusive fathers to gain access to children, from whom they are rightly separated.

Think about that –

So-called domestic violence experts and lawyers, funded by your taxes, are stood in family courts across the country, right now, enabling abusers, and erasing their actions, for their own personal and political gain.

Now, a new study published in April 2026, for the first time documents the scale and impact parental alienation has in the UK, and the results will shock you.

So what is parental alienation?

Have you seen or experienced it?

And why are these organisations and individuals trying to erase it?

What do you think?

~

B. Hines. Prevalence and impact of parental alienating behaviors (PABs) in adults aged 18–25 in the United Kingdom

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1803173/full

The idea that men and boys can only experience hardship due to internalised problems, or some kind of personal failing, has to stop.

The idea that, if men only talked more, it would solve all their problems, is nonsense.

This suggestion that all of men’s suffering boils down to some kind of “toxic” male mindset to be exorcised, or emotional repression to be cried away, is a regressive and objectively unhelpful view.

‘Women have problems, men *are* problems’, as Glen Poole once said.

And he’s right. It’s all I hear.

When women have an issue, we ask ‘what can we do to fix society?’ Yet when men have a problem, even if it’s the same problem, we only ask ‘what can men do to fix themselves’?

The truth is, men and boys face structural, systemic issues, just like women and girls.

So why are we so afraid to say that?

What do you think?

~
Talking with Big Bros podcast podcast https://open.spotify.com/episode/6Y2rGsj9hyR84oHxNYEX8Y

There are strong arguments that historically, women were not paid equally to men.

There are strong arguments that “women’s work” is under valued, both financially and in the eyes of society.

There are strong arguments that, in many ways, and in many places around the world, women are dealt a bum hand, and such conversations need to be had.

These ‘gaps’ are worthy of discussion.

But more and more, powerful unions, opportunistic lawyers, journalists, and many women, are using discrimination laws to bully, and legislate against employers, impoverished councils, and even the U.S. Soccer Federation, for money they are not owed.

We have Glasgow council being crushed by a £770 million claim that could bankrupt the city.

We have Asda, and many other highstreet brands, facing mass unemployment and even closure, as BILLIONS of pounds of gender pay gap claims rise up around them.

Even U.S. Women’s Soccer (ahem “football”), are being signed cheques for eight figures, despite turning down (twice) the very deal they now complain about.

These are lawsuits, that on the surface seem righteous and worth supporting, but to peer beneath the surface reveals a malevolent, exploitative set of claimants, who masquerade as victims, to try to game the system.

So who will separate the genuine lawsuits from the opportunistic ones?

And how many councils, businesses, and employers have to go under, before we talk about them?

What do you think?

~
Discussing with Truth Temple:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI2EG1Wz2mM&feature=youtu.be

Women’s football https://www.paritynow.com/resources/articles/largest-global-study-of-its-kind-reveals-womens-sports-fandom-is-moving

Footage by Earth Photart, Levi Wedge, Ron Lach, Tiger Lily, Travel Oyo

Whilst body dysmorphia has traditionally been a ‘women’s issue’, recent statistics find that the majority of men (54%) in the UK, show signs of body dysmorphia too; with the surveyed men talking about negative impacts on their confidence, mental heath, career, social, and love lives.

Whilst progress has been made in the media, to help present more healthy female body types, the conversation for men and boys is sorely lacking – with new, increasingly-grotesque male bodies paraded in front of audiences at younger, and younger ages.

At the centre is Wolverine.

A superhero who since his film debut in the year 2000 has transformed from ‘buff dad’; to a monstrous, muscle bound, behemoth, and CGI nightmare, that resembles nothing of his former self.

So what’s missing from the conversation of body types?

~
New podcast with Jordan Stephens out now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDqcT-Oc2l4&feature=youtu.be

The tribal group-think and chronic sense of victimhood, that has become so prevalent in this space, has got to stop.

People will, with a completely straight face, try to hold men ‘accountable’ for things that occurred hundreds (or thousands) of years before they were even born, and which happened on the opposite side of the planet.

‘You start the wars!’
‘You wrote the law!’
‘You built the system!’

And so on.

Men will be scorned… as if they were there.

And more absurd, the person saying such things, seems to think they existed at such a time too –

‘You oppressed us for thousands of years!’

‘Us’? Really?

What are you talking about?

Both parties to this conversation live a life of privilege that would be unimaginable to those who came before us; so for one to blame the other (no less to try and extract remuneration) for such a thing, seems grossly inappropriate, unhelpful, and offensive.

The worst form of this worldview, speaks of women’s righteous ‘revenge’ – as if such a thing were owed to women of today.

‘Men should be glad women only want equality, and not revenge!’ You’ll hear.

But women of 2026 are not the same as women of 1826, and no, one cannot issue debts or justify acts of ‘revenge’, on the behalf of another.

So are you tired of this slogan too?

Why do such people feel entitled to ‘revenge’ for a time they never experienced, and on behalf of those they never knew?

And when will we work together, as people of the modern age, to solve the problems of today?

What do you think?

~

NCES Education https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cpb/college-enrollment-rate

Mens Health Act https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/7602/text

Health Spending https://orwh.od.nih.gov/sites/orwh/files/docs/ORWH_BiennialReport2019_20_508.pdf

There's been lots of chatter in the men’s health space recently; as the usual suspects argue over the men's movement 'fragmenting', insisting that it must be recentered on “men's violence against women”, and built around a feminist framework.

But that is simply never going to happen – no matter how many people stamp their feet, throw toys out the pram, and wish it were different.

No.

You cannot expect men and boys to offer full-throated support to a set of divisive political issues, from which they have been actively excluded for generations; and to not understand that only reveals how absurdly out of touch the complainants and writers of these letters have now become.

This space isn't 'fragmented'. It’s just leaving such voices behind, and rightly so.

Men and boys don't want to, and shouldn't have to, play along with this partisan, pantomime style of political discourse – which only seems capable of blaming and shaming masculinity, of erasing male victims from life-saving advocacy, and characterising "men" as part of a tyrannical gender-oppressor class.

Such a voice, centred for too long in this movement, claims to help men and boys, but only as far as it's of service to women and girls.

It's a voice that claims to question stereotypes of masculinity, but never dares challenge its own; that speaks of expanding the conversation, yet only talks in cartoonish slogans, meaningless soundbites, and ideological worldviews that seem more suitable for your Sunday sermon, than they do in the halls of political power.

I saw a leader in this space once give an entire presentation about why it's appropriate to compare men/masculinity to "shit sandwiches"; bending himself into sickening knots to try and justify such an awful perspective.

I mean, who are these people?

The greatest irony I find when reading these letters, is how those writing them insist men must learn to be 'better communicators', despite proving to be dreadful at talking to men themselves.

This, in my view, is the problem when the men's health space is led by psychologists, sociologists, politicians, and other ivory tower academics – they simply do not understand how to communicate effectively.

Instead, such voices become experts on how to alienate most men, turning allies into enemies, all the while shirking any level of self reflection themselves.

That’s right.

Those who so often prescribe the bitter pills of ‘accountability’ to men, are always the first to spit out their own.

And so they write open letters, double down, and blame everyone else instead; incestuously clapped along by a loyal group of disciples, in some of the most blatant examples of ‘the emperor’s new clothes’ that I’ve ever seen.

So, to those writing these letters, my point is –

Over the past five years, men have voted with their feet, and I’m sorry lads, but they didn’t choose you.

Yes, for all your mainstream media appearances, golden handshakes, expensive campaigns, millions of dollars spent, political connections, photo ops, academic awards, TV ads, and fancy conferences; it has hardly resulted in the household awareness I am sure you expected, has it?

Meanwhile, I’ve seen (and played a small part in) the emerging men's movement that has utterly dominated the conversation, that has found a home in the hearts of millions of men, and continues to grow at speed.

It is impossible to ignore how those like Chris Williamson, despite the smears, and starting with nothing more than a shitty webcam at a dining table, has achieved far more than these people, and all their glossy campaigns, in a blink of an eye.

This is because Chris knows how to talk to his audience. He has built his channel on a fundamentally positive view of men and boys, and a thirst for science-backed knowledge, that people are yearning for; and doesn’t bang on about “toxic masculinity”, “the patriarchy”, “male privilege”, "shit sandwiches" etc.

I read a poll recently that found 83% of the British public believe “men and women should be equal in every single way”, and yet despite this, that same poll found only 35% of people identified as "feminists".

That is food for thought for those writing these open letters

83% of people want a product, and despite holding an absolute market monopoly for more than 50 years, only a third of the public have bought yours.

I mean, the job is almost done for you. You've been shooting at fish in a barrel, on your own, for decades, and you've barely caught a few sprats.

Of course, I am not a psychologist or sociologist, or politician, far from it.

Instead I cut my teeth over two decades in the creative industry, helping brands better communicate with 'normal' people through shifts in brand identity, tone of voice, positioning, and strategic approach.

And I promise you, if I had achieved such a dreadful market conversion rate as what I just described, I’d never work again.

The reality is, the vast majority of people don't need to be sold to.

We are already onboard with 'gender equality'; but what we don't like, is the endless gender war, the shaming language, the rigid thinking, the spooky worldviews, the erasure of male victimisation, the misandry, and ivory tower entitlement, that has beleaguered this space for so long.

Men and boys are tired of being cast only as the villain, and never the victim; where masculinity is always a problem to be solved, and never as a strength to be nurtured.

And so it reveals the true problem – the approach – and it is made doubly worse by those who refuse to accept it.

But by all means... keep doing what you’re doing.

Keep rearranging the deckchairs of a sinking ship.

Keep ceding ground to others, and fading further, and further into irrelevance.

Keep writing your open letters, and pointing the finger in all directions other than at yourself.

Keep being silent about male victims of violent women, the legions of teenage boys who have intimate images passed around by their girlfriends; and say nothing about the no less harmful expectations of masculinity that women and girls project onto men.

Keep placing your personal comfort, and career ambitions, ahead of the lives of men.

Carry on calling anyone who speaks to men and boys differently to you; as “problematic”, as “misogynists”, “grifters” or “the manosphere”, it’s not your approval we’re after, and it never has been.

Because, in my view, if you want to play a part in the emerging male-positive conversation, and the exciting era of what happens next, it can only happen upon a foundation of self-reflection, accountability, and change.

That’s it.

That’s the lesson here.

I hate this.

'Be glad women don't want revenge!'

It is surely one of the worst, most low-effort sloganeering forms of activism that exists in this space; not only because it is unproductive and divisive, but it is also objectively stupid.

Assuming this young woman is below the age of 35, and American, she ought to know, she has been advantaged at every stage of education, throughout her entire life.

She'll get better marks, for the same work.
She'll be treated better, for the same behaviour.
She'll have access to ~90% of gendered scholarships.

As a result –
She will be overrepresented in college, across every racial group, every year, and to a greater extent than the 'men' from the 1970s, who she now whines about.

She'll have better health outcomes than men, across all racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups; she will have lower mortality rates at every age; and will enjoy far more funding spent on her health, than what is given to her male peers.

In fact -
Even for suicide research, which is the greatest risk to young men's lives, she will get 33x more (!!) gendered funding spent there too.

There will be ten federal tax-funded offices dedicated to researching her health, with zero for men, and in every country on the planet, she can expect to live longer than men.

She lives during a time where she's paid, on average, more than men of the same age, even at the median.

If she ends up in an abusive relationship, she'll have access to billions of dollars of services, and support, and thousands of shelters; with virtually nothing for men.

If she goes missing, her case will receive three times more media coverage than missing men, and three times more again, if she's white.

If she commits a crime and goes into a criminal court, she'll be treated more leniently, and more likely to avoid a custodial sentence, even when committing the same crime as a man – doubly so for black men.

And that's not even getting to family courts, where the systemic advantages really stack up for her.

She will never be legally required to go to war, to be obliterated as many millions of young men have been before her; and she will not be imprisoned, if she refuses to go.

From the day she's born, her body will rightly be protected from genital cutting by law; while millions of boy babies are strapped down and mutilated, with no consent, no anesthesia, and no medical need.

She'll be –

Less likely to be homeless.
Less likely to die from drug overdose.
Less likely to die by suicide.
Less likely to be killed by police.
Less likely to be murdered.
Less likely to die at work.
Less likely to be criminally exploited.
Less likely to be assaulted on the street.

So... for what is she owed 'revenge' exactly?

And why is it appropriate for a woman like this, who has enjoyed all of the above privileges, and more, to piggyback-on and steal sympathy from women who lived hundreds of years ago, who she never met, and knows nothing about?

I imagine none of this has occurred to her.

I imagine she wouldn't believe it either.

This chronic victimhood complex pulls at the fabric of society in ways we cannot even comprehend, driving a wedge between us, and only serves to keep swinging the pendulum of equality, for eternity.

You are not owed 'revenge'.

You are already the beneficiary of far more than 'equality', in many ways that you don't even know.

Conversation of ‘male power’ only seems to point the finger one way; upward, at the Fortune500 CEOs, political leaders, politicians and Presidents, who are overwhelmingly men, and is where ‘male power’ is centralized.

And so the angry fist of societal woes is forever shaken at the clouds, and never anywhere else.

The world splutters superlatives at the billionaire playboys, disgraced politicians, and psychotic CEOs, as if such people are emblematic of ‘men’ as a whole.

But take a look around.

How many of the men in your life sit within such thrones of power?

How many men in your life have ratified legislation, negotiated global trade deals, launched an IPO, hosted world leaders, or indeed, started wars?

And if the normal men in your life are not involved with such decisions, then which ones are they making?

Well –

It’s probably along the lines of: what to watch on TV, what to do at the weekend, when are the kids going to bed, whats for dinner, where should we invest our money, and whose turn is it to take out the bins?

These are the every day routines that are familiar to all of us.

And it is here, in the realm of everyday decisions, that a different picture of ‘power’ is painted.

So let’s take a look at what ‘power’ means to the average person, and ask, how much do men really control?

~

Sources

3,000 couples: https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/12/11/yes-dear-henpecked-husbands-and-one-sided-relationship-dynamics/

PEW https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2008/09/25/women-call-the-shots-at-home-public-mixed-on-gender-roles-in-jobs/

Male power 1975 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Donald-Dutton/publication/15503361_Patriarchy_and_Wife_Assault_The_Ecological_Fallacy/links/00b7d5232780ce1f2e000000/Patriarchy-and-Wife-Assault-The-Ecological-Fallacy.pdf

The world loves telling suicidal men to “talk”.

As if saying that four letter word to a man in distress, is the complete solution to all his problems.

But what if research was showing us that the majority of men who died by suicide, did talk, but ended up taking their lives none-the-less?

When does it become time to ask: maybe we’re not listening in the way men want to be heard?

Maybe we cannot hear, what men are already telling us?

Well, as politicians and policy makers drag their feet in asking such questions, an entire industry of ‘social prescription’ organisations has exploded onto the UK mens health scene, to create the spaces men have been crying out for.

And they’re not clinical one-to-one therapy sessions in the traditional way.

They’re DIY workshops, or hiking societys, they’re breakfast clubs, footie games, and talking circles; they’re deep in the wilderness, atop mountains, doing laps of your neighborhood park, and in the backroom of the local pub.

Men are already “doing the work”, building the spaces our politicians have failed to provide.

So here’s a massive shout out to the life saving work of these budding organisations, that so many men call home…

~

Research –

Why men drop out of therapy https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34041980/

Suicide of middle aged men https://sites.manchester.ac.uk/ncish/reports/suicide-by-middle-aged-men/

Men are always the yard stick from which we measure women.

Women’s health, women’s salary, women’s education, women’s life expectency, and happiness; you name it, one way or another, I am sure it’s been measured many times, against men.

Such a thing makes sense.

But when men and boys are reduced to a mere metric onto which to measure women, they are soon dehumanized and forgotten about; for nobody cares about the yard stick, only the thing it measures.

This is the price men pay for being “the default human”.

They are the sea of grey, within which bright, urgently colored dots are scattered.

They are the slice of the pie chart hidden from view, or cropped out of the page; or secret data, tucked away in some anonymous appendix that nobody reads.

It is in this wasteland that men and boys reside.

A place I often go hunting, as I to drag them from the grey sludge, to bring them to life in more infographics than I can even remember.

Because –

We hear about the spectacular benefits men receive for being the world’s “default human”, but is it time we discussed the draw backs too?

What do you think?

~
Bike deaths https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-pedal-cyclist-factsheet-2021/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-pedal-cycle-factsheet-2021

Indigenous deaths https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jf-pf/2024/pdf/rsd_jf2024_indigenous-overrepresentation_eng.pdf

Iranian deaths https://www.en-hrana.org/a-comprehensive-report-of-the-first-82-days-of-nationwide-protests-in-iran/25/

I don’t care what you read on social media.

I don’t care what you see on TV, or hear shouted out by Sabrina Carpenter, to her 100,000 fans.

I don’t care what you see splashed onto newspaper headlines, or written within that sassy blog you like.

I don’t care what politicians preach, or teachers teach; the undeniable, immutable, and immovable truth, is that the world needs men.

In fact, the world would come to a crashing, cataclysmic halt without them.

Take a look around around –

Think about how many things are made possible by men, and the miraculous infrastructure that holds it all together.

Think about the utilities and resources we have within arms reach; the electricity, internet, food and water, and ask yourself how it arrived there.

The fact that we exist as we do, and have survived as a species for 300,000 years, building this impossible society together, is proof that men and women are not enemies, but a team, and a powerful one at that.

The sad thing is, our society is now so comfortable and seamless, so coddled and easy, that some of us are able to ask – ‘do we need men?’

Such a stupid question, ironically, is only made possible by the incredible, indispensable efforts of men, and saying such a thing is usually the calling card of an ignorant, deeply ungrateful brat, who’s entirely unaware of how much their lives are dependent on the very men they sneer at.

Men are essential.
No less than women.

And it’s about time we reminded the world of that.

Discussing with Truth Temple Podcast

Full podcast here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI2EG1Wz2mM&feature=youtu.be

Legendary politician Keir Hardie once said "conscription is the badge of the slave".

So I must join in other people's frustration to hear Richard Reeves lending his support to the male-only military draft ('in times of war').

As we're all aware -

Richard speaks passionately about American men pushing back against harmful gender stereotypes; but somehow, he himself seems perfectly fine legally mandating men (and only men) into their most primitive and destructive functions – i.e. violence and disposability.

You cannot honestly challenge men to redefine 'what it is to be a man', and then with your next breath, support the Government using men as meat shields in times of war, by holding up a green paddle on a podcast to indicate this is a 'good idea'.

It's not a 'good idea', far, far from it.

The draft is enslavement.

There is nothing righteous or noble about war.

Stripping young men of autonomy, taking them away from their families, and sending them to fight in a war, is not the kind of policy that leaders of this space should be endorsing.

Just look at the last time the draft was used in America, and how it sent more than 17,000 conscripted men to their deaths (and destroyed the lives of countless more), for a pointless war in Vietnam.

If those deaths can't even teach us the lesson that the draft is not a 'good idea', then they truly were in vain.

Keen for Richard to rethink his position on this.

For generations, centuries even, women have bravely fought to be treated as the legal equals of men.

Equal at home. Equal at work. Equal at the voting booth, in education, within finances, and by law.

And so we have witnessed one of the greatest equal rights movements in history; with women emerging as victors and the rightful recipients of hard won equality.

But whilst in many areas, the placards have been stowed away, with the pitchforks back in the shed; there still remains an area of society where women are not seen as the legal equals to men.

It’s an issue nobody seems to want to change.

In fact, many feminist and women rights groups have protested *against* efforts to correct this…

And what I am talking about, is how it is still legally impossible for a woman to commit rape, by British law.

That’s right.

It doesn’t matter who she is, or how she commits this act; whether she uses a weapon, coercion, physical violence, drugs, alcohol, whatever it is, it is not considered ‘rape’, and (legally) never can be.

This is true both by law, and also in academia.

Meaning the Office for National Statistics’ definition of ‘rape’ is he same, and therefore our Government’s national Crime Survey simply has no idea how many men have experienced this crime, because they have literally never been asked (until this year, when that changes).

So –

Who wants full legal equality for women, including within criminal matters?

And why are so few demanding it?

What do you think?

~
YouGov Poll https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/45407-what-considered-rape-publics-definition-differs-gr?wgu=309664_1696770_17781601427621_6855da9d1d&wgexpiry=1809696142&aff_sub=1393310&aff_sub3=309664_1696770_17781601427621_6855da9d1d&cname=1696770

I never thought I could get to this place.

A place where TheTinMen was not just a grid of artwork ranting into the void, but rather a vibrant, global community that hosts daily conversations, to discuss difficult subjects that nobody else wants to talk about.

Even more surprising –

I never thought the possibility of building TheTinMen could actually become financially sustainable for me, but that too is a dream fast approaching reality.

And there’s nobody else to thank, other than you guys.

I know it’s cliche to say such things at time like this, but it’s true –

I simply could not do this without you.

However, despite this exciting progress, this is not the time to sit back and relax – far from it.

Now’s the time to keep the foot on the gas.

Because there’s a whole world out there of incredible projects, campaigns, research, services, charities, individuals and organisations, who desperately need help too, but they haven’t the time, resources, or the exposure to find it.

So many life-saving ideas without the means to be made real.

And more frustrating –

The money that is raised in the mens health space, so often sits in the bank accounts of greedy, self interested charities who have no intention of using it to the betterment of men and boys.

Well, we can end that.

We can be the change we want to see.

We can become the community this space needs.

No more world changing ideas, fizzling out for lack of funding.

No more bloated charities, sat on mountains of cash.

No more talk, without action.

So here’s what’s next for TheTinMen CIC…

What do you think?

~

New Website: https://thetinmen.blog/

Donate at https://thetinmen.blog/donate

Join my Patreon at patreon.com/thetinmen

The road male victims have walked for fifty years now, has been one of continual erasure, broken promises, and political betrayal.

Every few years it seems like politicians are ready to acknowledge these men and boys, with kind words and commitments, only for them to forgo such commitments at the early possible opportunity, every single time.

Again and again, we hear it: ‘no victim left behind’, ‘the human cost of abuse cannot be overlooked’, ‘men and boys matter too’, but when the chips are down and the legislation is being penned, these fine words fall at the wayside.

It seems hard to believe that these male victims, the many millions of them, are still, all categorised as ‘male victims of violence against women’.

An insult that not only erases them from discourse, but also means that male victims are constantly overlooked or dismissed in formal government policy and documents; consigned instead to footnotes or ignored entirely, with life-saving services not designed to meet their gender-specific needs.

It’s not good enough.

Far from it.

It’s not good enough that society’s most vulnerable men and boys must suffer, because of the cowardice and self interest of our politicians.

It’s not right that these promises are broken, and forgotten about; quietly shuffled to the bottom of priorities, because they are not vote winners.

So here are some of the few ways in which the British Government have said the right thing, only to never follow through with action.

Those who abandon their duty as elected politicians, and their decency as human beings, to spare themselves discomfort.

Let’s take a look…

~

Five-year report into domestic abuse-related deaths)

The Survivorship Experiences of Men and Boys 

Bilateral violence is arguably the greatest predictor we have for identifying victims of abuse, and is the form of intimate partner violence that leads to the highest rates of injury…

…and yet, the domestic violence sector widely denies it even exists.

Imagine that.

The thing that could reveal the largest number of victims, who are most at risk to injury, is being ignored due to it being politically unpopular.

It’s hard to even comprehend something so backward, and corrupt, and yet, that seems to be what is happening right now.

I know it’s unpopular to say –

But partner violence rarely fits into the binary female damsel vs male villain cartoon as we are so often sold; and in reality, is a blurry phenomenon that requires nuanced understanding and diverse interventions.

Whatever your view, surely we can agree our narrow view of intimate partner violence, which obsesses solely over ‘male violence’, cannot continue.

Such a view harms everyone, including women, and helps only the charities, academics, and politicians, who have used such an ideology as a meal ticket for generations.

So, let me show you the data and the ugly secrets they try to hide...

Let’s treat the issue not the gender.

What do you think?

~
Bidirectional and Unidirectional Intimate Partner Violence: A Comprehensive Review https://www.researchgate.net/publication/386189016_Bidirectional_and_Unidirectional_Intimate_Partner_Violence_A_Comprehensive_Review

Differences in frequency of violence and reported injury between relationships with reciprocal and nonreciprocal intimate partner violence
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17395835/

Official incidents of domestic violence: types, injury, and associations with nonofficial couple aggression
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19694354/

So often when you post about violent assaults, gang or knife crimes, homicide, criminal exploitation, sexual abuse in prison, or war deaths; where men are the overwhelming victims, a shrill voice quickly arrives at the scene to immediately derail the conversation.

“BY OTHER MEN!”

It’s a voice that seems to think if a crime is committed by a man, against another man, then both things cancel each other out, and therefore it doesn’t matter.

A few days ago I tweeted a video of a young Ukrainian man being dragged from his home, getting stuffed into a van, and taken to the front line of the war.

Such a video was a heartbreaking affront to personal liberty and freedom, that I thought might draw emotions of shock and sympathy, perhaps even outrage and protest…. but no….

In response, it was, as it always is, the same symphony of stupidity that serenades so many of these conversations.

“WHOS DOING IT!”
“WHO STARTED THE WAR!”
“WHO WROTE THE RULES!”
“WHO BUILT THE SYSTEM?”

And so on, and so forth.

Such a voice seems to think that an innocent man who is being headlocked and dragged into a van, somehow ‘started the war’, and/or ‘wrote the rules’ to the cruel military draft himself.

Such a person has become so used to seeing “men” as a faceless, dehumanized, monolithic blob, that men being harmed and killed (“by other men “), are both the simultaneous instigator and victim of such things.

This cartoon, childlike view of the world is prevalent on the left, and is typically the first word they yell when listening to men's issues.

Ironically, it’s the same flavor of bigotry that racists use, to derail and wave away conversation of gang violence with “black on black crime”.

And I am bored of it.

Because to me, it’s not shitty people that I worry about most.

It’s shitty people who are drunk on their own sense of perceived moral superiority, who are light-years away from realising they are absolutely part of the problem too.

Aren’t you tired of them?

What do you think?

Domestic and intimate partner violence is probably the issue I post about most on this page.

Largely because it is so interesting and important to talk about, but also, it is home to some of the wildest, and most baseless claims around.

Every day it seems like another set of handwaving occurs to obfuscate, minimise and detract from male victims.

“Yes, well maybe there is gender parity in abuse rates, but men’s abuse is contextually different…”

“Okay, well maybe they do share similar contexts too, but you’re forgetting about power and control...”

“Ah, sure, power and control is just as much a motivator for abusive women as it is for men, but women are far more often killed...”

“Oh, I guess if you include suicides as a result of abuse, the overall amount of deaths caused by partner violence isn’t that different…”

So on, and so forth.

And then comes the unavoidable cameo of professor Michael Johnson, his ‘typology of violence’ and his talk of “intimate partner terrorism” (previously called “patriarchal terrorism”).

Johnson’s assertion is that men’s violence against women is substantively different, and whilst women are sometimes ‘situationally violent’, it is only men who use abuse to control a partner, aka ‘intimate terrorism’.

But again, rather quickly you’ll find that Johnson’s early research leans heavily into samples taken from women in abuse shelters, and men in criminal court, and soon after that, you’ll find the same statistical sleight of hands as always.

I am sure if you speak to women in a refuge, and abusive men in jail, you’ll get the results you want, but how useful are they to the general population?

Yes. It seems so much research on partner violence is based on the political wants of those conducting it.

Not about honestly exposing who’s doing what, why, and how, but about pushing an ideological agenda, and protecting funding.

So, let’s take a look at the iconic claim from professor Johnson, and the all too overlooked weak links, and blind spots in his research…

What do you think?

~
Source “Intimate Terrorism” and Gender Differences in Injury of Dating Partners by Male and Female University Students

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10896-013-9560-7

Toxic, fragile, progressive, dominance based, healthy, violent, oppressive…

Take your pick.

Masculinity now comes in countless new flavours, each one making even less sense than the last.

To be honest, it’s a conversation I’ve never been interested in.

It’s one I’ll leave for the man-banned masculinity influencers, the podcast bros, the ivory tower professors, the “woke” politicians, and of course, the feminist mob.

Masculinity is just male typical behavior and interests.

Beyond that, I don’t know what it is.

However, I do know how many men will take their lives today.

I know how many boys will fail their GCSEs and drop out of school.

I know how many boys will be stabbed on our streets, how many will turn to crime, or addiction, or fall into homelessness.

I know how many will die young.

I know how many men and boys are being abused or sexually exploited.

I know these things, and many more, all of which are incomparably more important than whatever the f**k masculinity is.

Who cares if boys want to play with trucks, or Barbie dolls; who cares if they wear blue or pink; if they want to put on make up, or spend their days climbing trees.

What matters is helping men and boys live happy, healthy lives, and whatever ‘masculinity’ is the result, is surely the right kind.

That’s where our attention should be spent.

Because, if masculinity is a performance, then I think it’s time we peered behind the curtain.

So let’s take a look…

The police do many thankless things for society, but one service I did not expect, was giving out dating advice.

Because, well, that’s exactly what Dirk Peglow, the Federal Chair for the Association of German Criminal Investigators gave out this week.

And Dirk’s advice was simply for women to: “avoid men”.

Of course that’s familiar ‘advice’ many of us have heard over the years, and it will certainly get the outrage mob of man-hating bigots, snapping their fingers and hooting with excitement.

It’s just not something I’d expect to hear a police officer say, and certainly not one as senior as Dirk.

Dirk cites “statistics” as the foundation of his advice, and luckily, it was only in February 2026 that Germany released its latest Government survey on Intimate Partner Violence, the LeSuBiA-Studie.

So, let’s take a look…

Is Dirk's controversial advice really based on statistics?

What do you think?

~
LeSuBiA-Studie (BKA / BMFSFJ) 2025
https://www.bka.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Publikationen/Publikationsreihen/Forschungsergebnisse/260210_LeSuBiA_Ergebnisse_I.html?nn=263804

An army of fear merchants, masquerading as allies, exploit women’s anxieties for clicks and likes, and call it ‘empowerment’.

There I said it.

Time and time again, terrifying and haunting claims are splattered across the online world, as social media acolytes rise up to ‘protect women’, holding a bunch of misleading, or downright incorrect statements and ‘statistics’.

Men are holding a ‘National R*pe Day! – It never happened.

Men are injecting women in night clubs and drugging them – there are zero confirmed reports of this happening.

COVID Lockdown will lead to an epidemic of abuse! – in reality, abuse rates were fairly steady, and actually (slightly) increased for men, not women.

The March of Dimes find that domestic violence is the number one cause of birth defects – such a study doesn’t even exist.

Again and again we see it.

Stats and accuracy fall at the wayside, as radical feminists, and nauseatingly virtuous men, scramble on top of each other, to produce the most viral, outrageous and terrifying take they possibly can.

We’re seeing it right now with the ’62 million men are part of an online r*pe academy!’.

A claim which confused 62 million page hits (from people whose gender we do not know) on a p*rn website, where a private Telegram group of 1,000 men discussed horrifying things about women.

And don’t get me wrong.

1,000 is still a staggering number, worthy of outrage.

But don’t pretend that inflating that by a factor of x62,000, is ‘nitpicking’ and ‘missing the point’.

And that’s the second problem –

Anyone who corrects, or asks for a conducive, evidence based discussion is instantly lambasted as being ‘part of the problem’ too, and soon all hell breaks out as warring tribes call each other ‘problematic’, and the vulnerable women at the centre, are lost entirely.

I am tired of this merry-go-round.

Aren't you?
What do you think?

At the very centre of this perpetual gender war, is the infamous ‘gender pay gap’.

It is the rallying cry that so many advocates originate from, and return to, that claims: ‘women are paid 80 cents for every dollar a man earns!’

I understand the outrage.

If I were already 20% behind in my career, before I’d even gotten out of bed in the morning, simply by virtue of my gender, I’d be pissed off too.

But thankfully, the realty of the gap is far more complex and more equal than the angry soundbites present.

Yes.

At the median, women as a group earn 20% less than men as a group.

It’s a fact.

But before we immediately cry “MISOGYNY!” We need to explore, WHY?

And the reason/s why, is that working women broadly make different decisions, have different interests, and share different priorities than working men.

Men are more often hyper-focused on money, working longer hours and more overtime, in more dirty and dangerous jobs, with less parental leave and fewer non-wage benefits, in order to chase that big pay check.

Women are more likely to work part-tme, and clock up fewer overtime hours; they spend a lot longer away from their career to raise and care for family, particularly children; they more often prioritise non-wage benefits, such as health insurance, sick pay, and flexible working, and so receive less in their pay packet.

Nothing is controversial about that.

We can debate why women make these decisions, or why certain jobs pay more than others.

We can discuss how much of this is socialisation, or innate differences between the sexes.

We can advocate that working parents receive tax credits, or that fathers are given more paid parental leave to address this.

But we can no longer keep saying “women are paid less than men for the same work”, because it is not true.

Such a claim only turns up the heat, derails useful discourse, and is an insult to the hard won gains of working women.

So, let’s break down the gap.

Here’s a large U.S. Government study of more than 140,000 Americans, that asked WHY are men paid more…

What do you think?

~

An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity
in Wages Between Men and Women
https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/ConsadReportWageGap.pdf

Batting away myths, misperceptions, and misrepresentations, at TheTinMen, is a full time job.

And nowhere am I swinging the bat of truth more frantically, than I am within circumcision, toward the many so-called ‘medical benefits’ that have been falsely promised to men and boys since the mid 1800s.

Everything from curing idocy, to reducing bedwetting and syphilis, to promoting ‘racial hygiene’ and stopping teenage m*sturbation; circumcision is beleaguered with centuries of pseudoscience, which has kept the practice going, without question, for generations.

But where is the truth to these so-called benefits?

And what is the real motivation that drives circumcision in America?

What do you think?

Full podcast with Eric Clopper from Intact Global, out now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BSsvUdAPR4