This is one of five letters written by the (now disbanded) International Pro-Male Association to international organisations. None of these letters was replied to or even acknowledged.

22 April 2007

The World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20433
USA

Dear Mr. Wolfowitz,

Gender Equality as Scam Economics

We are writing to you in connection with the World Bank's report:

Gender Equality as Smart Economics: A World Bank Group Gender Action Plan (Fiscal years 2007–10) as reproduced on the webpage: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/GAPNov2.pdf (last accessed 6 April 2007).

The focus of our concern is your rationale for this action plan, which states, amongst other things, that:

The only evidence for this statement that you give is a footnote referring to the Opening address by Paul Wolfowitz, President, World Bank, at the High-Level Consultation on February 16, 2006, which is quite clearly not a reference to primary research. There is apparently no full-text version of this opening address available online, but it is reported on on the webpage: http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspcomunicados.asp?nid=147474 (last accessed on 6 April 2007). The only relevant statement by Mr. Wolfowitz that is reported there is:

This is not evidence -- this is a sequence of platitudes! We could even call it lies. Where are the statistics to back these platitudes up? In the West, we have seen increasing separation, divorce, crime, drug abuse, divorce, materialism, consumerism and environmental damage as arguable results of women being pressured to leave the home and enter the workforce.

It is clear that a political decision has been made to push women into the workforce internationally, and only token and cosmetic attempts -- amounting to a scam -- have been made by the World Bank to provide economic justification for this decision.

This is a typical example of the gender inequality policies with a distinctly anti-male bias that the United Nations agencies have been pursuing of late. In the past, one working member of the family ( tradionally the male) has been able to provide for his family. Because of the active involvement of females in the workforce, the ability of one person in the family to provide has been halfed.

This undermining of the ability of one person to provide for the family is actually economic subversion. As all lower and middle class members of the population in developed and devoloping countries well know, one person working cannot bring home the bacon and pay the rent any more. So companies are actually paying you half what you would have been paid in the 40's and 50's. Your paycheck may be a lot bigger, but your buying power has been halved.

The so called gender equalization has actually shackled and enslaved women, forcing them to give up looking after their own children, dumping them in childcare centres or indoctrinating public schools and going to work whether they want to or not. This has significantly contributed to broken families and homes, because workplaces provide opportunities for flirtation and increased access to feminist propaganda on the virtues of divorce, and because stressed-out partners come home from work to an equally stressed-out partner, as opposed to someone who has been housekeeping and babysitting, which involves fewer and different sorts of stresses. Career women are also to some extent in a competitive relationship to career men. All this invites discord and disharmony.

Have the United Nations agencies done one single act to protect the male or the family unit -- which, by the way, is what raises future world citizens? Men need support nowadays. In fact, they always did, but since they ran the world they concentrated on supporting women. Women are now exploiting that male chivalry, as they increasingly help to run the world. Men face discrimination -- both traditional discrimination brought about by chivalry and new-fangled discrimination brought about by feminist laws.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Zohrab
Secretary, IPMA

See also: